2022 Federal Election Watch - Part 2 the count

[Number37]

What is not so hilarious is the possibility that the early 'retirement' of Ralph Babet allows the UAP to select anyone they wish to take up the vacancy.

Won't matter.

ALP + Greens + Pocock + JLN > Coalition + One Nation + UAP

 

[Northalives]

What makes it f'n hilarious is that UAP ousted the Libs for the Senate seat thanks to the Vic Libs preferencing UAP.

Now that is absolutely f****ng hilarious!

 

[Johnny Bananas]

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The Labor Government is notifying the taxpayer of the problem left by the former government and laying out how they intend to fix the problem, and yes, recover the overpayments caused by the former government. No mention of "debt collection".

This is an argument of semantics. It's debt collection, just with a different name, like calling a tax a levy or a copayment.

 

[western royboy]

What is not so hilarious is the possibility that the early 'retirement' of Ralph Babet allows the UAP to select anyone they wish to take up the vacancy.

Should make no difference regardless to the passage of legislation, just means another grifter in Parliament for 6 years, no different to many of them.

 

[Forward Press]

First time also in history that WA had four Senators at a half-Senate election from the left. This is combined with the first time in 32 years (Hawke in 1990) that the majority of House of Representatives seats in WA were won by the ALP, and never by such a decisive margin (9 seats to 5).

The arrival of COVID caused a seismic shift in WA politics towards the ALP.

 

[Carn The Berries]

I find it hard to disagree with you.

Hopefully they will forgive smaller amounts and be lenient on bigger amounts.

The Labor party is the party of labour. They aren't a friend of the unemployed.

Don't forget that the current PM who won't commit to an increase in income support also said this “The submission will be consistent with what I said during the election campaign: that people who are on the minimum wage can’t afford to go backwards (and) can’t afford a real wage cut,”.

Minimum wage earners can't afford to go backwards, but income support recipients can... Such a caring and considerate new regime we have.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Don't forget that the current PM who won't commit to an increase in income support also said this “The submission will be consistent with what I said during the election campaign: that people who are on the minimum wage can’t afford to go backwards (and) can’t afford a real wage cut,”.

Minimum wage earners can't afford to go backwards, but income support recipients can... Such a caring and considerate new regime we have.

yes is odd that it doesn't increase in line with actual inflation rate, but at only 3.5%

this is separate to the consideration of whether it should be hiked up in general

 

[Carn The Berries]

yes is odd that it doesn't increase in line with actual inflation rate, but at only 3.5%

this is separate to the consideration of whether it should be hiked up in general

I'm just trying to get my head around the hypocrisy. Based on the ALP's actions people who are in stable work deserve more support than those out of work to deal with rising inflation.

Where is the outcry about this?

 

[Crankyhawk]

I'm just trying to get my head around the hypocrisy. Based on the ALP's actions people who are in stable work deserve more support than those out of work to deal with rising inflation.

Where is the outcry about this?

there never is outcry because the unemployed are seen as a class to punch down onto. THis was only halted during the pandemic when many got a taste of unemployment (at a much higher jobseeker rate) but it appears that empathy has evaporated. Or at least is not being reported (as none of the reporters actually got job seekered... perhaps a correlation)

 

[Pie eyed]

This is an argument of semantics. It's debt collection, just with a different name, like calling a tax a levy or a copayment.

Debt collection has connotations of a man at the door, ruining your credit rating.

 

[Blue1980]

Under-55s and higher educated voters propelled Labor to victory, study finds

Young voters were slightly more likely to have voted for Labor and substantially more likely to have voted for the Greens.

The largest aggregate flow between April and May 2022 was from Labor to the Greens, with 4% of all voters switching their vote from the centre-left party to the minor party.

That late surge appears to have helped the Greens pick up three seats, including Labor-held Griffith and Liberal-held Ryan and Brisbane.

Under-55s and higher educated voters propelled Labor to victory, study finds

Labor was more popular with women, ANU study finds, but difference ‘mostly due to a higher vote for the Greens’

www.theguardian.com

LNP plan to lift voting age to 55?

 

[Pie eyed]

Like to see the next polls and see how the Dutton hate is building.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Debt collection has connotations of a man at the door, ruining your credit rating.

Obviously it isn't physical debt collection, but it's really just a nicer face on the same thing. I agree with Gralin that the government should just forgive the debt, the same way that the previous one didn't try clawing back Jobkeeper (which was much more egregious and costly).

 

[Northalives]

First time also in history that WA had four Senators at a half-Senate election from the left. This is combined with the first time in 32 years (Hawke in 1990) that the majority of House of Representatives seats in WA were won by the ALP, and never by such a decisive margin (9 seats to 5).

The arrival of COVID caused a seismic shift in WA politics towards the ALP.

I think that COVID made people take a step back and realise that human beings are far more valuable than the filthy lucre.

 

[William Wonka]

I'm just trying to get my head around the hypocrisy. Based on the ALP's actions people who are in stable work deserve more support than those out of work to deal with rising inflation.

Where is the outcry about this?

The government doesn't pay the wages of those on minimum wage.
In fact they even get a bit via tax.

Welfare is paid by for by the state and things are pretty ******* tight courtesy of the last mob of 'strong economic managers' trillion dollar debt.

The issue will be looked at in time but it was not an election promise and recently the focus has rightly been on keeping the lights on.

You also need to remember that pensions are now linked to the Average male wage (Thanks Rudd) so higher wages equal higher pensions.

 

[Northalives]

The government doesn't pay the wages of those on minimum wage.
In fact they even get a bit via tax.

Welfare is paid by for by the state and things are pretty ******* tight courtesy of the last mob of 'strong economic managers' trillion dollar debt.

The issue will be looked at in time but it was not an election promise and recently the focus has rightly been on keeping the lights on.

You also need to remember that pensions are now linked to the Average male wage (Thanks Rudd) so higher wages equal higher pensions.

Well said and very balanced.

Once again, it's fallen upon a Labor Government to fix the wholesale mess the "strong economic managers" have left behind and once again, they will do it in a methodical, reasoned way - the ALP have given every indication thus far that this will be the case.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Well said and very balanced.

Once again, it's fallen upon a Labor Government to fix the wholesale mess the "strong economic managers" have left behind and once again, they will do it in a methodical, reasoned way - the ALP have given every indication thus far that this will be the case.

What an absolute crock of s***. There has been exactly zero inference (direct or otherwise) from the ALP that they have any plans to increase welfare payments at any stage to the level that they have advocated for the minimum wage. The rhetoric has been entirely different.

There are some seriously rose coloured glasses getting around here.

 

[William Wonka]

What an absolute crock of s***. There has been exactly zero inference (direct or otherwise) from the ALP that they have any plans to increase welfare payments at any stage to the level that they have advocated for the minimum wage. The rhetoric has been entirely different.

There are some seriously rose coloured glasses getting around here.

The fair work commission was awaiting a submission from government and needed a big overt push to increase wages.

Welfare will be looked at over the following months and years.

 

[Carn The Berries]

The fair work commission was awaiting a submission from government and needed a big overt push to increase wages.

Welfare will be looked at over the following months and years.
View attachment 1430018

How is that need any less significant that the need of someone on income support? I will be watching the next budget with interest, see if there are some actions to back up these words. There is ALWAYS money if the problem is serious enough. But its much easier to grandstand when you can put the burden of payment onto somebody else.

 

[Maggie5]

How is that need any less significant that the need of someone on income support? I will be watching the next budget with interest, see if there are some actions to back up these words. There is ALWAYS money if the problem is serious enough. But its much easier to grandstand when you can put the burden of payment onto somebody else.

I am not sure what you are expecting or wanting for a government that has been in power for a month.

Where have you been for the past 9 years?

 

[Carn The Berries]

I am not sure what you are expecting or wanting for a government that has been in power for a month.

Where have you been for the past 9 years?

So if the ALP just do a little bit better than the LNP in terms of changes to the level of welfare support that is ok because the last 9 years were considered worse?

I'm just questioning the apparent conflict between the government actively supporting a rise in the minimum wage in line with inflation but not committing to do the same to welfare recipients. Bloody easy to tell someone else to spend money, how about committing the funds you're in control of to do the same.

There hasn't been a single quote or press release that I've seen where the government has been so forthright in ensuring that welfare recipients "don't go backwards". I don't understand why people don't think that's somewhat hypocritical?

 

[Maggie5]

So if the ALP just do a little bit better than the LNP in terms of changes to the level of welfare support that is ok because the last 9 years were considered worse?

I'm just questioning the apparent conflict between the government actively supporting a rise in the minimum wage in line with inflation but not committing to do the same to welfare recipients. Bloody easy to tell someone else to spend money, how about committing the funds you're in control of to do the same.

There hasn't been a single quote or press release that I've seen where the government has been so forthright in ensuring that welfare recipients "don't go backwards". I don't understand why people don't think that's somewhat hypocritical?

Not sure you read my post clearly! It has been one month, they are going through the rubbery figures left by LNP, budget is due in October.

How about you wait and then tell me about the last 9 years?

 

[NSWCROW]

Count finalized

89.7% turnout

3.7% swing to the goodies.

 

[Forward Press]

Count finalized

89.7% turnout

3.7% swing to the goodies.

View attachment 1430242

68.3% voted for the coalition or Labor. This means nearly a third voted for someone other than those two. Unprecedented.