Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[Bloods86]

You don’t think he can get senate number? Would they be voting out of self interest (hip pocket nerve)

It comes down to the Greens. Pocock will be on board.

Depends if they want to turn this into a fight, like housing legislation, though this is more clear cut.

 

[Gralin]

Quite aware it was a strawman but you've invested heavily into 'someone else' without actually coming up with that someone else that is presumably not a white middle aged man.

I don't have to put up a better candidate though.
That's the same argument climate change deniers make, oh so you can't personally solve the problem, then you can't complain about it.

Did the government even interview 2 people?
Do you know?
The assumption that he was the best candidate that some are making is based on him getting the job and in those circles it's not about being the best

If you're asking someone to give you between $500,000 and $1,000,000 then... Yes

Why don't the banks have a responsibility in this area?

I don't like it - don't get me wrong, my parent was able to pay off a house and raise two kids on close to minimum wage in the 1990s and there is zero chance of that happening today and even she knows it's unfair on those today - but wailing about it does not change how it works nowadays. You need to make more and more sacrifices to get what you want.

Again this idea comes from a position of privilege of having the ability via sacrifices to meet the financials
Not everyone has that but talking like this sounds like you think everyone does.

I understand your idealism - sincerely, I do - but idealism doesn't pay the mortgage. There is no chance at all of the massive structural changes needed to get housing affordability back to the 1990s. I know I'm privileged compared to those buying today. I just have no empathy for those who borrowed to the hilt at 0.1%.

Again every single argument boils down to pointing at the people who did something stupid or desperate and saying everything is your fault.
It's the same attitude used to demonize people on welfare.
Governments push this angle so we sit here gatekeeping for them
Nothing will change when half the population is busy helping stop change

You genuinely think that effectively 0% cash rates are a long-term, sustainable option? Seriously?

Has never been my argument or issue with the idea that historic rates should mean anything

Sure, but complaining about it isn't saving the money you need and there is no chance the system will change any time soon. Ideally I'd want negative gearing to be completely abolished because I think investment property accumulation is the greatest factor behind housing unaffordability - but realistically that ain't happening.

Our parents had it good, grand parents even better - we have to work with what we've got now.

Again if you don't complain, if you don't organise and don't pressure then yes nothing will change

This idea that you can complain or save is also just crap.

You're actively pushing back against even talking about the issue let alone doing anything about it, not sure why given you seem to think things should be better

 

[Crankyhawk]

If the Greens Party oppose it because it doesn't go far enough or provides too much tax relief to high income earners, then the path to passage may get complicated.

as in greens may want something closer to my proposed 32.5 goes to 30c and leaves everything else unchanged at the top end and (some tinkering at the bottom end)? maybe.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Fair point, was worded awkwardly. I just don't have empathy for those with (imo) unrealistic expectations but we indeed should rally against how unaffordable housing is nowadays. I know the reality is you have to live at home longer if you want a good shot at a decent house - but it shouldn't have to be.

I'd be happy for those with one investment property to use it for negative gearing, we still need to create something of a rental market. But when you have 10 properties that you are reaping the tax benefits from then you really are taking the piss.

 

[Crankyhawk]

...and thereby breaking a core election promise made (and subsequently repeated on at least 100 occasions).

One term government.

all promises are non core.

 

[Bloods86]

...and thereby breaking a core election promise made (and subsequently repeated on at least 100 occasions).

One term government.

Yes, we know you're only capable of acknowledging events that suit. You don't have to remind us.

We know the Coalition have broken promises before, though one could never quite be sure if they were "core" or "non core" promises (until we got told after the fact).

The Australian public has no reasonable expectation that all promises will be kept. In fact, you've been incensed that Labor has stuck to other promises (i.e. the Voice referendum).

What we have here, is a government arriving at an outcome that is right and good, based on updated information. It's not that common in politics, and something that should be done more often.

But look, I get why you have to say the things you say. It's part of the game, nothing to do with what is the right outcome for the majority of Australians most impacted by cost of living pressures.

 

[FredLeDeux]

My interpretation of a quick read of several bios that have surfaced across various media platforms today:

His time at NewsCorp in various roles (including in reviving the flagging fortunes of Foxtel) was long and eventful, culminating 20 months as head of News Corp - an $8.1 billion company with 10,000 staff - a position from which he resigned more than a decade ago after clashing with the Murdoch family on issues relating to editorial autonomy, accountability and future directions. By the time he resigned as News Corp CEO in August 2013, he had spent 18 years in the NewsCorp empire.

But the sum importance of his 55 year working experience across multiple fields in Australia and overseas is more than just NewsCorp.

He's also a classically trained musician and composer who has composed sonatas and chamber concertos and managed orchestras and opera companies. Following university, he worked in opera, at the Sydney Conservatorium, and at the Australia Council, where he had been made a foundation member of the music board at the age of 20. He then became general manager of Music Rostrum Australia

His passion for the arts and the ABC is long established. In the 1980s he applied for the job as managing director of the ABC despite being only 28 and while he didn't get the job he was recommended to to Phillip Adams, who was then at the Australian Film Commission to work on a large number of public arts projects leading to CEO roles at the Australian Film Commission, Southern Star Entertainment and Musica Viva Australia and also as a senior executive at the ABC in 1991 heading up its pay tv initiative.

He's held numerous board positions (and chairmanships) in commercial and public life over more than three decades including as chairman of the Australian Film Finance Corporation (which he founded for the Commonwealth Government in 1988); chairman of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra and Musica Viva Australia; and as the chairman of the Sydney Opera House Trust from 2005 until 2013. He was also a commissioner of the Australian Football League (AFL) from 2014 until 2021.

Media reports that he has strong business and professional relationships spanning all forms of politics, academia, the arts, politics and social policy but has formed very few deep ongoing personal relationships as part of that journey points to a man that is somewhat of an enigma.

How that will all translate to being the new chair of the ABC at a time of immense upheaval in the media industry and with binary culture wars forming an increasing component of political discussion is beyond my capacity to guess. But I do think that in terms of background and experience he is as well equipped as anyone to not underestimate the political and business challenges he is likely to face in his new role.

It's John Kerr all over again, when will the ALP bloody learn?

 

[Donakebab]

...and thereby breaking a core election promise made (and subsequently repeated on at least 100 occasions).

One term government.

If I promised to meet someone at bar, but the pub was on fire, should I still go through with that promise?

 

[Forward Press]

Again this idea comes from a position of privilege of having the ability via sacrifices to meet the financials
Not everyone has that but talking like this sounds like you think everyone does.


Again every single argument boils down to pointing at the people who did something stupid or desperate and saying everything is your fault.
It's the same attitude used to demonize people on welfare.
Governments push this angle so we sit here gatekeeping for them
Nothing will change when half the population is busy helping stop change



Again if you don't complain, if you don't organise and don't pressure then yes nothing will change

This idea that you can complain or save is also just crap.

You're actively pushing back against even talking about the issue let alone doing anything about it, not sure why given you seem to think things should be better

I'm opposed to the system we have - I've posted extensively in the past about the mistaken idea (encouraged by successive governments) that property ownership is the best way to wealth. In a way I'm quite socialist when it comes to property in that we should have limits on accumulation of property and government should intervene.

I just want to be realistic and work within the system. Yes, I understand it means necessarily accepting what we have, but it's not protesting against the current situation by 'borrowing to the hilt' and then moaning that you can no longer afford your mortgage when interest rates go up by 0.25% to 0.35%. For the record, I have no investment properties and think that having a dozen of it is obscene and that in the olden days the French people brought out guillotines when that happened and maybe it should happen now - but me not participating in it will change little. I also want to have a secure life with a place on my own even if I have to make more sacrifices than my parents.

I would be one of those that think JobSeeker is too low and that the majority on them genuinely are doing it tough on JS and need it raised - but also simultaneously understand cracking down on welfare cheats because there are many out there that ruin it for those genuinely in need by faking medical issues or lying about income. Doesn't mean I don't also want cracking down on multinationals gaming the taxation system (a bigger problem, obviously) or wage theft by small business owners.

Things can co-exist and you can rail against multiple things at once.

 

[FIGJAM]

My view is that while people on $200k may not have Scrooge McDuck cash pools, or be on their 5th and 6th investment property (as was suggested glibly), they have more breathing space than someone on lower/middle income, in terms of getting crunched by cost of living pressures. Or they have more mobility if the worst happens and they have to downsize. And that's the context we're in, re-directing some of Stage 3s benefits to the people who need it most, to be able to meet basic needs.

Yep, which is why I said I'm fine with it despite being directly affected.

But again, there are better ways of doing it both immediately and from a long term point of view. It's just both sides of government are scared of businesses for reasons I don't fully comprehend.

 

[peetoo]

Some of you seriously think that people earning circa $200K per annum are swimming in pools of money like Scrooge McDuck!

1 in 10 tradies earn $200K. It's what a decent middle-aged professional with 10+ years of experience makes. A senior middle manager. Low-grade VPS7 managerial position in the Vic government.

The overwhelming majority of these people are only just scraping into the top bracket, own a maximum of 1 property, don't have the means for tax-dodging schemes and don't manage their own super funds.

Again, I am not asking for a violin for the $200K pa scrapers, but there also needs to be some perspective. Plus engaging in PAYE wars is stoopid, as it is what the government wants, as us bickering amongst ourselves means the government get off scott-free for not targeting businesses in the way that they should.

They certainly have the means to put in several tax minimisation measures, so thelll be meh. In any case the major reform planned might have rendered the margins on some of those measures less attractive

Anyway there was an element of booby trap left by the coalition on this why not put them in while in power and the budget looking better (oops)
Not upset at all if such cynicism blows up in their faces.
For eixample if they carry on too much, labor could contrast the situation with 2019 and say let’s look at what the coalition situation was, and how excessive printing of money since has affected inflation?

 

[Gavin Excell]

still yet to have a negative talkback caller on stage 3 changes, there have been a couple of texts highlighting broken promise but running 75/25 in favor of the cuts (as far as what has been read out by host Raf)
there has been one caller who wants to adjust tax situation for pensioners who earn (reportedly if you earn more than $90 a week you get taxed at 50%) but even that caller is in favor of stage 3 change

I'd suggest 2GB audience may be a tad different

 

[Gralin]

I just want to be realistic and work within the system. Yes, I understand it means necessarily accepting what we have, but it's not protesting against the current situation by 'borrowing to the hilt' and then moaning that you can no longer afford your mortgage when interest rates go up by 0.25% to 0.35%.

Ok but who the **** is saying this outside the made up defence of personal responsibility

For the record, I have no investment properties and think that having a dozen of it is obscene and that in the olden days the French people brought out guillotines when that happened and maybe it should happen now - but me not participating in it will change little. I also want to have a secure life with a place on my own even if I have to make more sacrifices than my parents.

Of course and the problem isn't that you can sacrifice and have some security it's that the number of people in your situation is shrinking

I would be one of those that think JobSeeker is too low and that the majority on them genuinely are doing it tough on JS and need it raised -

You should have stopped here because

but also simultaneously understand cracking down on welfare cheats because there are many out there that ruin it for those genuinely in need by faking medical issues or lying about income.

This bit is bullshit. This is the excuse used to punish everyone.
It would be cheaper and better to fund welfare properly and accept that a small number of people will work the system to get more than they should.
The punitive measures cost more than they save and primarily hurt people doing the right thing.

Doesn't mean I don't also want cracking down on multinationals gaming the taxation system (a bigger problem, obviously) or wage theft by small business owners.

This is unrelated to welfare.
Regulation of business and punishment of the individual

Things can co-exist and you can rail against multiple things at once.

Yes you can rail against multiple things, can even be part of the system while complaining about it

 

[greyhound punter]

Fair point, was worded awkwardly. I just don't have empathy for those with (imo) unrealistic expectations but we indeed should rally against how unaffordable housing is nowadays. I know the reality is you have to live at home longer if you want a good shot at a decent house - but it shouldn't have to be.

People routinely underestimate how likely bad things are to happen. It makes sense, no one likes thinking about the probability of bad things happening.

I am of the belief that the housing market in Australia is an enormous bubble. There is a prevailing mentality that the government "won't let prices fall". As such, doing whatever to borrow as much as you can should be encouraged.

The possibility of 50 to 60% falls in property values should not be ridiculed and I see it as a distinct possibility.

Trade accordingly.

 

[JackOutback]

I don't think another middle aged white guy is what the ABC needs

Don’t think young people have the career experience to head an organisation as large as the ABC, so not sure middle age should be part of the insult.

It’s also a change from old white female.

 

[FIGJAM]

They certainly have the means to put in several tax minimisation measures, so thelll be meh.

I certainly don't have those means and neither do most of the people I know in that bracket.

 

[peetoo]

Had to chuckle at the living at home beyond 18 line.

Yeah, if you're saving for a house or have a mortgage, you may need to be careful with spending, but if living with your parents as an adult is something people need to do to afford a house someday, then there's something wrong with the system.

It’s a part solution to the temporary shortage we have now

 

[Gavin Excell]

Feels to me like there are a lot in your Party who feel that not being Labor should be enough to return them to government and the absence of substantive policy might reflect that. I think Dutton was hoping for a rerun of the R/G/R years when Abbott was able to do pretty much that, during one of his first press conferences as leader he was already road testing the I'll clean up Labor's mess line.

That was when we had a National Debt Emergency when it sat at $20b

 

[greyhound punter]

I'm albo's biggest critic.

This outrage over Stage 3 tax cuts is total codswallop. Get over it. Anyone earning over $180 000 is probably already investing in multiple properties and getting tax benefits through other ways.

The whinging and whining saying, "I've worked hard etc" is total crap. Everyone is working hard. From the cleaner scrubbing toilets on $20 an hour to the cabbie tearing across town.

Sook it up. The LNPs feigned outrage is sickening. Almost makes me want to vote for the ALP.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Why don't the banks have a responsibility in this area?

Again every single argument boils down to pointing at the people who did something stupid or desperate and saying everything is your fault.

Has never been my argument or issue with the idea that historic rates should mean anything

They do. Turns out, people lie to show that their spending capacity is better than it actually is...

This isn't binary, it's not "buy a house or have nowhere to live". People have the option of renting (yes, I know that is pricey too). If you do something stupid then, yes, it is your fault. I'd love to hear an example of someone who was so desperate that they just had to take out a risky loan to buy a house because that was there only housing option.

We'll probably never have an instance where the cash rate is north of 10% again, I completely agree with that. But anyone taking out a loan when the cash rate is 0% should expect that rates will rise. Did they rise quicker than expected, of course, but they were never staying at zero.

 

[Gralin]

They do. Turns out, people lie to show that their spending capacity is better than it actually is...

Yeah and turns out banks tell people they can afford stuff they can't because they don't properly factor in increases/mortgage stress when offering a number to begin with, you know like the royal commission recommended and we had for about 2 years until the government wanted to kick start the economy with housing again

This isn't binary, it's not "buy a house or have nowhere to live". People have the option of renting (yes, I know that is pricey too). If you do something stupid then, yes, it is your fault. I'd love to hear an example of someone who was so desperate that they just had to take out a risky loan to buy a house because that was there only housing option.

There are plenty of people that cannot find a rental, housing security is at an all time low and the conversation needs to move beyond everyone struggling is an idiot because its about as true as everyone unemployed doesn't want to work

We'll probably never have an instance where the cash rate is north of 10% again, I completely agree with that. But anyone taking out a loan when the cash rate is 0% should expect that rates will rise. Did they rise quicker than expected, of course, but they were never staying at zero.

Cash rate was never zero, my argument wasn't that people shouldn't expect rate rises I was disagreeing with your position that current interest rates are "not really high" because of 20+ year old economic policy that despite being used and referenced by the RBA is massively out of touch with 2024

 

[Gralin]

Don’t think young people have the career experience to head an organisation as large as the ABC, so not sure middle age should be part of the insult.

Wasn't an insult was a description

It’s also a change from old white female.

Yeah and he might be better or no better but again I don't think the solution is to replace one member of the board with another

The entire board and management at ABC is responsible for their culture, the coalition had what a decade to reshape the broadcaster into what it is now

It's clear the problems are much more entrenched that Ita

 

[kickazz]

I'm albo's biggest critic.

This outrage over Stage 3 tax cuts is total codswallop. Get over it. Anyone earning over $180 000 is probably already investing in multiple properties and getting tax benefits through other ways.

The whinging and whining saying, "I've worked hard etc" is total crap. Everyone is working hard. From the cleaner scrubbing toilets on $20 an hour to the cabbie tearing across town.

Sook it up. The LNPs feigned outrage is sickening. Almost makes me want to vote for the ALP.

Especially with inflation at it is, now is just not the time. Makes little sense economically.

Literally the only reason to keep them is to pig headedly not break a promise.

It's not even dangerous politically, at least it shouldn't be. Any half decent Labor spin doctor will be able to sell this as "we want to help with the cost of living crisis, but the LNP don't"

No brainer, and had been for quite some time.

 

[Jello_B]

Albo has stuffed the voice, been very poor on the Israel conflict and has completely lied to everyone about these tax cuts (agree or disagree with the change but he’s still dishonest).
Who is there to vote for in Australia now? Dutton is a moron and Albo is an idiot.

 

[Gavin Excell]

Don’t think young people have the career experience to head an organisation as large as the ABC, so not sure middle age should be part of the insult.

It’s also a change from old white female.

Is he even considered middle age?
He's 72