Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

Remove this Banner Ad

Looking at the response it seems to be a good budget politically if the thing people are zeroing in on is the lack of means testing on a $300 rebate. I suspect the reply speech will heavily focus on nuclear energy and not much else.
I think they will say cost of living crisis 1,000 times. Might play a drinking game, every time they say crisis and possibly die.

Full focus on the poor outer-suburban types with mortgage stress.

This will be an LNP speech which completely abandons their usual support for the top-end of town. Trickle-down will not be mentioned any more by the LNP.
 
I think they will say cost of living crisis 1,000 times. Might play a drinking game, every time they say crisis and possibly die.

Full focus on the poor outer-suburban types with mortgage stress.

This will be an LNP speech which completely abandons their usual support for the top-end of town. Trickle-down will not be mentioned any more by the LNP.

Saw the start of this last night when Dutton was querying whether the energy relief should be given to people on high incomes.
 
I think the expectation on the rebate is that, with consumer confidence so low, people are more likely to bank any savings generated by the rebate as opposed to spending it.
That's a pretty unrealistic assumption to make when you're dealing with a cost of living crisis... We keep hearing that people are having to choose between food and medicine, why on earth would they be chucking any extra money in the bank?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I don't buy that for a second... It's not like the money is going directly to tax payers anyway. It would be quite simple to do a high level calculation by region and means test the payment based on gross income. I don't need a $300 reduction in my power bill and I would much rather see that money put to better use.

It's political pragmatism dressed up as equality.

So you don’t want the $300 rebate?
What’s your opinion on the reduction in stage 3 tax cut for the high tax bracket? Is it the same?
 
Are high earners really crying poor that they need the extra tax cut but don’t need the $300 rebate? What is it?
How many high earners are actually crying poor and saying that they need the Stage 3 tax cuts?

Note - I'm excluding the click bait, cherry picked examples that were trotted out by the Murdoch press when the changes were first announced.

Don't conflate what the LNP is saying high earners are thinking with what they're actually thinking.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Looking at the response it seems to be a good budget politically if the thing people are zeroing in on is the lack of means testing on a $300 rebate. I suspect the reply speech will heavily focus on nuclear energy and not much else.
I'm still suprised Dutton is still going on about nuclear energy given its fracturing his own party
 
Yet he wants them to get $5000 extra tax cut? You can’t make this up…

I think the rationale other than "Labor = bad" for this is defending their own tax cut plan. It was in stages with certain stages to provide cuts to certain income levels, and the last one was for people earning more than the average wage. Either way, the revised cuts are legislated and the body politic is about to move on.
 
I'm still suprised Dutton is still going on about nuclear energy given its fracturing his own party

It might be causing ructions between parliamentarians, but the branch membership love it.

And a few public disagreements between fed Libs and state Libs might not be the worst thing, especially for certain state divisions of the party.
 
How many high earners are actually crying poor and saying that they need the Stage 3 tax cuts?

Note - I'm excluding the click bait, cherry picked examples that were trotted out by the Murdoch press when the changes were first announced.

Don't conflate what the LNP is saying high earners are thinking with what they're actually thinking.
IMG_2522.jpeg
 
It might be causing ructions between parliamentarians, but the branch membership love it.

And a few public disagreements between fed Libs and state Libs might not be the worst thing, especially for certain state divisions of the party.
The state of the modern Liberal Party makes nuclear very difficult politically. In an ideal world the nuclear reactors would go as far away from the leafy green suburbs that the Libs called home for years as possible and into the places that they're now looking at as a road back to power which leaves them in rather a pickle.
 
I think the rationale other than "Labor = bad" for this is defending their own tax cut plan. It was in stages with certain stages to provide cuts to certain income levels, and the last one was for people earning more than the average wage. Either way, the revised cuts are legislated and the body politic is about to move on.

They’ve stated that they would reintroduce the stage 3 tax cut fir high earners..
 
Thank you for proving my point... Can you please show me examples of where high income earners are actually saying they need the tax cuts, rather than re-posting a sh1t clickbait headline?
Take a read of the Ausfinance subreddit if you want to see some examples of this.

These people definitely exist, but whether they represent the majority is debatable.
 
They’ve stated that they would reintroduce the stage 3 tax cut fir high earners..
Didn't the LNP say it, then back-tracked, then Dutton disappeared because he didn't want to say anything?

That's their current MO. Throw something out there, and if it doesn't go well, disappear and come back with something else weeks later as if the last thing never happened. Not a bad plan from opposition, but undermines credibility over time. I guess they're banking that the public doesn't give either side any credibility to begin with, so what's to lose?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top