Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
The HAFF wasn't a good policy because affordable housing is an expense that should be outlaid right now, as it's an emergency right now. The only other government expense that uses a fund mechanism is the Future Fund, which makes sense as it's a long-term need with a relatively small payout each year, so the funds invested have time to accumulate and compound. This is completely unsuitable for an immediate expense because the funds do not have sufficient time to compound to a good level. Otherwise, why doesn't the government just use this method for every expense, like defence spending?
The delay got Labor to remove their cap of $500m per year in distribution to social housing and make it a floor instead, and supply more initial funding to start the program. It isn't ideal, but it's better than the initial idea which would have been a drop in the ocean of what is required for true housing affordability.
Right. Would you tolerate racism, sexism and homophobia in a political party? If you wouldn't, maybe that makes you an ideologue too. Once upon a time people would have condemned you for not agreeing that Aboriginals are inferior to white people, women shouldn't work after marriage and gay people are morally depraved threats to children.
Do you understand how climate change works? Any new coal project is a disaster, and new gas projects should be limited and subject to very stringent controls, not the open season on drilling and fracking that Labor have allowed. Plibersek made a deal with the Greens for an environmental watchdog to scrutinise such projects, and Albanese came in over the top and killed it because he didn't want to lose those sweet mining industry donations.
Name one. It should be very easy.
Congratulations, you're getting old early!
Great. That does not give Israel a free pass to kill as many innocent people as they like, and it does not make a criticism of Israel an attack on Jewish Australians.
No, you're not. Demanding a state be run for all those living within it, rather than just those of one religion, is demanding equality over fascism. Israel has now made a two-state solution impossible with their repeated theft of land in the West Bank, so the only solutions left are a one-state solution with equal rights and respect for all, or an apartheid regime where Jews can steal whatever land they desire and the Palestinians are kept in open-air prison camps and bombed periodically. The Greens do not want the second solution, so they are asking for the first. If that's anti-semitic, then the term has no valid meaning anymore. By the way, the Palestinians are Semites.
You know Likud has "from the sea to the river" in their founding charter, right? But I guess that's fine and dandy. The concept of a state where people are treated equally regardless of religion or ethnicity though, oh no, that's racist.
Nope, bullshit.
You know there are Jews in the Greens, right? They ran Campbell Gome, a Jewish Australian man, in a winnable seat in the last Victorian state election. It's complete nonsense to say they completely ignore Jews, they just won't coddle Israel the way the majors do.
When was the last race riot against Jews in Australia? Cronulla in 2005 was a race riot against Arabs.
Well there’s a bit of common sense and reality. Great reading it. Thanks mate.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
The failure of the Greens to win more votes should be concerning. Are the Greens interested in self-reflection or do they view their ability to attract robust opposition as a badge of honor?
Thanks for confirming my suspicions- that the Greens are a bunch of fundamentalist ideologues, incapable of pragmatism, who see everything in black and white. Shades of grey not allowed.
Thanks for confirming you can't rebut my points, and are still sticking to your preconceived notions regardless of what evidence is presented to you. People believe what they want to believe, evidently.
Of course it’s not a collapse, but it is kind of concerning when you look at the votes they are leaving on the table
Your comments entirely validated my point- you did a great job. Thank you.
You're welcome. One day when you realise society has passed you by, perhaps reflect on why that is.
Obsessing over antisemitism and not giving comparable airtime to Islamophobia = Islamophobic.
Most people, like me, voted for parties that got way more than 12% of the vote....
Well done you! Give yourself a big pat on the back!
Sheesh what a rollover.
Who said anything about the Greens capturing the teal base?
Probably because they have different economic and social policies compared to the Teal independents. The Teals are just Liberals who understand climate science, yeah the Greens agree with them about environmental matters but on other matters they likely have quite varied policies. I'm not sure why anyone would think ex-LNP voters would vote for the Greens.
Because Green (and ALP) voters are voting tactically in those electorates to elect an independent instead of an LNP member.
Preferential voting is now considered voting "tactically" by Demonic Ascent.
They would preference the independent 1st to ensure they finished 1st or 2nd in the primary vote. If they fall below that then their preferences will likely be distributed to one of the two majors.
In terms of being able to impact policy they probably gained relevance ironically. But will they use this power. All they have to do is be closer to right on labors left than the liberals are closer to the left on labors right. Do that and they can impact nearly every policy labor puts to the senate.
