The Real Federal Politics Discussion Thread (No Left v Right)

Remove this Banner Ad

Albo is just more identifiable and well known to the average voter. You would be hard pressed to find a voter here in WA who even knows who Jim Chalmers is.

The reality is that elections are becoming more and more presidential and choice of leader is critical to electoral success.
I just don’t think Albanese can beat Morrison
 
We changed prime ministers less than a year before a federal election and the LNP still won. If that's not a slip up I don't know what is.

The ALP were punished for the Rudd/Gillard drama, why weren't the LNP?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

We changed prime ministers less than a year before a federal election and the LNP still won. If that's not a slip up I don't know what is.

The ALP were punished for the Rudd/Gillard drama, why weren't the LNP?
1. Chris Bowen is confusing and goes on tangents
2. Shorten misread his market
3. People received an LNP shock message bemoaning labor and their inability to ‘manage your money’
4. Morrison scared QLD voters into not voting for labor due to Adani
5. Labor packaged up no tax concessions from franking credits and to grandfather NG.
 
I just don’t think Albanese can beat Morrison
A drover’s dog could beat Morrison. Unfortunately for Labor, they had Shorten. Let’s not start declaring Morrison a genius; he went to an election against a deeply unpopular leader not declaring any policies and just scaring the bejeezus out of people. Labor will return the favour next election and he’ll be just another political loser.
 
It's likely the household debt chickens will come home to roost in Morrison's term. This might have been a good election to lose.
 
A drover’s dog could beat Morrison. Unfortunately for Labor, they had Shorten. Let’s not start declaring Morrison a genius; he went to an election against a deeply unpopular leader not declaring any policies and just scaring the bejeezus out of people. Labor will return the favour next election and he’ll be just another political loser.
Hopefully
 
A drover’s dog could beat Morrison. Unfortunately for Labor, they had Shorten. Let’s not start declaring Morrison a genius; he went to an election against a deeply unpopular leader not declaring any policies and just scaring the bejeezus out of people. Labor will return the favour next election and he’ll be just another political loser.
I don't think so. Acting the grinning lunatic is clearly enough to get the result. Labor need to make sure whoever leads them to the next election doesn't have a policy of any sort, but can goofball for the cameras. Then its an even fight.
 
1. Chris Bowen is confusing and goes on tangents
Really? I think he speaks pretty well. One of his errors though was coming off as a bit of an arse continually smugly calling stuff like the franking refund credits a gift. He's arguably correct but it wasn't a good look.
 
Really? I think he speaks pretty well. One of his errors though was coming off as a bit of an arse continually smugly calling stuff like the franking refund credits a gift. He's arguably correct but it wasn't a good look.
Well I mean the franking credit rebate is a strange policy, we are the only country to do it. The issue with a franking credit is that when you declare your dividend you’re declaring the full amount including the tax portion, then you get taxed with your marginal tax rate. I understand why people get frustrated, because if you can’t claim a credit back you’re declaring the full amount and getting taxed on it, then paying the gap if your tax rate is higher than the company tax rate.

It’s actually a lot worse if you’re in that middle band and your tax rate is slightly above the company tax rate. Labor’s argument is the rich can afford it, but the middle tier actually cops it.

At the end of the day, it’s a dud concept, and personally I feel there should just be a dividend tax system where we apply marginal tax rates against dividends paid like we do on income.

Bowen to me just can’t sell it to people, they need to argue that essentially they’re injecting a heavier tax on the wealthy by not allowing the rebate. I mean there’s no way around it. Seriously, I’d have left it alone.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I don't understand how they get this stuff so wrong.

This is how I see policy making. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Party comes up with areas that they would like to make better ie hospitals, cancer care etc. These areas will therefore need extra funding. Funding has to come from somewhere. Accessing all the data they find they can cut expenses from somethings, raise revenue from others, borrow if neccessary or use existing funds. They then allocate those cuts, extra revenue, borrowings or existing funds to the new funding areas. A simple concept. A budget. All done by a lot of fairly well paid workers.

The next stage is who will these changes impact, how it will impact them and will that impact enable us to form or keep government, so we can enact these changes. This is where all these fairly well paid workers should be earning their pay.

So lets look at one policy, excess franking credits. Regardless of good policy v bad policy (I'm not discussing that) how can it be that this policy is released and then amended with the pensioner guarantee? Was this not analysed to the nth degree prior to being released? If it wasn't then why not?

What about change in behaviour due to new policies. Are they truly analysed honestly and factored into forward estimates?

Policy making has always baffled me.


They saw $57 billion and stopped looking closely and started thinking only about spending it.
 
Really? I think he speaks pretty well. One of his errors though was coming off as a bit of an arse continually smugly calling stuff like the franking refund credits a gift. He's arguably correct but it wasn't a good look.

He's too mumbly. Too arrogant.

His petulant style of twitter posting (or that of his team) where he constantly sniped at Frydenberg was embarrassing. Good riddance.
 
He's too mumbly. Too arrogant.

His petulant style of twitter posting (or that of his team) where he constantly sniped at Frydenberg was embarrassing. Good riddance.

Agree on your 1st comment
The second is a steaming pile of hippo s**t
 
That and godliness. If our PM is a dinkum about his faith he believes that the earth is 2000 years old and you can pray the gay away. Or you can believe that his christianty is all for show and that he doesn't actually hold those values. Idiot or conman, the choice is yours.
Conman please is my hope. Then is a normal politician and may get some useful policies
 
It's likely the household debt chickens will come home to roost in Morrison's term. This might have been a good election to lose.
Global recession very possible when you consider the fallout from Trump's trade war with China, Brexit and the increasing US debt servicing taking a larger slice of their federal budget each year.
 
In the end we are a small player globally. If China and the US continue and expand their trade war it will have a far deeper impact on our economy than the RBA cutting interest rates by 0.25% and will certainly threaten the promised surplus.
 
With good policies and evidence of a good team Id vote Labor.

Shorten was terrible and the headless chook way they sold their policies at first, then just assumed the win was theirs.

No thanks.
Voters tend to want a little bit of charisma as well - it's not just an Australian thing, it's global.
Shorten just isn't charismatic.
 
As opposed to fatso god boy who just oozes charisma and authenticity?
Like his policies or not Morrison is more charismatic than Shorten.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top