Albo to the rescue

[Siso]

Who mentioned the libs. I expect a lot from politicians and the last 30 years or so they have been below par. Albo is in power at the moment so he is the one that needs to lead by example. We are also told how good the unemployment figures are at the moment. From the ABS- employed persons (aged 15 and over) during the reference week as employed persons (aged 15 and over) during the reference week as those in paid work for at least one hour, unpaid family workers working one hour or more, or individuals temporarily away from their job or business under specific conditions. What a joke and misleading.

[facthunter]

The Reserve Bank want the Unemployment figure to be Higher.The formula is what it is and not decided by LABOR. Nev

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

The Reserve Bank's charter doesn't say that.

[old man emu]

In the current international financial situation, no political party in a small nation such as ours has any control over the country's economy. If the Prime Minister was Taylor or Hanson or whoever is the leader of the Greens, the situation today would be exactly the same. 

[Jerry_Atrick]

8 hours ago, Siso said:

we won't touch negative gearing or CGT.

I actually did touch CGT, and implied in it was the negative gearing (as it is part of a tax package that was disproportionately creating demand in an asset class against all other asset classes considered for investment). I suggest you read my post. I am prepared to stand behind what I say and provide references accordingly when required  (which I am sure other forumites sometimes loathe the extents I will go to). 

 

It equalises treatment of one investment asset class.. and guess what. although the fundamentals would still include investment residential property in a portfolio for stability and growth, people (investors) are going knee jerk. And also, unlike other investment classes, residential property is for people to live in and build some security, The way it was being treated through preferential tax treatment was to artifically inflate the price denying millions of Aussies who aren't as cash rich as others a chance of financial security. A lot of young (and increasingly older) can't rely on the bank of mum and dad. To me, it is a positive step forward and it is not socialist. In fact the regime was in effect wealth socialism - artificially funnelling asset (or redistributing) to the more wealthy and already secure in society using tax incentives to inflate demand. You;re against socialism, but in a perverted way, it is redistributing the wealth - which is what socialism is about.  

 

It took a lot of balls to do the right thing as the backlash was always going to be huge. That to me, is the definition of leadership and one of the reasons why Albo has earned my respect as a leader. I still think he can do a lot better, but compared to the competition and many of his predecessors of both colours, he is not doing bad. 

 

Edited 40 minutes ago by Jerry_Atrick

[Jerry_Atrick]

8 hours ago, Siso said:

Make shit up like $275 off power bills, we won't touch negative gearing or CGT. Standby what I said, conman. He isn't the only one.

This is where you should do a little more research before cherry picking. Every PM or political party has broken some promises. I touched on CGT already.. The reality is, as Albo said, something had to be done... It was getting worse and worse for the average Australian and that is not a good place to be.

 

But, as I said, every political party/PM breaks promises.. some will definitely be intentional and some will be responding to conditions. 

 

For the record, I think the CGT promise as a lie and they had every intention of overhauling it. And, yes, while I agree with the outcome, he should have been more upfront about it.. Or maybe less upfront and vague about it. 

 

But, for the record, I looked up the number of broken promises between Albo and SFM. I have not validated these, but as a guide:

[Edit] This is the result of an ABC/RMIT Fact Check..

 

In all honestly, there is not too much to draw from these as there is a big number in progress for the current government - some may fail for valid reasons and some may fail for political reasons. But my point is there is 20% of the SFM promises failed. All leaders/political parties lie or break promises. And quite materially by the looks (not calibrating size/importance of the promise). 

 

You can prattle on targetting the side you don't like and think the sun shines out of the posterior of the side you do like.. That is your prerogative. But don't be surprised if others take a different point of view and come back at you. 

 

8 hours ago, old man emu said:

Be very, very careful. That statement could readily be taken as defamatory. It has been published on this site, so the site could be prosecuted, and maybe taken down.

I wouldn't worry too much about it.. If it isn't already a defence to defamation, a half witted lawyer could probably successfully persuade the court that a statement claiming fact is so devoid of truth that no average person could believe it to be true.

 

(That is not legal advice by the way... )

Edited 18 minutes ago by Jerry_Atrick

[willedoo]

16 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Fairly close, those numbers. If you take a net figure of promises kept (kept minus broken) it's 26 to 21 in Morrison's favour, so not much in it. I can remember John Howard copping flak on a lot of broken promises in his first budget after defeating the Keating government. The term core or non core promises was invented around then if my memory is correct.