Is our 2 party system just a con?

[Kyle Communications]

Octave. The proof is in the results. How can you get 34% of the primary vote yet hold 85% of the available seats?....population stacking is one of course look at Burke's electorate. Are you trying to tell me those voters make up their own mind on preferences...half cant even speak english so they follow the how to vote cards. This goes on all over the electorates. Most walk in and grab a sheet and then do a donkey tick on the ballot paper.

 

 

[red750]

Your preferences only apply in your electorate, which wins one seat in parliament. To win government, a party must win sufficient electorates in a first past the post race in the House, so it's only a partial preference vote.

[facthunter]

With FPP and a Lot of Candidates a ridiculously Low number of Votes can get someone in by  a small difference. . FPP is NOT the Magic bullet. A DECENT Media would be the Biggest Help.  Nev

[Kyle Communications]

I agree with you there Nev...the media in this country is shockingly bad. Journalism is now tainted with woke and left bias. Very few have any right bias its mainly left.

What ever happened to unbiased fact based journalism that just gave you the facts and not the spin depending on who owns the media company

The ABC used to until it was poisioned by idealogy and crap interviewers

[octave]

The thing with preferential voting is that  I can send a signal. My seat is a safe seat, it has not changed hands in decades. Whilst I know my vote will flow through to the least worst of the 2 major candidates. 

If the winning candidate only just scrapes in then post election analysis may pus a party right or left depending on where the preferences are coming from. A strong One Nation vote is a signal for the major parties to the right and a strong flow from the Greens may signal something different. No system is perfect.  

[facthunter]

Kyle, You think Sky and Murdoch don't have any right wing Bias? I can't see how you can say that with a straight face. Nev

Edited 6 hours ago by facthunter
typo

[old man emu]

Newspaper editorials have always been political when the there is a political discussion going on. They are not something that Murdoch et al invented. In Australia you can go back to the very first newspapers published in Sydney. (You can find them using Trove https://trove.nla.gov.au/ ) and see the political editorials therein. The editorials always promoted one view or another of the situation.

[Kyle Communications]

Nev. you didnt read what I wrote. I said there are not many that have a right bias.....the only really right side and not far right bias is Sky (any owned by Murdoch) all the rest are left or far left like the ABC is now

 

[octave]

Channel 7?    Their recent hatchet job on batteries was disgusting. Sure make your case but don't lie.

[Kyle Communications]

Actually ch7 has been a bit unusual lately. I noticed that when they showed Charmers interview when the interest rates went up and he blamed the Iran war basically and they then showed Michelle Bullocks assesment they did NOT show the the part where she said its mainly govt out of control spending that did the damage and not the war was the main reason..they essentially reported the story as Charmers version and did not show the other side. Then Spotlight did their program. so they seem to be swinging both ways on those 2 reports. Maybe its as usual its only for clicks not showing both sides of the one story.

 

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

Yeah, Govts' blame an external "enemy", rather than themselves.

[octave]

Is this government responsible for high interest rates?  Being a logical rational person I ask if high interest rates are only in this country. The US has quite a right wing government and high interest rates.  Inflation and interest rates are high everywhere. 

[Kyle Communications]

We are pretty much the omly first world country with the highest inflation rate. The USA is lower..even the basket case pommies are better than us .Japan is extremely low,

All economists and experts say its the amount of spending this government is doing. They are addicted to it.

The budgets they put out are creative accounting they do not show the full costs ..there is so much "off the books" they dont show which would then show the real balance sheet of Australia.

There are now literally more people working directly for the government in one way or another than the rest.

This country is not productive any more. I saw a stat a couple of days ago where 1700 private businesses have gone bust. 300 off in qld and 600 odd in NSW and the rest in Victoria..and that was the last month of two. Those businesses are private and didnt work or supply goods to the govt or their projects.

We are being led down the wrong track for the past 4 or 5 years. We need to turn this around. We need more of our young people to not do arty farty uni courses and get them on the tools..they will earn a lot more and build this place back up instead of importing dog walkers and yoga instructors and foreign studebts who just suck on the system and dont make this country productive

 

Is this too hard to do or am I barking up the wrong tree and I should get in my time machine and go back to the 80's

This country is so rooted now. Yes I am a baby boomer and what I have I have worked for and paid millions of dollars in tax yet apparently I am a drag on the system and not something to aspire to apparently

 

 

 

 

[octave]

I believe Australia is 4.35 percent and the US is 4.35 percent. Not a huge difference.

[facthunter]

 Don't pretend what's going on in the ME isn't the Main Problem World wide, Plus Ukraine& Trumps antics. We aren't doing that Bad under the circumstance despite the Hysteria some try to Make of it. It wasn't Labor who closed down  4 of the six refineries . Have you got a "funny" radio station going on in your ear all day Kyle? That will do it, OR Joining PHON. The RBA sets Interest rates no Matter who is in power and THEY could put us in a recession if they apply the Brake too Much. Zero Interest rates are Never Normal. Nev

[willedoo]

It seems funny hearing people refer to 4% as high interest rates. It was 17.5% when I took out a variable rate loan to buy my place, and the loan peaked at around 20%. My father was paying around 22% on his business loan at it's peak.

[Kyle Communications]

2 hours ago, octave said:

I believe Australia is 4.35 percent and the US is 4.35 percent. Not a huge difference.

From Grok

 

what is the current inflation rate in the USA and compare it to the current inflation here in Australia

Thought for 3s

 

As of the latest data (March 2026):

 

bls.gov

• United States: The annual CPI inflation rate is 3.3% (up from 2.4% in February 2026).
   

  tradingeconomics.com
• Australia: The annual CPI inflation rate is 4.6% (up from 3.7% in February 2026).
   

  abs.gov.au

Quick Comparison

• Australia's inflation is currently higher than the US by about 1.3 percentage points.
• Both countries saw inflation rise in March 2026, but Australia's increase was sharper (driven by housing, transport/fuel, and goods prices).
   

  tradingeconomics.com
• The US rate has been more moderate recently but ticked up partly due to energy (e.g., gasoline).
   

  bls.gov
• Australia's rate is now at its highest since around late 2023 and sits further above its central bank's 2–3% target band, while the US rate is closer to (but still above) the Fed's typical 2% goal.
   

  tradingeconomics.com

[Kyle Communications]

Wille. you are correct. I had 2 properties at the time. My home/workshop and the house next door that I purchased to rent out...18% from memory I was dealing with on both places

That wasnt caused by the economy though...Keating and the banks were fighting. The banks won

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Kyle Communications

[octave]

I was referring to interest rates and I got those figure slightly wrong, typed over a boozy lunch. 

 Just referring to inflation we have 3.3 compared to 4.6.  this means that a $100 item in the US would be $103.30 after one year whilst in Australia that item would cost $104.60. This is quite a similar inflation rate.  It doesn't really scream great financial management compared to atrocious financial management. Different countries have different strengths and weaknesses such as the size of the market.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[octave]

Just jumping back to the first past the post voting systems.  Here are the countries that have that system.  I can't really see a trend here as to whether these countries are better or worse to live in.

 

First Past the Post (FPTP) is a majoritarian electoral system where the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins, even without an absolute majority. As of May 2026, roughly 68 countries and territories use this system for their national legislatures, many of which are former British colonies. 

Electoral Reform Society +2

Countries Using FPTP for National Legislatures

This list includes major nations and representative examples across different regions:

The Americas & Caribbean

United States

Canada

Belize

The Bahamas

Barbados

Jamaica

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago 

 

Europe & Central Asia

United Kingdom (for House of Commons only)

Belarus (House of Representatives)

Azerbaijan 

Electoral Reform Society +3

Asia

India (Lok Sabha)

Pakistan

Bangladesh

Malaysia

Nepal (Note: Nepal uses a mixed system, but the plurality component is significant)

Laos 

 

Africa

Botswana

Ethiopia

Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Uganda, and Zambia

Zimbabwe 

 

Oceania

Cook Island

Country

Cook Islands

Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, and Tonga 

 

 

Key Characteristics

Plurality-Based: A candidate only needs one more vote than their nearest rival to win.

Single-Member Districts: Voters typically elect one representative for their local area.

Direct Result: It often leads to a "winner-takes-all" outcome, frequently resulting in two-party dominance.