Talking Politics

[AngryAnt]

Wow! It's amazing he was voted in for 4 terms given, to quote spook, he "set the country back at least three decades".

You obviously weren't a fan, but he must have had some supporters.

I'm certainly happy to give you some of the above, particularly the troops to war but I'll pick you up on a few:

I would have thought the first home owner's grant was a good initiative, giving many people the opportunity to own property that they otherwise couldn't afford. I have friends who took advantage of that initiative and now have good equity in their homes, and the ability to use that equity to make further investments. Why are you against the first home owner's grant which is still in place today? Why haven't the ALP scrapped it?

Overheating the housing market results in a boom bust situation. The largest peak-to-trough housing price drop since 1980 (excluding the COVID years) was 8.7% in 1982-83. Can you tell me when the housing market actually overheated?

Crippling mortgages for life and people frozen out of the market? With the prime interest rate being below 5% since 2008, it's been a great time to invest in property. I don't understand your angst, and what a government can do to alter market forces. Of course some people are frozen out of the property market, the same with every other major city worldwide. Still plenty of affordable housing (and employment) in regional area if you're prepared to get off your arse and have a look. Governments can't control the price of housing, just the same as they can't control currencies, commodities etc. Does my head in when any government gets blamed for rising housing prices. Governments can certainly assist those less fortunate with public housing projects etc, but they can't effect market forces.

Immigration is an essential part of growth. Are you against immigration? Are you scared that immigrants are going to take your job? Nonsense when you say "fuelling immigration for the primary purpose of increasing demand for housing". Do you have any idea how screwed we would be as a country without immigration? Let's see how Japan ends up down the track without immigration.

I am 100% against government-funding of private schools (I call them Government-funded, non-public schools as they sure as sh!t aint private or independent). I'm still waiting for the ALP to stop this. Do you think they will re-direct fund bound for GFNPS to public schools? I haven't seen one indication they will.

Ah Medicare. So much BS flies around regarding Medicare. How did he run it down exactly? I think Medicare is brilliant. As background, I owned and ran a bulk-billing medical centre in regional Victoria for 12 years from 2007. Paid my GPs well, had happy patients and the centre made good profit. Win-win-win. Now apparently bulk-billing is not viable. Complete nonsense.

On your final point, privatization leads to competition and productivity. If you rip off consumers, they'll go elsewhere. Do you really think a monopoly like the old SEC, Gas & Fuel Corp or the Water Board were big on competition and productivity? These dinosaurs were so inefficient, they had to be sold off.

One final point...do you give Howard credit for gun control after Port Arthur? I have some rusted on Labour mates who like you, hated Howard, but absolutely thought those reforms were brilliant and give him full credit for it.

BTW, my politics is firmly in the centre. I have voted for both ALP and LNP before...I'm no right ring nutjob. LNP with Morrison and Dutton have completely lost me. I'm liking what I'm seeing with Albo so far, but as for Dan...I think it'll end in tears.

Some very good points Nico and game is starting soon so I won't reply to all of them here, maybe tomorrow.

Nowhere did I say he wasn't popular - not sure where that come from. You don't get to win back to back elections without being an astute politician and yes, his middle-class and wealthy welfare system undoubtedly bought a lot of votes for him.

Gun control - yes, absolutely - he had to stand up against many of his own natural constituents to get that through.

 

[AngryAnt]

John Howard

Howard became Australia’s second-longest-serving Prime Minister, and during his term in office achieved nation-wide gun control legislation and significant reforms in industrial relations and taxation.

www.nma.gov.au

Im about to go to the footy ,so l won't add anything else .
Go the Tiges

Enjoy the game Bengal!

 

[Baloo]

Gun control is about the only thing I give Howard credit for. Even though it meant I no longer have my semi-auto shotguns.

Sabotaging the Republic referendum is something I won't ever forgive him for.
Instituting middle class welfare is probably his biggest damage to Australia long term.

And he couldn't bowl for *smile*

 

[Nico]

Gun control is about the only thing I give Howard credit for. Even though it meant I no longer have my semi-auto shotguns.

Sabotaging the Republic referendum is something I won't ever forgive him for.
Instituting middle class welfare is probably his biggest damage to Australia long term.

And he couldn't bowl for *smile*

Lol. He was an embarrassingly sh!te bowler, and his bloody power walking geez

 

[TT33]

Lol. He was an embarrassingly sh!te bowler, and his bloody power walking geez

His eyebrows had their own Postcode

 

[AngryAnt]

Wow! It's amazing he was voted in for 4 terms given, to quote spook, he "set the country back at least three decades".

You obviously weren't a fan, but he must have had some supporters.

I'm certainly happy to give you some of the above, particularly the troops to war but I'll pick you up on a few:

I would have thought the first home owner's grant was a good initiative, giving many people the opportunity to own property that they otherwise couldn't afford. I have friends who took advantage of that initiative and now have good equity in their homes, and the ability to use that equity to make further investments. Why are you against the first home owner's grant which is still in place today? Why haven't the ALP scrapped it?

Overheating the housing market results in a boom bust situation. The largest peak-to-trough housing price drop since 1980 (excluding the COVID years) was 8.7% in 1982-83. Can you tell me when the housing market actually overheated?

Crippling mortgages for life and people frozen out of the market? With the prime interest rate being below 5% since 2008, it's been a great time to invest in property. I don't understand your angst, and what a government can do to alter market forces. Of course some people are frozen out of the property market, the same with every other major city worldwide. Still plenty of affordable housing (and employment) in regional area if you're prepared to get off your arse and have a look. Governments can't control the price of housing, just the same as they can't control currencies, commodities etc. Does my head in when any government gets blamed for rising housing prices. Governments can certainly assist those less fortunate with public housing projects etc, but they can't effect market forces.

Immigration is an essential part of growth. Are you against immigration? Are you scared that immigrants are going to take your job? Nonsense when you say "fuelling immigration for the primary purpose of increasing demand for housing". Do you have any idea how screwed we would be as a country without immigration? Let's see how Japan ends up down the track without immigration.

I am 100% against government-funding of private schools (I call them Government-funded, non-public schools as they sure as sh!t aint private or independent). I'm still waiting for the ALP to stop this. Do you think they will re-direct fund bound for GFNPS to public schools? I haven't seen one indication they will.

Ah Medicare. So much BS flies around regarding Medicare. How did he run it down exactly? I think Medicare is brilliant. As background, I owned and ran a bulk-billing medical centre in regional Victoria for 12 years from 2007. Paid my GPs well, had happy patients and the centre made good profit. Win-win-win. Now apparently bulk-billing is not viable. Complete nonsense.

On your final point, privatization leads to competition and productivity. If you rip off consumers, they'll go elsewhere. Do you really think a monopoly like the old SEC, Gas & Fuel Corp or the Water Board were big on competition and productivity? These dinosaurs were so inefficient, they had to be sold off.

One final point...do you give Howard credit for gun control after Port Arthur? I have some rusted on Labour mates who like you, hated Howard, but absolutely thought those reforms were brilliant and give him full credit for it.

BTW, my politics is firmly in the centre. I have voted for both ALP and LNP before...I'm no right ring nutjob. LNP with Morrison and Dutton have completely lost me. I'm liking what I'm seeing with Albo so far, but as for Dan...I think it'll end in tears.

1. Home owners grant - yes, two edged sword - helps some but inflates the market. It's not the worst thing though - governments should be working on increasing housing stock for lower income families, not promoting wealth through a portfolio of investment properties for rich people. You'd have to ask the ALP what they are doing, I'm not the ALP.

2. Immigration for growth - yes for sure, but you then have to create the infrastructure to support that immigration, not force people into existing housing stock which then increases housing costs for everyone again. But the comfortable middle class want the value of their homes to go up, so nothing changes.

3. We agree on education, we agree the ALP probably won't do much. I'm not the ALP.

4. Medicare - Howard forced us into inefficient private health care and cut health budgets - a trend that has continued (and yes it's also a state issue). I applaud your management of your rural practice, but just because you bulkbilled and made it work why then is bulkbilling almost totally gone from practices in the cities? You say funding of medicare isn't the problem - tell that to poor people who pay gap fees when they visit the GP.

5. "Privatisation leads to competition and productivity" - straight from the Milton Friedman handbook - but we don't really have competition in utitilities do we? We have a mishmash of "public/private partnerships" which means that governments award lucrative contracts to private sector mates which results in inefficient contracts - like gold plating the power pole infrastructure rather than changing the network to accomodate intermittent renewable sources, home based renewable systems and the like. How do I go elsewhere in terms of the monopolies/oligopolies around power supply? Sure, I can change retailer - but apart from marginal savings if I swap retailer every 6 months I'm still getting power from the same suppliers.

Meanwhile the likes of Morrison and Perrotet consciously run down government services and public utilities/health to force us into the "private is more efficient" paradigm. Look at the real world, not an economics textbook.

 

[DavidSSS]

Yes, it has been a great time to invest in property, just not such a great time for those who want to live in a property. Housing is way over-priced compared to income and the beneficiaries have been the investors. I own a house, I live in it, the market value of the house is irrelevant because if I sell I either have nowhere to live or I need to buy in the same market I sold in, overpriced sale price and oversized purchase price.

To say that governments cannot influence the housing market is simply bollocks. Investors force house prices up, so build heaps of public housing so there is somewhere cheap to live for those less well off, and less rental return for landlords, that will impact prices. Regulate such that investors pay more tax on a home they do not live in. Get rid of the tax break for the rich that is negative gearing. Get rid of the capital gains tax discount, you earn money by doing no work and just owning an asset, you should pay more tax not less.

While we're at it, all those horrible apartment blocks going up which barely have any apartments for people to raise a family, tax the absolute crap out of any landlord who rents them out short term - you want to AirBnB your apartment, fine, you pay well over 50% tax on the earnings and you pay whether it is rented out or not.

Plenty of ways to influence the property market. One of the biggest problems now though is that it has been allowed to get so out of control that making housing more affordable will penalise those who bought recently, and that is a political problem you can't ignore.

DS

 

[tigerman]

Housing in Australia was more affordable before Howard brought in "the first home buyers grant". Up until then people saved until they had enough for a deposit. The first home buyers grant put more people in the market, and prices increased.

This is an article from 2007.


"Australia's leading real estate body is pushing to double the federal first-home buyers' grant to $14,000, giving people a chance to crack into the booming property market.
The Real Estate Institute of Australia (REIA) told the Nine Network a $14,000 grant would be the best way to help young people realise their dream of home ownership.
The grant was introduced seven years ago but the property market has since doubled, and in some cases, tripled in price, the institute said.

"It certainly is a crisis in my view, right across the country," REIA president Graham Joyce told the Nine Network."

Push to double first home-buyers' grant

www.smh.com.au

 

[Sintiger]

Read this book back in the day. Have it at home somewhere, might drag it out for a reminder !!

https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/1948788...6820&msclkid=0924b121cef916f9a005d532217e7209

 

[Nico]

Yes, it has been a great time to invest in property, just not such a great time for those who want to live in a property. Housing is way over-priced compared to income and the beneficiaries have been the investors. I own a house, I live in it, the market value of the house is irrelevant because if I sell I either have nowhere to live or I need to buy in the same market I sold in, overpriced sale price and oversized purchase price.

To say that governments cannot influence the housing market is simply bollocks. Investors force house prices up, so build heaps of public housing so there is somewhere cheap to live for those less well off, and less rental return for landlords, that will impact prices. Regulate such that investors pay more tax on a home they do not live in. Get rid of the tax break for the rich that is negative gearing. Get rid of the capital gains tax discount, you earn money by doing no work and just owning an asset, you should pay more tax not less.

While we're at it, all those horrible apartment blocks going up which barely have any apartments for people to raise a family, tax the absolute crap out of any landlord who rents them out short term - you want to AirBnB your apartment, fine, you pay well over 50% tax on the earnings and you pay whether it is rented out or not.

Plenty of ways to influence the property market. One of the biggest problems now though is that it has been allowed to get so out of control that making housing more affordable will penalise those who bought recently, and that is a political problem you can't ignore.

DS

If governments can influence the housing market, why haven't they done so? Surely that's on Albo's agenda. Right?

Housing market is supply and demand. Because more people want to live in Toorak and Double Bay compared to West Broken Hill, their prices are way higher. Should governments intervene with the price of properties in Toorak and Double Bay to make it affordable for everyone? Housing is very expensive in capital cities, but go out to the regional areas and you can pick up newly built 4 bedroom homes for $400K. Plenty of employment in the regional areas ATM as well. You cannot view the property market purely through capital cities prices.

Investors provide rental properties. Get rid of investors from the property market and there'll be less rental stock which will force rents up. I'm sure the abolition of negative gearing and the capital gains discount is also on Albo's agenda right? Hawke abolished negative gearing in 1985, then re-introduced it 1987. Why did he do this? Why didn't he stick it out?

Agree with you about short term rentals.

BTW, there already is public housing for those less well off. Could there be more? Sure, but Dan and Albo must be all over that.

 

[Nico]

Housing in Australia was more affordable before Howard brought in "the first home buyers grant". Up until then people saved until they had enough for a deposit. The first home buyers grant put more people in the market, and prices increased.

This is an article from 2007.


"Australia's leading real estate body is pushing to double the federal first-home buyers' grant to $14,000, giving people a chance to crack into the booming property market.
The Real Estate Institute of Australia (REIA) told the Nine Network a $14,000 grant would be the best way to help young people realise their dream of home ownership.
The grant was introduced seven years ago but the property market has since doubled, and in some cases, tripled in price, the institute said.

"It certainly is a crisis in my view, right across the country," REIA president Graham Joyce told the Nine Network."

Push to double first home-buyers' grant

www.smh.com.au

Yes Howard introduced the grant. Why didn't Rudd or Gillard abolish it? Will Albo abolish it?

 

[tigerman]

Yes Howard introduced the grant. Why didn't Rudd or Gillard abolish it? Will Albo abolish it?

Albo will build a lot more social housing that what the Libs did.
The Albanese Govt can't get rid of all the Libs bad populist policies in one go.
Albo's already made changes to superannuation. Howard and Costello allowed themselves and their fat-cat mates to put a lump sum of up to $1 million into superannuation.

 

[Nico]

1. Home owners grant - yes, two edged sword - helps some but inflates the market. It's not the worst thing though - governments should be working on increasing housing stock for lower income families, not promoting wealth through a portfolio of investment properties for rich people. You'd have to ask the ALP what they are doing, I'm not the ALP.

2. Immigration for growth - yes for sure, but you then have to create the infrastructure to support that immigration, not force people into existing housing stock which then increases housing costs for everyone again. But the comfortable middle class want the value of their homes to go up, so nothing changes.

3. We agree on education, we agree the ALP probably won't do much. I'm not the ALP.

4. Medicare - Howard forced us into inefficient private health care and cut health budgets - a trend that has continued (and yes it's also a state issue). I applaud your management of your rural practice, but just because you bulkbilled and made it work why then is bulkbilling almost totally gone from practices in the cities? You say funding of medicare isn't the problem - tell that to poor people who pay gap fees when they visit the GP.

5. "Privatisation leads to competition and productivity" - straight from the Milton Friedman handbook - but we don't really have competition in utitilities do we? We have a mishmash of "public/private partnerships" which means that governments award lucrative contracts to private sector mates which results in inefficient contracts - like gold plating the power pole infrastructure rather than changing the network to accomodate intermittent renewable sources, home based renewable systems and the like. How do I go elsewhere in terms of the monopolies/oligopolies around power supply? Sure, I can change retailer - but apart from marginal savings if I swap retailer every 6 months I'm still getting power from the same suppliers.

Meanwhile the likes of Morrison and Perrotet consciously run down government services and public utilities/health to force us into the "private is more efficient" paradigm. Look at the real world, not an economics textbook.

1. Not everyone who owns investment properties are rich. There are many hard working folk who have bought investment properties to fund their retirement, so they won't be a drain on the government.

2. Comfortable middle class? You mean the folk who work their guts out, save for a deposit for a house rather than buying jet skis and HSVs, invest wisely, start businesses and provide employment. Evil middle class.

4. The AMA encourages GPs to bill privately. Bulk billing works, and it still does, but many GPs turn their nose up at it. You have to work harder though, through chronic disease management programs and the like compared to private billing GPs who take their $90 for 6 minute appointments. I had GPs earning $450K+ p.a. basically working 9-5 M-F. I sold the medical centre 3 months before COVID (nicely timed) as it was becoming increasingly difficult to recruit GPs. If recruitment of GPs wasn't an issue, I could certainly open a chain of bulk-billed medical centre in the cities.

5. Let's see how Dan goes with his new SEC. Will be interesting.

Of course private is more efficient both in textbooks and in the real world. Do you really think the public service is more efficient than the private sector?

 

[Baloo]

Yes Howard introduced the grant. Why didn't Rudd or Gillard abolish it? Will Albo abolish it?

Because Governments want to stay in Government. The Henry Tax Review was probably the most important document any Australian government has produced/commissioned this millennium. Implementing it's recommendations will go a very long way to sorting our this mess of tax we have at the moment. Simplify things and make it more equitable across the board.

By no government will attempt to do that because every Australian tax payer who submits a tax return will be impacted, and for or better or worse, an opposition narrative can ensure the government changes at the next election.

It would need bipartisan support, or have an opposition so weak that it will never have a chance to win the next election for any government to attempt it.

 

[Nico]

Albo will build a lot more social housing that what the Libs did.
The Albanese Govt can't get rid of all the Libs bad populist policies in one go.
Albo's already made changes to superannuation. Howard and Costello allowed themselves and their fat-cat mates to put a lump sum of up to $1 million into superannuation.

I hope he builds more public housing. Why are you so sure he will?

He can and should get rid of any bad policies immediately. Why would he wait? Maybe he'll lose votes if he did it, or maybe he concedes that some mightn't be that bad after all.

I agree with the super changes.

 

[Bones17]

Albo will build a lot more social housing that what the Libs did.
The Albanese Govt can't get rid of all the Libs bad populist policies in one go.
Albo's already made changes to superannuation. Howard and Costello allowed themselves and their fat-cat mates to put a lump sum of up to $1 million into superannuation.

Politicans are not affected by the Super Changes. Albo would not have the BALLS to change the rules so it affected Politicans Super.

 

[Sintiger]

1. Not everyone who owns investment properties are rich. There are many hard working folk who have bought investment properties to fund their retirement, so they won't be a drain on the government.

2. Comfortable middle class? You mean the folk who work their guts out, save for a deposit for a house rather than buying jet skis and HSVs, invest wisely, start businesses and provide employment. Evil middle class.

4. The AMA encourages GPs to bill privately. Bulk billing works, and it still does, but many GPs turn their nose up at it. You have to work harder though, through chronic disease management programs and the like compared to private billing GPs who take their $90 for 6 minute appointments. I had GPs earning $450K+ p.a. basically working 9-5 M-F. I sold the medical centre 3 months before COVID (nicely timed) as it was becoming increasingly difficult to recruit GPs. If recruitment of GPs wasn't an issue, I could certainly open a chain of bulk-billed medical centre in the cities.

5. Let's see how Dan goes with his new SEC. Will be interesting.

Of course private is more efficient both in textbooks and in the real world. Do you really think the public service is more efficient than the private sector?

1. To me the answer for negative gearing has always been to cap it. If interest on loans for negatively geared property was capped ( say to interest on $500k or some other number) then the argument that the “hard working folk” are being disadvantaged would disappear.
2. I have had experience with the AMA in a different sector to you but it has always amazed me that they are held in such high regard. (They have been called the CFMEU in white coats). Firstly membership of the AMA is quite low, although it is higher with GPs than specialists. Secondly I have found them to be interested in little apart from maximising doctor’s incomes and appearing to be experts on everything by offering easy access to commentary on health for the media. Not sure what your view on that is.

The inability to recruit GPs is a big issue and what we are now seeing is that trainee doctors are steering away from GP training as well which is just going to make the issue worse.

 

[eZyT]

Another huge modern australian social problem;

Aged Care.

Howard sold it off to Michael Kroger cheaply, so he could feed nana gruel and pay unqualified non-english speaking migrants $15/hr to ignore her.

Almost all ills sheet back to this nasty little *smile*

I hope to attend his funeral parade,

with a party hat on and cheezels on every finger

 

[tigersnake]

How so spook?

Pissed the riches from the biggest mining boom in our history up against the wall buying votes with middle and upper class welfare while building no infrastructure.
Told Australians it was ok to be racist.

10 years. Went back 10-20 economically, 20 or 30 culturally

 

[DavidSSS]

If governments can influence the housing market, why haven't they done so? Surely that's on Albo's agenda. Right?

Housing market is supply and demand. Because more people want to live in Toorak and Double Bay compared to West Broken Hill, their prices are way higher. Should governments intervene with the price of properties in Toorak and Double Bay to make it affordable for everyone? Housing is very expensive in capital cities, but go out to the regional areas and you can pick up newly built 4 bedroom homes for $400K. Plenty of employment in the regional areas ATM as well. You cannot view the property market purely through capital cities prices.

Investors provide rental properties. Get rid of investors from the property market and there'll be less rental stock which will force rents up. I'm sure the abolition of negative gearing and the capital gains discount is also on Albo's agenda right? Hawke abolished negative gearing in 1985, then re-introduced it 1987. Why did he do this? Why didn't he stick it out?

Agree with you about short term rentals.

BTW, there already is public housing for those less well off. Could there be more? Sure, but Dan and Albo must be all over that.

Why are you asking the resident anarchist what is on the agenda of one of the major political parties?

I have no idea what's on Albo's agenda, as Mr Ant said, why don't you ask the ALP?

You know, we are pretty much the most urbanised country in the world, the proportion of Australians who live in capital cities is very high. Capital city house prices matter. Yes, the ridiculously exclusive and expensive suburbs you cite are always going to be expensive, but that was why you chose them obviously. What is ridiculous is that a family with 2 professional incomes could barely afford a house in Altona these days let alone somewhere like Bentleigh. Back years ago a 1 income family of a factory worker could afford a house. We have gone backwards so far on housing affordability it is criminal.

So, if the negative gearing goes all the investors will stop buying houses. Good, maybe they will be affordable for people who actually want a home. I presume when the investors go away the houses don't just disappear. The Hawke-Keating govt reintroduced negative gearing, even though they knew it was a complete swindle, because they were gutless.

Dan and Albo should be building heaps more social housing, but I have little faith they will build enough and Dan should have started years ago. Can't be that we're short of funds, willing to blow $300billion on subs we won't get for 20 years and by that time human crewed subs will most likely be obsolete.

DS