Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[SaintsSeptember]

Not sure being a landlord would be quite as easy as what most people would think..

Personally I'd prefer other ways to invest capital.

You have to pay for maintenance.
If you live near your property , you can change the tap washers yourself and save a fortune on plumbing.
If you are geared to the hilt , interest charges are screwing you over. Sell it to someone else then.

What's the hard part?

Some, not so greedy Landlords don't owe that much on the property, and reasonable rent will more than cover their costs.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

A hefty vacancy tax is required. Coastal holiday homes exempt as they hardly solve any 'housing crisis'.

And ban foreign ownership.

I hope so , i'm set to inherit a share of a little house in a shanty town. ( on an inlet, and the sand aint white ....or sandy ). I'd hate to have to pay a fortune to help keep it in the family.

 

[nut]

We are getting ripped off

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Well the prevailing policy of borrowing, spending, and handouts over the last 20 years has also done SFA.

Just a modicum of discipline during the GFC and Covid and we would be in a far better place.

Continuing to spend only kicks the can down the road.

If what Chalmers delivered is going to meet his objectives then he should be able to explain why.

We could actually do with some “economists” in these positions. Anyone, just an experiment, following the principles rationally and dryly.

"Economists" are beholden to orthodoxy, such as privatisation delivers better results, such as trickle down economics, such as handouts for big business is good because it drives investment etc etc

Funny that all these orthodox beliefs lead to bigger profits/more money in the pockets of big business while destroying essential services and driving inflation that the schmucks have to pay for with higher costs and higher interest rates.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

"Economists" are beholden to orthodoxy, such as privatisation delivers better results, such as trickle down economics, such as handouts for big business is good because it drives investment etc etc

Funny that all these orthodox beliefs lead to bigger profits/more money in the pockets of big business while destroying essential services and driving inflation that the schmucks have to pay for with higher costs and higher interest rates.

None of this is economics. Trickle down economics is just bullshit with economics tacked onto the end of the title.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

None of this is economics. Trickle down economics is just bullshit with economics tacked onto the end of the title.

Exactly, it's ideology dressed up as economics. "Magic of the marketplace" more fanciful than the crap they peddle in church on Sunday's.

 

[Theseventhhamster]

Exactly, it's ideology dressed up as economics. "Magic of the marketplace" more fanciful than the crap they peddle in church on Sunday's.

Any time you hear an politician (like Scomo or another Lib) say "it's economics 101" it's because that's as far as they got before they taught the stuff about market failure, externalities etc.

Any good economist is a lefty, the rest are whores for rent. You can guess where the RBA ghouls belong.

Crankyhawk stop slandering me, you're as bad as first dog on the moon.

 

[peetoo]

Exactly, it's ideology dressed up as economics. "Magic of the marketplace" more fanciful than the crap they peddle in church on Sunday's.

More and more, billionaires spend their ‘pocket money’ at establishments owned by other billionaires, paying workers peanuts in the big economy.

And they still aren’t happy

 

[Crankyhawk]

Any time you hear an politician (like Scomo or another Lib) say "it's economics 101" it's because that's as far as they got before they taught the stuff about market failure, externalities etc.

Any good economist is a lefty, the rest are whores for rent. You can guess where the RBA ghouls belong.

Crankyhawk stop slandering me, you're as bad as first dog on the moon.

The whores for rent are dominant in the opinion spaces though are they not?

 

[Theseventhhamster]

The whores for rent are dominant in the opinion spaces though are they not?

100%. Like asking Alan Dershowitz for a legal opinion on the age of consent though.

We're all doing our best trying to get sensible policy out there and these IPA sponsored campaigners are pretending there's evidence behind whatever garbo capitalist shit they're shovelling.

 

[Gralin]

The whores for rent are dominant in the opinion spaces though are they not?

The media being largely run by billionaires will do that

 

[JackOutback]

None of this is economics. Trickle down economics is just bullshit with economics tacked onto the end of the title.

 

[Saint]

If we taxed gas and other minerals at the same rate as our competitors (i.e. Qatar), nobody would have to care about cost of living.

Instead we tax about the same rate as Russia (i.e. money goes to a wealthy few) and the rest of us have to struggle along.

Stop arguing about progressive income tax rates on citizens and look where the inflation is caused and wealth is created and tax that.

Same goes for global corporations making money here and paying no tax (NewsCorp, Alphabet, Meta, Apple etc.). Nobody in the whole country would be worse off if those companies were taxed more, but everyone would benefit from the tax receipts.

 

[Black Diamond]

Same goes for global corporations making money here and paying no tax (NewsCorp, Alphabet, Meta, Apple etc.). Nobody in the whole country would be worse off if those companies were taxed more, but everyone would benefit from the tax receipts.

If this is the case, why doesn’t Labor push for it?

Seems like it would be an easy win for them and popular with their constituents.

 

[Saint]

If this is the case, why doesn’t Labor push for it?

Seems like it would be an easy win for them and popular with their constituents.

Because I just listed the four largest media organisations in the world.

The only thing they like better than fighting each other is fighting together to maintain their dominance.

 

[Black Diamond]

Because I just listed the four largest media organisations in the world.

The only thing they like better than fighting each other is fighting together to maintain their dominance.

So why wouldn’t Labor take them on at the moment? They would have enough sympathy in the senate I reckon.

 

[Saint]

So why wouldn’t Labor take them on at the moment? They would have enough sympathy in the senate I reckon.

Same reason the Libs let them get away with it for 10 years. The power of media is stronger than the power of doing the public good.

 

[JackOutback]

So why wouldn’t Labor take them on at the moment? They would have enough sympathy in the senate I reckon.

Kevin Rudd thought he was in a position to take them on, look where that got him. Times have changed in the last 15 years, so maybe the Murdochs of the world have less power, but the Zuckerbergs and Musks have more, so more than cancels it out.

 

[Kram]

Complaining about the media as an excuse for anything is like the footy fan that always goes on about the umpires.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Complaining about the media as an excuse for anything is like the footy fan that always goes on about the umpires.

Complaining about poor commentary is fair game though, isn't it?

 

[JackOutback]

Complaining about the media as an excuse for anything is like the footy fan that always goes on about the umpires.

But you know the umpires sometimes **** up, right, and can even alter the result of a game?

 

[Saint]

But you know the umpires sometimes heck up, right, and can even alter the result of a game?

Umpires are trying to be fair. Media corporations are selfish, as required by law.

 

[Chief]

Someone is getting enriched.

I'll cop to any criticism for replying a week later.

Someone might bring this up:

When the people making the rules and setting the amounts are also making money from these allowances, that's a conflict of interest.

Is it an acceptable conflict that is mitigated with other controls? Not to my mind.

 

[The Punter]

I'll cop to any criticism for replying a week later.

Someone might bring this up:

When the people making the rules and setting the amounts are also making money from these allowances, that's a conflict of interest.

Is it an acceptable conflict that is mitigated with other controls? Not to my mind.

Elected officials also make laws in other areas they themselves are governed by. The entire job is a conflict of interest.

Greater transparency is the improvement here, or a concrete proposal for how to house all the people required to work in Canberra who live somewhere else.

 

[Chief]

Elected officials also make laws in other areas they themselves are governed by. The entire job is a conflict of interest.

But this one is directly related to money in their pocket.

Greater transparency is the improvement here, or a concrete proposal for how to house all the people required to work in Canberra who live somewhere else.

Yes, but this one is a very easy gap to fill.

Make these related party transactions illegal.