Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[Johnny Bananas]

Truss - opportunistic, sure, but you don't get to PM by being unable to enlist the support of your party even if she managed to alienate most of them within a few weeks.

GWB - some say he was basically the figurehead of a neo-conservative movement within the Republican Party but he was also Governor of Texas and by all accounts smarter than what is commonly portrayed in the media.

You might argue that makes them good at playing the political system but not at anything intellectual.

 

[QuietB]

I'll send you those talking points if I ever get them.

So what exactly did the PM spend his capital on then? Because he had it after he won the election (every new government starts with political capital) and he sure isn't acting like he has much of if left.

Oh, just for my curiosity - how does it feel to have an imbecile be, by any objective measure, be much more successful than you? I mean, I feel I can safely assume you've never been the elected leader of your country.

I think Albo has spent his political capital on generally being disappointing.

Labor have been completely piss weak pushing back against Dutton, particularly on the Voice, immigration, Palestine and energy.

I think Albo's small target government is wearing thin. Dutton will not benefit from that failure though - independents will.

The LNP have proven they are not up to it, Labor has not risen to the occasion (despite actually running a pretty competent government if you exclude the endless immigration booby traps) and the end result will be Australian's continuing to desert both of them.

 

[The Punter]

I think Albo has spent his political capital on generally being disappointing.

Labor have been completely piss weak pushing back against Dutton, particularly on the Voice, immigration, Palestine and energy.

I think Albo's small target government is wearing thin. Dutton will not benefit from that failure though - independents will.

The LNP have proven they are not up to it, Labor has not risen to the occasion (despite actually running a pretty competent government if you exclude the endless immigration booby traps) and the end result will be Australian's continuing to desert both of them.

On the current situation in the Middle East, Mr Albanese can only choose which group of people inside the Labor project to disappoint. His political opponents on all sides have no such issue.

 

[Forward Press]

You might argue that makes them good at playing the political system but not at anything intellectual.

Perhaps, but you still need some kind of intellect to do things like navigate campaigning, build up your support and numbers, craft your message to voters etc. There are any number of Pauline Hansons in the public with her typical views, for example, but only one Pauline Hanson with the consistent vote-getting ability, and name and brand recognition.

Anyway at least this is interesting compared to the endless circular debates.

 

[QuietB]

On the current situation in the Middle East, Mr Albanese can only choose which group of people inside the Labor project to disappoint. His political opponents on all sides have no such issue.

The fact he has played both sides so much plays into the small target narrative though. Again, there is no conviction in the Labor position. Having said that I understand the threat of social disharmony and it would be complete mayhem by now if Dutton was in charge.

 

[JackOutback]

I think Albo has spent his political capital on generally being disappointing.

Labor have been completely piss weak pushing back against Dutton, particularly on the Voice, immigration, Palestine and energy.

I think Albo's small target government is wearing thin. Dutton will not benefit from that failure though - independents will.

The LNP have proven they are not up to it, Labor has not risen to the occasion (despite actually running a pretty competent government if you exclude the endless immigration booby traps) and the end result will be Australian's continuing to desert both of them.

Why does Albanese need to push back on Palestine (Dutton is all in on Israel at a time when they are massively losing the PR war) or energy (nobody thinks nuclear is a good or feasible idea)? Don't interrupt when your enemy is making a mistake.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Why does Albanese need to push back on Palestine (Dutton is all in on Israel at a time when they are massively losing the PR war) or energy (nobody thinks nuclear is a good or feasible idea)? Don't interrupt when your enemy is making a mistake.

Because, in terms of Palestine, Dutton may be all in, but Albanese isn't far behind. While he may not be losing the PR war as badly as the LNP, I wouldn't say he is winning it either. He's leaving a big vacuum for the Greens/Indis/Others to fill.

I'd argue that the ALP are making bigger mistakes in this space, the LNP is just pandering to the more extreme parts of their base.

 

[QuietB]

Because, in terms of Palestine, Dutton may be all in, but Albanese isn't far behind. While he may not be losing the PR war as badly as the LNP, I wouldn't say he is winning it either. He's leaving a big vacuum for the Greens/Indis/Others to fill.

I'd argue that the ALP are making bigger mistakes in this space, the LNP is just pandering to the more extreme parts of their base.

And there is the small issue of standing against genocide

 

[Number37]

Oh, just for my curiosity - how does it feel to have an imbecile be, by any objective measure, be much more successful than you? I mean, I feel I can safely assume you've never been the elected leader of your country.

Getting elected to parliament = success by "any objective measure"?

I'll send you those talking points if I ever get them.

Subliminal messages from your local LNP branch meetings.
You don't even realise that you are repeating nonsense.

So what exactly did the PM spend his capital on then? Because he had it after he won the election (every new government starts with political capital) and he sure isn't acting like he has much of if left.

What is 'political capital'?
How is it measured?

 

[JackOutback]

Because, in terms of Palestine, Dutton may be all in, but Albanese isn't far behind. While he may not be losing the PR war as badly as the LNP, I wouldn't say he is winning it either. He's leaving a big vacuum for the Greens/Indis/Others to fill.

I'd argue that the ALP are making bigger mistakes in this space, the LNP is just pandering to the more extreme parts of their base.

Pandering to the extremes risks isolating the rest of your supporters... Dutton is definitely making the bigger mistake. Albanese has to actually govern rather than dog-whistle, while knowing our two most important allies are backing Israel. I also don't think the vacuum to be filled is that big.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Pandering to the extremes risks isolating the rest of your supporters... Dutton is definitely making the bigger mistake. Albanese has to actually govern rather than dog-whistle, while knowing our two most important allies are backing Israel. I also don't think the vacuum to be filled is that big.

I don't think many LNP voters will be materially changing their view on the party based on Dutton's Israel stance. He may not be tailoring his messaging to the masses, but I don't think he's really alienating them either.

There would be far more progressive ALP voters who believe Albanese is acting in a pro-Israel manner (without taking into account the possible ramifications of a change in stance, either through naivety or otherwise)

 

[The Punter]

Getting elected to parliament = success by "any objective measure"?

Subliminal messages from your local LNP branch meetings.
You don't even realise that you are repeating nonsense.

What is 'political capital'?
How is it measured?

Abbott was Prime Minister - he wasn't merely elected to parliament. He won the party leadership and a general election.

I love the award winning condescension.

As Paul Keating said about political capital "you know it when you have it".

 

[Sphynx]

Even if we accept the premise that wage growth causes inflation (it doesn't, not the primary reason anyway), god forbid people earning a pittance want to eat and have a roof over their heads. If it means I'm paying a bit more at the supermarket I am perfectly fine with that.

Wages have long lost pace with CPI.

Not in all sectors.

Construction is one of the 4 largest employment sectors along with Retail, Health and Education and certainly hasn't lost pace with CPI.

The wages aren't sustainable and when coupled with government infrastructure spending, has absolutely supercharged inflation.

 

[Festerz]

So what exactly did the PM spend his capital on then? Because he had it after he won the election (every new government starts with political capital) and he sure isn't acting like he has much of if left.

I think going all out with The Voice Referendum was a bigger political risk than Albanese is given credit for - certainly it turned out to be.

Revamping the Stage Three Tax cuts - and breaking a pre-election promise to deliver those changes - was also a risky endeavour but the pain for doing that was short lived as no politician ever suffered a loss from giving the majority a tax cut.

But delivering any sort of sustainable long term deep policy reform to address the two economic and social biggest crises of our times - climate change and the lack of affordable housing is what is needed and what has been ignored. Of course, it should go without saying that delivering the sort of policies that are required to tackle these two objectives is political poison in the short term because it involved a form of wealth distribution that will create winners and losers in the short term, both for those with political capital and for the middle class heartland that determine election outcomes.

Where are the visionary political leaders with the courage and capacity to take on such long term challenges that necessarily will create short term economic hardship for cross generational benefits? Who are capable of looking beyond the the next election cycle to shoulder the short term political cost of generational reform for long term benefit?

It's not as if those looming crises aren't widely known, or the policy measures needed to tackle them aren't known FFS. So what is it?

Maybe the truth is that with 3 year non-fixed Federal electoral cycles and the demise of independent critical-thinking journalism in favour of social media based binary click-bait platforming catering to the TL;DR masses our political leaders no longer have an avenue to pursue long term change? That they, like us the voters, are destined to short-term incrementalism?

And the notion of 'political capital' in terms of incoming governments having the ability to influence and implement deep long term policy change died with it?

Leaving the only politicians who can ever dare to talk seriously in public about major policy change being those who have zero realistic chance of excercising the political power to change things?

....yet.

 

[Number37]

Abbott was Prime Minister - he wasn't merely elected to parliament. He won the party leadership and a general election.

I love the award winning condescension.

As Paul Keating said about political capital "you know it when you have it".

Abbott lost govt and his own seat.
Master strategist moonlighting as an imbecile.
Everyone saw right through him. His own blue ribbon electorate saw straight through him.
He is an imbecile.

 

[Gough]

Abbott lost govt and his own seat.
Master strategist moonlighting as an imbecile.
Everyone saw right through him. His own blue ribbon electorate saw straight through him.
He is an imbecile.

Libs love quoting Keating, so much so you wonder why they put the Rodent up against him in 96 and and why they tried to block pretty much everything he did prior to that in government. One thing you can be sure of though beyond laughing at the time he said he would shirtfront Putin, no f***er will ever be quoting Abbott in the future.

 

[The Punter]

I think going all out with The Voice Referendum was a bigger political risk than Albanese is given credit for - certainly it turned out to be.

Revamping the Stage Three Tax cuts - and breaking a pre-election promise to deliver those changes - was also a risky endeavour but the pain for doing that was short lived as no politician ever suffered a loss from giving the majority a tax cut.

But delivering any sort of sustainable long term deep policy reform to address the two economic and social biggest crises of our times - climate change and the lack of affordable housing is what is needed and what has been ignored. Of course, it should go without saying that delivering the sort of policies that are required to tackle these two objectives is political poison in the short term because it involved a form of wealth distribution that will create winners and losers in the short term, both for those with political capital and for the middle class heartland that determine election outcomes.

Where are the visionary political leaders with the courage and capacity to take on such long term challenges that necessarily will create short term economic hardship for cross generational benefits? Who are capable of looking beyond the the next election cycle to shoulder the short term political cost of generational reform for long term benefit?

It's not as if those looming crises aren't widely known, or the policy measures needed to tackle them aren't known FFS. So what is it?

Maybe the truth is that with 3 year non-fixed Federal electoral cycles and the demise of independent critical-thinking journalism in favour of social media based binary click-bait platforming catering to the TL;DR masses our political leaders no longer have an avenue to pursue long term change? That they, like us the voters, are destined to short-term incrementalism?

And the notion of 'political capital' in terms of incoming governments having the ability to influence and implement deep long term policy change died with it?

Leaving the only politicians who can ever dare to talk seriously in public about major policy change being those who have zero realistic chance of excercising the political power to change things?

....yet.

Look, I'm an incrementalist because it has tended to be the only kind of change that endures, but at least on the housing crisis, we should be well past incrementalism.

Vision tends to go hand in hand with something akin to thinking out loud - political poison in 2024. Part of the reason the Suburban Rail Link in Victoria was devised in the manner it was was to avoid the predictable political downfalls associated with considering options and putting those options on paper. Also see Tax Reform. When a political journo (regardless of quality) asks "Can you rule out xxx"?, the two options are to refuse to rule it out (and get stuck with the option as something you now plan to pursue because you didn't rule it out), or rule it out (and get stuck with being a lying liar who lies when you then implement the thing you ruled out). This is a big reason why we are where we are.

Domestically, climate change has the added spice of action not necessarily translating into results (Australia eliminates all emissions but temperatures keep rising because of the world), and certainly not translating into results quickly. Opportunists see the wedge opportunities and away we go.

Having said that, the current government definitely had some capital because all new governments do. Howard spent his on gun control, lost it, went to an election and got it back, spent it, then the world changed. Eventually he couldn't get any more. Rudd spent his on the apology and the GFC, but political capital doesn't tell the Rudd story, organisational capital does (his relationship with his colleagues). I think Rudd came as close to leaving with political capital intact, but he could have spent it on the CPRS (I'm not suggesting he would have won that battle however, but he didn't really try).

 

[The Punter]

Libs love quoting Keating, so much so you wonder why they put the Rodent up against him in 96 and and why they tried to block pretty much everything he did prior to that in government. One thing you can be sure of though beyond laughing at the time he said he would shirtfront Putin, no f***er will ever be quoting Abbott in the future.

I quote Abbott all the time - just one line I heard him say. I'm sure he didn't come up with the quote, and it's instructive.

"Sometimes it is better to ask forgiveness than permission."

Resume passive-aggressive sub-quoting.

 

[Gough]

I quote Abbott all the time - just one line I heard him say. I'm sure he didn't come up with the quote, and it's instructive.

"Sometimes it is better to ask forgiveness than permission."

Resume passive-aggressive sub-quoting.

There was that time he behaved like one of those self ordained Imams and interpreted his holy book to suit his own ends. That was pretty gross.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/even-jesus-christ-would-not-accept-every-asylum-seeker-says-tony-abbott/news-story/7010ff93174be9efe5e42c34fe7b5ba9

"This idea that Jesus would say to every person who wanted to come to Australia, 'Fine, the door's open', I just don't think is necessarily right," Mr Abbott said.

"(But) let's not verbal Jesus, he is not here to defend himself."

Says he doing exactly that.

 

[The Punter]

There was that time he behaved like one of those self ordained Imams and interpreted his holy book to suit his own ends. That was pretty gross.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/even-jesus-christ-would-not-accept-every-asylum-seeker-says-tony-abbott/news-story/7010ff93174be9efe5e42c34fe7b5ba9

Says he doing exactly that.

I don't agree with Abbott's analysis on that one, and I doubt very few would.

 

[Forward Press]

Not in all sectors.

Construction is one of the 4 largest employment sectors along with Retail, Health and Education and certainly hasn't lost pace with CPI.

The wages aren't sustainable and when coupled with government infrastructure spending, has absolutely supercharged inflation.

Great. But when I said that wages are not keeping up with CPI I meant overall. I have no doubt many sectors are paying well but many also are not and hence the data indicating that real wages are falling.

You've fallen into the trap that inflation is the worst thing ever. It's not. People need to eat and have a roof over their heads, that should be the priority.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Great. But when I said that wages are not keeping up with CPI I meant overall. I have no doubt many sectors are paying well but many also are not and hence the data indicating that real wages are falling.

You've fallen into the trap that inflation is the worst thing ever. It's not. People need to eat and have a roof over their heads, that should be the priority.

That's a very broad statement to make. There can be dire consequences when inflation is allowed to continued un-restrained. Zimbabwe for example.

 

[Gralin]

Not in all sectors.

Construction is one of the 4 largest employment sectors along with Retail, Health and Education and certainly hasn't lost pace with CPI.

The wages aren't sustainable and when coupled with government infrastructure spending, has absolutely supercharged inflation.

And yet

 

[Seeds]

Albanese made to look a fool last night on John Oliver for gushing over the deeply racist modi.

 

[Sphynx]

And yet
View attachment 2011125
View attachment 2011126

Nice graph.

I have absolutely no idea what awards are included within it.

Some of the ones I am involved with have absolutely kept pace with the CPI.

You could argue that those that have decelerated are simply correcting vs decade(s) of low inflation with consistent wage growth outperforming the CPI for a long time.

The problem is those industries that had wage growth outstripping inflation for the last 20 years, that have also used the current CPI as a reason for even larger pay rises.

Their net position hasn't changed.