Scott Ludlam - new generation politician!

Extracted from Dazz's post:

What it does state on point # 25 of their Economic Justice policy adopted November 2012 is this ;

Quote:
Taxation reforms that improve housing affordability by no longer rewarding speculation and reducing asset inequality.

What does "reducing asset inequality" mean exactly ??

I think I might make a recommendation to Adam Bandt on how to expand this that should attract a lot of Green and Labour voters.

I suggest that there is a 0.2% annual levy imposed on all residential property holdings apart from the PPOR and calculated on the gross value of all combined residential property holdings in Australia.

The money raised from this could be allocated directly into an infrastructure fund used solely for the purpose of building affordable state housing.

This would reduce property speculation and simultaneously increase supply of housing. As in Singapore part of the new property supply developed could also be sold to first home buyers at a capped income level.
 
Intrinsic_Value said:
I think I might make a recommendation to Adam Bandt on how to expand this that should attract a lot of Green and Labour voters.

I suggest that there is a 0.2% annual levy imposed on all residential property holdings apart from the PPOR and calculated on the gross value of all combined residential property holdings in Australia.

The money raised from this could be allocated directly into an infrastructure fund used solely for the purpose of building affordable state housing.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I think it would appeal to labor and green voters. Anyone who doesn't own property, or aspire to.
How many affordable houses did the Northern territory Labor government government build when entrusted with a similar fund?

Value for money Infrastucture? school halls anyone...
 
datto said:
We already have land tax. Any more taxes is madness.
Click to expand...

Yes but land tax is a 'general' revenue raiser that applies to all forms of property. The income collected is neither specific to residential property nor is to dedicated to assisting with dealing with Australia's high residential property prices and rents.
 
OK...so the some of the Greens policies might be bit radical originally...but they seem to be moving to the right a bit to attract a wider vote base.

I can't see any solid policies coming from the Libs at the moment.

Game on.... !!

Dazz said:
Hello HiEquity,

I'm not so sure about that. That link you provided to a Sydney Morning Herald newspaper article isn't the source of the Australian Greens political policies. It's just an article written by a Fairfax journo. No more, no less. It certainly isn't definitive.

Having just wasted 20 minutes of my time reading the details of their published policies on the Australian Greens website, a lot of the former points raised have simply been "smoothed over". It doesn't definitely state one way or the other what their position on death duties is.

What it does state on point # 25 of their Economic Justice policy adopted November 2012 is this ;

​

What does "reducing asset inequality" mean exactly ??

I wouldn't have any confidence whatsoever that the Greens wouldn't implement death duties if elected, and strip away most assets from hard working people upon their death to feed their voracious Communist philosophies. Make no mistake, these folks are watermelons - not greens.

We - as a world population - saw that Communism as an economic model is an utter failure. Didn't the USSR amply demonstrate that to us ?? Good for ants, not much chop for humans.

Their agenda doesn't work without revenues from Carbon and Mining Taxes, which are strangling investor confidence. No country has ever taxed their way to prosperity. Capital just gets up and goes elsewhere where it is treated more kindly.

The Greens don't understand that, and never will, it is totally against their philosophy. That's why they will never be taken seriously by the voting public in Australia and will never have the opportunity to govern.

We've all seen what happens to an economy when the Greens have a say in the decision making process (Tasmanian state and federally after 2010) and it turns out very ugly indeed.

I honestly think their high water mark was the 2010 Federal election just prior to Bob Brown quitting, and they are now sliding back down to the irrelevant slop amongst the micro parties.....just like the Democrats did.

Let's have a squiz this time next week after the speculation stops and the definitive numbers are in for both SA and Tas.

My humble prediction is that it's going to be very ugly for the Greens. We don't have to wait long.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sash said:
OK...so the some of the Greens policies might be bit radical originally...but they seem to be moving to the right a bit to attract a wider vote base.

I can't see any solid policies coming from the Libs at the moment.

Game on.... !!
Click to expand...

Exactly Sash.

That's why I will be giving them a platform for my proposals (together with the labour party).

My proposals will be consistent with their overall objectives.

Watch this space
 
Last edited by a moderator:
... there is an ageist culture ... some people are simply unemployable ...
Click to expand...
Further to that - and possibly more an accurate reason for their "unemployability" - and this is a generalisation - many older folk (say; 50 years plus) are in "coasting mode" - simply want to work their day at 2nd gear pace, not have to think too hard, raise a sweat, etc...decent day's work for a day's pay and not much more.

Employers generally want their staff to be superhuman, work in 4th gear, never get sick, are Management Material, show initiative, leadership...generally; be able to split the atom before smoko (and keep working through smoko). :D

But seriously; you are probably more likely to get a younger employee who will take the bull by the horns and want to step up and take the business to the next level, show the passion and/or vision, more innovative etc to take the Company forward - that Employers like to see in Employees.

I've noticed this my whole working life as an employee and an employer, and given the choice betweeen a very experieced older employee with no real involvement in the business, or the younger person who may perhaps be less experienced, but displays the willingness to step it up and learn more of the various requirements to be like me - the owner - in their thinking and actions - I'll take the younger person every time.

From my experience older folk tend to become a little too inflexible and lose the willingness to take on new training and new technologies, etc.


(many young folk like this as well of course).most on the dole have poor skills and (more importantly) faith in themselves and self esteem ... all levels of government don't invest enough in regional areas ...
Click to expand...
Lizzie, do you mean invest in their own Govt jobs in those areas, or invest in infrastructure, etc?

Having spent a large chunk of my youth growing up in the Riverina, it seems to me that most of the kids from there simply have no desire to hang around unless they are staying with Dad on the farm, or are happy to work in jobs with not much avenue for advancement around the town.

All the kids with ambition tend to leave. Some return of course...go back as a school teacher, or nurse, or doctor, etc.

So, mostly the towns get left with the retirees and those who are not creating lots of employment and so on. Not much incentive for Govt to invest in these areas if folks won't stay there.

And (and I've said this before numerous times here); many immigrants coming to Aus are mostly "City Dwelling" types - they simply won't move willingly to these areas; just clog up the Cities even more. I see this everywhere.

I also believe that child support should cap at child #3 ...
Click to expand...
Anyone who willingly has more than 3 kids in this day and age needs their head read.

I love kids, and we have 3 beautiful ones, but geez it's hard work a lot of the time.
 
Last edited:
This is quandry that New Jersey mafia need to address:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/com...on-where-are-the-new-jobs-20140310-34hq0.html

If they can sort the jobs issue the Coalition will be LIBerated from their jobs. :)

The issue in the article is exactly what I was pointed out but the article is more eloquesnt...the displaced will vote against the Libs...and the fear of others losing jobs will turn them against the Libs.

How stupid are these guys......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's an opinion piece with little substance... from the Canberra Times :rolleyes:.

If you want to be taken seriously at least post something that Glenn Steven has said in the last few days.

And some advice to you... let it go, and accept that Labor lost the election.
 
Boys you seem to forget I voted for little Johnny in 1996.....what a disappointment. I am what you call a swinging voter...not that that party. ;)

I am not a through and through labour voter.

Personally, I like despots.....they seem to get things done....I might even put my hand up to run the country.....the current one with Big Years....looks more like Noddy to me....:D

weg said:
That's an opinion piece with little substance... from the Canberra Times :rolleyes:.

If you want to be taken seriously at least post something that Glenn Steven has said in the last few days.

And some advice to you... let it go, and accept that Labor lost the election.
Click to expand...

The Fence said:
Best advice Ive seen for awhile.

Take it sash, please.

Scott Ludlam is about to enter reality.
Click to expand...
 
catsteve said:
These people are the loony left. This guy is only preaching to the extremist fringe.
Not mainstream Australian, as labor found out, the hard way.
Click to expand...

Scott Ludlam is fairly well known and well regarded amongst the IT community for his stance on topics such as internet censorship and the NBN.

If I lived in WA, I would vote for Scott for the Senate (below the line ... would never vote for the Greens above the line).
 
Dazz said:
What will change in the very near future ??


1. This Greens Senator will be kicked out.


2. SA will finally dump Labor and elect a new Liberal led Govt to commence getting that basket case economy back on track.


3. Tasmania will finally dump this Green led Labor Govt they've had for over a decade.
Click to expand...


1. Unconfirmed. About 3 weeks to go for the vote, and another 3 or 4 weeks until a result is known. Standby.


2. Unconfirmed. Labor have definitely lost seats to the Liberals, just don't know if they lost enough to lose Govt. Will probably need a week or two to finalise postal and pre-poll votes in the tightly held electorates. Out of the 47 lower house seats, about 4 or 5 are still unknown. Standby.


3. Confirmed. Green vote plummets. Labor vote plummets. Labor and Greens kicked out of Govt. Liberals elected to Govt in sweeping fashion, best showing for 60 years.


Anyone arguing that the TFA is agreed by everyone, obviously isn't listening to the Tasmanian people.
 
At this point....Labor may just nudge ahead...but definitely the land slide which people hoped for. Apparently...the talk is about what the Lib govt policies at the federal govt has hurt the Libs on the ground. They should have won this hands down....

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...-hung-parliament/story-fnl3k6uz-1226855941923

Dazz said:
1. Unconfirmed. About 3 weeks to go for the vote, and another 3 or 4 weeks until a result is known. Standby.


2. Unconfirmed. Labor have definitely lost seats to the Liberals, just don't know if they lost enough to lose Govt. Will probably need a week or two to finalise postal and pre-poll votes in the tightly held electorates. Out of the 47 lower house seats, about 4 or 5 are still unknown. Standby.


3. Confirmed. Green vote plummets. Labor vote plummets. Labor and Greens kicked out of Govt. Liberals elected to Govt in sweeping fashion, best showing for 60 years.


Anyone arguing that the TFA is agreed by everyone, obviously isn't listening to the Tasmanian people.
Click to expand...
 
sash said:
At this point....Labor may just nudge ahead...but definitely the land slide which people hoped for. Apparently...the talk is about what the Lib govt policies at the federal govt has hurt the Libs on the ground. They should have won this hands down....
Click to expand...

It had nothing to do with what people 'hoped for'.

The week or so before showed the polls at 45/55 2pp Libs way, then following a very aggressive scare campaign by Labor the next week polling showed the margin to narrow significantly.

So had they gone to an election on those polling figures Libs would have won easily.

That last week made a big difference. Both sides agree with that.

Even Rau a long term Labor MP stated he thought the votes (160K of them) that went in days beforehand, could have resulted in people voting differently to what they would have had they voted on election day.

The other interesting thing is, as it stands the 2pp without pre-polling and postal votes shows Libs at OVER 52% and still not over the line. This should go up further yet and still not guarantee a win. Crazy!

Last election they lost with a 51.6% 2pp.

We get called the Labor state but it's not quite the case it seems.
 
weg said:
The other interesting thing is, as it stands the 2pp without pre-polling and postal votes shows Libs at OVER 52% and still not over the line. This should go up further yet and still not guarantee a win. Crazy!

Last election they lost with a 51.6% 2pp.

We get called the Labor state but it's not quite the case it seems.
Click to expand...

Not crazy, just what happens in a system based on discrete constituencies. A number of UK governments have had a majority of seats in parliament, although in aggregate the opposition party got more votes, and in a good few US presidential elections the winner has got fewer votes than his opponent (2000: Bush: 50,456,002, Gore: 50,999,897).

If you've got 52% and ten constituencies of 1000 people, you want 520 voters in each seat, not 800 in three, and 400 in the other seven. So the answer for SA Libs is to get members in very safe seats to move to ones where their votes will make a difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top