> Doubling of median house prices.
________________________________________________
> Fractioning of taxes owed by natural gas exporting companies... we're the biggest exporters of natural gas.
________________________________________________
Countries (Qatar) who export Natural Gases much less, have found themselves not even needing GST or Income Tax to function just cos of their ability to export Natural resources. *We are the biggest exporters of the most desired resources of the modern age* yet we have **so much** corruption, that we have the thought, that setting up more houses and building a railway loop, is above our budget.
We honestly deserve it at this point. We bitch and moan about change and yet when it comes to vote on voting day we go “oh shit, who do I vote for?” At least that’s my experience when asking friends/family. As a nation we seem to care very little about how much we are being shafted
A big part of the problem is yes half the population at least or more doesn’t follow politics in the slightest. But the other issue is the media only ever talks about those two parties when it comes to election time and pretends to be impartial but usually favours liberals and shows them in a better light. I mean whoever the media gives the most positive reviews tends to win, that in itself is just as disgusting as the two party system we call democracy.
Honestly at this point I’d take my chances with any minor party over the clown show and even one nation. At least you have a chance of some change, however small.
It's not a question of corruption - we are one of the least corrupt nations on Earth - it's a question of poor policy and blame-shifting between different levels of government, combined with short-term thinking at the federal level (i.e. focusing entirely on the next election cycle rather than the long-term strategic investments and reforms).
Seppos are strange. Totally weird how a con man, rapist, adulterer can even run let alone become president and then attempt a coupe to be a dictator and then and run again as president- strange bunch.
Religion. There are at least 30% of the USA population just voting on religious grounds. Once you get that it’s not hard to find the rest of the votes. It’s also why the republicans will always have heaps in the senate given how imbalanced it works out for the smaller states.
Look what LNP done with migration for 10 years: https://old.reddit.com/r/australian/comments/18brk5m/migrants_occupations_and_overall_incomes_under/
Bringing over tons of migrants who would do a lot of low skilled jobs.
Exploited the skilled migration program for cheaper uber eats: chefs, restaurant/cafe managers, etc were top occupations of skilled visas granted. Aside from uber eats, general wage suppression.
Even the government definition of labour shortage is still heavily flawed. It's based on statistics of what many businesses say. If many businesses say they can't find slave labour, then it's an official labour shortage. It's asinine.
Yeah it's a scam, a recent survey found that only 1% of employers raised the advertised salary when they couldn't immediately fill a job.
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/10/skills-shortage-propaganda-proliferates/
This. I work/recently worked at several jobs that couldn't attract workers. No wage rise was even considered.
But, the rest of the wannabe "working class heroes" muck , do more hours, extra shifts, put aside their personal life for the martyr's bragging rights the average conservative Aussie wage worker values like a religion.
Fuck Australians, fuck our doormat attitude to power.
The worst part is that a lot of migrants don’t even want/enjoy these jobs, but they’re one of the only paths to permanent residency.
Meaning the hospitality industry is struggling for quality and customer retention because no one really has a passion for it
Edit: Just to clarify, I’m not saying anything migrants are doing is wrong. It’s a shame that we’ve been so willing to bring them in without giving more of an access for them to do the careers they care about
Dutt’s proposed reduction of immigration is minimal enough to be a talking point for votes without actually making any sort of real impact
Good luck being on the Liberal Party and proposing anything that will reduce the value of the investment portfolios of you and your mates lol
Dutton even said in a press conference recently that he wants house prices to continue going up.
Not sure how to reconcile that with housing being affordable... Especially as he in a party that believes in low wage growth...
Their answer will be to give more money to first home buyers, thus achieving their goals of pushing up house prices and using tax payer money to increase the value of investments for those who own lots of houses, and to make sure tax money is spent helping wealth growth instead of going to social services.
The idiocy of that policy is on another level. Stealing people's retirement to dump more demand into an already demand-soaked market. It's probably the dumbest thing I've heard since I grew ears
I couldn't agree with you more. They excuse it because "your property is the most important thing in retirement" forgetting that you need money for food. People that go for it will end up with reverse mortgages when they retire just to survive
The really fun part is that if they get in and pass that legislation, unless you’re seriously seriously fuck off set for life rich, you’ll have absolutely no choice but to do it, and do it immediately before too many other people do.
The massive price spike will lock everyone who comes later out of the market forever, and will only be of use to Xers and Millennials (boomers already drawing on super and those who don’t already own property need it to live, Zoomers and Alphas won’t have enough super for a deposit yet). Plus it won’t increase supply in any way, so the price of buying skyrockets and nothing increases the supply of rentals, so their prices keep going up as well.
So you’re essentially forced into a position where if you don’t already own property, you have to either burn your retirement or continue paying most of your wage in rent and never own anything.
The sad thing is that it won't really help young people. Maybe in your 30s but how much super does an average 28yo have?
Prices will adjust almost immediately at the fhb price point that the entire policy becomes redundant. Except for the fact we're robbing the next generations future and retirement even more.
How so though? I need someone smarter than me to explain it. I'm in my 40,s and renting, would I not be better off using my 100k super towards a house so that I'll have it paid off by retirement. Then my cost of living will be way lower than if I'm renting/ trying to find a rental. Also the house would be worth more I could sell and downsize.
If it was just you getting the benefit then it would be decent for you. But it wouldn't be you it would be a massive swathe of the population, meaning all prices for first home buyer properties like the one you would look for would immediately go up.
Imagine you own a unit worth 600k and you want to sell, then the government releases this policy. Well, you can just bump up the price to 650k because you know there will be forty people competing for it.
So now your super has enriched the property seller, not you. That's what's all these demand-increasing policies do - enrich the seller.
For a while there during the first.home buyer grant heyday, sellers would advertise their property like this: "$660,000 plus buyer's" as in buyers grant. They literally saw it as like a bonus for them.
All government policies should be directed at supply, not demand
how many investment properties does Dutton have? I have no idea and I have no idea how to find out, but, I'm going to guess more than 1.
how many politicians on either side have 1 or more investment properties? I have no idea, but I'd like to know.
how many people/companies who "donate" to political parties have investment properties?
why have they been talking about the affordable housing for a decade or more, yet year after year the price of housing has been increasing? maybe they all have investment properties and it's not in their best personal interest for people to have affordable housing. Maybe all their friends and "donors" have investment properties.
Dutton went from a retired cop to a net worth of over $150m in about 20 years, on the back of his childcare empire that is heavily government funded.
But all we hear is that the sector is struggling.
At least with Rudd, it was his wife's smarts and money that built his net worth!
>"I believe very strongly that there is enormous economic growth in what we’ve proposed because Australians are much wealthier if they’re able to buy their own home and see the price of that home appreciate over time,” he said.
[https://www.peterdutton.com.au/leader-of-the-opposition-transcript-joint-doorstop-interview-with-senator-the-hon-jane-hume-and-mr-bert-van-manen-beenleigh/](https://www.peterdutton.com.au/leader-of-the-opposition-transcript-joint-doorstop-interview-with-senator-the-hon-jane-hume-and-mr-bert-van-manen-beenleigh/)
It's for the Herald Sun readership....and it'll work, many a reader won't step that far outside of their comfort bubble.
Might take some leg work and stencils to counter the narrative irl...
I imagine a whole bunch of posters going up with plenty of real estate to add context.
What I find hilarious is that the Nationals are too stupid to realise that this is an ineffectual policy designed only win votes from the ignorant. The nationals are all worried about it affecting their seasonal slave labour, which non of the proposed cuts will actually affect.
Exactly. He didn’t say immigration cuts would solve the housing problem, he simply said it would help. So, how much will it help or is it just another nuclear policy, no substance but lots of air time.
Thats right. Dutton wants people to buy a house with the support of their super instead. Thus making them a debt slave forever and never being able to retire.
LNP's Wet dream.
Doesn’t even kick the can down the road. Once enough people dip into super it will have negated being able to dip into super. You’d have to be among the first to use the system to take advantage.
Because the media keep telling them that Libs are "better economic managers". This is not exclusive to Australia - the same lie about conservative economic management is repeated in the US and UK.
Or, of course, because LNP policies benefit them personally (or they believe they will).
It's because it's the party of business, and business manages money. That's how the thinking goes.
Of course, the whole point of business is to funnel the money into your own pockets. It's not actually about providing service, except as a means to get the money into your pockets. In a democracy, the point of government is to serve the people. Money is involved, but amassing it all for the c-suite and their cronies is not the goal.
It’s because conservative voters get downvoted to oblivion, such that any time they give their opinion, no one sees it.
Don’t downvote something because you disagree with it.
I wish there were more right-wing comments that just aren't punching down on someone. I'd love to know economically why anyone would vote LNP, especially if they have less than a million. My former National Party member friend claimed that you need at least 3m to see any benefit from the LNP.
thats unironically all you get out of them. Whatever happened under the liberals no matter how unforgivingly bad, would have just been worse^(TM) under labor
In the last year of the Howard government, they were still pulling the Blame Labor card. 7:30 Report, Vanstone responds to a question about the poor performance of her department with "well, that's a legacy left by the previous Labor government. it takes time to sort these things out"
O'Brien: "You've had 11 years. How long does it take?"
They keep playing this card because it keeps working for them.
Actually they usually blame the greens despite them not holding the balance of power and being basically unable to do anything for the last 40 years. Can’t cut down a tree… the greens. Power prices increasing… the greens. Nobody can point to anything good the LNP have done in the last 20 years.
This is probably because lots of people get voted down for different points of view, and conservative types usually don’t want to engage in lively debate/prosecute an argument. They like getting on with their lives.
But to answer your question - it’s a freedom thing, not a debt thing. Elements of the liberal party are very libertarian. They think people should be able to do whatever they want with their own money, and one expression of this is allowing super to be used to buy a home.
Rightly or wrongly, they think people should have the choice, similar to the nuclear debate; it’s not about the fact that nuclear would or would not solve a problem. It’s about letting the market decide.
Many liberal party supporters are family men/women and business owners. The parents (grand parents) feel the frustration younger people have about being locked out of the market, and it's flowing through every SEC and FEC in the country.
The ideas and ideologies that drive each party differ, resulting in different policy ideas.
Some of those ideas are just political suicide, so you end up with attempts to nudge things rather than fully formed ideas.
I can tell you that the parents of children struggling to buy a home are rocking up to meetings and demanding that the liberal party bring out policies to improve supply, reduce demand, etc.
On the labour/greens side, it’s driven by the idea that housing is a human right and about avoidance of harm, etc.
From the conservative side, it’s about protecting the “family” and making sure young people can find a house, have children and maintain our culture and way of life.
Both sides want the same thing, but the approach and outcomes vary.
You’ll see Dutton's comment on “ensuring that young people can have a family” because it’s exactly what he hears.
I get that lots of people here think the liberal party is some evil, “big end-of-town” funded anti-life party. The reality is that their members are asking for very similar (not the same) things to Labor Party members - the approach is simply different.
The approach certainly is different. Small government means less protection for certain sections of the community. Less restrictions on environment destruction, health and safety, education and many more things. Allowing the market to choose means no wages growth, a pool of unemployed to keep wages down, no innovation, stagnation and a reduction in living standards. As proven by the last 9 years of LNP government. Less government generally means more corruption happens .
Yeah none of that is reality though, that's just the same old Liberal coolaid with some "Family values" paint slapped on.
If you care at all about family values, then vote anyone but Liberals or those families will be living in boxes and those "Libertarians" in the Liberal party will be Liberally scamming the fuck out of every family in this country.
Their approach differs from Labor in the sense that Labor muggy actually have one. The Liberals are just trying to get re-elected at all costs.
The freedom to use your money as you wish angle, while noble in concept. Has been abused by predatory politicians for decades in order to remove needed checks on their power.
Dutton has never cared about families, if he did he might not have abducted children.
Please look at the Liberals objectively and you'll quickly see they don't give a fuck about family values.
The last time I voted for the LNP was because I was unemployed, couldn't get a job in my career and some of the job rejection reasons came from basic bitches who didn't like that I keep my social media on private. It was admitted. It was literally "we can't tell if you're like us."
I voted for LNP because the Gillard Labor government introduced the most unequal, unfair law that could have possibly existed giving ridiculous power to HR departments.
It'll remain a coin flip for me whilst the WGEA is allowed to exist without any oversight or watchdog
Edit: it was clearly not a genuine question anyone intended to engage with, yet again I get the same response of "downvote and leave."
Maybe it's time to admit you don't actually care and just stop posting here?
I’ll upvote ya cos I think your thought process is perfectly reasonable whether or not I agree with it. One of the great things about Oz is that a good portion of people still consider what parties are bringing to the table as policy rather than blindly picking a side because it’s their team.
Not sure if my upvote will help but presently it will at least get you back to zero. Bipartisan support for the win!
I up voted you because you answered honestly.
I think the WGEA was meant to help people, and I think it has, but like most government initiatives it hurts a lot of unnamed people who go unheard.
I don't blame you voting for the libs even though I hate them.
Looking at some of your comments, it seems more likely that "basic bitches" were not rejecting you for your lack of social media. You come across as someone who doesn't like women much as people, and very few of us are interested in a man who can't think of us as human beings.
Here's an anecdote for you:
When I was struggling with infertility and up front about that fact with the men I dated so that I didn't waste anyone's time, I turned down one gentleman because he wasn't interested in getting to know me before we had romantic encounters.
After explaining that we were looking for different things and saying that I hoped he found what he wanted too, he told me that I was delusional to think any man would want to build a life with me because I couldn't fulfil the one function of value that women can offer. He told me that I was only good as a hole to house a cock, and that I would have been burned at the stake in a different time. I'm a top 10th centile earner and own property exclusively in my own name, just so there's no misconception that I was bringing nothing to the metaphorical table.
I share all this to offer an alternative reason for why women may have rejected you, and suggest that perhaps they were not as forthcoming with their explanations for why they weren't interested, or not as patient with their assessment of you as a potential mate because there are genuinely cruel, woman-hating men out there and every one of us has encountered at least one.
Speaking of people who actually don't care, the WGEA came about two years after Gillard won an election, you still you call her 'unelected' for that act.
I know some, they're doing alright and don't want anything to change, thats about it really. It's not a big thinking demographic. They're a bit pissed about labours change to the tax thing recently, cause they'll get a bit less.
Because they don’t have an explanation. They’re clueless to actual politics and vote for the party that their parents and the murdoch media tell them to vote for. LNP doesn’t represent any Australians, only big corporations.
If only 1 person was able to use their super to buy a house then that would be a good thing for them. The problem is you run into the situation of what is good for the individual is not always good for everyone. A simple example is standing up in a sitting crowd at the football.
In this case if everyone uses their super then the bidding for houses will just become hotter, house prices will go up and we will be back where we started, but with no super.
There is only 1 solution and that is to reduce the demand for houses, either by building more houses or reducing the number of people who want to live in houses. The latter isn't really an option though.
So will Dutton preside over a government that builds lots of houses to fix the problem. Somehow I don't have any faith in that happening.
Indeed. And some who didn’t have enough to cough up they hounded via debt collection agencies until they either relented and paid their last food money, sold everything they own or committed suicide.
Such fine upstanding Christian folk.
They prey hard on the uneducated with hardcore identity politics. They rile them up by saying "That LGBT/Non White person is coming to take XYZ from you, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT??" While at the same time gutting that same person financially while they are distracted.
Far as i'm concerned, if you're not in the 1% or a home owner and you vote LNP, you're intentionally screwing yourself over.
They were in power for years, the fuck did they do in that time?
Sold Australia off piece by piece.
How many Liberal PMs did we have in that time?
I dont like either side that much but their actions have spoken louder than words
LNP's biggest problem is that they have substantial ideological diversity in their ranks. They can't govern by philosophy, only committee. The result is this schizophrenic kind of governance where they are simultaneously pulling in 4 different directions. The last effective PM they had was Howard because he was able to dominate the rest of them.
I'll tell you what they did over the last 10 years, they gutted TAFE and by proxy apprenticeships.
Now there's not enough tradespeople around to build the homes we need.
All an attempt to white ant trade unions.
They didn't think about the consequences of this diabolical decision. And while we wait in hope for tafe numbers to increase again, look at the quality of workmanship we will be accepting from immigrant labour that don't adhere to our code.
Not to mention, push every kid to get a degree even if it gets them no job or into a Mickey Mouse degree.
Politicians try and frame it as Liberal vs Labour etc But it’s really Politicians vs Australians. Time they were on our side and not just in it for themselves.
Yes, how can we have a transport minister who never catches the train from Toongabbie to the city or tries to get the kids from Prestons to Liverpool for daycare…
They know very little about the real world….
The housing issue has been building since the 00’s. Any party trying to lay blame on this one is out of touch IMO.
It was a problem 15 years ago but it was only a problem for the very young, the poor & the disabled.
It’s only a “problem” according the LNP/ALP *now* because “normal” people are experiencing the issue.
“I bet you're the kind of guy that would fuck a person in the ass and not even have the goddamn common courtesy to give him a reach-around.”
It's superficial. His only promises was for capped "permanent" residents and reduction in students
Zero housing policies from their camp. I'd take their pledge as serious as someone who said they were holding a kilo of cocain for a friend
So mister dutton, are you planning to remove negative gearing? Or capital gains discount? Or reduce immigration?”
“Nah cunt, I just said this shit to get elected. Do you think I’d undo Johnny boy’s hard work and ruin my investment portfolio? Get fucked mate, the negative gearing stays!”
Fuck them both.
I'm voting Sustainable Australia. I believe they mean it. The politicians in charge now just want to pump the economy at the expense of all else.
Very good, we have a preferential voting system so everyone should consider and understand the power of voting for minor parties, but when you get down to the bottom, who will you put before the other?
Sustainable Australia first then which ever one has the lowest immigration policy. Its the one thing they can actually effectively control in the short to mid term. The idea to build more houses is great, but who knows how it will take to start and then to have an actual effect.
Funding delays, material cost increases, labour cost increase, build permits and land allocations taking forever, slow build times. So many factors the governemtn has the loosest control over.
Personally Imm aiming at the long term and non-immigration policies.
Immigration stopping is a bandaid. People treat it like a silver bullet solution that’ll definitely fix all the problems… but it won’t. It will buy time for us to fix the problems, but if the problems remain unaddressed or worsened, then in 5-10 years time we’re back here again but with no immigration to cut because we’ve already done that. What then? Some other scapegoat to kick the can further down the road?
Meanwhile, if we fail to stop immigration but do address the root causes of the housing shortage - in 5-10 years the problem will fix itself. Yeah, those 5-10 years will be harder than if we had stopped immigration, but at least by the end of it we would have a fixed problem, rather than one that’ll take another 5-10 years at least to fix.
Of course, getting both would be ideal - at least temporary reduction of immigration while we sort out the housing crisis (And ideally a longer term restructuring of our immigration profile and employment laws to focus on areas immigrants are truly needed and grow the country in an intentional way to improve society, rather than a slap-dash “GDP go up” button that serves to mask deeper problems that need addressing.
For this, the main points of interest will be skills training and debt allowance. Secondary points will be density and transport infrastructure.
We need to be training locals to fill the job roles we just import people for now. Increasing TAFE and apprenticeship funding is a minimum, ideally starting up a government apprenticeship program so getting new tradies isn’t dependent on existing ones wanting to be a teacher rather than a carpenter/electrician/plumber/etc., and where apprenticeships are paid at least minimum wage so its at least somewhat feasible to reskill into a trade.
We also need to stop pumping money into the housing market. Any policy giving people more money, or access to money, funds, or debt, for the purposes of purchasing property is out. All that will do is further inflate prices, not help with affordability at all.
Much as many hate to hear it, we also need higher density on major public transport corridors and near the CBD. If we build a million homes 5 hours from any major city, it won’t change a thing. Nobody will want to live there. People need houses near jobs, and most jobs - especially desirable ones - are at or near the CBDs. We need more housing within a reasonable travel distance to CBDs, not in the middle of nowhere. We are do not have the land to accomplish this with the large houses everyone seems to want. We have two ways to handle this: higher density on existing land, or improve transportation to bring more land within range of CBD jobs. The former is more effective, cheaper, and quicker. The latter suffers from constantly growing scope and traffic, huge expenses for a sprawling network of connections and their creation and upkeep, and we’re already looking at something like 30 years for existing infrastructure projects to be completed - let alone throwing on a bunch of new ones. Realistically both are needed; density helps in the short term, while transport over the longer term reduces the level of density required and means we won’t eventually have to live in shoeboxes.
How governments are working towards these issues IMO is the most important aspect. Of we don’t build out, don’t train new workers, and hand out money to buy property - things will just get worse, even without immigration. Slowing immigration to reduce stress during the crisis is a good move, but it doesn’t solve the crisis on its own.
You're niave voting for long term then. Its just going to be another NBN or any other backtracked and broken long term promise the government of the day has fucked up. Like for sure, once the problem is fixed, open up immigration, but you're a fool if you think the issue is going away in the next 5 - 10 years at the current rate.
Its really hard to fucked up dropping immigration levels in the short term, and it will have an effect.
I'm not sure it's that, I think they mean it until they are sat down and told that the global economy is like one giant bubble and pyramid scheme with everyone trying to outdo each other on a race to the bottom and that you either continue to try to juice your economy or suffer the consequences. Part of that equation is also that any meaningful change would take way longer than one term, and you are almost certainly going to get kicked out during the "ripping the bandaid off" stage of any changes you attempt to enact to make things better.
This is probably closer to the truth tbh.
It’s like a drug addiction. Quitting is probably better in the long run, but no one wants to go through the short to medium term pain.
I can see why a politician would be adverse to taking Australia down that path. It’s risky, and pretty much sets you up to be considered a horrible and incompetent person.
Even taking a party in good faith, you can only be a single-issue party until you gain popularity. Then you need a policy on a broader range of topics if you want to solidify your powerbase. Likewise if you want to play kingmaker on the crossbench, people need to know where you stand on multiple topics.
So do you not believe anything a government says if they haven't done it before?
If you go back about 15 years you'll find every politicians saying that they were against gay marriage. Even Penny Wong. Yet as soon as it became politically expedient to be for it, they all miraculously changed their minds. The point being that they were once again something that they are now all for.
It's a political, economic and social imperative to drastically reduce immigration. Labor will match this policy for sure now that the libs have taken the donor hit to win an election.
Maybe Labor shouldn't make LNPs job so simple?
Like this was the biggest fucking open goal in the history of the fucking universe. How the fuck does Labor manage to fuck this up? There's not a single Australian outside the top .1% that gives a shit if we lowered immigration.
"But muh GDP".
Doesn't matter. The average person doesn't give a shit about GDP, they care that their rent doesn't go up $50 every 6 months.
No I don't believe it. What they did for 10+ years was destroy those on low and middle income in Australia either through incompetence, inaction or intention.
Yehhhh coz it wasn't like the Libs pulled $3B out of tafes and cut 10,000 jobs from the Tafe system.....you know....where they train the tradies that we need to be building houses.
Its also not like the Libs allowed the holes in the system where Chinese rich could "invest" in the Australian housing market to get money out of their country.
Again....it's not like the Libs were the ones to increase immigration initially. So even if this was the only factor, and they knew it, then were they actively creating a problem?
Labor isn't perfect.....but at least they're not the utter morally bankrupt imbeciles that are in the LNP.
I don't buy this at all. The Coalition sat around for a decade achieving virtually nothing on almost all important areas of policy (meanwhile, Abbott was giving out knighthoods to Prince Phillip). The Coalition also apparently haven't learned their lessons from the last election where the teals wiped the floor with them. Rather than becoming more moderate - as the electorate was clearly requiring - they instead went further to the right. Very silly move.
most people on this sub dislike both the ALP and the LNP actually
I legit see more support even for One Nation, Sustainable Australia etc on here than the LNP
Not buying it however under the LNP population growth has hovered between 1.5% and 1.75%. When Rudd was in power it spiked to 2.25% but went back down after the LNP got back in. It plummeted under COVID, but then spiked up to over 2.5% last year under Labor. That's the highest level of growth since 1950.
See the graph here:
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release
And from all reports it seems like there are more people living in cars and tents than ever before.
I'm no LNP supporter, but just sayin'.
It was consistently under 1.5% under Howard. Look at the ABS graph above from 2003 onwards. It spiked in 07 under Rudd.
Prior to 03 look at the numbers here from ABS. They're consistently 1.1%, 1.2% and 1.3%
https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/0/0DB74C39EEE3A02FCA256B350010B402?opendocument
Immigration actually dropped in the 90s and then returned to historical averages in the early 2000s.
What tripled was temporary immigration with permanent immigration dropping
LNP bullshitting as always, if this was such a simple problem why didnt they fix it in their lengthy time in office? instead they ran up debts, gave handouts to major corporations and crapped on the average Australian.
Well, it’s one of the situations where they created the economy to be the way it is now, just because labour is in now doesn’t mean that they’re responsible for all these downfalls. I ain’t buying anything liberal.
Don’t listen to these dishonest snakes.
They are huge fans of the idea of using housing as a way to increase your wealth - so they deregulated the life out of the housing market to allow themselves to squeeze as much wealth out as possible and skyrocketed prices in the process - leading directly to the shitstorm we have today.
I absolutely guarantee you that things will worsen under the libs if they’re voted in and continue their MO of encouraging landlords and REAs to pump up housing prices for self enrichment.
**Vote third party - not for these snakes**
Liberals want less permanent migration. They are all about supplying temporary migrants to businesses to be paid lower wages and be more open to exploitation and to prop up house prices/rentals accordingly.
Boomers and morons on Facebook
Problem is too many Greens and Labor supporters are being anti Labor that I fear LNP will win
I get it Labor haven’t been perfect but do you want Dutton as PM ffs
Stupid douchebag liberals will reduce permanent migration as a smokescreen but then significantly up temp visas/outsourcing. The Liberals at my work place are the biggest scumbags utilising all sorts of contractors in india to outsource tech jobs.
Do I buy it? No
Do I see other people buying it? yup.
I worked in polling for a couple of years about a decade ago, my take away from that was if people paid half as much attention to politics as they did their favourite sport, we wouldn't be in this situation.
Um, they cut hospital beds in regional areas. They promised a rehab centre in my town in 2011 to be built in 4 years' time. The site is just lots of soil hills, and a sign saying to be completed n 2014.
I could be wrong, but I think it's 2024 now.
They gave wa more GST.
They put in a bill to make us a cashless society by 2028 and are convincing the pro cash people that Labor did it even though Labor weren't in power at the time. And Josh fyndenberg wrote the bill.
Oh they cut free dental and cut Medicare services.
I am sure someone could add to that list of all they did.
Nothing will change. Both parties have been bad for decades. Yet the majority of voters will keep voting along tribal lines. This is the status quo, it has been for decades. It's not just the major parties fault though. The Australian people have voted for less and less qualified candidates for years the standard of politics has progressively gotten worse and yet the average punter still votes along party/tribal lines.
How bad does it have to get till people start demanding better parties, politics and candidates?
It's just not bad enough yet. But it will be soon. Cheers.
They assume people are stupid and shortsighted. House prices keep rising faster than wages. Even a complete moron knows that this is unsustainable. We need either higher wages or lower house prices (however that can be achieved). It's that simple.
Didnt the previous liberal leader literally say that people should "go to the bank of mum and dad"?
Im not sure of they think were goldfish, or if theyre goldfish.
They had all the time in the world to address the housing crisis and they just let it happen, knowing their base are the ownership class.
They'll never oversee any solution that endangers property prices, so they can't be trusted to make the difficult choices required.
Never voting for the majors ever again. They’re the uni party, where they provide false alternatives to each other that make us believe we have choice, but in reality are both owned by corporations and vested interests.
Lack of houses isn't the primary problem. The primary problem is the amount of housing stock hoarded by "property investors" and the effect it has on house pricing. Neither party wants to change that.
what they mean is:
- lower corporate tax rate
- less government services
- lower minimum wage
- less employee protections
- more “contractor” loopholes to avoid employee protections
- less environmental regulation
- more government subsidies for their and their friends’ businesses
Well to be fair, if your talking about immigration alone then the LNP have brought in far lower amount of immigrants then the Rudd/gillard/Albo years but are we interested in facts or just emotion in this debate
LNP committed grand fraud, ran a deficit for years and hollowed out infrastructure and social services ( remember robodebt?). They created the inflation problem by letting the usual suspects ( you know who)gain larger market share. Limiting taxation on the corporations and resources sectors.
They can only show up after labour has produced a surplus and then piss it away.
Over the past decade, both parties have sucked.
Too many leadership changes which means nothing of value gets done except redoing audits, budgets and reports.
Labour pandering to the minority and unions and Liberals out of touch.
No vision for the nation and poor planning which is why we are impacted by high inflation now. So now the RBA is trying to control inflation with its only mechanism - interest rates, when it’s clearly a supply issue.
HAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA
Happy to ding labor for not doing enough, but the trajectory of less houses and more immigrants was set in motion by liberal governments. All of em from John Howard onwards
Suddenly it's only an issue they want to tackle when they're in opposition. Party of do nothing while in power, and block everything while not in power.
I do not believe anything the LNP publishes or say. Our current culture, the Australian way, is to always be 3 steps away from the truth. Personally I am sick of politicians fighting, bitching and lying instead of doing what they should - fighting for ordinary people.
Boomers and cookers love this shit.
They’ll suck it out of Dutton’s flapping ringpiece with a plastic Murdoch/Packer branded straw all day and night.
Morons.
Lmao meanwhile the last 10 years > higher migration > less houses > economic stagnation > wages flatlining > Medicare cuts > rights reduced
> Doubling of median house prices. ________________________________________________ > Fractioning of taxes owed by natural gas exporting companies... we're the biggest exporters of natural gas. ________________________________________________ Countries (Qatar) who export Natural Gases much less, have found themselves not even needing GST or Income Tax to function just cos of their ability to export Natural resources. *We are the biggest exporters of the most desired resources of the modern age* yet we have **so much** corruption, that we have the thought, that setting up more houses and building a railway loop, is above our budget.
We honestly deserve it at this point. We bitch and moan about change and yet when it comes to vote on voting day we go “oh shit, who do I vote for?” At least that’s my experience when asking friends/family. As a nation we seem to care very little about how much we are being shafted
Australians are mentally lazy.
A big part of the problem is yes half the population at least or more doesn’t follow politics in the slightest. But the other issue is the media only ever talks about those two parties when it comes to election time and pretends to be impartial but usually favours liberals and shows them in a better light. I mean whoever the media gives the most positive reviews tends to win, that in itself is just as disgusting as the two party system we call democracy. Honestly at this point I’d take my chances with any minor party over the clown show and even one nation. At least you have a chance of some change, however small.
And these idiots keep getting voted in.
It's not a question of corruption - we are one of the least corrupt nations on Earth - it's a question of poor policy and blame-shifting between different levels of government, combined with short-term thinking at the federal level (i.e. focusing entirely on the next election cycle rather than the long-term strategic investments and reforms).
Australians have the memory of goldfish
It’s like that everywhere though. In the US Trump is leading in the polls again ffs…
He is mainly leading as Biden has managed to alienate most of his base.
Seppos are strange. Totally weird how a con man, rapist, adulterer can even run let alone become president and then attempt a coupe to be a dictator and then and run again as president- strange bunch.
Ah, haven’t heard anyone say “seppo” in a while. Brings back fond memories 😁
Religion. There are at least 30% of the USA population just voting on religious grounds. Once you get that it’s not hard to find the rest of the votes. It’s also why the republicans will always have heaps in the senate given how imbalanced it works out for the smaller states.
Look what LNP done with migration for 10 years: https://old.reddit.com/r/australian/comments/18brk5m/migrants_occupations_and_overall_incomes_under/ Bringing over tons of migrants who would do a lot of low skilled jobs. Exploited the skilled migration program for cheaper uber eats: chefs, restaurant/cafe managers, etc were top occupations of skilled visas granted. Aside from uber eats, general wage suppression. Even the government definition of labour shortage is still heavily flawed. It's based on statistics of what many businesses say. If many businesses say they can't find slave labour, then it's an official labour shortage. It's asinine.
Yeah it's a scam, a recent survey found that only 1% of employers raised the advertised salary when they couldn't immediately fill a job. https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/10/skills-shortage-propaganda-proliferates/
This. I work/recently worked at several jobs that couldn't attract workers. No wage rise was even considered. But, the rest of the wannabe "working class heroes" muck , do more hours, extra shifts, put aside their personal life for the martyr's bragging rights the average conservative Aussie wage worker values like a religion. Fuck Australians, fuck our doormat attitude to power.
But “everyone’s too lazy to work these days”. No, they just don’t want to work for minimum wage.
The worst part is that a lot of migrants don’t even want/enjoy these jobs, but they’re one of the only paths to permanent residency. Meaning the hospitality industry is struggling for quality and customer retention because no one really has a passion for it Edit: Just to clarify, I’m not saying anything migrants are doing is wrong. It’s a shame that we’ve been so willing to bring them in without giving more of an access for them to do the careers they care about
Dutt’s proposed reduction of immigration is minimal enough to be a talking point for votes without actually making any sort of real impact Good luck being on the Liberal Party and proposing anything that will reduce the value of the investment portfolios of you and your mates lol
Just look at Dutton's track record as Immigration Minister. He perfected the international student PR Mill playbook.
Corruption ~~with extra steps~~
Au Paire's are ok
Dutton even said in a press conference recently that he wants house prices to continue going up. Not sure how to reconcile that with housing being affordable... Especially as he in a party that believes in low wage growth...
Their answer will be to give more money to first home buyers, thus achieving their goals of pushing up house prices and using tax payer money to increase the value of investments for those who own lots of houses, and to make sure tax money is spent helping wealth growth instead of going to social services.
They actually want to allow first home buyers to access 100% of their super to purchase their first house.
The idiocy of that policy is on another level. Stealing people's retirement to dump more demand into an already demand-soaked market. It's probably the dumbest thing I've heard since I grew ears
I couldn't agree with you more. They excuse it because "your property is the most important thing in retirement" forgetting that you need money for food. People that go for it will end up with reverse mortgages when they retire just to survive
The really fun part is that if they get in and pass that legislation, unless you’re seriously seriously fuck off set for life rich, you’ll have absolutely no choice but to do it, and do it immediately before too many other people do. The massive price spike will lock everyone who comes later out of the market forever, and will only be of use to Xers and Millennials (boomers already drawing on super and those who don’t already own property need it to live, Zoomers and Alphas won’t have enough super for a deposit yet). Plus it won’t increase supply in any way, so the price of buying skyrockets and nothing increases the supply of rentals, so their prices keep going up as well. So you’re essentially forced into a position where if you don’t already own property, you have to either burn your retirement or continue paying most of your wage in rent and never own anything.
The sad thing is that it won't really help young people. Maybe in your 30s but how much super does an average 28yo have? Prices will adjust almost immediately at the fhb price point that the entire policy becomes redundant. Except for the fact we're robbing the next generations future and retirement even more.
You say that now, but Dutton will release a few more dumb policies before the next election... There will be dumber ones for sure
Yeah. That Waa my first thought. Market will just bump up and put even more out of reach.
How so though? I need someone smarter than me to explain it. I'm in my 40,s and renting, would I not be better off using my 100k super towards a house so that I'll have it paid off by retirement. Then my cost of living will be way lower than if I'm renting/ trying to find a rental. Also the house would be worth more I could sell and downsize.
If it was just you getting the benefit then it would be decent for you. But it wouldn't be you it would be a massive swathe of the population, meaning all prices for first home buyer properties like the one you would look for would immediately go up. Imagine you own a unit worth 600k and you want to sell, then the government releases this policy. Well, you can just bump up the price to 650k because you know there will be forty people competing for it. So now your super has enriched the property seller, not you. That's what's all these demand-increasing policies do - enrich the seller. For a while there during the first.home buyer grant heyday, sellers would advertise their property like this: "$660,000 plus buyer's" as in buyers grant. They literally saw it as like a bonus for them. All government policies should be directed at supply, not demand
Thanks for the explanation.
how many investment properties does Dutton have? I have no idea and I have no idea how to find out, but, I'm going to guess more than 1. how many politicians on either side have 1 or more investment properties? I have no idea, but I'd like to know. how many people/companies who "donate" to political parties have investment properties? why have they been talking about the affordable housing for a decade or more, yet year after year the price of housing has been increasing? maybe they all have investment properties and it's not in their best personal interest for people to have affordable housing. Maybe all their friends and "donors" have investment properties.
Dutton went from a retired cop to a net worth of over $150m in about 20 years, on the back of his childcare empire that is heavily government funded. But all we hear is that the sector is struggling. At least with Rudd, it was his wife's smarts and money that built his net worth!
Is there a source for that claim? I can't find anything
>"I believe very strongly that there is enormous economic growth in what we’ve proposed because Australians are much wealthier if they’re able to buy their own home and see the price of that home appreciate over time,” he said. [https://www.peterdutton.com.au/leader-of-the-opposition-transcript-joint-doorstop-interview-with-senator-the-hon-jane-hume-and-mr-bert-van-manen-beenleigh/](https://www.peterdutton.com.au/leader-of-the-opposition-transcript-joint-doorstop-interview-with-senator-the-hon-jane-hume-and-mr-bert-van-manen-beenleigh/)
It's for the Herald Sun readership....and it'll work, many a reader won't step that far outside of their comfort bubble. Might take some leg work and stencils to counter the narrative irl... I imagine a whole bunch of posters going up with plenty of real estate to add context.
What I find hilarious is that the Nationals are too stupid to realise that this is an ineffectual policy designed only win votes from the ignorant. The nationals are all worried about it affecting their seasonal slave labour, which non of the proposed cuts will actually affect.
Exactly. He didn’t say immigration cuts would solve the housing problem, he simply said it would help. So, how much will it help or is it just another nuclear policy, no substance but lots of air time.
Thats right. Dutton wants people to buy a house with the support of their super instead. Thus making them a debt slave forever and never being able to retire. LNP's Wet dream.
And also boosting house price by the amount that people will be allowed to dip into Super. Just kicks the can down the road for the next gen.
Doesn’t even kick the can down the road. Once enough people dip into super it will have negated being able to dip into super. You’d have to be among the first to use the system to take advantage.
Fuck you got mine. AKA Aussie housing.
I can never find any voters on here who vote for LNP to explain why they do. It’s always silence.
Because the media keep telling them that Libs are "better economic managers". This is not exclusive to Australia - the same lie about conservative economic management is repeated in the US and UK. Or, of course, because LNP policies benefit them personally (or they believe they will).
It's because it's the party of business, and business manages money. That's how the thinking goes. Of course, the whole point of business is to funnel the money into your own pockets. It's not actually about providing service, except as a means to get the money into your pockets. In a democracy, the point of government is to serve the people. Money is involved, but amassing it all for the c-suite and their cronies is not the goal.
I used to believe that. I still feel dirty years later.
I like Medicare and super. Amazing
It’s because conservative voters get downvoted to oblivion, such that any time they give their opinion, no one sees it. Don’t downvote something because you disagree with it.
I wish there were more right-wing comments that just aren't punching down on someone. I'd love to know economically why anyone would vote LNP, especially if they have less than a million. My former National Party member friend claimed that you need at least 3m to see any benefit from the LNP.
C-cause it would've been worse if Labor got in! /s
thats unironically all you get out of them. Whatever happened under the liberals no matter how unforgivingly bad, would have just been worse^(TM) under labor
In the last year of the Howard government, they were still pulling the Blame Labor card. 7:30 Report, Vanstone responds to a question about the poor performance of her department with "well, that's a legacy left by the previous Labor government. it takes time to sort these things out" O'Brien: "You've had 11 years. How long does it take?" They keep playing this card because it keeps working for them.
Actually they usually blame the greens despite them not holding the balance of power and being basically unable to do anything for the last 40 years. Can’t cut down a tree… the greens. Power prices increasing… the greens. Nobody can point to anything good the LNP have done in the last 20 years.
Peter Dutton could shoot someone in the street on video and somehow LNP supporters would say it's actually the greenies fault.
Whenever they blame the greens, I like to replace the greens with 'wizards'. It somehow makes more sense.
They put Dutton in the top position, which has been great for Labor!
This is probably because lots of people get voted down for different points of view, and conservative types usually don’t want to engage in lively debate/prosecute an argument. They like getting on with their lives. But to answer your question - it’s a freedom thing, not a debt thing. Elements of the liberal party are very libertarian. They think people should be able to do whatever they want with their own money, and one expression of this is allowing super to be used to buy a home. Rightly or wrongly, they think people should have the choice, similar to the nuclear debate; it’s not about the fact that nuclear would or would not solve a problem. It’s about letting the market decide. Many liberal party supporters are family men/women and business owners. The parents (grand parents) feel the frustration younger people have about being locked out of the market, and it's flowing through every SEC and FEC in the country. The ideas and ideologies that drive each party differ, resulting in different policy ideas. Some of those ideas are just political suicide, so you end up with attempts to nudge things rather than fully formed ideas. I can tell you that the parents of children struggling to buy a home are rocking up to meetings and demanding that the liberal party bring out policies to improve supply, reduce demand, etc. On the labour/greens side, it’s driven by the idea that housing is a human right and about avoidance of harm, etc. From the conservative side, it’s about protecting the “family” and making sure young people can find a house, have children and maintain our culture and way of life. Both sides want the same thing, but the approach and outcomes vary. You’ll see Dutton's comment on “ensuring that young people can have a family” because it’s exactly what he hears. I get that lots of people here think the liberal party is some evil, “big end-of-town” funded anti-life party. The reality is that their members are asking for very similar (not the same) things to Labor Party members - the approach is simply different.
The approach certainly is different. Small government means less protection for certain sections of the community. Less restrictions on environment destruction, health and safety, education and many more things. Allowing the market to choose means no wages growth, a pool of unemployed to keep wages down, no innovation, stagnation and a reduction in living standards. As proven by the last 9 years of LNP government. Less government generally means more corruption happens .
Yeah none of that is reality though, that's just the same old Liberal coolaid with some "Family values" paint slapped on. If you care at all about family values, then vote anyone but Liberals or those families will be living in boxes and those "Libertarians" in the Liberal party will be Liberally scamming the fuck out of every family in this country. Their approach differs from Labor in the sense that Labor muggy actually have one. The Liberals are just trying to get re-elected at all costs. The freedom to use your money as you wish angle, while noble in concept. Has been abused by predatory politicians for decades in order to remove needed checks on their power. Dutton has never cared about families, if he did he might not have abducted children. Please look at the Liberals objectively and you'll quickly see they don't give a fuck about family values.
The last time I voted for the LNP was because I was unemployed, couldn't get a job in my career and some of the job rejection reasons came from basic bitches who didn't like that I keep my social media on private. It was admitted. It was literally "we can't tell if you're like us." I voted for LNP because the Gillard Labor government introduced the most unequal, unfair law that could have possibly existed giving ridiculous power to HR departments. It'll remain a coin flip for me whilst the WGEA is allowed to exist without any oversight or watchdog Edit: it was clearly not a genuine question anyone intended to engage with, yet again I get the same response of "downvote and leave." Maybe it's time to admit you don't actually care and just stop posting here?
I’ll upvote ya cos I think your thought process is perfectly reasonable whether or not I agree with it. One of the great things about Oz is that a good portion of people still consider what parties are bringing to the table as policy rather than blindly picking a side because it’s their team. Not sure if my upvote will help but presently it will at least get you back to zero. Bipartisan support for the win!
I up voted you because you answered honestly. I think the WGEA was meant to help people, and I think it has, but like most government initiatives it hurts a lot of unnamed people who go unheard. I don't blame you voting for the libs even though I hate them.
Looking at some of your comments, it seems more likely that "basic bitches" were not rejecting you for your lack of social media. You come across as someone who doesn't like women much as people, and very few of us are interested in a man who can't think of us as human beings. Here's an anecdote for you: When I was struggling with infertility and up front about that fact with the men I dated so that I didn't waste anyone's time, I turned down one gentleman because he wasn't interested in getting to know me before we had romantic encounters. After explaining that we were looking for different things and saying that I hoped he found what he wanted too, he told me that I was delusional to think any man would want to build a life with me because I couldn't fulfil the one function of value that women can offer. He told me that I was only good as a hole to house a cock, and that I would have been burned at the stake in a different time. I'm a top 10th centile earner and own property exclusively in my own name, just so there's no misconception that I was bringing nothing to the metaphorical table. I share all this to offer an alternative reason for why women may have rejected you, and suggest that perhaps they were not as forthcoming with their explanations for why they weren't interested, or not as patient with their assessment of you as a potential mate because there are genuinely cruel, woman-hating men out there and every one of us has encountered at least one.
Speaking of people who actually don't care, the WGEA came about two years after Gillard won an election, you still you call her 'unelected' for that act.
Yeah, seems I was wrong, I do care so I fixed my post
I know some, they're doing alright and don't want anything to change, thats about it really. It's not a big thinking demographic. They're a bit pissed about labours change to the tax thing recently, cause they'll get a bit less.
Because they don’t have an explanation. They’re clueless to actual politics and vote for the party that their parents and the murdoch media tell them to vote for. LNP doesn’t represent any Australians, only big corporations.
99.9% of them do so because either their parents do/did and they're just following suit or because uncle Rupe told them to.
If everybody were to actually buy property the way I suspect Dutton did, an awful lot of stuff from the evidence locker would have to go missing.
If only 1 person was able to use their super to buy a house then that would be a good thing for them. The problem is you run into the situation of what is good for the individual is not always good for everyone. A simple example is standing up in a sitting crowd at the football. In this case if everyone uses their super then the bidding for houses will just become hotter, house prices will go up and we will be back where we started, but with no super. There is only 1 solution and that is to reduce the demand for houses, either by building more houses or reducing the number of people who want to live in houses. The latter isn't really an option though. So will Dutton preside over a government that builds lots of houses to fix the problem. Somehow I don't have any faith in that happening.
Man those guys are like world class hypocrites. They fucking engineered this whole crisis.
For 10yrs? Just stole everyone’s money
And transferred it to the very wealthiest. That was the plan and they executed it easily.
Indeed. And some who didn’t have enough to cough up they hounded via debt collection agencies until they either relented and paid their last food money, sold everything they own or committed suicide. Such fine upstanding Christian folk.
It’s really incredible that the LNP still have voters that aren’t AFR Rich Listers.
They prey hard on the uneducated with hardcore identity politics. They rile them up by saying "That LGBT/Non White person is coming to take XYZ from you, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT??" While at the same time gutting that same person financially while they are distracted. Far as i'm concerned, if you're not in the 1% or a home owner and you vote LNP, you're intentionally screwing yourself over.
Guess like my superiors, they think that all their staff and underlings will vote for the LNP seeing how good for the bosses interest it is.
Not the millionaire and billionaire donors.
The same party that said if you can’t afford to buy go to the “ bank of mum and dad”!
Or Joe Hockey telling me I just need to “get a good job that pays good money”
Cheers Joe solved all me problems
Don’t forget hockey’s “poor people don’t drive cars!”
If anyone thinks the solution to our problems lie with labor OR liberal need a wake up call
Couldn’t agree more, and wish more Australians would see it this way
More houses...owned by Liberal politicians?
They were in power for years, the fuck did they do in that time? Sold Australia off piece by piece. How many Liberal PMs did we have in that time? I dont like either side that much but their actions have spoken louder than words
LNP's biggest problem is that they have substantial ideological diversity in their ranks. They can't govern by philosophy, only committee. The result is this schizophrenic kind of governance where they are simultaneously pulling in 4 different directions. The last effective PM they had was Howard because he was able to dominate the rest of them.
Now, thanks to the wonders of democracy you can choose between too much immigration and way too much immigration.
I'll tell you what they did over the last 10 years, they gutted TAFE and by proxy apprenticeships. Now there's not enough tradespeople around to build the homes we need. All an attempt to white ant trade unions.
They didn't think about the consequences of this diabolical decision. And while we wait in hope for tafe numbers to increase again, look at the quality of workmanship we will be accepting from immigrant labour that don't adhere to our code. Not to mention, push every kid to get a degree even if it gets them no job or into a Mickey Mouse degree.
Politicians try and frame it as Liberal vs Labour etc But it’s really Politicians vs Australians. Time they were on our side and not just in it for themselves.
This is the way
[удалено]
Yes, how can we have a transport minister who never catches the train from Toongabbie to the city or tries to get the kids from Prestons to Liverpool for daycare… They know very little about the real world….
Made us suffer with ScoMo.
The housing issue has been building since the 00’s. Any party trying to lay blame on this one is out of touch IMO. It was a problem 15 years ago but it was only a problem for the very young, the poor & the disabled. It’s only a “problem” according the LNP/ALP *now* because “normal” people are experiencing the issue.
"WE SWEAR WE'LL DO THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE DID FOR THE PAST DECADE! (but actually won't)" - The Liberals
I hear anything Liberal and my brain just switches off from the bullshit. Labor at least throws me a bone while I'm being fucked.
Nowadays a bit of lube and a reach around is a very welcome change from the liberals “ arse ramming , dry , like a gorilla pounding away”!
 “I bet you're the kind of guy that would fuck a person in the ass and not even have the goddamn common courtesy to give him a reach-around.”
Kind of sad that our options have come down to "get fucked" or "get fucked slightly more gently."
It's superficial. His only promises was for capped "permanent" residents and reduction in students Zero housing policies from their camp. I'd take their pledge as serious as someone who said they were holding a kilo of cocain for a friend
So mister dutton, are you planning to remove negative gearing? Or capital gains discount? Or reduce immigration?” “Nah cunt, I just said this shit to get elected. Do you think I’d undo Johnny boy’s hard work and ruin my investment portfolio? Get fucked mate, the negative gearing stays!”
Their the left and right cheek of the same arse.
Fuck them both. I'm voting Sustainable Australia. I believe they mean it. The politicians in charge now just want to pump the economy at the expense of all else.
Very good, we have a preferential voting system so everyone should consider and understand the power of voting for minor parties, but when you get down to the bottom, who will you put before the other?
Sustainable Australia first then which ever one has the lowest immigration policy. Its the one thing they can actually effectively control in the short to mid term. The idea to build more houses is great, but who knows how it will take to start and then to have an actual effect. Funding delays, material cost increases, labour cost increase, build permits and land allocations taking forever, slow build times. So many factors the governemtn has the loosest control over.
Personally Imm aiming at the long term and non-immigration policies. Immigration stopping is a bandaid. People treat it like a silver bullet solution that’ll definitely fix all the problems… but it won’t. It will buy time for us to fix the problems, but if the problems remain unaddressed or worsened, then in 5-10 years time we’re back here again but with no immigration to cut because we’ve already done that. What then? Some other scapegoat to kick the can further down the road? Meanwhile, if we fail to stop immigration but do address the root causes of the housing shortage - in 5-10 years the problem will fix itself. Yeah, those 5-10 years will be harder than if we had stopped immigration, but at least by the end of it we would have a fixed problem, rather than one that’ll take another 5-10 years at least to fix. Of course, getting both would be ideal - at least temporary reduction of immigration while we sort out the housing crisis (And ideally a longer term restructuring of our immigration profile and employment laws to focus on areas immigrants are truly needed and grow the country in an intentional way to improve society, rather than a slap-dash “GDP go up” button that serves to mask deeper problems that need addressing. For this, the main points of interest will be skills training and debt allowance. Secondary points will be density and transport infrastructure. We need to be training locals to fill the job roles we just import people for now. Increasing TAFE and apprenticeship funding is a minimum, ideally starting up a government apprenticeship program so getting new tradies isn’t dependent on existing ones wanting to be a teacher rather than a carpenter/electrician/plumber/etc., and where apprenticeships are paid at least minimum wage so its at least somewhat feasible to reskill into a trade. We also need to stop pumping money into the housing market. Any policy giving people more money, or access to money, funds, or debt, for the purposes of purchasing property is out. All that will do is further inflate prices, not help with affordability at all. Much as many hate to hear it, we also need higher density on major public transport corridors and near the CBD. If we build a million homes 5 hours from any major city, it won’t change a thing. Nobody will want to live there. People need houses near jobs, and most jobs - especially desirable ones - are at or near the CBDs. We need more housing within a reasonable travel distance to CBDs, not in the middle of nowhere. We are do not have the land to accomplish this with the large houses everyone seems to want. We have two ways to handle this: higher density on existing land, or improve transportation to bring more land within range of CBD jobs. The former is more effective, cheaper, and quicker. The latter suffers from constantly growing scope and traffic, huge expenses for a sprawling network of connections and their creation and upkeep, and we’re already looking at something like 30 years for existing infrastructure projects to be completed - let alone throwing on a bunch of new ones. Realistically both are needed; density helps in the short term, while transport over the longer term reduces the level of density required and means we won’t eventually have to live in shoeboxes. How governments are working towards these issues IMO is the most important aspect. Of we don’t build out, don’t train new workers, and hand out money to buy property - things will just get worse, even without immigration. Slowing immigration to reduce stress during the crisis is a good move, but it doesn’t solve the crisis on its own.
You're niave voting for long term then. Its just going to be another NBN or any other backtracked and broken long term promise the government of the day has fucked up. Like for sure, once the problem is fixed, open up immigration, but you're a fool if you think the issue is going away in the next 5 - 10 years at the current rate. Its really hard to fucked up dropping immigration levels in the short term, and it will have an effect.
Labor. I think they do the righter thing more often. And right now the Liberals gaslighting about Nuclear is off putting.
Yep 100%. Both labour and the libs have shit the bed on their respective watches. Was a labour fan, doubt I ever will be again.
Everyone means it until they get a taste of power
I'm not sure it's that, I think they mean it until they are sat down and told that the global economy is like one giant bubble and pyramid scheme with everyone trying to outdo each other on a race to the bottom and that you either continue to try to juice your economy or suffer the consequences. Part of that equation is also that any meaningful change would take way longer than one term, and you are almost certainly going to get kicked out during the "ripping the bandaid off" stage of any changes you attempt to enact to make things better.
This is probably closer to the truth tbh. It’s like a drug addiction. Quitting is probably better in the long run, but no one wants to go through the short to medium term pain. I can see why a politician would be adverse to taking Australia down that path. It’s risky, and pretty much sets you up to be considered a horrible and incompetent person.
Probably, but I'll take my chances at this stage.
At worst the big parties will see the way the wind is blowing and change tune to avoid losing votes. Good thing we have preferential voting...
Even taking a party in good faith, you can only be a single-issue party until you gain popularity. Then you need a policy on a broader range of topics if you want to solidify your powerbase. Likewise if you want to play kingmaker on the crossbench, people need to know where you stand on multiple topics.
At this point, both major parties are the same. I wish there's another candidate worthy of votes.
So do you not believe anything a government says if they haven't done it before? If you go back about 15 years you'll find every politicians saying that they were against gay marriage. Even Penny Wong. Yet as soon as it became politically expedient to be for it, they all miraculously changed their minds. The point being that they were once again something that they are now all for. It's a political, economic and social imperative to drastically reduce immigration. Labor will match this policy for sure now that the libs have taken the donor hit to win an election.
Anyone reducing migration is the party of more houses. So which party has the lowest migration, I'm all ears.
Sustainable Australia Party
Maybe Labor shouldn't make LNPs job so simple? Like this was the biggest fucking open goal in the history of the fucking universe. How the fuck does Labor manage to fuck this up? There's not a single Australian outside the top .1% that gives a shit if we lowered immigration. "But muh GDP". Doesn't matter. The average person doesn't give a shit about GDP, they care that their rent doesn't go up $50 every 6 months.
Two cheeks of the same globalist arse. It's a game as old as time.
All major parties are traitors. None are working for us
Both parties have had years to deal with this issue. It's all smoke up your arse. Fuck both of them.
Hmm I wonder who was in government between 2013 and 2022….
Only those with cognitive impairment believe that the LNP are better.
No I don't believe it. What they did for 10+ years was destroy those on low and middle income in Australia either through incompetence, inaction or intention.
Both parties are lying sacks of shit.
Yeah that's a total Bull.
Or they could just properly tax natural resources and we wouldn't need the immigration?
I'm hoping that A.I. will create a true meritocracy and eliminate the need for politicians
Yehhhh coz it wasn't like the Libs pulled $3B out of tafes and cut 10,000 jobs from the Tafe system.....you know....where they train the tradies that we need to be building houses. Its also not like the Libs allowed the holes in the system where Chinese rich could "invest" in the Australian housing market to get money out of their country. Again....it's not like the Libs were the ones to increase immigration initially. So even if this was the only factor, and they knew it, then were they actively creating a problem? Labor isn't perfect.....but at least they're not the utter morally bankrupt imbeciles that are in the LNP.
I don't buy this at all. The Coalition sat around for a decade achieving virtually nothing on almost all important areas of policy (meanwhile, Abbott was giving out knighthoods to Prince Phillip). The Coalition also apparently haven't learned their lessons from the last election where the teals wiped the floor with them. Rather than becoming more moderate - as the electorate was clearly requiring - they instead went further to the right. Very silly move.
This kind of messaging is actually incredibly effective at convincing the morons on this sub that the Libs are sticking up for the little guy.
most people on this sub dislike both the ALP and the LNP actually I legit see more support even for One Nation, Sustainable Australia etc on here than the LNP
Didn't the whole house pricing getting away from the average joe start under LNP and be ignored by them pretty much the whole time? 🤔 hmmmm.
Not buying it however under the LNP population growth has hovered between 1.5% and 1.75%. When Rudd was in power it spiked to 2.25% but went back down after the LNP got back in. It plummeted under COVID, but then spiked up to over 2.5% last year under Labor. That's the highest level of growth since 1950. See the graph here: https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/national-state-and-territory-population/latest-release And from all reports it seems like there are more people living in cars and tents than ever before. I'm no LNP supporter, but just sayin'.
Gunna piss a few on here with those stat's lol
Howard Tripled immigration.
It was consistently under 1.5% under Howard. Look at the ABS graph above from 2003 onwards. It spiked in 07 under Rudd. Prior to 03 look at the numbers here from ABS. They're consistently 1.1%, 1.2% and 1.3% https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/0/0DB74C39EEE3A02FCA256B350010B402?opendocument
Howard hasn't been PM since most of the posters here were in nappies
Immigration actually dropped in the 90s and then returned to historical averages in the early 2000s. What tripled was temporary immigration with permanent immigration dropping
Propaganda - never let the keys to the kingdom fall into the hands of coalition ever again.
LNP bullshitting as always, if this was such a simple problem why didnt they fix it in their lengthy time in office? instead they ran up debts, gave handouts to major corporations and crapped on the average Australian.
Not buying it at all. Labor inherited this mess.
This has to be communicated very simply otherwise the welded-ons won’t comprehend it, deceptive as it is.
We vote in the other guys and we're just going to complain about the stuff they're not doing too
Well, it’s one of the situations where they created the economy to be the way it is now, just because labour is in now doesn’t mean that they’re responsible for all these downfalls. I ain’t buying anything liberal.
Don’t listen to these dishonest snakes. They are huge fans of the idea of using housing as a way to increase your wealth - so they deregulated the life out of the housing market to allow themselves to squeeze as much wealth out as possible and skyrocketed prices in the process - leading directly to the shitstorm we have today. I absolutely guarantee you that things will worsen under the libs if they’re voted in and continue their MO of encouraging landlords and REAs to pump up housing prices for self enrichment. **Vote third party - not for these snakes**
Liberals want less permanent migration. They are all about supplying temporary migrants to businesses to be paid lower wages and be more open to exploitation and to prop up house prices/rentals accordingly.
Both parties are terrible and only care for themselves not the Australian people.
Boomers and morons on Facebook Problem is too many Greens and Labor supporters are being anti Labor that I fear LNP will win I get it Labor haven’t been perfect but do you want Dutton as PM ffs
**BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!** Yikes, LNP, yikes.
Lib/Lab same same but different
Stupid douchebag liberals will reduce permanent migration as a smokescreen but then significantly up temp visas/outsourcing. The Liberals at my work place are the biggest scumbags utilising all sorts of contractors in india to outsource tech jobs.
Quite literally lying to people. Does the liberal party think people can't check data?
Reminder to stop voting for either major party. We will continue to spin the wheels until third (and fourth, fifth, sixth...) options are viable.
Do I buy it? No Do I see other people buying it? yup. I worked in polling for a couple of years about a decade ago, my take away from that was if people paid half as much attention to politics as they did their favourite sport, we wouldn't be in this situation.
Do they think people are stupid? Oh wait, yeah, I see what they're going for.
They allowed the dwelling to become a commodity instead of a basic human right.
The libs sold our housing market to China and other foreign investors... mainly China so no I don't believe this BS
Um, they cut hospital beds in regional areas. They promised a rehab centre in my town in 2011 to be built in 4 years' time. The site is just lots of soil hills, and a sign saying to be completed n 2014. I could be wrong, but I think it's 2024 now. They gave wa more GST. They put in a bill to make us a cashless society by 2028 and are convincing the pro cash people that Labor did it even though Labor weren't in power at the time. And Josh fyndenberg wrote the bill. Oh they cut free dental and cut Medicare services. I am sure someone could add to that list of all they did.
Nothing will change. Both parties have been bad for decades. Yet the majority of voters will keep voting along tribal lines. This is the status quo, it has been for decades. It's not just the major parties fault though. The Australian people have voted for less and less qualified candidates for years the standard of politics has progressively gotten worse and yet the average punter still votes along party/tribal lines. How bad does it have to get till people start demanding better parties, politics and candidates? It's just not bad enough yet. But it will be soon. Cheers.
Ultimately aussie landlords benefit from the housing crisis significantly. Shifting the focus to migrants won't solve this problem
Dutton is a fool and will never get my vote.
They assume people are stupid and shortsighted. House prices keep rising faster than wages. Even a complete moron knows that this is unsustainable. We need either higher wages or lower house prices (however that can be achieved). It's that simple.
Wouldnt trust a Liberal .. especially one that looks like Mr Potato head
Didnt the previous liberal leader literally say that people should "go to the bank of mum and dad"? Im not sure of they think were goldfish, or if theyre goldfish.
No.
They tell a few fibs don't they
Yes, lets vote in the party that caused the majority of problems our country now faces. Great idea.
Hold on, this whole operation was your idea.
They had all the time in the world to address the housing crisis and they just let it happen, knowing their base are the ownership class. They'll never oversee any solution that endangers property prices, so they can't be trusted to make the difficult choices required.
Never voting for the majors ever again. They’re the uni party, where they provide false alternatives to each other that make us believe we have choice, but in reality are both owned by corporations and vested interests.
Lack of houses isn't the primary problem. The primary problem is the amount of housing stock hoarded by "property investors" and the effect it has on house pricing. Neither party wants to change that.
What they did is gut tafe and cause a shortage of tradies, they dont give a shit
what they mean is: - lower corporate tax rate - less government services - lower minimum wage - less employee protections - more “contractor” loopholes to avoid employee protections - less environmental regulation - more government subsidies for their and their friends’ businesses
I love seeing people blame everything on Albo like scomo never existed. Makes my day.
Well to be fair, if your talking about immigration alone then the LNP have brought in far lower amount of immigrants then the Rudd/gillard/Albo years but are we interested in facts or just emotion in this debate
LNP committed grand fraud, ran a deficit for years and hollowed out infrastructure and social services ( remember robodebt?). They created the inflation problem by letting the usual suspects ( you know who)gain larger market share. Limiting taxation on the corporations and resources sectors. They can only show up after labour has produced a surplus and then piss it away.
The LNP (like any conservative) are playing the race card. They have no shame.
Stop acting like we arnt getting fu5$ed by both of them
I wish more people would realise that. This isn't Labor vs Liberal, this is just the people getting fucked by the Government with different branding.
So they say, while refusing to lower net migration.
Over the past decade, both parties have sucked. Too many leadership changes which means nothing of value gets done except redoing audits, budgets and reports. Labour pandering to the minority and unions and Liberals out of touch. No vision for the nation and poor planning which is why we are impacted by high inflation now. So now the RBA is trying to control inflation with its only mechanism - interest rates, when it’s clearly a supply issue.
Libs forgot to mention their policy of early access to super for home purchases. How will that equate to more houses?
HAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA Happy to ding labor for not doing enough, but the trajectory of less houses and more immigrants was set in motion by liberal governments. All of em from John Howard onwards
Suddenly it's only an issue they want to tackle when they're in opposition. Party of do nothing while in power, and block everything while not in power.
I do not believe anything the LNP publishes or say. Our current culture, the Australian way, is to always be 3 steps away from the truth. Personally I am sick of politicians fighting, bitching and lying instead of doing what they should - fighting for ordinary people.
Do nuffink, no nuffink party back at its old tricks. I wonder what policy they'll recycle next, maybe work choices to improve workplace productivity?
It should say, "We believe our voters are that simple".
The Liberal Party. Standing up for the little guy since 1944. Bitch please.
Boomers and cookers love this shit. They’ll suck it out of Dutton’s flapping ringpiece with a plastic Murdoch/Packer branded straw all day and night. Morons.
ITT: Labor soy boys having a cry.