The first poll in the post-budget avalanche is a Galaxy survey of 1006 respondents showing the Coalition leading 54-46 on two-party preferred, from primary votes of 34% for Labor, 46% for the Coalition and 10% for the Greens. While it shows a highly negative reaction to the budget in terms of effect on personal finances (14% expect to be better off against 48% worse off), support for abolition of the baby bonus is remarkably high (64% in favour, 22% opposed). Full tables courtesy of GhostWhoVotes. Nielsen, Newspoll, Essential Research and Morgan should all be joining the party over the coming days.
[guytaur
Posted Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 9:00 pm | PERMALINK
“@GhostWhoVotes: #Nielsen Poll 2 Party Preferred: ALP 46 (+3) L/NP 54 (-3) #auspol”]
Obviously Phil Vee made all the difference 🙂
ML yes from 10 to 15%. I didn’t say that’s what should happen just contributing to the discussion as to what the impact on the budget would be. However I do believe it should be considered as part of any comprehensive taxation review.
confessions @ 791
It also catches high income, high spenders who otherwise may pay little income tax.
Total Eclipse of the Moon is going to remain the best known song of Bonnie Tyler.
@david I have done that with the iPad but I did see it bounce along the road on it side/end on the first corner. Amazingly it still worked and only the corners were scratched and dented in a bit.
DWH, ML
I suppose that Abbott increasing the GST by 5% would be outside the margin of error?
Who is Bonnie Tyler?
G
‘It also catches high income, high spenders who otherwise may pay little income tax.’
Oh. You mean tax cheats?
Given what an utterly shithouse couple of weeks Labor has had, 46% is actually quite good. I wouldn’t have been surprised if it had been 40%.
It would be very well within the margin of what would be AN ERROR!
Put it that way :devil:
46/54 does look better than 43/57.
But is the start of a trend?
[Psephos
Posted Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 9:07 pm | PERMALINK
Given what an utterly shithouse couple of weeks Labor has had]
Why?
New thread.
[It also catches high income, high spenders who otherwise may pay little income tax.]
Yes, at the expense of those households with very little, if no surplus income for necessities.
[Mod Lib
Posted Sunday, May 19, 2013 at 9:07 pm | PERMALINK
It would be very well within the margin of what would be AN ERROR!
Put it that way]
Comon MOD LIB did you manage to buy your euros before the dollar dropped, or are you gong to use that as an excuse not to shout me coffee :devil:
shpo
Eurovision should have a warning – contains graphic Images of Tony Abbott. Yech!
Seeing Tony Abbott’s promise to create two million jobs for the first time, it is laughable, Except it is not funny. One obvious way to do it would be to sack the 1.8 million state and federal public servants first, then hire them back (mostly) in privatised services. Am I joking? I hope so.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1301.0~2012~Main%20Features~Public%20service~91
Seriously though, two million extra jobs in the next three years is almost mathematically impossible. We only have a workforce of 12 million, including 600,000 unemployed. Population growth over three years will be at most 5%. If we have continued population growth and zero unemployment by 2016, we would have at most an extra 1.2 million jobs. Two million jobs?. ROTFL 🙂
Did Barnaby do the maths?
Looks like Jack Hammer knows Jack Hammer about it.
O wait …..
err, Guytaur “Heart”