A quick replay of yesterday’s polling:
• Essential Research has two-party preferred steady at 51-49 to the Coalition, from primary votes of 38% for the Labor (down one), 43% for the Coalition (down one) and 9% for the Greens (steady). The survey finds only 44% saying they will definitely not change their mind, with 30% deeming it unlikely and 21% “quite possible”. Respondents were also asked to nominate the leader they most trusted on a range of issues, with Tony Abbott holding modest leads on economic management, controlling interests rates and national security and asylum seeker issues, and Kevin Rudd with double-digit leads on education, health, environment and industrial relations. Kevin Rudd was thought too harsh on asylum seekers by 20%, too soft by 24% and about right by 40%, compared with 21%, 20% and 31% for Tony Abbott.
• Morgan has Labor down half a point on the primary vote to 38%, the Coalition up 1.5% to 43%, and the Greens up one to 9.5%. With preferences distributed as per the result at the 2010 election, the Coalition has opened up a 50.5-49.5 lead, reversing the result from last week. On the respondent-allocated preferences measure Morgan uses for its headline figure, the result if 50-50 after Labor led 52-48 in the last poll.
• BludgerTrack, which was formerly updated weekly but will now be brought up to date whenever substantial new data arrives, records no change on two-party preferred from the addition of the two new polls, although the Greens are up on the primary vote at the expense of Labor. However, there’s a fair bit of movement on the state seat projections, with Labor up one in Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania and down one in Queensland for a net gain of two seats. That leaves two state-level projections at which one might well look askance: a finding of no gains for Labor in Queensland, against three gains for them in Western Australia. Whereas poll results in the weeks after the Rudd takeover had Labor outperforming the national result in Queensland as often as not, I now have five data points over the past fortnight all of which have them below. And while three gains in Western Australia certainly seems hard to credit (for one thing, the model is not adequately accounting for Labor losing the Alannah MacTiernan dividend from 2010 in Canning, which at present is rated a probable Labor gain), all five data points from the past fortnight show Labor improving on the 2010 result – a pretty solid result given how noisy small-sample state-level data tends to be.
• As far as I can tell, Labor and Liberal each had one television ad in business yesterday, and they read from much the same tactical script: both are positive, showcase the leader, and appear tailored to launching the parties’ rather nebulous campaign slogans. Kevin Rudd speaks to us of “a new way”, Opposition Leader style, while the actual Opposition Leader makes like Luke Skywalker and offers us “new hope”. The latter effort is a fairly obvious exercise in image softening, but what most stands out for me, having grown accustomed over the years to “face of Australia” advertising being served with a thick layer of political correctness on top (Qantas being an acknowledged leader in the field), is that all but a very small handful of the 50 or so faces in the ad are white.
UPDATE: ReachTEL has published the results of an automated phone poll of 702 respondents in Kevin Rudd’s electorate of Griffith, and it points to a 4% swing to the Liberal National Party paring his margin back to 4.5%. The primary votes from the poll are 45.6% for Kevin Rudd, 41.0% for LNP candidate Bill Glasson and 8.0% for the Greens.
But the Coalition put shit on the carbon tax for placing pressure on the cost of living.
At least the carbon tax consisted a compensation package.
What about the GST…cost of living up, ZERO compensation.
Fuck, people are stupid!
hockey was ask to day about the gst
and he said NO the states do that
as we all know there will soon be all liberal state
so easy just tell em
No, it’s your mistake to project 20th century concepts like ‘the state’ into frontier 19th century. The settler societies governed themselves – that was my point.
I don’t know what word other than ‘war’ one would use for one peoples patterned, repeated, economic and ideological assaults on another.
(And I say this knowing the limits of the word ‘war’ – faux wars on generic nouns like ‘drugs’).
Zoidlord I was talking about company tax not the GST. I never mentioned the GST.
I’m not actually totally averse to an increase to the GST. Although, it would add more onto grocery bills and hurt a bit, it might be necessary revenue to aid with improving state infrastructure.
What I do oppose is the (very Dickensian) notion that the current economically under-performing states should be punished. It’s when you are down that you most need the support.
Mind you, if Rudd can get Abbott to concede that he intends to raise the rate of the GST – Rudd wins 😎
SSHHH, keep it a secret 😀
@davidwh/1304
I know, but you cannot talk about Company Tax without talking about other revenue raising.
As I said, something has to GIVE.
1281
imacca
[>Murdoch will (over time) lose his dominance as a content provider/distributor, and the financial and political advantages it currently brings him.
I suspect that will happen, eventually. But if they can nobble the NBN by having it built to the inferior FTTN model, then sold off in bits by the Coalition (where Murdoch aligned companies are possible bidders), they can amass very considerable market power in the content owning business. They probably want to work towards something like the Coles/Woolies situation.]
Agreed. Which is why we need to get it finished now.
I am not at all keen on the idea of selling off, ever. Keep the basic physical network in public hands. Only way to guarantee equitable access and a fully linked up network.
Again I never mentioned the GST.
…selling it off,…
There is a possibility that a cut in Co Tax will raise revenue.
@davidwh/1309
So your ignoring what has to happen? If you take away revenue from one part of the tax system, you will get less?
You can talk about company tax in isolation as a reduction has multiplier effects.
The GST is a regressive tax that depresses the economy as it makes the cost of goods and services more expensive.
The only who benefit are the highest income earners who are taxed less than what they otherwise would, to fund other initiatives.
@davidwh/1313
Such as?
1305
Punish the weak is currently very popular with the Germans, who are benefiting from their currency being held down by the weaker members.
[I don’t know what word other than ‘war’ one would use for one peoples patterned, repeated, economic and ideological assaults on another.]
Try “indigenous-settler frontier conflicts.” You are falling into the common trap of allowing moral outrage to lead to language inflation. The Myall Creek massacre, no matter how abominable it was, was not a war, or an act of war. (And the perpetrators were hanged, by the way.) we see this also with the debasement of the word “genocide”, now thrown about in all sorts of contexts.
1314
Exactly. And it does not achieve non-revenue objectives like other indirect taxes.
[I am not at all keen on the idea of selling off, ever. Keep the basic physical network in public hands. Only way to guarantee equitable access and a fully linked up network.]
Yup, thats actually one thing the Greens managed in the Senate that i very much support. That it cant be sold off until the sale is debated and passed by parliament. Or at least thats my understanding of the legislation.
Such as increase in business investments, increase in employment, increase in business revenue, increase in business profits and increase in business tax payments. It is how many economies start to re-build after a recession or economic slowdown.
[I support a cut in company tax. Business needs to drive growth to give government room to reduce the deficit over time. If the rumour is correct then it’s an excellent move.]
Which will increase the deficit by nearly $6 billion over the forward estimates.
[Such as increase in business investments, increase in employment, increase in business revenue, increase in business profits and increase in business tax payments. It is how many economies start to re-build after a recession or economic slowdown.]
This is absolute bullshit Lafer curve fairy land crap.
This cut to company tax will result in company tax revenue going down, not up.
@ davidwh can you prove this correlation between a lower corporate tax rate and economic growth outside of the theoretical. Companies expand and invest to meet demand not the other way round. Companies are more likely to just pocket the extra income with LNP government making up the short fall thru regressive tax hikes and service spending cuts likely to deflate demand further.
@davidwh/1320
Has there been any Analysis on this or you just repeating that Coalition Party said?
Estonia has a 21% Company Tax for example.
Showy that depends on what level business grows over the forward estimates. Sure I agree that if we cut company tax by 1.5% and business activity and profits stay the same for the next four years then the government has less revenue. I just don’t agree that is the likely outcome.
[Showy that depends on what level business grows over the forward estimates. Sure I agree that if we cut company tax by 1.5% and business activity and profits stay the same for the next four years then the government has less revenue. I just don’t agree that is the likely outcome.]
Well the idiotic Coalition is saying they will offset this cut with “SAVINGS”. Does that mean other taxes go up? Or does it mean $5 billion worth of spending cuts, which itself will effect GDP.
Get your calculator out 6b- over forward estimates vs increased revenue from. 1 increased investment. 2 less unemployment(less social payments and more paye tax. 3 increased in stock market value (which will result in more revenue to govt and your superannuation). 4 More foreign investment of which we will a slice.
Zoidlord Australian Treasury has published plenty of reports on this issue and the multiplier effects are real. It is hard to exactly quantify the effects because a whole host of other factors will impact over time. I don’t have time tonight but I will look for the Treasury information tomorrow and post a link.
@Davidwh/1328
But According to Joe Hockey we can’t believe what Treasury said.
Showy I am arguing the real world and not the politics, I have no idea what the opposition intends to do to offset any possible tax shortfall. They may not have even thought that far ahead.
Do you want the link Zoidlord of are you just having fun paying out on me? 🙂
@Davidwh/1331
Bit of both 😛
Coalition Party are just not the party to deliver it.
silmaj/1327
1.5% – 1.5% = 0.
Depends on the effects of the PPL scheme over the forward estimates.
And of course their other polices effects the economy.
1298
Psephos
….William’s tables show a 3% drop in their vote from 2010, and only a very small uptick in support over the past two weeks. This shows that the overwhelming majority of Labor voters, even those who subscribe to the boatist narrative, accept that what the government has done is both right and necessary.]
I ran into one of my Afghan acquaintances tonight. She is a Tajik in her early 30’s. She arrived here as a sponsored migrant while in her teens, her family having left Afghanistan when the Taliban came to power as her father wished his daughters to receive an education.
She is a single woman and owns a small nearby restaurant. So you can see her somewhat as I see her, I will mention that she is petite, always impeccably groomed, well-spoken and, by any standard, attractive in both her appearance and manner. She is, of course, an Australian citizen too.
I hadn’t seen her for a while and asked her what she thought about the PNG policy. She said she still wished that refugees could come as the situation “in their home” was very unsafe. She felt that refugees had very few and difficult choices to make and that frequently they had almost no money at all.
But she also said – maybe more from resignation than conviction – that she could see why the boats had to be stopped. She said all the agitation on the issue had tended to increase resentment of Muslims. This had been bad enough recently that her female friends were uncomfortable wearing head scarves because that would attract verbal abuse in the street or on the road. She went on to say that she tended to keep her religion to herself these days, because she expected to face discrimination as a Muslim.
She also said that this issue has clearly divided the everybody and that Muslims were getting caught in the backlash.
If there are things we should learn from all this, surely one is that we must see that Muslims are not the targets of rejection and abuse; and, beyond this, that we should really expand our humanitarian refugee intake. I think, after all the clamour, that if we cannot do these things we will have failed ourselves as well as those that look to us for safety and freedom.
Zoidlord everything at present is about politics. I really don’t care who supports business as long as someone does soon.
@Davidwh/1334
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/06/tony-abbott-company-tax-cut
“The Coalition’s promised company tax cut would take the rate from 30% to 28.5%. Labor had promised a 2% tax cut to be paid for by the mining tax, but the first percentage point was dropped when the mining tax did not raise the expected revenue and the second percentage point was also abandoned in the May 2012 budget when payments to households were increased instead.”
“Abbott has been under pressure to pare back the cost of his expensive paid parental leave scheme, estimated at more than $4.3bn a year. But he has stuck to his signature policy despite criticism from his own party and business groups.”
I think a 1% Tax Cut should be fine in the current budget/economy.
Coalition Party are spending too much on their PPL Policy.
@ davidwh – sorry but both Stigliz and Krugman would disagree with you re company tax. Are you getting you information from the IPA?
The Co Tax cut could be revenue pos so therefore not a spend.
[Companies expand and invest to meet demand not the other way round. Companies are more likely to just pocket the extra income with LNP government making up the short fall thru regressive tax hikes and service spending cuts likely to deflate demand further.]
Would this be piss down economics?
Business wont expand if it expects the economy to soften. Giving it money just sits in its pocket. Giving the public money according to a number of US studies sees a certain percentage spent, saved and debt reduction which itself becomes leads to a spending stimulus, or at least maintains demand. This was all discussed back with the Rudd Labor stimulus package.
Giving business extra money whilst at the same time domestic demand is falling sees them reduce staff due to softening demand, and pocketing the extra money to boot.
A combination of both maybe the better solution along with govt infrastructure projects that improves productivity…aka Rudd stimulus package.
[If there are things we should learn from all this, surely one is that we must see that Muslims are not the targets of rejection and abuse; and, beyond this, that we should really expand our humanitarian refugee intake.]
I agree on both points. But we will not be able to do either while our immigration system is being massively gamed by people who, even if they do meet the definition of refugee, are far from being the most deserving, and who are also, incidentally, mostly Muslims. This undermines support for immigration and particularly for refugee intake, and also fuels anger against all immigrants and particularly Muslims.
@silmaj/1337
Not if Abbott is spending $4.3 billion per year on PPL Policy.
Over a 3 year period, that is $12.9 billion dollars.
I’m pretty sure that could be spent elsewhere (such as Health, Education, NBN, etc).
Wow. The return of Reaganomics.
Zoid@1340
what is labors parental leave worth?
[1339
Psephos
If there are things we should learn from all this, surely one is that we must see that Muslims are not the targets of rejection and abuse; and, beyond this, that we should really expand our humanitarian refugee intake.
I agree on both points. But we will not be able to do either while our immigration system is being massively gamed by people who, even if they do meet the definition of refugee, are far from being the most deserving, and who are also, incidentally, mostly Muslims. This undermines support for immigration and particularly for refugee intake, and also fuels anger against all immigrants and particularly Muslims.]
On this we are in complete agreement.
Rather than just handing out tax cuts, it would be far smarter to give firms accelerated deductions for investment, such as Gillard/Swan introduced.
Investment stimulates both higher sales and employment and future income growth. Tax credits for investment can also be designed to have a limited lifespan, so that firms are encouraged to concentrate their spending. Tax cuts, however, once given, are often impossible to reverse.
@silmaj/1342
It’s 18 weeks vs 28 weeks:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/blogs/the-party-line/what-is-the-best-model-for-paid-parental-leave-in-australia-20120302-1u6vl.html
“Our scheme gives all eligible mums $590 a week (before tax) for up to 18 weeks. Mums earning up to $150,000 can get it if they meet a simple work test – working at least one day a week for 10 out of 13 months before their baby arrives”
According to the Australian:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/election-2013/coalition-push-for-abbott-to-drop-leave/story-fn9qr68y-1226692411896
“PETER Reith has urged Tony Abbott to abandon his generous paid parental leave scheme after last week’s $12 billion blowout in the budget deficit, as Nationals MPs warned they would cross the floor to vote against the policy if the Coalition won power.”
Abbott is being pushed to drop PPL.
[On this we are in complete agreement.]
On that happy note I will say good night.
[1341
Roger Miller
Wow. The return of Reaganomics.]
It didn’t work 30-odd years ago and it won’t work now.
Cheers Psephos
The co tax cut will deliver extra rev thru extra investment. If they fund a ppl then labors yearly cost will go. So b4 you can say its Revenue negative a calculator is required to work it out. Making statements that it will worsen the deficit is a guess. Im sure the experts will work it out.
If it is budget negative then savings will need to be found. If its Budget positive then the budget deficit is reduced. If they announce matching savings from somewhere else then it could be a double rev pos.
Not all Tax cuts result in less budget returns.
Joe Hockey is a fucking hopeless joke!
[The Hockeynomics contradictions were front and centre on Friday. You can either be appalled by the forecast rise in unemployment and give the impression you would reduce it, or you can be appalled by the larger deficit and give the impression you would reduce it – but you can’t do both at the same time.]
http://www.smh.com.au/business/joe-hockeys-please-explain-moment-20130805-2r8fh.html