It’s been a very quiet week for federal polling, leaving the regular weekly Essential Research result as the only game in town. The fortnightly rolling average on voting intention ticks a point in the Coalition’s favour, with Labor’s lead narrowing from 53-47 to 52-48. However, the only change on the primary vote is a one point drop for Labor to 39%, with the Coalition, Greens and Palmer United steady on 40%, 9% and 2%.
Further questions relate to the Intergenerational Report, of which 45% of respondents professed no awareness. When prodded about one of its findings, 41% offered that more older people in the workforce would be good for Australia (notably higher among older cohorts of respondents) versus 31% for bad; and in relation to one of its non-findings, 46% agreed climate change should be a priority versus 33% for not a priority. Strikingly, quite large majorities said they expected children, young adults, families, the middle-aged and retirees to become worse off over the next 40 years.
Opinion on the government’s reinstatement of funding for the car industry was evenly divided, with 38% approving and 39% disapproving, which slightly surprises me in that industry protection usually gets the thumbs up in opinion polls, rightly or wrongly. Joe Hockey’s short-lived notion that people should be allowed to access their superannuation to buy a home went down better with respondents than with some of his colleagues, with 41% supportive and 46% opposed. The poll also suggests Tony Abbott was not on exceedingly dangerous ground with his response to United Nations criticism of Australia in relation to asylum seekers, which was found to be of concern to 44% of respondents and not of concern to 48%.
From the previous…
[2639
TPOF
The fact is that negative gearing is an incentive to private investment in housing.]
Well…mainly it is used as an incentive to speculate in land. Very little investor demand is directed to new housing. Nearly all of it goes into established housing stock – that is, into “location”.
Negative gearing and CGT concessions fuel demand in locations that are already built-up and where competition from new supply is least.
William,
Was it this weeks or last weeks figures that caused the drop in Labor’s primary?
Rex
I am inclined to agree with you re Shorten he has too much baggage as well re getting rid of two ALP Leaders.
I am a big fan of Husic he is calm clear and has a conscience.
Rex
My ideal leadership team would be Dreyfus and Husic.
Tony has done it again he has now upset the Irish on St Patrick’s Day.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-st-patricks-day-message-causes-offence-in-ireland-20150317-1m10h4.html
Barney, you’ll recall that the week before last, I said Labor had a very strong result that got smoothed away by the fortnightly average. Yet the following week, their position in the fortnightly average did not improve. That’s all I’ll say.
Thanks William.
MTBW@4
2 members of the right! 😮
So behind their apparent consistency they’re bouncing a bit.
A quick reminder for those that think prices always rise be it commodities or house prices or whatever.
Prices will always fluctuate. The trick is never put your eggs in one basket.
So Housing bubble or not prices will come down in real value even if not in list prices. If they are high now due to a shortage of supply at some stage that will change when enough housing is built to meet that supply.
The only question is when not if.
Briefly @1
It may be the case in inner Sydney, but not necessarily elsewhere. As I pointed out in my other posts, there are problems with negative gearing as it is currently applied. It may well be that it should be replaced with something else that better meets public housing policy objectives. But we need to be clear about what it does achieve in the public interest so that those benefits that we wish to keep are catered for in some other way.
A change in the range of MOE does not worry me.
The fact is the trend is crystal clear. One term is very much on the cards for the LNP. Looks more like Labor’s last period of polling than a first term government.
These polls also look similar to Queensland. With expected result at teh end and Abbot at least as unpopular as Newman
Guytaur there is only three things you have to know about real estate – location, location, location.
Long term housing prices never go down. Best investments I have ever had have all been in real estate.
Henry
So far so lucky. They thought the same in the US until the GFC hit and so many foreclosures forced prices down.
So its when not if still applies.
If may apply to within your lifetime though
From previous thread –
We’ve just got back from a day out at Cleland Wildlife Reserve with our little granddaughter. Whils there we got tangled up in the shooting by a US crew of stuff for the TV show Dance Moms. we signed consent forms allowing our images to be shown when the program airs in a few months’ time. We also found ourselves sitting next to the moms and daughters – a more ugly and appalling group of individuals I have never seen. Simply gross.
We had met up with a lovely young lady visiting from Arizona and it was reassuring to have her as a comparison to demonstrate that Americans are not all like that!
We don’t have same sub prime mortgage craziness that the yanks did (and still do). Plus under-supply, particularly in the capital cities has been and will an issue for many years.
MTBW (5)
Doubling down, in one of his QT answers today Tones also likened one of Bill Shorten’s interviews to an “Irish joke”. I wonder what the Irish Ambassador, who just happened to be a distinguished guest in the Speaker’s Gallery today, thought of that latest tone deaf utterance from our esteemed leader
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2015/mar/17/metadata-deal-between-labor-and-coalition-stirs-controversy-politics-live#block-550798dae4b07784ec630403
One feels that there is a trend towards things settling down a bit for the Abbott Government for a while.
Some of the factors contributing to this situation would seem to be:
1) The growing likelihood of a good result for the Libs in NSW: there just isn’t any sign of the public unease that we saw in the lead up to the Qld election. The media keeps telling the electorate that Baird is a great guy and the electorate appears to be buying it. This seems to be enough to keep at bay any transfer of public dissatisfaction with the Abbott Government. I think what happened in Qld was a bit of a perfect storm: the public were already uneasy with Newman, and then their even greater unease with Abbott was intensified by the Prince Philip stuff, and then all of this came together at just the right time. There are no signs of anything like this happening in NSW. Foley is a far less impressive prospect than Palaszczuk, and there is a lot more that the electorate will need to forgive and forget in relation to NSW Labor than Qld Labor.
2) The Abbott Government is going through a relatively quiet phase: it has backed down on a lot of stuff that has upset the electorate and, since the spill motion, hasn’t really done anything as objectionable as it did in the period before that. I don’t think the public is any more comfortable with Abbott than they were before, but, when he can avoid goofing up for stretches of time, they become a bit more comfortable with having him around. However, I suspect that – when they are next forced to vote for/against him – it could get a bit ugly: when I talk to swinging voters and even some dyed-in-the-wool Libs, they seem to have very little respect for him. It’s hard for political leaders to get the public’s respect back once they’ve lost it. Take Anna Bligh for an example: you would struggle to find anyone in Queensland who didn’t think she performed brilliantly as a leader during periods of flood and cyclone. But, all the same, she was crushed in the next election.
3) Abbott has done some good work in focusing his attack on bleeding hearts and the objects of their affection: Gillian Triggs, Australian Muslims, Aborigines, etc. I reckon this stuff tends to provide a bit of a short-term boost, but electors become immune to it after a while.
These factors all amount to a bit of a sugar hit in the polls for Abbott. When (and I believe it’s a case of when and not if) the Coalition wins reasonably handsomely in NSW, we will probably reach the maximum level of sugar saturation in the blood. Then comes the Budget, and I’m struggling to see what sort of convincing story the Government will be able to tell then. It will need to be a story in which we are on track to balance the budget sooner or later without any unpopular nasties. I’m glad it’s not my job.
Even if they can get through that, I still reckon the second half of the year is going to present many difficulties. But one feels that Abbott might now continue as leader for up to another 8-9 months before there is another challenge: possibly until the “political killing season” of November-December. It’s hard to see how a challenge can be avoided beyond that point: the economy isn’t looking likely to do anything other than deteriorate a bit further. And Abbott and Hockey are not projecting the appearance of having too many of the answers to this problem. That’s what ultimately destroyed Gillard and Swan. One feels it can happen again.
[Prime Minister Tony Abbott has told Coalition colleagues the government will have the budget back in balance within five years.
The bullish prediction, made during a joint meeting of the Liberal and National parties on Tuesday, has raised the prospect of new deep spending cuts to replace blocked measures in Treasurer Joe Hockey’s first budget.
The recently released Intergenerational Report forecast the deficit could be eradicated within five years but that hinged on the Senate agreeing to all spending cuts, including the Medicare co-payment and the original higher education package.]
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-promise-to-balance-budget-in-five-years-raises-prospect-of-new-cuts-20150317-1m16dm.html
Henry
Its still when not if. So you can argue its not a bubble due to lack of supply and fair enough and that it will run for years to come yet barring unforeseen events.
However wrong you think Keen is it does not change the basis of how a market works.
Supply equals demand is a stable equilibrium.
For example due to climate change over supply of housing in country could become a shortage as people flee rising see levels on the coast and vice versa.
Daley has convinced me that the whole thing around negative gearing does little to affect rent prices, rather supply and demand does. State governments are more to blame than investors.
I think BK and the folks from Dance Moms = an incongruity
A swing of 10% plus is hardly a good result for the libs in NSW meher.
Henry@23: Right now, a win by a reasonably convincing margin would be a triumph for Baird and, in particular, Abbott.
I realise that this might seem counter-intuitive in some senses, but it’s the way these things go. The tide has turned against the Coalition, so any win will be a good win. A bit like how Labor’s win in SA earlier this year was something of a triumph: even though the 2PP swung in the Coalition’s direction.
mb
[A bit like how Labor’s win in SA earlier this year was something of a triumph: even though the 2PP swung in the Coalition’s direction.]
The subsequent SA by-elections swung to the Labor govt. The Coalition is seriously on the nose there.
Joffaboy (@2655 previous thread):
Strip out the gratuitous, constant personal attacks, and what’s left in your post? Not a whole lot. However, your claims seem to be, in rough order:
(1) Loss of negative gearing would increase the cost of investment, leading prices to increase.
Actually, only half right. Real estate is seen as a risk-free, tax-free investment. An awful lot of money’s parked there, bidding up prices on extant property, that could be doing more productive things.
One strong, undisputed (except by people like you) effect of negative gearing as it currently stands is to heat up the market for existing house prices.
(2) Loopholes and legislation have nothing to do with one another.
Sorry, you’re wrong. Loopholes are often enshrined -in- legislation – just because something’s legislated does not make it “not a loophole”. I’m not disputing that negative gearing (even some of the more out-there rorts of it I’m seeing) is legal under current legislation. I just don’t think that all of it should be.
(3) Disagreeing with negative gearing makes one – simultaneously – a fool, a communist, a moron, etc. etc.
And people like TPOF want to talk about “civil discussions”! Impossible, so long as people like you are in here, throwing around a stream of verbal excrement at anyone who disagrees with them.
Henry @23:
Everyone, but everyone, realized that there was a swing on. This was going to be true no matter who’s in charge in Canberra and no matter what Baird did.
The previous election result was very much an outlier, and highly unlikely to be duplicated under the best of circumstances.
Rubbish meher. There is still a chance Baird will lose which is unthinkable given the result 4 years ago. 61-39 IIRC.
Abbott is so on the nose with the liberals in NSW that have specifically asked him not to campaign with them.
Any win will only be as a result of Baird’s likability. Abbott is a massive drag the coalition in NSW.
Hardly an outlier Matt, the polls predicted the result for at least 12 months prior.
Henry
In previous thread I posted about Abbott losing Baird volunteers for his campaign.
So its not just the effect on the polls its also momentum
64:36 was the last NSW result.
A 54:46 result, if achieved, would be good for libs given their signature policy is massively unpopular.
Plus the NSW right will have to mull over having a left leader
I meant an outlier in historical terms, Henry. It was – I believe – the best ever result for the Coalition in NSW.
That kind of result’s not susceptible to repetition, if only because at least two of the driving factors of it – a corrupt NSW (Labor) Government that should have lost the previous election and a contentious Commonwealth (Labor) Government that people were waiting to take cricket bats to – simply aren’t there anymore.
People aren’t going to vote Liberal due to disgust with Labor Parliamentary corruption in 2015, because Labor’s the Opposition. Likewise, they’re not going to vote Liberal to send Julia Gillard a message, because she’s not the PM anymore.
Both of those, you will not, have nothing to do with what Baird or Abbott has done to please or annoy the punters.
I don’t think the problem is with “negative gearing” itself – the principle, that commercial losses can be offset against commercial income before tax is paid (ie. that you only pay tax on net income) seems sound.
The problem arises when this treatment of investment property – which is really just the same treatment that applies to other income-generating operations – combines with the Capital Gains Tax discount. This means that the tax foregone on the losses is at a lower rate than the tax paid on the ultimate income, which leads to the perverse incentives involved in negative gearing of property.
It seems like you this should be able to be fixed by applying an appropriate adjustment at CGT time: for example, you could say that full, undiscounted CGT must be paid up to the value of all net operating losses accrued against the asset over the time it was owned, and the CGT discount only applies to profits beyond that.
From the previous thread:
Very ‘emotional’ discussion about negative gearing, I was going to make a contribution but instead:
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/negative-gearing-the-economic-reasons-why-government-must-kill-this-sacred-cow-20150317-1m14s4.html
Henry @16:
[Plus under-supply, particularly in the capital cities has been and will an issue for many years.]
Precisely. And if you want to deal with under-supply, negative gearing isn’t the answer for Canberra. Getting the State Governments to actually release more land and zone it for residential construction, getting more tradies trained, certified and ready to work in anticipation of potential labour shortages in the industry – those are the answers.
There’s no shortage of people who want to get into the housing market, and that’s not going to go away if negative gearing is restricted (for instance, to one property at a time per taxpayer) or eliminated.
SGOS @34:
Oops. You’ve opposed negative gearing – you’re a Communist now.
Or something like that. But yes, I fail to understand how negative gearing encourages supply of new housing, given that 95% of it’s claimed on pre-existing properties.
Not a terribly good bang for the buck, IMO.
The Anti-piracy policies dream are coming from Brandis:
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/401763,brandis-to-introduce-site-blocking-legislation-this-week.aspx
This was introduced in the UK, and the next step is to block proxies and then VPNs.
Matt
[State Governments to actually release more land and zone it for residential construction]
A great example of the land crap was Port Hedland a few years back during the boom. Hose prices and rents were outrageous even by Sydney standards.
Plenty of empty land surrounding the town but the council were not releasing any land. What odds council members had properties that were being rented out for several $1,000s of bucks a week for little more than a cottage ?
BK
I occasionally watch Dance Moms just to see how nuts they all are!!
Rabbithat
[I wonder what the Irish Ambassador, who just happened to be a distinguished guest in the Speaker’s Gallery today, thought of that latest tone deaf utterance from our esteemed leader]
Probably thinks Abbott is the moron he is.
I loved his little video clip with the green tie for St Patrick’s Day. He is utterly incapable of getting anything right with the comments he makes.
Welcome by the way good to see you here.
meher baba
Meanwhile the economy is not doing so well. The feedback i continually get from the small business sector is that they thought things would improve with a change of govt. Instead, things are so much worse
poroti @38:
[A great example of the land crap was Port Hedland a few years back during the boom. Hose prices and rents were outrageous even by Sydney standards.
Plenty of empty land surrounding the town but the council were not releasing any land. What odds council members had properties that were being rented out for several $1,000s of bucks a week for little more than a cottage ?]
I’ve heard of such cases, yes. And it’s a perfect example of the real problems in the housing market – and negative gearing won’t solve those.
In its current form, negative gearing amounts to throwing an awful lot of tax revenue down the drain on middle- and upper-class welfare for 3/5 of 5/8 of not very much in return.
It doesn’t cause new housing to be built (ref: SGOS @34). It doesn’t make home ownership more accessible. It doesn’t even help renters – if negative gearing’s cut and house prices go down, more people will buy rather than rent (leading to downward pressure on rental prices).
We’ve had negative gearing in place for over 30 years, and it doesn’t seem to have helped homelessness. How long does a neoliberal policy have to be tried before it’s abandoned as not fit for task? Forever, it seems.
[I think BK and the folks from Dance Moms = an incongruity]
You’re not kidding! I thought of a ripper thing to say to the worst of the mums – “You could at least wax your young daughter’s legs properly” – but thought better of it. It might have started a scene.
vic
In the flesh they are no different!
@Victoria/41
That is the general vibe I am getting as well, but we all know that Coalition Party does not support Small Business, it attacks it instead.
meher baba@24
It may not feel like a ‘win’ if the tories cannot get the privatisation bills through the upper house – from the latest Galaxy –
[ However, the poll finds only 32% agreeing with the proposition that the Legislative Council should pass electricity asset sales if the government has a mandate in the form of an election win, with 48% declaring otherwise. ]
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2015/03/16/galaxy-54-46-to-coalition-in-nsw-2/
Also from the ABC –
[ Results from the ABC’s self-selecting Vote Compass survey, also finds only 31% in support of the Coalition’s proposed sale of electricity assets with 55% opposed, rising to 60% in rural areas.
Further evidence of opposition to privatisation from the Fairfax papers courtesy of Ipsos, whose last poll in early February found 67% opposed and only 23% in support when it was asked if electricity infrastructure should be partly sold. ]
So voters may return the baird government, yet deny them a mandate on their main policy?
I hope so.
Matt, and all this time I was worried about there being a ‘Red’ under the bed, when there was one on it!
Which reminds me of my favourite communist joke:
A Russian couple, Rudi and Olga were leaving the local branch meeting of the Communist party, when they both noticed a few drops of rain, Rudi said “quick get in the car it’s going to bucket down” Olga looked at the clouds and replied “it doesn’t look that bad”. Rudi said “I’m telling you there’s going to be a downpour and there will be at 102mm of rain tonight”, “don’t be silly dear, how could you possibly know that?” Olga responded.
The next day whilst watching the weather report Olga was stunned to hear that there had been 102mm of rain, she turned to Rudi in surprise and said “that’s amazing, how did you do that?” Rudi smiled and replied “Rudolph the Red knows rain, dear!”
meher
[3) Abbott has done some good work in focusing his attack on bleeding hearts and the objects of their affection: Gillian Triggs, Australian Muslims, Aborigines, etc. I reckon this stuff tends to provide a bit of a short-term boost, but electors become immune to it after a while.]
Abbott attacking people like those you mention is good?
This cartoon from M David says it ALL about the Abbott government!
MTBW @48:
[Abbott attacking people like those you mention is good?]
It plays well in the media and public opinion. For all that we’re the country of the “fair go”, we do seem to enjoy watching our leaders kick the powerless around.