UPDATE: Contrary to what it says below, James J in comments relates that there is a Newspoll out, and that it’s unchanged on a fortnight ago: a tie on two-party preferred, with primary votes of Coalition 43%, Labor 35% and Greens 12%. Also unchanged is Malcolm Turnbull’s 55-21 lead as preferred prime minister, but he’s down four on approval to 44% and up three on disapproval to 41%, while Bill Shorten is up two to 30% and down two to 55%. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1815. Full tables from The Australian.
There will apparently be no Newspoll this week, so Roy Morgan gets the guernsey instead. Their latest face-to-face plus SMS poll, conducted over the past two weekends from a sample of 3011, has the Coalition lead at 53-47 on both the previous election and respondent-allocated measures of two-party preferred. This is half a point better for the Coalition than the previous two results, but still two points lower than in any of their earlier polls on Malcolm Turnbull’s watch. The primary vote figures are in interesting study in the effects of survey design, with the “others” vote spiking three points to 13%, its highest level this term. This is very likely influenced by the fact that the Nick Xenophon Team is now being included as an option in the questionnaire nationally, and not just in South Australia as before. The Coalition is down half a point to 43%, Labor is steady on 29.5%, and the Greens are down two to 13%.
UPDATE 2 (Essential Research): Essential Research is unchanged at 50-50, with primary votes of 43% for the Coalition (steady), 37% for Labor (down one) and 10% for the Greens (steady). Also featured are the monthly leadership ratings, which have Malcolm Turnbull down six on approval to 45% and up eight no disapproval to 35%, Bill Shorten steady on 27% and down one on disapproval to 47%, and Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister narrowing from 52-15 to 48-19. Further questions find 41% approval for negative gearing, and 37% disapproval; 35% approving of Labor’s policy to limit it to newly built homes, and 39% disapproving; and 32% saying they would prefer house prices go up, with 34% wanting them to come down.
We are of the same mind on that, Yabba 🙂
Most of the markets I model are well-defined partial equilibrium with fairly a straightforward investment cycle. Macroeconomics – well that’s just guesswork and PB chat.
[Seriously Peter Reith is another reminder of how crap the Liberals are. Wish they would just shut up]
Not to mention how crap the media is. I know the SMH has to meet its right wing quota, but couldn’t they find someone better?
lizzie
[ I understand that voters have been persuaded to buy the economy myth, but how in the wide world can they possibly believe that the Coalition is “best for the environment”? ]
If your environment consists entirely of the inner city, the Libs are the best to manage it.
The Age @theage 1m1 minute ago
Has the mystery of the broken marble table finally been solved? #auspol http://bit.ly/1LL3CB1
P1
In the opposite corner, I offer you Matthew Guy, VicLib opposition leader and sometime Planning Minister.
lizzie
[ In the opposite corner, I offer you Matthew Guy, VicLib opposition leader and sometime Planning Minister. ]
What can I say? The Libs are a “broad church”! 🙂
Morrison is using Union style attacking to attack negative gearing.
Mmmm. I know you’re just pinging the wealthy inner city Coalition voting types but living in inner city Sydney I can appreciate the sorts of things Clover Moore is trying to do while under constant attack from the Libs and Lib backers.
So in my case I can say without doubt that Libs in power do not improve my inner city life.
[If Abbott cannot or will not stop the destabilisation, it could be a bad result for the Coalition and more importantly very bad for Australia if Labor were able to return to the government benches.]
Have to say Reithy makes a good point: you never hear Labor just stating baldly that if the Libs get in that’s automatically BAD for everything.
In case anyone still thinks ICAC actually produces results and is value for money.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/former-union-boss-john-maitland-escapes-jail-time-for-misleading-icac-20160307-gnca14.html
[I thought we had reports last week that Newspoll was in the field.]
Someone said they got polled by Galaxy – that’s as much as I know.
meher baba @2460 (previous thread)
I have not read what Ergas wrote most recently, but have read much of what he has written in the past. The man is a skillful liar of whom people should be very wary.
The Australian Competition Tribunal (an entity associated with the Federal Court and presided over by a Federal Court judge) found that he has “an inability to express an objective expert opinion upon which reliance can be placed”.
It has been said that “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts”. The particular skill of Ergas is to disguise his own facts within his opinions, thereby elevating the opinion to the level of (supposed) fact. For example in a relatively recent piece he (without explanation) substituted gross national income (GNI) into a context where gross domestic product (GDP) is used universally and then based his argument on the results of this substitution (of GNI as “his own fact”). And this is not an isolated example; in every piece I have read from him he has introduced unusual or irrelevant facts, used cherry-picked data and otherwise engaged in scientific fraud (economics claims to be some dismal sort of science, I believe).
meher baba @ 2584 (previous thread)
ratsak@2569: “As someone noted a very different thing to scientific modelling where the model method and all inputs are available for peer review.”
No, credible economic modelling is identical to this sort of modelling. And it is equally subject to peer review.
Scientific experimentation is very different to, and far more accurate than, economic experimentation. But modelling is modelling: the only accurate test of it is how it compares to the reality that eventually comes along.
Science is science; economics-whilst claiming to be a science-does not require its practitioners to behave like scientists, and they do not.
For example, many current economics textbooks contain an incorrect theory about the process by which commercial banks create money (as does the introductory course at the Harvard Business School). In particular the incorrect theory (money multiplier) has the causality running in the opposite direction, and this is contradicted by evidence.
This would be equivalent to physics continuing to teach phlogiston, aether or the approach of Aristotle, which does not occur.
It is not equivalent to continuing to teach Newtonian mechanics, which is merely inaccurate rather than wrong. Newtonian mechanics has considerable predictive power and is thus extremely useful except in the situations where its limitations are exposed. Theories that get the causality wrong have no predictive power (rather the opposite).
So the question is why does economics continue to teach things that economists to be wrong becuase they are contradicted by evidence? One answer – it’s easier for students to understand – doesn’t wash in physics. Another answer – it would (in this particular instance) offend powerful and wealthy people who learned it at Harvard Business School – is closer to the mark, and that shames the whole discipline: peer review is irrelevant if enough of the peers are corrupt.
I thought ajm said at#18 that he was Newspolled?
(sorry, formatting was stuffed)
meher baba @ 2584 (previous thread)
[ratsak@2569: “As someone noted a very different thing to scientific modelling where the model method and all inputs are available for peer review.”
No, credible economic modelling is identical to this sort of modelling. And it is equally subject to peer review.
Scientific experimentation is very different to, and far more accurate than, economic experimentation. But modelling is modelling: the only accurate test of it is how it compares to the reality that eventually comes along.]
Science is science; economics-whilst claiming to be a science-does not require its practitioners to behave like scientists, and they do not.
For example, many current economics textbooks contain an incorrect theory about the process by which commercial banks create money (as does the introductory course at the Harvard Business School). In particular the incorrect theory (money multiplier) has the causality running in the opposite direction, and this is contradicted by evidence.
This would be equivalent to physics continuing to teach phlogiston, aether or the approach of Aristotle, which does not occur.
It is not equivalent to continuing to teach Newtonian mechanics, which is merely inaccurate rather than wrong. Newtonian mechanics has considerable predictive power and is thus extremely useful except in the situations where its limitations are exposed. Theories that get the causality wrong have no predictive power (rather the opposite).
So the question is why does economics continue to teach things that economists to be wrong becuase they are contradicted by evidence? One answer – it’s easier for students to understand – doesn’t wash in physics. Another answer – it would (in this particular instance) offend powerful and wealthy people who learned it at Harvard Business School – is closer to the mark, and that shames the whole discipline: peer review is irrelevant if enough of the peers are corrupt.
don
aw, shucks.
I don’t believe NewsPoll bins polling so William must be wrong :devil:
Jackol
[ I can appreciate the sorts of things Clover Moore is trying to do while under constant attack from the Libs and Lib backers. ]
Hmmm. I’m afraid my view of Clover Moore is less positive than yours. In my view, Sydney has deteriorated quite badly as a “livable city” under her mayoralty.
However, she did go up quite a bit in my estimation when she said this about the Lindt cafe siege (https://www.google.com.au/#q=outrage-after-clover-moore-rejects-lindt-siege-as-terrorist-act) …
[ “It wasn’t a terrorist event,” Ms Moore said yesterday. “This was a one-off, isolated event by a mentally ill man with a violent background who shouldn’t have been out on bail.” ]
Now where did I leave that rock 🙁
Just read the Reith article.
My, what a kicking they’re giving Abbott. This is head-pulping stuff, with the kidneys and gonads removed, without anaesthetic.
Will they be eating his raw liver next? Sheesh.
All Abbott’s got to do is start fighting back and it’s popcorn.
davidwh
[ I don’t believe NewsPoll bins polling so William must be wrong ]
William is never wrong! My memory must be faulty 🙂
Matt Price of dear departed memory used to say that delays in Newspoll were due to a sudden need to ‘balance’ the sample by polling aged care homes and RSL clubs.
[I thought ajm said at#18 that he was Newspolled?]
It was also ajm who said s/he had been Galaxied.
“Who’s Don”, GG? Ahh indeed – who are any of us? BTW, Julia’s revisiting of Denise Scott’s childhood took her through the streets of Greensborough. Anywhere near your house?
Maybe ajm should go out a little more to avoid being badgered by those pesky pollsters ….
I’m sure ajm is conflating Newspoll and Galaxy, and not purporting to have been polled twice.
Oh dear.
[Pat O’Neill
Like This Page · 6 hrs · Edited ·
There’s more to being PM than taking selfies. When is Malcolm going to realise that his job is about serving Australians, not just himself? #auspol]
https://www.facebook.com/patoneillbrisbane/photos/a.298399723679322.1073741828.298375017015126/493440500841909/?type=3&theater
Joke, William.
Jack,
Ralph McTell once wrote
Let me take you by your hand
And lead your through the streets of Greensborough
I’ll show you something,
That’ll make you change your mind.
Ben Eltham @beneltham 46s46 seconds ago
Australian internet industry tells federal govt to build fibre all the way: ‘Just do it.” http://www.itwire.com/it-industry-news/telecoms-and-nbn/71758-build-it-in-fibre-%E2%80%93-%E2%80%98just-do-it.html …
[It is politicians – rather than their staff – who must ultimately be accountable to the public, something that the former prime minister Tony Abbott has always argued in defence of his staff, and particularly of his controversial chief of staff Peta Credlin.]
Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/it-is-politicians-not-their-staff-who-must-ultimately-be-judged-20160307-gncpbw#ixzz42CcERNn6
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook
Says Laura Tingle
Uhlmann spruiking July 2 election again.
Apparently lots in the government think it’s the only option.
What Turnbull thinks or has the guts to do, who knows.
“Male MPs were dancing shirtless.”
When the opposite sex start dancing shirtless then I’ll know there’s been a change in attitude.
If your environment consists entirely of the inner city, the Libs are the best to manage it.
No, that would be if your environment consists entirely of a concrete car park. Or maybe a coal mine. Or a piece of enemy territory you wanted to scorch.
If your environment consists entirely of the inner city, the Libs are the best to manage it.
No, that would be if your environment consists entirely of a concrete car park. Or maybe a coal mine. Or a piece of enemy territory you wanted to scorch.
William,
Do you have a view on why Morgan has the Primary for Labor on 29.5% cf. other pollsters primary?
“What do you think? Has political correctness REALLY gone mad?”
Lateline poll. What next: should women be allowed outside?
Talk about dog whistling.
I don’t, Monica, but you’ll note that the Greens are picking up the difference.
Hmmm. I’m afraid my view of Clover Moore is less positive than yours. In my view, Sydney has deteriorated quite badly as a “livable city” under her mayoralty.
I point out in passing that Sydney is adminstered by 40-something councils. Clover Moore is only Mayor of the CBD and nearby suburbs – an inner city area a few km across.
Absolutely. The economics discipline has been captured by wealthy and powerful interests. It lacks the
rigorous scrutiny, feedback, and correction mechanisms of the natural sciences.
This piece by Helen Razor explains brilliantly everything that is wrong with Savva’s expose.
[And I’m opposed to almost everything that uncritically cheers for the Power Blouse of liberal feminism. But, Savva’s document of Freudian terror is even too much for me. And this is not because the document, which seems to suggest that an entire nation was held hostage by an individual’s Moody Menstrual Calendar, is “bad for women”.]
Thanks, William, yes I did note that Makes me wonder about the sampling methodology.
Link
http://dailyreview.com.au/razer-on-peta-credlin-niki-savva-and-primordial-female-horror/38325
Economics is intrinsically about choices, values, interests, and power. Unlike the natural sciences it isn’t about phenomena that have an existence independent of human knowledge and decisions.
Vic
The photo in your Razer link reminds me I can’t recall a picture of Credlin smiling.
Steve777
[ I point out in passing that Sydney is adminstered by 40-something councils. Clover Moore is only Mayor of the CBD and nearby suburbs – an inner city area a few km across. ]
Yes, that’s the area I was talking about. I used to live in it in the 80s/90s, and now live (part time) on the edge of it.
Hewson is dreaming( delusional) if he thinks Roads to Ruin will disappear after a day or 2.
mikehilliard
Credlin obviously had lots of serious work to do. No time to smile.
Anyhoo here is Wendy Harmer interviewing Savva. She asks Savva re her partner being a Turnbull staffer
[Wendy Harmer
Wendy Harmer – Verified account @wendy_harmer
Incorrect. I did on @702sydney @deniseshrivell @leftocentre
#pmagenda #auspol
Listen here: https://soundcloud.com/702abcsydney/niki-savva-talks-to-wendy-harmer … https://twitter.com/deniseshrivell/status/706714291462778880 …
9:41 PM – 6 Mar 2016]
[The photo in your Razer link reminds me I can’t recall a picture of Credlin smiling.]
I remember her smiling (or as near to smiling as she could) when she was conversing with JBishop after QT, holding that Gillard dirt file folder when the Libs were arking up about Gillard’s house refurbishments etc from 40 years ago.