The latest weekly reading of the Essential Research fortnightly rolling average records a widening of Labor’s two-party lead, which is out from 52-48 to 53-47. On the primary vote, the Coalition is down a point to 37% and Labor is up one to 37%, with the Greens up one to 11%, One Nation down one to 5% and the Nick Xenophon Team steady on 3%. Quite a few interesting supplementary questions this week:
• Respondents were asked to retrospectively evaluate major government decisions, recording big majorities in favour of Medibank/Medicare and compulsory superannuation, lesser but still favourable results for the GST, floating the dollar and free trade agreements, an even balance on reducing subsidies to car manufacturing, and strong opposition to the privatisations of Qantas, Telstra and the Commonwealth Bank.
• There is an even balance of opinion on the New South Wales government’s backflip on banning greyhound racing, with 41% approving and 38% disapproving.
• Seventy-nine per cent would be “concerned” if Donald Trump became President, with only 14% not concerned.
• With a plebiscite off the table, 55% say a vote should be held in parliament, while 30% say the matter should be left on the table until the election.
• Sixty per cent said they would support a tax cut for small businesses, with 17% opposed; almost the exact reverse say the same for larger companies (20% and 61%); and if small business was taken to apply to companies with upwards of $2 million revenue, 26% would be in favour and 41% opposed.
• Fifty-eight per cent approve of Labor’s 50% renewable energy target by 2030.
• Fifty-eight per cent are “not confident” that the government together with the current Senate will be able to get things done that the nation needs.
• Thirty-five per cent expect the government will run full term compared with 39% who expect an early election.
Sky News Australia
Sky News Australia – Verified account @SkyNewsAust
#BREAKING @TonyAbbottMHR’s Warringah motion for NSW Liberal Party reform has been lost 246-174 at the state council meeting #auspol
5:27 PM – 21 Oct 2016
8 RETWEETS4 LIKES
Mogotrone
Spot on!!
That’s what I mean by “minimal self-awareness”.
Bemused is the biggest verbal thug here. His complaining about being bullied is pure projection.
He sees threats where there are none. He makes nasty comments about others’ mental health, education, reasoning capabilities and their general character… and then wonders why some take him on and dish a bit of it back out to him.
His dislike of Gillard – in favour of Rudd – borders on obsession. No positive comment by anyone about Gillard goes unanswered by a Bemused slag-off. Even those who speak in general terms about “misogyny” cop it, because he thinks they’re defending the hated Gillard.
If they persist then the attacks become personal: not only on Gillard, but also on the person who unwittingly came to be a victim of Bemused’s trawling and trolling.
He once knew someone who wasn’t to fazed by misogynistic comments made in her direction – as least as far as she was prepared to admit to Bemused, anyway – and so he uses that as his model for claiming that misogyny hardly exists at all… purely so he can characterize Gillard as a whinger and whiner for pointing it out to a very deserving perpetrator, Tony Abbott, who was trying to get under Gillard’s skin by making thinly veiled comments about her (recently) dead father “dying of shame”. Abbott thought it was a hoot, and if he was lucky might get Gillard to cry.
Well, she didn’t cry. She got even. Seeing Abbott’s shit eating grin turn into a scowl was worth the price of admission.
Things had been building up before the famous Misogyny” speech. There was the Queensland Liberal dinner where they made crude jokes about Gillard’s allegedly small breasts and her allegedly fat arse. What a hoot! just good fun! According to Bemused she should have shaken that off.
Then there was the heckling by Hockey and Pyne in the parliamentary corridors. There had been “Ditch The Witch”, “Bob Brown’s Bitch” etc. etc in the past, but in Bemused’s Rudd-loving eyes these were not misogyny. Presumably the signs and actions we all saw or heard about were structured, du=ocumented arguments simply and reasonably attacking Gillard’s policies , not her gender. Go figure that, if you can.
Misogynists of course always have at least one woman that they point to as an exemplar of “how women should behave”. It might be Maggie Thatcher. It might be Joan Child. It might be Hilary Clinton. Or all three. But there is always at least one. Then they hold these women up as heroic role models, but only so that they can better slag-off the real female object of their dislike, by a false comparison.
It’s a standard tactic.
When called on it, Bemused cries “Bully!”, as all the best bullies do. It’s pretty pathetic, actually.
mogotrone @ #1400 Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 12:34 pm
Quite a debut Mogotrone, a great post.
I look forward to reading more from you.
BB
And just Imagine if Gillard presided over her govt, in the way that the useless Turnbull has been managing his to date.
bushfire bill @ #1403 Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 12:41 pm
Same old tired bullshit from ‘Brawler Bill’.
And full of factual errors as usual. *YAWN*
BB
That old political groupie, #WhinyLittleBitch always has to have the last say.
Waiting, . . . 1, 2, 3
Oh, didn’t have to wait long. Already done.
dtt
Dont know anything about this Syracuse Professor. Just that his modelling ignores every single poll. Basically his thought process is that after two terms of one party, the other one gets voted in. So basically, we are due for a rethug President.
BK
To the very limited extent that this article tat this article says anything at all, the Kouk is wrong.
Earth to Kouk: typing an article with one hand whilst the other is otherwise occupied does not a pretty picture make.
Verily I say to you: the pen (is) is not mightier than the (s) word!
Give Joan Child a call and ask her about glass jaws, Bemused. From all reports, she could tell you a thing or two about not over-reacting to criticism.
victoria @ #1408 Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 12:48 pm
Did you read what the article said?
In essence he was saying that polls show what people are thinking and not necessarily how they will act i.e. will the actually go and vote.
He says the primaries and the fervour they generate are a better guide to how motivated people are to actually get out and vote.
Going on memory as I closed the article, but I think I am close to the mark.
bushfire bill @ #1410 Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 12:52 pm
She died a few years ago idiot.
Now get out your hanky and have a big cry.
And, while we’re at it, let’s call Trump for what he really is:
A slut.
In the deepest meaning of shaming women, Donald Trump is a slut, shaming men.
And a misogynist of the first order.
Rummell, you are wrong. Trump is a misogynist.
He professes to love women, and I’m sure he does, BUT ONLY if they’re willing to please him. Otherwise he shames them/hates them.
Donald (Tramp) Trump is the latest incarnation of White (Orange) Male Supremacy; and that’s why the conversation is where it’s at now.
EG Theodore
That was indeed a crap article by the Kouk. Where to start
Use the Royal Telephone.
Trog @ 12:33
Thanks for the condolences, but I wasn’t an actual victim of Pell. I got out of the Catholic Church before he could hurt me. No!, I include him among my villains because he is such a sanctimonious hypocrite. He pretends to be a pastor, while keeping a keen eye on the lamb prices at the abattoirs. Still, I grew up to be a maverick ram, and not a sheep.
As night follows day ‘The Weekend Australian’ has three articles criticizing those are trying to restrict the free speech of a certain cartoonist.
Leak is a troll.
The best way to treat a troll is to always, and without fail, ignore them.
The problem with his argument is that modern US presidential elections are rare. There’s so few that much common knowledge may simply not yet have been disproven (no President had an x in their name until Nixon for example).
Contrariwise there’s substantial evidence that modern polling is accurate to within ~5 points because it gets applied to a lot more things (and its been reasonably accurate on recent Presidential elections too). The primaries argument is even weirder because it’s an argument from old data.
EGTheordore
I have been following the discussion triggered by Salt and continued by the Kouk with a great deal of interest. I thought I detected two errors of fact in the Kouk’s article.
I would appreciate knowing why do you think that the Kouk is wrong.
Kouk’s article fell down pretty early where he confuses giving up on getting a house based on economic impossibility and then making the rational decision to expend those resources elsewhere with having no desire to own a house.
E
The Kouk’s point is that there is no need to give up on getting a house based on figures he provides. What I am curious about is why you and EG Theodore think the Kouk’s figures are incorrect.
As an occasional participant in this blog but mainly a lurker, I will say the standard of the blog seems to have steadily fallen over the last number of months maybe even the last couple of years..I don’t know if i speak for other lurkers but the number of posts for purely personal attacks and snap-back responses seems to have increased steadily to the point where my scroll through index is well over 50%. Although there are great contributions from many posters, increasingly those diamonds are harder and harder to find among the rocks and detritus.
Of course, I am inviting the response of “if you dont like it go elsewhere” which in my mind is akin to the redneck response “if you don’t love it, leave” I’m sure most of us loathe. I do appreciate the comments and discussion from many posters and find most of the debates interesting and informative. Differences of opinion however do not however have to degenerate into name calling and endless posts of he said/she said or hatfields/mccoys type feuding.
Make of this what you will. I am confident others on here not directly involved in these spats feel the same way. I guess I am motivated by having more on-topic contributions from all involved (including lurkers like me) leading to a greater diversity in opinions and making this an even better blog.
There endeth the sermon. The contribution plate is coming round. Please give generously 🙂
Gippslander,
“These people were all educated at some point by Jesuits. Things look bad for Jesuit education!
I also have a Pantheon of of good guys/gals, which includes: Bill Shorten, Pope Francis…”
I think Pope Francis is himself a Jesuit.
I skimmed the Kouk article and was mightily unimpressed. It seems that every young person who doesn’t already have a mortgage and wants one is immediately filed in the overpriced ‘smashed avocado’ group.
It’s a bit like immediately filing every unemployed young person in the lazy layabout at home group.
Sure, most of us know someone in the category – but anecdote about one or two people is not evidence of the behaviour of one or two hundred thousand people. I expected more from a respected economist.
We used to mash potatoes. Now we ‘smash’ them. Such sophistication! :/
That :/ used to produce a sarcasm icon. Pah!
TPOF
I too expected from the Kouk
ImaXXXXXandivote
I am with you! You have hit the nail right on it’s head.
I have been posting for years on here but rarely post anymore as for the reasons you say.
Gippslander
I didn’t actually think you were one of Pell’s victims – just my somewhat juvenile attempt at a double entendre to your mention of Pell “bringing up the rear”.
Lizzie
We also “drizzle” things.
I can’t say much about his figures honestly. I’m a horribly stereotypical Latte Sipping Socialist and I mean it literally when I say I’m saving to buy a house. I’m not exactly in a fair position to judge standard income and true cost of living as a result.
Thank you ImaXXXXX
My sentiments exactly
imaxxxxxandivote @ #1422 Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 1:23 pm
I think more contributions from you would be a good move.
Hey, did youse hear about the TERRORIST attack in Motown??
He stabbed two of his colleagues at an accountancy firm. Had the whole Motown CBD shut down last Monday.
One chap’s still fighting for his life. The other’s okay.
He later shot himself, suicide by gun, in Newborough.
Oh, hang on, it was a white guy. Must be mental health.
As you were. Nothing to see here.
Ivote, agree with your observations, and if we just heed BW’s advice of not feeding the trolls, this would be a better blog.
Kezza, I met a ex financial planner once who had a mental breakdown during the GFC. Obviously he had a conscience and was horrified by what his advise had done to his clients.
Maybe this guy in Moe/Newborough was dealing with the same thing. From all accounts his behaviour came out of the blue.
There is a video of interview.
(CNN)Former chess champion Garry Kasparov told CNN’s Jake Tapper Friday he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin is “absolutely” trying to bend the US presidential election in favor of Donald Trump.
“Absolutely,” replied Kasparov, when asked on CNN’s “The Lead” whether he agrees with “the premise that the White House puts for…….
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/21/politics/garry-kasparov-russia-donald-trump/index.html#
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/john-howard-says-gun-laws-should-be-strengthened-not-weakened-20161022-gs8agp.html
It seems to me that on days when a single poster (not always the same one) dominates the thread, it becomes boring and no longer represents a conversation between equals. This is what is turning posters away, IMO.
Last night I attended the “White Dove Ball”, which is organized by South Burnett Peace of Mind Inc, at the Kingaroy Town Hall. The ball provides an opportunity for those who do not usually get to have a “posh” night out to do so. We’ve been fund raising for months and although tickets for the ball were $50.00 ($35.00 concession), those who are on the margins attended for free. The Mayor was there (arrived late due to another commitment) and the Deputy Mayor; the editor of the local paper, and other community reps. The guy providing the music was top quality and the catering was superb (no alcohol). During the day a local hair-dresser gave up her time to provide free hair “dos” and cuts for anyone attending the ball (and you could tell. Her “customers” looked absolutely amazing). Also never underestimate the quality of clothes and bargains available at your local “op shop” – there are at least half a dozen in Kingaroy. All in all a great night was had as everyone let their hair down.
Lizzie – I did a rough count this morning. In a little over 3 hrs one poster racked up about 1 in 5 posts.
Just how many downright idiotic, mindless stereotypes can one pack into a simple question:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/curt-schilling-jake-tapper-jews-democrats-israel_us_580a8079e4b02444efa38180
Victoria
I took a quick glance at the Syracuse professor article and thought is was a tad more than “due for a change.” Not saying he is right because it would be the greatest failure of polls in history if so, but I think he was sort of suggesting that there is a “shy Tory” effect and also actual turn out matters.
Bemused
Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 9:59 am
“I am not making any of this up. I have personally witnessed it and it has also been well documented.”
As have I.
PeeBee
Say what? “Maybe this guy in Moe/Newborough was dealing with the same thing (horrified by what his advise had done to his clients) From all accounts his behaviour came out of the blue.”
Who knows? I’d be game to bet that whatever it was impacted his family more than having a conscience about his clients.
Whatever, it was terrorism writ large for this community.
Who knew we weren’t having an ISIS attack, given the method.
As I said, alert subsided once it was generally known it was a whitey.
I’ve been wondering about Trump’s tactic of accusing vote rigging ahead of the actual election. I wouldn’t be surprised if stoking doubts over the legitimacy of the process among his conspiracy minded base isn’t just sabotaging his own chances. If the vote is rigged anyway, why even bother turning out?
CTar1
I’m surprised it was so few. I’ve never counted, but some days you just get the feeling…
lizzie @ #1439 Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 2:23 pm
Your wisdom is exceeded only by your beauty and the love of your dog.
Quite right. 🙄
Boerwar:
The Kook’s central claim is that “economics worked 40 years ago, it still does”.
40 years ago the world had reached an economic model that was sustainable (in economic terms). The Australian economy was quite inefficient (this was largely corrected by the Hawke-Keating reforms) and the world economy had encountered sub-par growth due to the oil supply shocks, but neither of these challenged sustainability.
Since 1980 in the US/UK (and 2000 in AU) the sustainable economy has been replaced by one built on tax arbitrage. That is, the wealthy (who would be taxed at 30% if they invested in productive businesses) instead pay 5% to their enablers (the FIRE sector i.e. financial, insurance and … real estate) in order to access at 15% tax rate the government has made available to them.
In addition to being grossly inequitable (a reduced tax rate accessible only to the wealthy or those who are both insane enough to risk bankruptcy through excessive leveraging and well connected enough to have access to such leverage) this model is also unsustainable, in that:
– it inevitably deposit’s wealth into land. Land has no elasticity of supply and thus all that is achieved is escalation of land prices (until the inevitable collapse)
– it diverts investment away from building productive capacity (taxed at 30%) and the infrastructure that business would insist on if it were principally concerned with delivering goods and services rather than exchanging assets (at ever higher prices)
Long term growth is now probably below 2% whereas in the 60’s it was 3.5%. This has occurred despite the greatest advance in technical progress (which Solow and other have shown is far more important to growth than inputs such as capital or labour, at least 75% of growth is sourced from technical innovation).
Growth should have been 4 to 5% through the period given the technical progress and compounded over 40 years the difference between 3% (which overestimates actual growth) and 4% (which under-estimates the positive influence of the actual technical progress).
What has happened instead is that the Baby Boomers have taken the real wealth (built on capacity to generate output) created by their parents, “invested” it into real estate and thereby impoverished their children.
Millennials may well be able to pay the rent the banks charge for the privilege of calling themselves home owners but this situation of paying rent to a bank (“servicing a loan” in the RBA’s terms) rather than to a landlord is very different to the situation facing the baby boomers, who were able (due to the exertions of their parents) actually to come to own homes in fairly short order. The final piece in the puzzle is that eventually the situation must end (a non-productive economy can’t last) and then everyone will be left with partly or wholly owned assets whose value is a fraction of the rental cash flows they have forfeited over the years and must continue to pay: a $1m loan is still a $1m loan even if the house is now worth only $300k…
In a little over 3 hrs one poster racked up about 1 in 5 posts.
And, funnily enough it was our very own #WhinyLittleBitch