Two more sets of post-voting intention budget numbers, though nothing yet on their regular questions on response to the budget:
• Newspoll moves slightly in favour of Labor, who now lead 53-47 after dropping back to 52-48 in the previous poll three weeks ago. Both parties are on 36% of the primary vote, with the Coalition steady and Labor up a point, with the Greens up one to 10% and One Nation down one to 9%. The report states that Malcolm Turnbull’s net approval has improved from minus 25% to minus 20%, while Bill Shorten’s is down from minus 22% to minus 20%, although approval and disapproval ratings are not provided. Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister has widened from 42-33 to 44-31. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1716.
• The post-budget Ipsos poll for the Fairfax papers, conducted Wednesday to Thursday from a sample of 1401, has Labor leading 53-47, down from 55-45 in the previous poll in late March. On the primary vote, the Coalition is up four to 37%, Labor down one to 35%, and the Greens down three from a hard-to-credit result last time to record 13%. Both leaders have improved substantially on person ratings, with Malcolm Turnbull up five on approval to 45% and down four to 44% – the first net positive result we’ve seen for either leader in a long time – and Bill Shorten up seven to 42% and down six to 47%. The preferred prime minister shifts from 45-33 to 47-35. Newspoll hopefully to follow.
The electricity wars, like the Cold War are never really over, they just go quiet for a little while.
player one @ #947 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:03 pm
All the countries you trumpet on about having nuclear power, France, India and China, have another thing in common.
I’ll give you one guess.
Maybe there is an ulterior motive and power is a side product.
J
Circus? Yes. Clowns? Yes. Laughs? No.
Blanket Criticism
That Assange chappy is a mighty decent fellow eh what ?
This is an accurate statement about the failure of “progressives” to look beneath the surface appearances of leaders and scrutinize the material consequences of policies:
https://www.crikey.com.au/2017/05/16/razer-we-need-more-than-appearances-and-personalities-from-our-leaders/
zoidlord @ #923 #923 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 5:09 pm
Chrome on my mac desktop does not allow me to log in to PB, so I cannot post. Firefox does, but I cannot save sftu.
Chrome on my mac laptop works just fine.
Go figure.
Has anybody posted this link. First word that comes into your mind when I say ‘Trump’.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/05/voters-call-trump-idiot-and-liar-in-disastrous-new-poll.html
‘Teenage Corbyn squashed my baby sister’s rabbit with a pogo stick’. This is almost as bad as Fairfax or ABC click-bait. Enlarge and read to the end.
https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/864304575502721024
barney in go dau @ #952 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:13 pm
So since they already have enough nuclear weapons to wipe out the planet, there is no reason not to send them our uranium to try and save it, is there?
Tandberg (sorry if already posted)
https://twitter.com/otiose94/status/864252709188194304
@KayJay,
No problem,
I can post on all other social media including other WordPress sites, bit weird!
@Blanket Criticism
Maybe term is “Gone Silent”..
I find it absolutely bizarre that “corrupt” is not one of the top words chosen by American poll respondents for their President.
N
Hey, let’s take over the means of production and then each according to his needs and from each according to his means.
It works every single time.
P1
‘but I also accept that it isn’t going to happen here in Australia, because public sentiment is so strong against it.’
Public sentiment has nothing to do with it. Which is why I think you’re ignorant on the issue.
An honest and sad statement from Fairfax:
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/media/2017/05/13/what-the-future-holds-fairfax/14945976004636?cb=1494923809
Translation: Our role is to reinforce the power of the already powerful and to augment the wealth of the already wealthy. There Is No Alternative to neoliberal economics because alternatives would mean changes to the distribution of power and wealth in our society.
I’ll amend that — very little to do with it.
Boerwar
Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:43 pm
N
Hey, let’s take over the means of production and then each according to his needs and from each according to his means.
It works every single time.
The converse is certainly working well for those who now hold the means of production, wherein the maxim is “From each according to their needs and to each according to their means.” As a matter of course, those with greatest need surrender the most; those who have the greatest means add to them with ease.
Well said Briefly.
Don
Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:16 pm
zoidlord @ #923 #923 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 5:09 pm
Safari works effortlessly.
P1
‘So since they already have enough nuclear weapons to wipe out the planet, there is no reason not to send them our uranium to try and save it, is there?’
Peculiar justification…
Some countries already have established nuclear power generation. Some have no other viable sources of power.
‘Teenage Corbyn squashed my baby sister’s rabbit with a pogo stick’.
Well, that’s that sorted for the British Election. Corbyn will be PM. I mean, killing his girlfriend’s cat seems to have worked a charm for Turnbull. 🙂
The ch7 news showed Fizza announcing some shipbuilding project or other here in Adelaide. Then student protesters, and lines of police ‘protecting’ his car as it entered a carpark for his next event.
Who is he scared of? Students? Shoppers? Barrel makers?
N
I already told you the fix: the proles band together, pitchforks in hand, leaving the faux-intelligentsia behind, grab the means of production and then work like buggery according to their means and divvy the results according the needs of each person.
Of course first it is necessary to eliminate the intelligentsia (because as long as some people are smarter than others they will use that smartness to diddle the proles); wealthy people; anyone in a uniform; anyone connected with any of the existing parties including the Greens (after all, they HAVE been complicit in aiding and abetting nasty powerful people); all farmers (they are ALL kulaks these days); contractors (worker exploiters to a man/woman)…
Golly, I hope there are enough walls to go round.
What could possibly go wrong?
Shorten is out and about looking for a puppy to massacre as we post.
Boerwar,
No, just have a rule that as soon as you have accumulated a certain amount of wealth, you go to gaol for excessive greed and the rotten deeds you must have committed in getting it. The wealth is the evidence.
Testing – if this posts, then I have no worries using “Brave” as browser.
No plug-ins installed – just no ad pop-ups either!
https://www.brave.com
P
Uh huh. Hollande clapped a 100% tax on income about $1 million per annum.
The stampede to get out of France was something to behold.
He was forced to backtrack to something a bit more sensible.
Sorry. 100% on income above $1 million per annum.
I’ve probably missed something but it seems (to me) that Turnbull, Morrison et al didn’t do the usual budget hard sell to the same extent as in previous years.
Perhaps they thought that the budget would sell itself, with Gonski 2.0, the half percent Medicare levy increase for NDIS and the tax on big banks.
It’s too late now of course to do much after the budget was savaged by Shorten, not to mention the RWers and the Catholic school lobby. Even the Greens seem to have backtracked on giving Gonski 2.0 the green light (pun intended) .
Now it seems that Turnbull once again is facing the usual hard slog of trying to get something passed in the Senate. It’s a delicious irony that the Senate composition is a direct result of him being too clever with his DD.
Nicholas,
You must be really struggling to make your argument if you have to resort to posting links to articles by Helen Razer. I find her interesting at times, but only a first-year undergraduate would cite her as a reference.
player one @ #959 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:22 pm
What has that got to do with having nuclear power in Australia?
Boerwar @ #978 Tuesday, May 16th, 2017 – 6:58 pm
His mistake was expecting people to act rationally and think “I don’t currently make $1 million/annum, nor am I ever likely to; this doesn’t affect me in the slightest”.
C
They are virtually in electioneering mode, visiting town halls, making little project announcements all over the place, and the like.
Laura Tingle is doing most of the budget selling it appears.
The effort on LNL last night was extraordinary. Either that or she has gone totally off the reservation.
Either way I don’t think she is convincing many or attracting many buyers.
Laura Tingle is doing most of the budget selling it appears.
The effort on LNL last night was extraordinary. Either that or she has gone totally off the reservation.
At any rate I don’t think she is convincing many or attracting buyers.
Boerwar
How many wealthy people own half the resources of the planet? How short a metaphorical wall do we need, come the revolution?
AR,
So you think that acting rationally is to only be concerned about laws that affect you personally, rather than, say, a principle?
AR
Hollande basically did not get it that there would be mass capital flight.
There were people with incomes of $50 million a year. Suddenly they could get part of the first million and Hollande proposed to take over remaining $49 million.
Never underestimate the sheer stupidity of the French Far Left.
These were the very same people who sat on their duffs and allowed Le Pen to set herself up for the next french presidential election.
The SYRIZANS, BTW, operated the same Nicholas-type policy stupidity with the same consequences: massive capital flight from Greece. (Nicholas ignores what happened in Greece and continues to praise the theoretical architect of the Greek tragedy – one Varoufakis).
I sort of get the theory but I also get it with every single economic theory: humans will always game any system they encounter.
P
You don’t have to persuade me about the evils of the current situation.
What does not persuade me is crazy brave theoretical solutions that have never even nearly worked when applied in practice.
barney in go dau @ #981 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:00 pm
Not much. So why did you raise the issue?
zoomster @ #970 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:51 pm
I have no idea what your point is.
Sohar @ 6:19 pm
‘Teenage Corbyn squashed my baby sister’s rabbit with a pogo stick’. This is almost as bad as Fairfax or ABC click-bait. Enlarge and read to the end.
https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/864304575502721024
The same “newspaper”, the Sunday Sport, published a story in 2013 that Ralph Miliband (Ed’s father) killed a kitten. See a pattern there?
Prices up, wages down in real terms, what could go wrong with the budget forecasts?
“Public sentiment has nothing to do with it. Which is why I think you’re ignorant on the issue.”
Public sentiment is the number one reason we dont have nuclear power. Lead in costs and times are factors, and moreso now, but public antipathy beginning in the 70s ensured we never tried.
What i also find interesting is those who attack P1 in the energy bleh very rarely refer to emissions in their arguments, always citing technology and economics and price. Moving to renewables without gas may be quicker, but will it be twice as quick? I suspect the self appointed experts on this blog dont really know.
Peter Piper @ #988 Tuesday, May 16th, 2017 – 7:05 pm
No, just that deciding to flee an entire country based upon a law that will never affect you personally isn’t rational. Unless that law is something abhorrent and lethal like “all Jews will be killed”.
There’s always room for principles in decision-making. But I don’t think that in any way implies that choosing to quit a country over what might happen if you suddenly find yourself earning more than $1 million/year is anything other than blatantly irrational thinking (for anyone that’s not already earning $900,000+/year). If you disagree with that proposition in principle, then it would make more sense to stay and get involved in political action to change it. Not run away to go be poor somewhere else.
P1
No, you wouldn’t.
C
There goes the Budget assumption on wages growth: it lasted exactly a week.
With it goes the calculations for the contribution of income tax to revenue.
A week is a long time in politics…
But this is one fast week.
KayJay @ #950 Tuesday, May 16th, 2017 – 6:04 pm
Shouldn’t be. The C+ plugin (latest version) should handle smilies correctly as long as you use the ‘Quote’ button when quoting text with smilies in it. Unless maybe if you’re using it alongside CCCP or some other plugin. That use-case has not been tested.
zoomster @ #996 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:15 pm
And if you are not going to tell us, why did you bother posting? Just sniping again?
player one @ #990 Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:10 pm
To highlight that they had developed the nuclear expertise which was able to be put into power production.
We don’t have that.