The Guardian reports the first result from Essential Research in three weeks has Labor’s two-party lead at 52-48, down from 53-47 last time. The changes on the primary vote are slight, with the Coalition up a point to 38% and Labor steady on 36% (CORRECTION: the Coalition is steady, and Labor down two). The Guardian report notes that Essential has changed the provider of the online panel from which its respondents are drawn from YourSource to Qualtrics, without changing the underlying methodology. Perhaps relatedly, the sample size is identified as 1652, where in the past it has been a little over 1000. The Guardian provides no further findings from attitudinal questions – we’ll see if the release of the main report later today provides anything on that front, along with the minor party primary votes.
UPDATE: Full report here. No change for the minor parties, with the Greens on 10% and One Nation on 7%. The poll was conducted between January 23 and January 31 – I’m not sure if this was a contingency for the long weekend, but in the past Essential’s field work dates have been Thursday to Sunday. Other findings:
• When presented with a number of explanations for a lack of gender parity in politics, the most favoured responses relate to the failures of political parties, and the least favoured relates to “experience and skills”. Gender quotas for parties have 46% support and 40% opposition, with age interestingly more determinative of attitudes here than gender.
• There are a number of questions on Australia Day, the most useful of which is a finding that 52% support a separate national day to recognise indigenous Australians, including 15% who want that day to replace Australia Day, with 40% opposed.
• Respondents were presented with various groups and asked who they felt they would prefer to see win the election. The most interesting findings are that the media was perceived as favouring the Coalition by 32% and 25%; that despite all the recent talk, pensioners were perceived to favour Labor by a margin of 42% to 28%; and that families with young children were perceived as favouring Labor by 50% to 21%.
UPDATE 2: It turns out that both the longer field work period and the larger sample were a one-off, to it will be back to Thursday to Sunday and samples of a bit over 1000 in future polls.
PeeBee @ #347 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 2:24 pm
You say that but you don’t prove it. Prove it to me by telling me:
1. What nominal value in shares that you and your wife have.
2. What is your most recent cash payment from the government.
3. What was your taxable income last year, before an accountant manipulated it, if so.
4. How much you earn per year from your SMSF
5. How much you will lose if this change goes ahead.
If you don’t want to put up that information, or, it seems, any other examples to prove what you assert is true, then how can anyone believe you?
@PeeBee
What Bowen means is that, A person with no assets will not benefit from Frankling Credits (i.e. like me), or unable to afford to.
A person with big portfolio with shares, with pension with these Tax Funded Credits will get more from the government than someone on Age Pension or a Disability Pension.
He is not pulling a wool over your eyes.
Kimberley Kitching
Verified account @kimbakit
1h1 hour ago
How “Liberals” forgot Menzies’ forgotten people:
Household debt 4th highest in world: families struggle to make ends meet
️Middle-class families priced out of housing
Activist govt never more important
Insightful stuff from ALP’s Kos Samaras #auspol
http://kossamaras.blogspot.com/2019/01/how-housing-boom-killed-off- …
https://twitter.com/RichardDiNatale/status/1092622892120952832
Very well said.
Hasn’t this hullabaloo concerning franked shares and dividend imputation put a zing in the step of the LNP lackeys working for the media that depends on the LNP being in power to secure their tenure as preeminent scribes of all things wonderful.
The reality is, a succession of governments have institutionalised a large number of unfair rorts and deceptive practices to maintain power.
Franked divdends is just one.
Tax free superannuation funds is a far bigger rort.
Capital gains discounts is another.
Politicians gambolling around the countryside at tax payers expense, upon being elected to government, being appointed a minister or for being on a committee are far more blatant acts of rorting.
As is the use of tax payers money to promote policy which without doubts benefits certain voters to the detriment of others.
Would you be worse off losing some of the minimalist Newstart allowance or losing the benefits of franking credits?
The poker machine and the club industries, both heavily supported by governments, spend millions to maintain their favoured status at the expense of tax payers and the poor.
The recently announced extension of the instant depreciation concession is another rort.
The car leasing industry, initially given benefits to support thd local manufacturers went ballistic when it was announced that it was time to retract the rorting.
The whole economy is designed on rorting.
Remember airports before they were privatised.
The greatest example of rorting occurred when the Greens voted to support the LNP to prevent Rudd from introducing legislation to help stem the ravages of climate change. The Greens voted to maintain their lapsing relevance.
Undoing the malpractice of bad government is the biggest problem facing this young country in the next 20 years.
I’ve often stated that the years of Howard/Costello will be the unstable ballast which will cause this ship to flounder for years.
Hawke and Keating aren’t and shouldn’t be immuned from their share of criticism.
There will be change of government simply because this current LNP government is not the best of a bad lot.
The polls suggest a change of government is appropriate and the current trickle suggesting a resurgence in a desire for a continuation of the Turnbull/Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison is a mirage of miraculous proportions.
An election decided by the faux outrage of an already pampered retirees movement is beyond belief.
Perhaps we do need a revolution or war to rein in the ravages of bad government.
If you doubt a need to elect a new government have a glance at some dead coral, a dry Darling River, a refugee camp, dying townships, indigenous health and feral animals.
Then a look at at a AGM and observe the renumeration the diectors award themselves, a renumeration that cannot be voted down and the renumeration offered to the poor and needy.
Australia needs a chasnge of government sooner than later.
ven
It was a clayton’s RC constrained by its ToR and length of sitting, both of which were dictated or influenced by the big banks.
Pegasus
A RC into the banking and finance industries should be like a alord of the Rings trilogy.
We have just had the “prequel”.
Part 2 could get down to the serious business where the Dark Suited Lords are confronted in their lairs.
Part 3 can be the vanquisting where the Dark Suited Lords are bundled off to prison in a privatised prison that they have funded.
PeeBee
says:
People with large share portfolios will not be effected by his policy. They will get the full benefit of the franking credit.
The poor pensioner with a few shares will get no benefit of the franking credit.
You don’t seem to acknowledge that, that is not fair.
___________________________________
I can’t believe that due to the incompetence of the ALP stooges on here that I am forced to defend ALP policy:
Pensioners are exempt from the franking credit changes. They can get them all.
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/australianlaborparty/pages/7652/attachments/original/1522101043/180327_Fact_Sheet_Pensioner_Guarantee.pdf?1522101043
TPOF@2:13pm
True
PeeBee @ #344 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 10:24 am
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
…
Pegasus @ #342 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 2:22 pm
A peoples’ bank is too radical left for Bowen
Paul Keating’s legacy of superannuation for all has been mangled and generally vandalised by Howard and Costello to provide yet another tax lurk for the wealthy and new sets of rent-seekers with a vested interest in keeping these lurks. Is it part of a strategy to ‘starve the beast’ and through target, totally unjustified concessions and handouts, increase the Liberal base?
C#t,
Knowing my financial situation won’t help you understand the inequities of the ALP policy. Just look at some case studies to see how the small investor (who may be a pensioner) will be disadvantaged by it and the large investor will continue has they always have.
nath @ #358 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 2:36 pm
..the incompetence of the dolt Bowen you mean
Steve777
Spivs will always find a way in so we need the legislation, regulation and enforcement to overcome it.
Conservative governments tend to make it easy for the spivs on all three fronts.
Rex Douglas
says:
..the incompetence of the dolt Bowen you mean
____________________
that too. You wouldn’t buy a used car off him, I wouldn’t anyway.
@Leroy -150pm
Wondering what William thinks about the points you raised over the Essential poll? Could it be different if it had waited till after the RC Report was released? A blogger today mentioned the possibility of voters taking it out on the Government for what is blatantly obvious a long term issue…..mind you, the Coalitions numerous attempts to stop a RC until it looked like it could lose a vote over a RC doesn’t do it any favours in voters minds. And when (IF) Parliament resumes, I’m sure the Greens and Labor will remind the public of this Governments intransigence.
The best article I have seen on franking credits etc:
https://www.smh.com.au/money/tax/real-victims-of-labor-s-dividend-tax-policy-are-not-average-joannes-20181122-p50ho7.html
BiGD: “Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.”
Wrong.
If you became a pensioner after 28th of March 2018, you are not exempt.
(That is why I prefaced my examples by saying “in general….”. I didn’t want to get bogged down in detail).
PeeBee
says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 2:41 pm
BiGD: “Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.”
Wrong.
If you became a pensioner after 28th of March 2018, you are not exempt.
(That is why I prefaced my examples by saying “in general….”. I didn’t want to get bogged down in detail).
______________________________________
No that’s not right. That’s for couples with one on a SMSF and another on a pension.
nath @ #366 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 2:40 pm
Morrison/Frydenberg or Shorten/Bowen.
No wonder the electorate is in despair.
swamprat
Lord of the Rings trlogy -among my favourite sci fi novels.
Unfortunately it is fantasy, so to speak.
Despite my reading tastes, I am too grounded and realistic to believe anyone of import will be prosecuted and jailed.
nath says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:33 pm
Windhover
says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:15 pm
nath says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 11:56 am
52-48 might put the ALP in government but Opposition should be much further in front based on the performance of the government. I suspect that if MT was still PM it would be 50-50.
………………………………………………………………………….
Interesting nath, when you write “might put the ALP in government” what psephological doubt are you expressing about the outcome of a 52-48 poll. Do you think the ALP have to win 53-47 to form government? Why?
________________________________________
Your error is assuming I am using the word ‘might’ as a principle of uncertainty when I am clearly using it to contrast that ‘despite’ the ALP gaining government on 52, they should be performing much better.
See definition 6
………………………………………………………………………………..
So I can get this straight nath, when you used “might” you meant the ALP “will”gain government (on the strength of the 52/48 poll)?
Is there something wrong with a 52/48 2PP result? It might just about be the best result in the delicate art of balancing “stated policies” for which you hope to argue a mandate for upon gaining government against frightening the electors with “radical”policies.
I mean a 60/40 ALP win would be a great victory but maybe a few more “radical”policies could then have been announced pre-election without significantly risking the binary importance of winning government.
Also, can you get back to me on how you think the LNP would go electorally with the Harold Holt hypothetical (obviously assume he is alive). Please show workings. Because your MT hypothetical was really interesting.
nath@2:36pm
See ALP is not that bad as you portray. 🙂
But we used to have a Bank owned by the Australian people. It was flogged off, like all our assets, and became another organistion to exploit the people.
Pee Bee
People with large share portfolios will not be effected by his policy. They will get the full benefit of the franking credit.
The poor pensioner with a few shares will get no benefit of the franking credit.
_______________________________
Bowen could have said, of course, people with large share portfolios in super accounts in retirement phase – but then ‘retirement tax’ would be twice around the world before he got that mouthful out.
Sadly, the debate has come to this. But a broad (though not absolutely entirely accurate) summary is a hell of a lot better than an absolute lie!
If the Coaltion stays in office for several more terms, once Medicare has been dismantled, the Snowy Hydro and Australia Post sold off, the ABC broken up and sold, unemployment benefits abolished and pensions outsourced, when basically no one except employees and small businesses pay any tax to pay for bloated militaries, militarised police and customs, together with loaded-up contracts for Liberal mates, rorts like refunding tax not paid will, at the last, probably be ended too.
Windhover
says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 2:43 pm
nath says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:33 pm
Windhover
says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:15 pm
nath says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 11:56 am
52-48 might put the ALP in government but Opposition should be much further in front based on the performance of the government. I suspect that if MT was still PM it would be 50-50.
………………………………………………………………………….
Interesting nath, when you write “might put the ALP in government” what psephological doubt are you expressing about the outcome of a 52-48 poll. Do you think the ALP have to win 53-47 to form government? Why?
________________________________________
Your error is assuming I am using the word ‘might’ as a principle of uncertainty when I am clearly using it to contrast that ‘despite’ the ALP gaining government on 52, they should be performing much better.
See definition 6
………………………………………………………………………………..
So I can get this straight nath, when you used “might” you meant the ALP “will”gain government (on the strength of the 52/48 poll)?
Is there something wrong with a 52/48 2PP result? It might just about be the best result in the delicate art of balancing “stated policies” for which you hope to argue a mandate for upon gaining government against frightening the electors with “radical”policies.
I mean a 60/40 ALP win would be a great victory but maybe a few more “radical”policies could then have been announced pre-election without significantly risking the binary importance of winning government.
Also, can you get back to me on how you think the LNP would go electorally with the Harold Holt hypothetical (obviously assume he is alive). Please show workings. Because your MT hypothetical was really interesting.
________________________________________
I used ‘might’ as described under definition 6 as in ‘despite’. Perfectly sound to do so as the dictionary would have informed you.
I think 52/48 is pretty dam low considering how bad the government has been. I think Shorten is a drag on that vote. It should be around 55.
Not sure about how Holt would go, but when MT was PM the polls were closer at that period, and he was more respected than Morrison.
Thanks Nath (never thought I would say that) you are correct.
I don’t generally feel ‘sorry’ for convicted drug smugglers etc, but maybe she should have been a so called banker ?
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/bali-nine-drug-trafficker-renae-lawrence-sentenced-over-car-theft-20190205-p50vrj.html
Rex: [No wonder the electorate is in despair.]
Has there been polling demonstrating the elector despair?
Is it possible that you are simply inferring despair from the anecdotal evidence you have gathered from people having a political discussion with you?
I ask because, without wishing to be unkind, I can imagine you would confront much despair in those discussions.
BiGD,
I shall repeat it, until it sinks in.
PeeBee
says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 2:48 pm
Thanks Nath (never thought I would say that) you are correct.
______________________
No probs. 🙂
steve davis
THANK YOU. An article I tried to find so as to post and repost and repost as a reminder.
The Outline link to the article sd posted.
https://outline.com/qyhGVw
nath
[Not sure about how Holt would go, but when MT was PM the polls were closer at that period, and he was more respected than Morrison.]
What a pity. Your ruminations re Holt would be just as interesting.
Ven
says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 2:44 pm
nath@2:36pm
See ALP is not that bad as you portray.
___________________________
In all the speculation about my identity and motives, no one has yet suggested I might be working for the ALP, solidifying Bill’s support amongst online ALP supporters. Essentially, training them in a Pavlovian fashion to dismiss all criticism of Bill.
PeeBee @ #367 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 10:41 am
Detail is important and as nath points out it’s only in a particular circumstance.
You’re really struggling to justify your position.
The media can’t even find people to justify it.
We’ve had a woman with a current income of $159,000 a year and another who has strong Liberal Party connections, just to name two.
Remember it’s meant to be a tax credit, not a tax refund. 🙂
All Bowen had to do was grandfather the ‘cash refunds’ policy and take an evolutionary rather than revolutionary approach to his first term in office on ‘tax’ reform –
But he wouldn’t because he needs that pile of money staying in the coffers to pay for Labor’s election promises in social welfare areas, Health, Education, etc. It’s always a gamble who you take it from and who you give it to. Kudos for political courage Mr Bowen- but its going to cost you some votes in scare mongering attack ads to come and trigger confused debates, claims and counter claims as we see here in PB already.
PeeBee @ #364 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 2:38 pm
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
Current pensioners are exempt from the changes.
Repeat.
What about THIS do you not get!?!
Or are you wilfully not getting it!?!
And, you can’t just wail about ‘poor pensioners’ without defining what you mean!
C@t
Perhaps this definition from the steve davis linked article ?
.
.
but its definition of a lower-end retiree is someone with $900,000 in an self-managed super fund at age 65.
ANY Self Funded Retiree who earns $1 or more than a Pensioner, after taking into account what they have to live on per year after a change to Cash Back Tax Refunds on Franked Dividends is, by definition, wealthier than that Pensioner. Thus, if you think you deserve more than those Pensioners from the Taxpayer to live on, then say so.
PeeBee
My view on fairness of the imputation scheme.
In general with the current system the rich bastard with a taxable income gets $X per share and with the help of the franking credit pays no tax on it so pockets $X. The rich bastard with no “taxable” income (AKA “poor” person) also gets $X per share and with the help of the franking credit gets an additional refund of $Y so pockets $X+Y. The rest of we taxpayers have fork out the $Y
Without the refund component both would get to pocket $X per share. This seems to be the fairer option to me.
poroti @ #389 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 3:01 pm
Yes. Emotive, non-specific rhetoric is replacing facts.
Poor Greens, RDN can’t even keep his party in check, no wonder people aren’t convinced of Tricky Dicky!!
PeeBee says:
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 2:38 pm
C#t,
Knowing my financial situation won’t help you understand the inequities of the ALP policy. Just look at some case studies to see how the small investor (who may be a pensioner) will be disadvantaged by it and the large investor will continue has they always have.
________________________________
No. It’s simply not the case.
Let’s say there are four holders of CBA shares (with various amounts of other taxable income) and each receives a fully franked dividend of $1,000 each. Of these:
– Person A has a total income (including the dividend) below the threshold at which tax is payable. Person A gets to keep the dividend without paying any tax.
– Person B has a total income (including the dividend) where the highest marginal rate is 21c (including Medicare). Person B can apply the franking credits to their dividend so that no tax is payable on the dividend. The remaining 9c in the dollar can be applied to any other tax owed, but only so far as more tax is owed.
– Person C has a total income (including the dividend) where the highest marginal rate is 34.5c (incl Medicare). Person C can apply the franking credits to the dividend so that only 4.5% tax is payable on the dividend. But this person still pays more tax on the dividend than Persons A and B.
– Person D has a total income (including the dividend) where the highest marginal rate is 47c (including medicare). Person D will have to pay 17c in the dollar tax on each dollar of dividend despite having full benefit of the franking credits.
Sounds fair to me.
steve davis @ #214 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 8:56 am
Someone should point out to the Gaul’s:
– Superannuation is intended to be used as retirement savings, it’s not an inter-generational wealth transfer mechanism;
– Over the years they have received very generous tax concessions for their superannuation contributions, and;
– The “public purse” is not like a savings account where you make contributions and withdrawals and they are “taking” from the public purse – they use Medicare, the PBS, benefit from the police etc and presumably make use of the roads.
nath
Your last post about being an ALP plant made me laugh as do many of your other piss-takes which are often witty and creative.
It’s obvious your detractors have no ability to appreciate your humour. They take themselves far too seriously.
If you were directing them at the Greens and me, I would still laugh.
ALP online partisan Bill Shorten defence class of 2018/2019. You have passed with flying colours. 🙂
C@tmomma @ #227 Tuesday, February 5th, 2019 – 9:16 am
You can watch at least some them again on Facebook for at short period after they’ve been delivered.
thanks Peg, 🙂