The Guardian reports the fortnightly Essential Research poll includes the monthly question on Anthony Albanese’s leadership, recording 58% approval (down one) and 26% disapproval (up one). Respondents were also asked what appear to have been all-or-nothing questions on stage three tax cuts, finding 53-47 in favour of sticking with them rather than breaking an election promise regardless of the economic situation, and 52-48 against a more general proposition as to whether break election promises should ever be broken. However, the split in favour of keeping the tax cuts was 70-30 in favour among those who felt they were most likely to benefit compared with 60-40 for least likely. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1122 – there should be a good deal more from it when the full report is published later today.
UPDATE: Full report here.
https://www.pollbludger.net/2022/10/18/essential-research-albanese-approval-and-tax-cuts-open-thread/comment-page-52/#comment-3998200
Boer War’s NFI, all Libs lite … all values, great policy, forget competency, actual services/ action …
The problem with just paying taxes is there is no guarantee it will go where you want it to go.
From the UK press, an ad headed “Are you suffering from memory loss?” (Tories only)
https://twitter.com/S3DGX/status/1583332767508889600/photo/1
Mexicanbeemer @ #2601 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 3:48 pm
Yes, but it has more chance of getting where it is needed.
Mexicanbeemer says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 7:48 pm
The problem with just paying taxes is there is no guarantee it will go where you want it to go.
The day we each get to pick and choose where our taxes are spent, we’re F#$&ed. I’m all for the common good even though that involves taking the rough with the smooth. But, each to his own I suppose.
Johnson’s supposed popularity is another fake, according to a UK polls analyst:
‘Prof Jane Green, director of the Nuffield Politics Research Centre, cast doubt on Johnson’s popularity, saying “he’s a very polarising character” who did not have “very high popularity” compared to Theresa May, although he was favoured by those who voted leave in the EU referendum.’
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-63327087#lx-stream
Most taxes is just money taken out of the economy.
Barney in Cherating says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 7:52 pm
Mexicanbeemer @ #2601 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 3:48 pm
The problem with just paying taxes is there is no guarantee it will go where you want it to go.
Yes, but it has more chance of getting where it is needed.
————————————-
More likely it wont get to where its needed. To be able to directly hand the money to the intended target wont miss but paying taxes leaves it up to countless others to share your judgement on how best to spend it.
Interesting opinion , looking forward to seeing who turns up for this.
Dog’s Brunch says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 7:53 pm
Mexicanbeemer says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 7:48 pm
The problem with just paying taxes is there is no guarantee it will go where you want it to go.
The day we each get to pick and choose where our taxes are spent, we’re F#$&ed. I’m all for the common good even though that involves taking the rough with the smooth. But, each to his own I suppose.
———————-
The tax system is cleverly designed to encourage people to support certain institutions.
Mexicanbeemer @ #2607 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 3:56 pm
Do we start addressing you as doG?
Socrates @ Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 6:25 pm
I would suggest backpfeifengesicht which roughly translates as “punchable face”. Not that I would normally encourage violence towards potato people
Barney
You don’t know what i would spend money on but it would be better spent than the government does.
Dog’s Breakfast
All these accounts on social media running with ‘woke’ and the rest of it are just scammers looking to take advantage of the zombies out there and monetize the ‘outrage’.
Dog’s Brunch @ #2608 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 3:57 pm
I’m outraged that if I come accross an unconscious woman, I can’t have sex with her.
Taxes go to help solve problems you don’t know even exist.
Most charities waste sh*tloads, increasingly on fundraising (mate of ours was employed by a charity – he kept 50% of whatever he raised). Look at the recent Guide Dogs revelations.
(The best charity is the UN. It does amazing things on almost no money and very little is spent on administration).
The other problem with choosing where your money goes is that people go for popular causes rather than necessary ones. If you get breast cancer, you’ll get lots of support from charities; bowel cancer, and you’re invisible. (As someone observed, there’s little attraction is wearing a brown ribbon…)
Anyway, I’ve always liked Carole Lombard’s take, when she was asked how she felt about paying 80% of her income in tax —-
‘I enjoy this country. I like the parks and the highways and the good schools and everything that this government does. After all, every cent anybody pays in taxes is spent to benefit him. I don’t need $465,000 a year for myself, so why not give what I don’t need to the government for improvements of the country. There’s no better place to spend it.’
Mexicanbeemer @ #2612 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 4:03 pm
Really?
You’ve certainly got the modesty of a doG.
Ashasays:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 6:27 pm
“I’m usually not one for conspiracies about buried polls, but if there isn’t a Newspoll tonight, I’m calling shenanigans.”
https://youtu.be/UbtByiZrKqY
Barney
Really?
You’ve certainly got the modesty of a doG.
———————-
Jim Chalmers would be the first to tell you how wasteful the last budget was.
Barney… “ I’m outraged that if I come accross an unconscious woman, I can’t have sex with her.”
I feel your pain
Mexicanbeemer @ #2618 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 4:12 pm
As opposed to the point Zoomster just made?
“Barney
You don’t know what i would spend money on but it would be better spent than the government does.”
This old insane anti democracy small govt lie, it serves only to disempower voters and empower billionaires. It is not arrogance, it is decades of people drinking antidemocracy trickle down anti democracy koolaid until they are morons or automatons, or both, or whatever.
Zoomster
People should pay taxes and its only by paying their taxes that they can take advantage of tax refunds but the argument that everything should be funded by the government misses the point that people can directly support a charity or institution and a larger percentage of that money will go where its intended than if it goes through the government.
“People should pay taxes and its only by paying their taxes that they can take advantage of tax refunds but the argument that everything should be funded by the government misses the point that people that people can directly support a charity or institution and a larger percentage of that money will go where its intended than if it goes through the government.”
Again this is the kind of logic that sees people without houses and without mental health treatment in gutters you need to walk over to get to work. It is just disgusting. It is the problem masquerading as a solution. The only solution it is, is to solve the democracy problem and solve the wealthy people paying taxes problem.
WeWantPaul says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 8:15 pm
“Barney
You don’t know what i would spend money on but it would be better spent than the government does.”
This old insane anti democracy small govt lie, it serves only to disempower voters and empower billionaires. It is not arrogance, it is decades of people drinking antidemocracy trickle down anti democracy koolaid until they are morons or automatons, or both, or whatever.
———————————
If you hand $100 dollars to a homeless person then all that $100 goes to the homeless person but if you hand that $100 to the government most of it wont go anywhere near a homeless person.
Mexicanbeemer @ #2622 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 4:16 pm
There’s much more to our society than just social security.
Watch the Budget. You might learn something.
zoomster at 8.08 pm
Correct re UN. Kofi Annan once pointed out, in the 1990s, that the regular budget of the UN was less than the regular budget of the Tokyo city fire department. True as of 1998 according to this source, and most unlikely to have changed a lot since:
“The budget for the UN’s core functions — the Secretariat operations in New York, Geneva, Nairobi, Vienna and five Regional Commissions — is $1.25 billion a year. This is about 4 per cent of New York City’s annual budget — and nearly a billion dollars less than the yearly cost of Tokyo’s Fire Department. It is $3.7 billion less than the annual budget of New York’s State University system.”
https://ldb.org/unfacts.htm
Barney in Cherating
There’s much more to our society than just social security.
Watch the Budget. You might learn something.
——————————–
Thanks but i know how budgets work.
Until such time as WWP’s scurvy masses vote for high taxing parties I am happy to donate brains, brawn and funds to fill social and environmental holes.
Mexicanbeemer @ #2624 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 4:20 pm
So, have you just given that person a home?
No, you haven’t.
You’ve just given yourself a warm fuzzy feeling.
You’ve done nothing to change that persons future.
Rex Douglas says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 7:25 pm
simm0888 @ #2579 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 7:16 pm
Rex “We must as a country cease enabling the worlds biggest emitters with our fossil fuels.”
Which emitters are you referring to?
https://www.worldenergydata.org/australias-fossil-fuel-exports/
中华人民共和国
So Rex old chap we tell India, Japan and South Korea to bugger off. Then we tell China get your own gas (we don’t export coal to China). That leaves the Australian Economy to take a hit of US$286 Billion (Population of 25.69 million) per year.
To put that in perspective “Trussonomics” was going to inflict a £65 billion ($US73.75 bilion) hit to the British tax take (Population of 67.22 million). Your genius has 3.8 times the effect on only 38% of the population.
Even the Lettuce would appear like a “Rocket Scientist” next to your proposal. The Great Depression would have been a walk in the park compared to what Australia would face.
Should Australia survive the massive “Rex Shock”, its mostly unemployed and destitute population (the Commonwealth and States Tax take will be pummelled so benfits will have to go), the collapsed $AU would have to buy much more expensive renewable energy alternatives. That’s because Coking Coal and Energy prices will head North making any manufactures that rely in Steel very expensive.
Further “Mad Vlad” will get a massive boost in his war with Ukraine, as he can supply Coking and Thermal Coals plus Gas at even higher prices. The Chinese will have a field day, being the worlds largest Coal producer and the USA and Canada step up their Coking Coal production. Previously uneconomic Coking Coal and Gas sites in Africa will suddenly be developed in virgin wilderness.
Qatar and them damn Saudis will kiss your feet as you make them instantly even richer than they are.
Yes Rex – I reckon you need to take your crayon and go back to the drawing board. Thank Buddha the Greens didn’t get the balance of power.
https://www.energyconnects.com/news/oil-and-gas/2022/july/australia-s-energy-exports-to-hit-record-high-on-surging-coal-and-gas-prices/
“However, most of this pollution comes from just a few countries: China, for example, generates around 30% of all global emissions, while the United States is responsible for almost 14%.In the ranking below you can find the 10 countries that produce the most emissions, measured in millions of tons of CO2 in 2019.
China, with more than 10,065 million tons of CO2 released.
United States, with 5,416 million tons of CO2
India, with 2,654 million tons of CO2
Russia, with 1,711 million tons of CO2
Japan, 1,162 million tons of CO2
Germany, 759 million tons of CO2
Iran, 720 million tons of CO2
South Korea, 659 million tons of CO2
Saudi Arabia, 621 million tons of CO2
Indonesia, 615 million tons of CO2
https://climatetrade.com/which-countries-are-the-worlds-biggest-carbon-polluters/
WeWantPaul says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 8:19 pm
“People should pay taxes and its only by paying their taxes that they can take advantage of tax refunds but the argument that everything should be funded by the government misses the point that people that people can directly support a charity or institution and a larger percentage of that money will go where its intended than if it goes through the government.”
Again this is the kind of logic that sees people without houses and without mental health treatment in gutters you need to walk over to get to work. It is just disgusting. It is the problem masquerading as a solution. The only solution it is, is to solve the democracy problem and solve the wealthy people paying taxes problem.
————————–
The tax system is designed to encourage people to spend money to offset tax.
There are large amounts of waste at the UN.
mex
‘The tax system is designed to encourage people to spend money to offset tax.’
Talk to your accountant some time.
If you were going to give money to charity anyway, and not to minimise tax, fine (but then why claim it back?)
Otherwise you’re spending money you’ve already paid tax on, which means you’re spending 60 cents to get 40 back, which is obviously silly.
Barney
So, have you just given that person a home?
No, you haven’t.
You’ve just given yourself a warm fuzzy feeling.
You’ve done nothing to change that persons future.
————————————–
If only paying taxes ended homelessness but it hasn’t.
“If you hand $100 dollars to a homeless person then all that $100 goes to the homeless person but if you hand that $100 to the government most of it wont go anywhere near a homeless person.”
This the inane rubbish that has accompanied the koolaid since Regan’s welfare queen lie, that so many still believe to this day. A lie. Disproved for decades, yet still a fundamental stepping stone in the anti democracy pro billionaire structure.
The problem isn’t the $100 that goes to the homeless person that you choose, you could / should pay more tax AND give the homeless person $100, it isn’t a binary thing, well except if you want it to be. Neither is the administrative cost of Government, much of which is wasted trying to stop the fictious welfare queens, which is part of the whole koolaid lie.
The problem with you giving $100 to the homeless person is the 20000 you don’t give anything to.
See homelessness and poverty aren’t accidents. They aren’t deserved outcomes, they are the outcomes of bad policy decisions. In particular the full range of koolaid antidemocracy, antigovernment, antitax trickle down policies.
You can’t sprinkle a couple of billionaires and their few $100 tax deductible donations and solve a deliberate systemic poverty trap that you’ve caused with bad policy, you’ve got to undo the bad policy.
“If only paying taxes ended homelessness but it hasn’t.”
It isn’t just taxes, you’ve got to empower democracy and solve it across a whole range of policy areas.
Zoomster
Exactly that’s how the tax system works.
Upnorth – Malleo Stultus @ #2631 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 8:25 pm
Christ What an argument. We must continue to kill people because we can’t afford not to.
This is the Cartel at work.
Some people are poor because of the force of circumstances. Others are poor because they make bad choices.
WeWantPaul says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 8:29 pm
“If you hand $100 dollars to a homeless person then all that $100 goes to the homeless person but if you hand that $100 to the government most of it wont go anywhere near a homeless person.”
This the inane rubbish that has accompanied the koolaid since Regan’s welfare queen lie, that so many still believe to this day. A lie. Disproved for decades, yet still a fundamental stepping stone in the anti democracy pro billionaire structure.
———————
I’m not talking about welfare queens or so called bludgers but that the government wouldn’t give that $100 to the homeless person because they would spend it on other things.
Mexicanbeemer @ #2634 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 4:29 pm
It’s certainly done a lot more for getting people off the streets than your $100.
Drugs drive poverty.
Boerwar @ Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 7:27 pm:
“ MacArthur there were only two clear lessons from the Allied strategic bombing campaign in World War 2.
1. Target energy/fuel.
2. No-one on any side was ever charged or tried for bombing.”
———————————-
Boerwar, you need to revise your history. The Rome Statute was published on 17 July 1998 and came into force on 1 July 2002. Article 8, s2.a references war crimes defined in the Geneva Convention which came into force on 12 August 1949. It is irrelevant whether or not actions defined in the Rome Statute as war crimes went unpunished in WW2. Anyone who, in the present day, advocates or supports targeted strikes against civilian utilities (water, electricity, etc) is advocating or supporting the commission of a war crime. Please reassure us you are not doing this.
“Christ What an argument. We must continue to kill people because we can’t afford not to.
This is the Cartel at work.”
Just ypical koolaid, trickle down, anti democracy sophistry. Full of sound and fury signifying predominantly lots of money for the super wealthy and shit loads of deliberate poverty and cruelty.
Like with mental health, the good guys saw the problems with institutions and shut them down, then the trickle down, poverty evangelists unfunded not just the institutions but everything they possibly could.
“Drugs drive poverty.”
No no no. Trickle down economics drives poverty, and quite deliberately. Treating the health problems associated with drugs as a criminal problem, and not a health and mental health problem, see above on mental health policy, just helps select who falls into the deliberate poverty trap.
Player One says:
Sunday, October 23, 2022 at 8:33 pm
Upnorth – Malleo Stultus @ #2631 Sunday, October 23rd, 2022 – 8:25 pm
That leaves the Australian Economy to take a hit of US$286 Billion (Population of 25.69 million) per year.
Christ What an argument. We must continue to kill people because we can’t afford not to.
This is the Cartel at work.
中华人民共和国
No don’t throw simple lines out P1. Stick to the facts. Where will you find the $US286 billion?
Why will you enable the likes of Russia, China, Qatar and the Saudis to inflate their profits even further.
Why do you want all Government welfare programmes to cease?
Why do you want to make the price of renewables higher on a much weakened Australian $?
Don’t come on herer with cheap rehtoric. Give us some facts. I’m interested to know and I am sure other bludgers are as well. Pure and simple what is your plan??
macarthur I do not at all appreciate the way in which you set yourself up as a moral guardian. I don’t have to assure you of anything.
These trickle down lies have worked so well for so long, it isn’t that surprising they persist like the zombies and cockroaches they are.
Closing the institutions was a well intended mistake.