OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Eelogical]

I worked near those merkins for years ... they apparently encouraged employees to do challenging things .... there was a period where there were lots of merkins trying to learn to ride unicycles .... pretty f**kin funny

I'm sure that will increase productivity even allowing for the increase in workplace insurance policy premiums.

 

[Gary Gutful]

 

[strider]

View attachment 37321

you do realise all your searches will return rubbish results for the next 3 years

 

[Gary Gutful]

you do realise all your searches will return rubbish results for the next 3 years

It's true. I just typed 'Best Rugby League Forum' and it took me here!

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Murdoch media dont pay for the adds, they receive revenue from them, much like we do here at LU, hence they receive money from Google.

Thats how advertising works. The funds come from company called Google Analytics, not the advertisers themselves.

Ok gotcha

 

[Poupou Escobar]

That assumes that having a surplus reduces debt, when it doesn't.

It just transfers it from the government to business and individuals.

Just as all these measures will transfer debt from business and individuals to the government.

I don't know about you, but I'm much happier with the latter than the former.

That's private debt as a percentage of GDP.

https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/government-debt-to-gdp

That's government debt to GDP.

Can you see what's happening there?

Neat hey?

I don't think it is neat. Like anything that scales it leaves governments and their populations exposed to black swan events such as the GFC and pandemics.

 

[Bandwagon]

I don't think it is neat. Like anything that scales it leaves governments and their populations exposed to black swan events such as the GFC and pandemics.

The "neat" is how reality fits the principle, or the other way around if you prefer.

We fuel our wealth and living standards through debt, that doesn't change regardless of who is holding it. However in a crises like this it's far better that it is the government who holds it because they have far greater capacity to service it.

This crises will pass, then we'll move to repairing the economic damage that's done. And there'll be a loud chorus from so called "economic conservatives" to reduce the level of debt the government holds. They'll trot out such nonsense as they have before, like how we are hocking the future of our children, all the while what they are really advocating ( often unknowingly I'd suggest, I mean otherwise their f**king ghouls ) is the transfer of that debt from the government back to the people, and merkins will actually believe that to be to their benefit and vote for it.

And that'll be where the real damage of this debt is done, yet it doesn't have to be that way at all.

 

[Gronk]

The "neat" is how reality fits the principle, or the other way around if you prefer.

We fuel our wealth and living standards through debt, that doesn't change regardless of who is holding it. However in a crises like this it's far better that it is the government who holds it because they have far greater capacity to service it.

This crises will pass, then we'll move to repairing the economic damage that's done. And there'll be a loud chorus from so called "economic conservatives" to reduce the level of debt the government holds. They'll trot out such nonsense as they have before, like how we are hocking the future of our children, all the while what they are really advocating ( often unknowingly I'd suggest, I mean otherwise their f**king ghouls ) is the transfer of that debt from the government back to the people, and merkins will actually believe that to be to their benefit and vote for it.

And that'll be where the real damage of this debt is done, yet it doesn't have to be that way at all.

Meanwhile just watch the same economic conservatives register their businesses for the JobKeeper Allowance, payroll tax rebates, instant asset writeoffs etc on offer.

 

[Bandwagon]

Meanwhile just watch the same economic conservatives register their businesses for the JobKeeper Allowance, payroll tax rebates, instant asset writeoffs etc on offer.

This is the hypocrisy conundrum, that dictates that if you oppose the way the world works at any given time, that unless you just step off, you are a hypocrite.

It's the same argument that has advocates of climate change being labelled hypocrites for catching a plane.

In the end we have whatever shit sandwich we have, that we partake of it whilst advocating for something we feel is better does not make us hypocritical, it just makes us some what less than perfect.

 

[strider]

Meanwhile just watch the same economic conservatives register their businesses for the JobKeeper Allowance, payroll tax rebates, instant asset writeoffs etc on offer.

Pricks should just let their businesses go down the gurgler

 

[Gronk]

This is the hypocrisy conundrum, that dictates that if you oppose the way the world works at any given time, that unless you just step off, you are a hypocrite.

It's the same argument that has advocates of climate change being labelled hypocrites for catching a plane.

In the end we have whatever shit sandwich we have, that we partake of it whilst advocating for something we feel is better does not make us hypocritical, it just makes us some what less than perfect.

Yes and no. The a CC analogy of living your life carbon neutral is unrealistic and the most practical position that anyone can really undertake is to "walk softly on the earth".

Does it pass the pub test however that those libertarians who campaign against social welfare, all of a sudden become egalitarian when their arse is on the line ? The answer is probably yes because they were coerced by the system to contribute in taxes, which makes them entitled to it.

Accordingly am more than happy for them to stand in front of me in the queue and accept the money with the grace that it deserves.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The "neat" is how reality fits the principle, or the other way around if you prefer.

We fuel our wealth and living standards through debt, that doesn't change regardless of who is holding it. However in a crises like this it's far better that it is the government who holds it because they have far greater capacity to service it.

This crises will pass, then we'll move to repairing the economic damage that's done. And there'll be a loud chorus from so called "economic conservatives" to reduce the level of debt the government holds. They'll trot out such nonsense as they have before, like how we are hocking the future of our children, all the while what they are really advocating ( often unknowingly I'd suggest, I mean otherwise their f**king ghouls ) is the transfer of that debt from the government back to the people, and merkins will actually believe that to be to their benefit and vote for it.

And that'll be where the real damage of this debt is done, yet it doesn't have to be that way at all.

People will be in debt after the crisis because they're consuming more than they produce. There's no magical accounting tricks that can change that. Not even from the government.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Meanwhile just watch the same economic conservatives register their businesses for the JobKeeper Allowance, payroll tax rebates, instant asset writeoffs etc on offer.

Why wouldn't they? Their taxes fund it.

Edit: which you acknowledge here:

Does it pass the pub test however that those libertarians who campaign against social welfare, all of a sudden become egalitarian when their arse is on the line ? The answer is probably yes because they were coerced by the system to contribute in taxes, which makes them entitled to it.

Accordingly am more than happy for them to stand in front of me in the queue and accept the money with the grace that it deserves.

But really, does anyone truly think there should be no safety net? The questions are always about scope: who should be entitled and when, and even whether or not it should be the government providing it.

 

[Bandwagon]

People will be in debt after the crisis because they're consuming more than they produce. There's no magical accounting tricks that can change that. Not even from the government.

I'm sure they will be, peoples lives are geared to their income, it's not that simple a thing to adjust to.

We saw that in the GFC around the world, the poor remained poor. The rich mostly remained rich, and the middle class collapsed.

Even this package, as generous as it might seem can't solve the problem that someone earning a reasonable wage is going to have a life geared to their income, personal debt is still f**king high, and it isn't going to go away.

Although there is a solution, but the complete freezing of all existing credit is admittedly a pretty radical measure. Though starting with mortgages and rents might well not be.

 

[hindy111]

Put gst up 1% - 5 -6 billion a year

-Any earnings over 80k super payments go to half rest goes to budget for next 5yrs for people under 50.( no idea revenue)

-Anyone enter country pays a $120 entry fee unless Aus citizen for work. About 1 Billion a year.

This will get us about 50 billion in 5 yrs.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Just introduce a transaction tax and see what we can pull from income tax to balance it out.

Wanna buy a Mercedes rather than a Camry? Go for it, mate. A $2m house rather than an $800k house? Cool.

 

[strider]

I saw a financial merkin suggest that every pay what is the equivalent of $2 more a week in medicare levy and it would smash the debt quickly

I'd be all for a 1% GST increase - have been forever ... goverments are too scared to do it tho ... if the Libs said they would do it, Labour would use it to make out they are f**kwits harming the poor .... if Labour said they would do it, firstly hell would have frozen over, but then the Libs would accuse them of not looking after their base voters etc etc

Both sides of goverment need to get together privately and make an agreement of a way to pay it off - then present a united front for a change and not be a bunch of bickering merkins

 

[Gronk]

I saw a financial merkin suggest that every pay what is the equivalent of $2 more a week in medicare levy and it would smash the debt quickly

I'd be all for a 1% GST increase - have been forever ... goverments are too scared to do it tho ... if the Libs said they would do it, Labour would use it to make out they are f**kwits harming the poor .... if Labour said they would do it, firstly hell would have frozen over, but then the Libs would accuse them of not looking after their base voters etc etc

Both sides of goverment need to get together privately and make an agreement of a way to pay it off - then present a united front for a change and not be a bunch of bickering merkins

It might actually happen you know. Elections are 2 years away and it paves way for bipartisan stuff. Just look how the AG Porter has been banging out industrial relations reform with ACTU Sally McManus. Poor @Delboy must be inconsolable.

The USA are paying the price of inaction bc Trump decided to downplay C19 because he thought that a shutdown would harm his election chances. In fact the opposite is true. I suspect that Scotty’s approval rating would be sky high right now, a direct contrast to his dimwit handling of the bushfire season.

 

[Twizzle]

 

[Noise]

I saw a financial merkin suggest that every pay what is the equivalent of $2 more a week in medicare levy and it would smash the debt quickly

I'd be all for a 1% GST increase - have been forever ... goverments are too scared to do it tho ... if the Libs said they would do it, Labour would use it to make out they are f**kwits harming the poor .... if Labour said they would do it, firstly hell would have frozen over, but then the Libs would accuse them of not looking after their base voters etc etc

Both sides of goverment need to get together privately and make an agreement of a way to pay it off - then present a united front for a change and not be a bunch of bickering merkins

Without having too long to think about it I like the $2 a week idea .