Hanson getting back in was annoying but inevitable - snack pack was great though.

Liberals will form Government soon but they have seriously undermined themselves.
A win for them is as good as a loss and will surely start the turnbull overthrow clock ticking.

I think your entertaining weekend will be short lived when reality sets in:
- Pauline Hanson may get up to 4 seats and hold the balance of power in the Senate
- Derryn Hinch & Fred Nile to join the crossbench
- Turnbull to be ousted within 6 months paving the way for a more sinister right-wing conservative side of politics to fill the vacuum that has been left by the more moderate Liberal ministers losing their seats
- Australia to potentially lose its AAA credit rating

Couldn't really get any worse...

People whinge about the crossbenchers and a minority government but it can actually be a good thing. Policies have to actually be debated in the lower house and as what happened in the last term of parliament, controversial policies don't get passed (in the main, metadata retention is a shitful policies that both majors support because it gives them a lot of power in government so they supported it).

If you want a rubber stamp government, move to North Korea or China.

Right....and the liberal government is actually going to propose useful policies or engage in parliamentary debate?

Because last time I checked, this whole election was started because the crossbench refused to bow down to the LNP's policies.

I'd rather another 3 years of a do nothing government than one that will wreck the place. Then guess what will happen? They'll be out on their arse.

Also when you're a minority government, if you're on the nose no confidence motions actually pass.

I am with you on the "do nothing" part as I don't think Governments should really be too involved in our private lives.

But when we are at a point where the national debt is 18% of GDP and at risk of losing our AAA credit rating, we will need economic reform and government that actually DOES something in this regard.

I wouldn't be so worried. A lot of those right wingers in the senate are more populist, than tru neo-cons. When it comes to things like privatisation or govt spending, they would actually have more in common with the left.

I think Hanson will likely end up with a maximum of 2 seats. Derryn Hinch is an interesting one - if you look at his party's website, it is almost all about criminal law issues (which are state-based). I don't see what he would actually be trying to implement at a federal level.

Also, with Xenophon ending up with 3 Senate seats, they will be the voice of reason in that house.

As repugnant as Hanson and Nile are, I actually think it is a good thing that they enter parliament every now and then - they provide a pressure valve that enables the racist minority to voice their anger, and gradually peter out of their own accord.

It is completely locking these voices out of the political structure that builds up huge pressure, and ends up blowing up in unpredictable ways (see Trump and Brexit).

If Turnbull got ousted, and replaced by a conservative PM, they will get comprehensively voted out next election.

Regarding the AAA rating - I think this is slightly overblown. Firstly, I don't think we will lose it, but it is important to note that not many countries do have a AAA rating any more anyway, and also - interest rates are at historical lows, so there won't be much of a financial impact.

And lastly, regarding the Senate - remember this. The Double Dissolution was a one-off event, but the voting reforms are permanent.

The voting quotas were halved, this won't be the case in future. So a lot of those senators will go away at the next election anyway.

A national debt of 18% of GDP is very low. Most comparable countries are up in the 60-80% range.

The issue is that the Libs have conflated 2 different issues regarding debt. We do not have a short-term spending issue. At a time of low growth, and extremely low interest rates, now is the time where accruing debt is a reasonable course of action if the money is spent on things that will help increase our capacity for future growth - infrastructure is the classic example.

But the Libs have just used the debt issue to put the boot into their favourite targets - the poor, unemployed, education etc.

What we definitely do have is a long term structural spending issue - the ALP have tried to address this with negative gearing policy, and changes to super.

I do have to credit the Libs for proposing super changes which would work against one of their core constituencies, but is a necessary structural change.

These changes won't save money in the short term (and won't therefore cut the deficit in the short term), but over time the effect will multiply, and will do a lot to put the long-term budget position into a structural surplus.

Unfortunately, the Libs also proposed company tax cuts, which would erode the tax base. And also it seems they are going to ditch the super changes they proposed.

Here is a pretty cool "Senate calculator" the Guardian has put up:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2016/jul/04/senate-calculator-legislation-pass-after-australian-election-2016

If the ALP forms minority govt, the Senate looks to be pretty reasonable to navigate - ALP + Greens + NXT is enough to pass legislation.

A lot harder for the Libs, as they have to pass things without the Greens support.

If a lot of micro parties get in then it's almost democracy in its purest form....on the surface of it...

But democracy don't mean shit once back room deals are done...I mean it's not like they will go back to their constituents and say " hey guys who should I do back room deals with so you guys get a better deal"

Good summary. We're not in emergency territory, but tweaks need to be made. All these government forecasts on "returning to surplus" are based on the economic conditions (many global) improving. The government spending more in lean times is completely reasonable.

On past history, I think the senate is pretty unworkable for the Libs.

Labor 73 seats + greens and wilkie to make 75. Dunno enough about Cathy McGowan may be able to be coerced? and I think NXT will be happy if they could sit on the fence so maybe Sharkie as speaker. I think that'd be workable.

i hate it when people pull out the " oh but our debt is lower compared to other countries card" to excuse getting into more debt.
It's a bit like if I had a 500k mortgage and I was paying a shit load of interest compared to
The guy with 2 million dollar mortgage , but I say it's ok " he's got the bigger debt "](*,)
Debt is debt ..just sweeping it under the carpet by saying someone else has a larger one doesn't make it go away
Off with fairies again are we:roll:



Edited by Socawho: 4/7/2016 10:51:51 AM

Edited by Socawho: 4/7/2016 10:54:52 AM

If they can get together 72 seats and crossbenchers, ALP may be able to bypass the idiotic plebiscite and pass marriage equality in its own right.

Repeat after me, mate.

"Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage. Sovereign debt is not synonymous with a mortgage."

I understand why you have this opinion because pollies have been using this analogy for years but household debt is not the same thing. A more important thing to look at is the inflation rates (which are in my opinion too low at the moment).

Or you can look at what notor posted :lol:

Edited by mcjules: 4/7/2016 10:57:02 AM

I never said it was the same thing
Debt is debt ...money borrowed money needs to be paid back

Edited by Socawho: 4/7/2016 11:00:44 AM

How on earth can we even fathom something as trivial as gay marriage when Medicare is on the verge of being destroyed by the libs arrgghhh

Eventually. What exactly are you concerned about? Defaulting? The Australian government owns the (virtual) printing press, it can't default. The issue is printing more money means more inflation, but go have a look at the inflation figures. We're no where near a position where that's going to be an issue. Basically the government needs to do what it can in this period of slow global growth to keep the economy stable.

Not according to notroganic. He thinks its magical money that falls from the sky and never ever has to be repaid. Countries like Greece are an incredible example of what one country can achieve when you borrow beyond your means and don't pay your dues. He thinks we should raise more debt sow e can flourish like Ireland and Greece.

I wouldn't be so confident about the markets as you two are. From what I have been reading, a credit rating downgrade will likely increase the cost of funding for Australia’s banks, resulting in higher interest rates for borrowers & as a consequence effecting the housing market. Furthermore, a downgrade could increase the government’s borrowing costs.

If labour get elected will they give me $900 or whatever Kevin07 gave me?

The rusty meltdown is quite fun. Roll on, brother.

That's not an issue anymore because the voters have ensured it won't happen.





The co-payment and other stuff they tried in this term was the catalyst. People were already worried.

Is this a serious question?

Yes but borrowing costs are EXTREMELY low at the moment. My argument is that the downgrading (which I don't think will happen) is much less important than it would have been 15 years ago.

Not really, but I wouldn't say no to if Shorten offered it to me :lol:

Things globally would need to be in pretty dire straights for another targeted stimulus like that to be put on the table.

But thanks to the non-action of the Americans on the financial capers that caused the 2008 crisis in the first place and that these things are by nature cyclical, it's likely that it will happen again very soon. I'd be surprised if the next major crash (I'm not counting short-term Brexit hysterics) was any later than 2017-18 financial year.

Peak of the crash is a great time to invest and grow your wealth if you play your cards right. That's why wealth inequality has only grown exponentially since 2008.

Definitely - but also once you remove the Greens from the equation, Libs would need 9 out of 10 or the "crazies" to get stuff through.

I think if the lower house situation ends up in minority govt territory (which it seems like it will) this will mean the ALP is in the box seat.

For one, the greens have definitively ruled out any deal with the Libs.

Secondly, no matter what you think of Shorten, he has spent his whole working life negotiating in his life as a union official, and then an ALP number cruncher.

I'd argue he is much more capable, and likely, than the Libs to be able to cut a deal that works for the ALP.

Libs only hope is to get to 76 seats on their own. Which seems relatively unlikely at this stage.