southerntiger
New member
@happy tiger said:@goldcoast tiger said:@cktiger said:Lambie is a dope and Xenaphon a populist politician - waste of votes.
In the end the Liberals pulled the wrong rein - Turnbull is all fluff and was good for them to attract some swinging votes without being made leader.
They wouldn't have done any worse with Abbott - I think the best thing for them now would be somehow to get Julie Bishop to the top.
As for Bill Shorten,he is an insipid leader who looks like he is waiting for someone (a union official?) to give him a slap at any moment.
Plus he's a liar.
What a poor bunch to choose from :unamused:
They are ALL liars when it suits them, Abbot turned lying into an art form, Gillard and Howard told lies , pick a leader who hasn't. I think Noah was the last leader who didn't.
And he probably only told everyone to be prepared for scattered showers.
I was overjoyed when Turnbull rolled that fruitcake Abbottand , would have voted Coalition, but when Turnbull became Abbott series 2 , I changed my mind.
Happy to see it's likely to be a Senate that can block anything too right wing.
These days it's too dangerous to give any major Party the control of BOTH houses
Would have loved to see the restrictions on Negative Gearing though,
I guess we'll just have to watch that legalised Tax Evasion method continue blocking young people from affording a start in their own homes for another 3yrs.
Particularly in the Capital cities
GCT the reason people can't afford him in the cities and country area is pure greed
Greed from everyone involved , including the SELLERS , you and I
Sure thats human nature. So good policy needs to take into account of such motivations. Neg gearing is terrible policy. No one supports it other than for selfish reasons i.e. they are in real estate, construction or already hold investment properties.
It been abandoned in nearly all developed countries because of recognition that it badly distorts the market.
Our tax laws don't allow taxpayers to deduct non-commercial business losses against other income (i.e. losses from businesses that are not intended to make a profit) so why do we allow non-commercial property losses against other income?