Budget 2016/17: Malcolm Turnbull ‘quietly confident’ of re-election

Malcolm Turnbull is confident of re-election, saying he’ll win off the back of the budget.

Budget 2016/17: Malcolm Turnbull ‘quietly confident’ of re-election

Within the next few days, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is expected to announce a 2 July election which, based on the Federal Budget, he says he is “quietly confident” of winning.

The PM has told news sources that on 2 July Australians will have their chance to decide who will be the country’s next leader, and he believes the election will be won based on which party has the better economic policies.

"I'm quietly confident that the Australian people will give us another term in government, but you can't take anything for granted and it's a two-horse race and it's a choice," said Mr Turnbull. "It's a choice between me and Bill Shorten.

Claiming Budget 2016/17 is not a short-term fix aimed at garnering votes in the next election, Mr Turnbull firmly believes that voters will back the Coalition based on its financial policies.

"We'll be going to the election with a positive national economic plan," he said.

However, even members of the PM’s own party aren’t so sure that will be the case, saying this budget was a “fudged opportunity”. Whilst it does the Coalition no major disservice, according to departing Western Australian Liberal MP Dennis Jensen, it’s “a budget that essentially does nothing”.

It seems that electioneering has already begun, with Mr Turnbull wasting no time in attacking Labor’s policies. The PM has also called out Opposition Leader Bill Shorten for trying to start a “class war” because of Labor’s disapproval of the Coalition’s new income tax policy, the lowering of the company tax rate and its treatment of what is to be considered ‘small business’.

"They're arguing that people who earn $80,000 a year are rich," he said. "Labor doesn't want them to benefit from a tax cut ... that the type of war of envy, the politics of envy which absolutely stands in the way of aspiration and enterprise and growth."

The PM is expected to announce the 2016 Federal Election on Friday or over the weekend.

Read more at www.abc.net.au

Opinion: Election battle lines being drawn

Now that Budget 2016/17 is out of the way, the next step for the Coalition is securing government for the next term – and the PM may have a couple of aces up his sleeve to help his party over the line.

The Coalition’s cards are all but on the table – all except that mysterious $1.6 billion in expenses for “decisions taken but not yet announced”. These expenses are as yet for unknown budget announcements, but many are referring to them as a ‘war chest’ to be used to fight the upcoming election. Finance Minister Mathias Cormann has confirmed the ‘buried coffers’, but has played them down as ‘something governments do’.

And he’s right. In the past, most governments have set aside funds to help them in an election war. In fact, the Parliamentary Library has tracked this occurrence over the last 12 budgets, and says it’s nothing out of the ordinary.

But Opposition finance spokesperson Penny Wong feels the Government may be up to something, and expects there to be some last-minute “nasties” it is currently trying to hide from voters.

So, with the Coalition’s financial policies outlined in Budget 2016/17, the Opposition has its chance to do the same today, with Labor Leader Bill Shorten due to make his party’s case for election in his budget response tonight.

It is expected that the Opposition Leader will announce taxes and savings measures that will fund spending on services such as health, education, renewable energy and housing affordability, as well as an increased tobacco excise and superannuation changes. But, no doubt, he will also take a few pot shots at the Government for its budget being “fundamentally unfair” to the working class and instead prioritising big business over good old Aussie battlers.

Malcolm Turnbull’s claims of being “quietly confident” of winning the next election is bold, but it may be premature. With the lowest Government Confidence Rating since Malcolm Turnbull became Prime Minister, the Coalition may have more of a fight on its hands than it is publicly acknowledging. And if the PM’s intention is to clear out seats to refill them with more ‘malleable’ MPs, then he may receive a rude awakening. According to Roy Morgan Research, if Australia went to the polls today, it would most likely result in a hung Parliament.

The Coalition is, as usual, doing all it can to look after its wealthy constituents, at the expense of the less well-off – including older Australians. As Debbie McTaggart points out, the changes to super do very little for retirees and the PM’s youth jobs plan, whilst commendable, will, if successful, further reduce employment opportunities for older workers. If you had the option to pay someone $4 per hour over paying a minimum wage to an older worker, what would you do?

And say what you may about Bill Shorten, he has solidified his party into a force to be reckoned with, he’s a seasoned campaigner and Labor’s policies are, let’s just say, a little more focused on improving conditions for the average Australian.

As far as the PM hoping to win off the back of this budget? Well, as far as political pundit Barrie Cassidy is concerned, Scott Morrison’s first budget won’t help – that advantage will have to come from elsewhere.

Either way, the battle lines for the next Federal Election are being drawn. Stay tuned for more political pantomime involving scare campaigns, policy attacks, and ‘he said, she said’ daytime soap-styled electioneering.

Do you think the PM is right to be confident of winning the next election? Would you vote for the Coalition based on its budget? What would Bill Shorten have to do to get your vote? Do you think that the Government is justified in holding back $1.6 billion for ‘pork barrelling’ marginal seats at the 2016 Federal Election?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Mike
    5th May 2016
    10:12am
    Why would you vote for the Liberals. Hockey called disabled people rorters whilst he and his cronies rorted the travel allowance to pay for their Canberra Holiday houses. Bronwyn Bishop and her ilk rorted hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars. The Liberals destroyed the retirement plans of an estimated 560000 retirees who worked and saved under then current Centrelink guidelines and vowed NEVER ever to vote Liberal ever again. Scott Morrisson allowed the sale of our biggest dairy , a huge chunk of Tasmania, to the Chinese. We will never get any benefit from it, and our kids will suffer for it in the long term. Why would anyone ever vote for those Liberal rorters ever again.
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    10:33am
    Why would anyone vote for Labor either? Labor spent the money and then sided with the Greens to stop the Liberals trying to fix it.

    I read that only maybe 300,000 may have had their nice to have extra money and benefits taking away or reduced.

    Nothing has changed with my retirement plans other than I may lose a few bob in franking credit with lowering of the tax rate on companies. However this will be more than made up with the increase in dividends.

    Do you really think Labor would have stood in the way of that diary sale?
    Tom Tank
    5th May 2016
    11:09am
    Ah Bonny I give you full marks for sticking to the Party line.
    Figures clearly show that as a percentage of GDB the current Government has outspent the ALP. Not buy much grant you but it doesn't point to an inconsistency in the statements about Labor being bigger spenders than the Libs.
    It is obvious from your statements as to which end of town, financially speaking, from which you hail.
    Don't overlook the fact that Abbott's plan to fix the Budget emergency (which seems to have magically disappeared) was going to be at the cost of the ordinary Australian. I guess you would have been safe.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    12:34pm
    Ah Bonny, the trolls are at it early with the normal misinformation and accusations.
    The budget is a budget for lowering the taxes for the rich. I said as much weeks before the budget and it has come to pass.
    Whatever sweeteners were in the budget for ordinary Australians we should all expect another 'Abbott backflip after the election is done and dusted.' Who in their right mind does not believe that there are lies waiting to be thrown in the bin?
    The government has been fairly sneaky. At the last election it stitched up working mums with the lie of Paid PArental Leave. This time around they have stitched up small business and extended tax cuts to ALL BUSINESS.....the rich!
    In the end one has to ignore the media propaganda campaign which already appears to have started from the 7, 9 and 10 networks and focus on 'trust'. Given the Abbott era who would trust this bunch as far as they could throw them. 'He lied'!!!!
    We hear a lot about "managing the finances of the country". Voters need to remember that Labor ran smaller deficits than the current government and that Australians got something out of it: the NBN, Gonski, etc....which Turnbull has butchered, costing us more.
    I am sick of the government's Royal Commissions into the opposition whilst refusing to look into the real corruption: the the financial relationship between this government and business. Methinks there is likely fraud on a large scale, which will remain off limits until a federal ICAC is established.
    We truly need an election. Hopefully the mentally challenged can remember the last few years, the deceit and the lies when they show up to vote.
    KSS
    5th May 2016
    1:11pm
    " Voters need to remember that Labor ran smaller deficits than the current government and that Australians got something out of it: the NBN, Gonski, etc...."

    MICK, MICK, MICK......ALP sure did, pink batts that burnt down houses and cost lives, school halls that cost far more then they should have and in many cases were not the building the school actually needed, $900 to dead people and those living overseas, influx of 50,000 on leaky boats all demanding Commonwealth 'support'.......In 6 years under Labor how many people actually got the NBN? Gonski largess was largely unfunded and what about the NDIS? That was never costed or funded even for the first year. Its easy to give away Commonwealth money when you know you are not going to have to account for it.

    You talk constantly about 'He lied'!!!! when referring to Mr Abbott. Frankly why would you care? Unless you live in his electorate you would never have voted for him nor would you in this next election. And you can't tell me that either Ms Gillard (remember the carbon tax?) or Mr Rudd or even Mr Shorten are without stain on the truthfulness score. As for Mr Shorten looking out for the 'little end of town (as opposed to the others at the big end of town), don't kid yourself. Mr Shorten did nothing for the union members when negotiating working condition deals that only benefitted himself and his union officials.

    You will of course resort to calling me a paid NLP troll. But without the need to insult the Australian electorate, I too hope that people "can remember the last few years, the deceit and the lies when they show up to vote".
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:29pm
    KSS: what part of SMALLER DEFICITS do you not understand?

    Your misunderstanding of getting a return on capital defies logic. Surely you are not that dumb, rusted on or indifferent to be able to look at the facts.

    We had pink batts and solar hot water. These are doing a fantastic job on my roof. Yes, U understand that the coal industry had to finish off the competition and get rid of renewable energy.

    School halls and infrastructure: You show your ignorance. State schools had been neglected for many decades and were falling down whilst government subsidised schools went with out nothing, including swimming pools.

    NBN: Your assertions are desperation. The NBN was rolling out SLOWLY. Still is. The only difference is that now we are experiencing problem because Turnbull has tried to mix 2 technologies. And the cost of this has blown out to much more than the cost of the entire job TO THE PREMISES. And of course de now have FTTN. Substandard and dodgy in every way. Just like Turnbull!

    Boat arrivals: I agree with you on that one. That was always my policy. I commend Abbott for implementing it.

    'He lied': Well that is the issue is it not. Gillard, one lie...and Alan Jones started a "she lied" on his program. Abbott, multiple lies. No comment. It says heaps about the role of the media in this country.

    Gonski: Education is one of the great levellers. If the schools of the rich are to have everything imaginable including one on one coaching then state schools deserve the same. If you want to talk about unfunded then have a close look at the budget for the same deal.

    Your post is what I would expect from you KSS. Full of the normal BS and lacking truth and for the most part facts.

    I do truly hope that voters remember who this government was after with its (caught out) lie of a "Budget Emergency" so it could justify putting taxes on anything which ordinary Australians require in their lives whilst at the same time giving the top end huge tax cuts. And I imagine you have not heard that the divide between rich and poor has been growing significantly for the past few decades. Of course the poor do not have Tax Havens. Nor do they have specialist accounts to get their taxable income (the only figure that matters) down to zilch.

    Let's talk about the facts and who this government is governing for KSS. IT AIN'T WORKING AUSTRALIANS OR RETIREES!
    KSS
    5th May 2016
    1:46pm
    What? No come back for Mr Shorten and his stitch up of working union members then?

    Talk about one-eyed desperation MICK. You set a very good example of that.
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    1:47pm
    MICK, KSS is right!
    Labor have a black hole of $62b over a 4 year estimate. Labor are the high spenders and the high taxers.
    If we don't brace ourselves and take a conservative approach we will find it much harder to get off the canvas. If we ever do. Is that what you want for your kids?
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:13pm
    Try it on as you like government tag team.
    There is no response to the facts you choose to ignore. Never is other than your normal BS.
    I'll tell you what: get the government to legislate for an INDEPENDENT FEDERAL ICAC with wide ranging powers to investigate ALL FRAUD and ALL CORRUPTION at the highest levels and I'll accept any finding they make. Including union corruption. What do you say?
    Of course you will not go there will you?
    Many Australians can see that money is flowing from big business and the rich to the Liberal Party. And this is not fro free! Likely bribery and fraud. Let's put it on the table boys to clear the air! What do you say??????
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    3:14pm
    MICK, when you say ICAC it just cracks me up.
    Anonymous
    5th May 2016
    3:57pm
    @ Mike, I think that the number of people denied further DSP payments shows that there were indeed some "rorters". As to the sale of the Tasmanian dairy property, you might have mentioned that the owners were not Australians so the sale moved the property from one foreign owner to another.

    @ Tom Tank, your figures may be right about deficits and debt but perhaps you could have mentioned the Labor legislation that still is ongoing and the way the Senate blocked attempts to reduce the costs of many departments including the Climate Commission.

    @MICK, I apologise, I thought Abbott was a backbencher but it seems that this election will still be dependent on his honesty. As regards school funding, I agree that all schools should have the same facilities and to that end can I suggest that all schools should now charge each and every student the same fees as the private schools. And I can't agree with voting Independent because unless you have a "hung" parliament an Independent is virtually useless. Normally they cannot get support for any legislation they propose and funds for infrastructure rarely make their way to an Independent's electorate. I can't begin to imagine a parliament where all of the members are Independent, which way would they vote and would there be any loyalty to support unpopular decisions?
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:01pm
    As expected Frank.
    Rae
    5th May 2016
    4:01pm
    It doesn't matter which party wins. Interest rates are not going up nor investment returns. ROE is dropping for most companies, banks etc and so dividends will fall. Bonds are down, property down. We will be lucky to make 2.5% a year. Investment returns are down.

    As Bonny said it would have been nice if the government had not betrayed self funded retirees but they did betray them. All three major parties.

    AS far as I can see there is money for non savers and businesses but not for hard working savers on very ordinary wages.

    I'll vote independents in future. Probably for whoever wants to cut the million extra immigrants every three years or so because we simply don't have the water to support them.
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    4:19pm
    Rae, I agree with your view on ROE dropping and if you look at the 10 and 15 year bond rates, they're almost flat lining. All things considered I'm pleased the RBA has stepped in to try stopping the A$ from rising. Everyone could possibly feel betrayed by all politicians but these are very unusual circumstances. What annoys me is that we no longer have politicians with courage. They are all being bullied into cowardice by the media. They are all telling us what we want to hear and I find that dangerous.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:22pm
    We cannot escape the bigger world economy we live in Rae. And yes savers have been betrayed in favour of gamblers.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:22pm
    We cannot escape the bigger world economy we live in Rae. And yes savers have been betrayed in favour of gamblers.
    HarrysOpinion
    5th May 2016
    5:24pm
    Hey Bonny, which 'diary' sale? Tony Abbot's memoirs? Bronwyn Bishop's?
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    6:03pm
    Mick if you got both pink batts and solar hot water subsidies you broke the rules. You could only have one or the other.

    Do you think I should tell ICAC?
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    9:01pm
    Tell the ICAC about election funding = repeal of Carbon Tax, election funding = repeal of mining tax, election funding = no scrutiny on big banks.
    If all you have is pink batts and solar heaters you have nothing. They were not corruption at work. I might think that the above are, but we will never know because the relationship is a hidden and protected process.
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    10:11pm
    Mick you should know that neither the mining tax or the carbon tax worked for their correct purpose.
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    10:15pm
    Mick I stole a pen from one of the big banks today. Do you think I should give it back?
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:33am
    No need to steal a pen from the banks... they will GIVE them to you for nothing.... your act today has a rather Homer Simpson tang to it....

    "Whoo-hoo! Fooled 'em! Got me a free pen!"

    "Ahh, Mr Simpson... the banks are giving them away."

    "D'OH!"
    ex PS
    10th May 2016
    12:52pm
    KSS, seems that your dog like loyalty to your party has led you to believe everything they say no matter how absurd.
    For a start pink bats, the responsibility for safety and quality of service in the workplace is always held by the contractor who employs the workforce not the government providing the subsidy.
    The school halls scheme, the procurement method normally employed in such purchases would normally take months and even then the job would not necessarily go to the cheapest bidder, things that would impact on the decision would include availability of the builder to start on the date required, demonstrated quality of work, demonstrated ability to complete similar sized projects, necessary company infrastructure, the list is endless.
    What people seem to ignore is the fact that the government was trying to provide immediate stimulus to the economy, to have followed the normal process would not have provided the stimulus quick enough and would even then probably not been much more cost effective.
    I don,t know about you but I wouldn't like my kids sitting in a hall that was built by a builder selected for the sole reason that he provided the cheapest quote.
    buby
    13th May 2016
    11:04am
    http://www.alp.org.au/

    http://greens.org.au/

    https://nxt.org.au/

    https://www.liberal.org.au/

    http://nationals.org.au/
    So we should all go and check out these sites, and weight up who should we vote for next. I won't be voting Labor and i won't be voting liberal either.
    We have to make up our minds soon.
    There's lots of reading to do :) chop chop ppls :)
    Chris B T
    5th May 2016
    10:13am
    It really doesn't matter who wins it will be a Rabbit.
    How lucky we are Both Parties only have Rabbits all through there Ranks.
    Be carefull of Rabbits with Mixo and then there is Callicky virus ones.
    We are free of Foot and Mouth, but wait the election proccess has just started.
    No winners, we as always the looser.
    ;-(o)
    buby
    13th May 2016
    11:07am
    Well to avoid all those deseases, chose wisely Chris

    http://www.alp.org.au/

    http://greens.org.au/

    https://nxt.org.au/

    https://www.liberal.org.au/

    http://nationals.org.au/

    Study hard, and pick one that will do the right thing for the ppl, and not run us round like we are on a merry go Round, Cause i'm a bit fed UP with it all.
    BrianP
    5th May 2016
    10:54am
    Some words come to mind about the current government and its leader. Devious, cloak and dagger, smug, out-of-touch, favouring the rich.

    But of all these perhaps the worst is that they are so out-of-touch with everyday Australians that they are in danger of leaving the planet!
    Fredklaus
    5th May 2016
    10:59am
    LIKE,WE shold have a like button like FB
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:34pm
    Are you kidding Brian? This bunch know full well what their intentions are. They are now doing it. Transferring money from poor to rich and taxing poor to pay for it.
    Though you were a bit more astute.
    BJ
    5th May 2016
    11:02am
    Last night i heard the treasurer saying stop thinking whats in this for me well i will when the politicians stop thinking whats in it for them they have all the lurks and perks that we only dream of funny how they can reduce business tax over the next ten years there for reducing billions or dollars revenue and we cant find two bob for our pensioners also sick and tired of hearing that there is a lot of baby boomers planning to retire or have already retired no one complained about the number of baby boomers when we were all paying our taxes and the people in power misspent the money or gave it away i will only vote for whoever will look after our pensioners also dont get to cocky Tunrbull
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    11:04am
    Well maybe you just shouldn't vote because I can't see any of them looking after the pensioners as there is no money left in the till for them.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:35pm
    Please do vote BJ. Just remember what this government has done to average Australians during the past few years...and vote accordingly!
    Rae
    5th May 2016
    4:06pm
    If they lose the 25% of pensioners vote they'll care Bonny. Whoever can get it will do very well. I hope it is the Mature Age Party. I'd like to see another spannner in the works. As far as no money in the kitty. Not true. Just another lie they've told you Bonny.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:25pm
    This government takes retirees for granted. It lives in the belief that older people will vote as they always have...and quite a few do. But there is change in the air too and this government has been on the nose since Abbott lied his way into power. Let's hope that reasoning triumphs over propaganda on the TV this time around.
    HarrysOpinion
    5th May 2016
    5:48pm
    Rae, if 36% of pensioners live in poverty and will not vote for the Liberal Party, where did you get the figure of 25% from?
    Anyway, I believe there will be no landslide mandate for the Liberals this time round and I dread the thought of another hung Lower House parliament.The outcome for the Senate will be interesting to watch.

    A happy and prosperous country is one where the government creates the right balance between the rich and the poor.
    HarrysOpinion
    5th May 2016
    5:48pm
    Rae, if 36% of pensioners live in poverty and will not vote for the Liberal Party, where did you get the figure of 25% from?
    Anyway, I believe there will be no landslide mandate for the Liberals this time round and I dread the thought of another hung Lower House parliament.The outcome for the Senate will be interesting to watch.

    A happy and prosperous country is one where the government creates the right balance between the rich and the poor.
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:34am
    I look forward to a hung parliament... let the bastards work for their money and perks for a change.
    Anonymous
    6th May 2016
    6:55am
    I think a hung parliament would be the best outcome. We have a choice of appalling, thoroughly appalling, or totally disastrous. Not much of a choice. But anyone who supports this LNP is a stinking Neoliberal elitist who wants a return to feudal society conditions. Heaven help us all if this disgusting mob are re-elected. Destroy public health and education, wipe out the income of struggling retirees, and drive the poorest families further into poverty to give nearly $17000 to those on salaries of $1 million, tax cuts to anyone earning more than $80,000, and tax cuts to big multinational companies that send all their profits overseas? How can that NOT send the economy spiralling further downhill?

    But according to Bonny, it's okay because it WON'T HURT HER. And it ONLY crucifies a few hundred thousand retirees. That makes it acceptable. Never mind fairness or economic wisdom, folks. All that matters is Bonny's well-being. How utterly and disgustingly selfish!
    Rae
    6th May 2016
    8:31am
    HS I may be wrong but I believe I read that figure somewhere recently. It was all retirees though not only the welfare pensioners.

    36% of pensioners receiving the Government aged pension live in poverty but I was referring to all including self funded.

    Have just read the newsletter from my accountant and it could affect Bonny who happily runs a SMSF as I do believe, I'll need to read it again and check, that lump sum withdrawal rules have been changed.

    It may suit us all to become self employed as there is an increase there in tax cuts from 5% to 10% and increasing over time to 16%.

    That sort of cut may just be better than super but we will have to start a little business and hire out our labour to get it.

    Transition to retirement has been affected and the nasty change is to the tax paid on superannuation by your spouse or kids if you die leaving money in your fund. Hmm.

    I could have misread the jargon but my accountant tends to be on the job and it is worth checking all this out if you have any money in super.

    As I've always said the sovereign risk for super is enormous.
    Anonymous
    7th May 2016
    7:01am
    Rae,

    Yes, there is a tax on money left in super when you die. I believe it was Costello who introduced the '''death tax by stealth''. It does not apply to money left to your spouse or to other dependants, but certainly applies to money left to your adult children.

    ''Although superannuation death benefits are tax-free when paid to individuals considered ‘dependants under the tax laws’, a ‘death tax’ continues to apply when super monies are paid to individuals considered ‘non-dependants under the tax laws’.

    Refer to http://www.superguide.com.au/smsfs/beware-the-dastardly-death-tax for more detail.
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    8:20am
    Rae your statement of...... "36% of pensioners receiving the Government aged pension live in poverty but I was referring to all including self funded."

    Given that the balance are homeowners, assuming that a homeowner is not living in poverty (if they are it is a personal choice), this 36% will be looking forward to an increase in their pension in January.
    I applaude Abbott for this move to rebalance the welfare bill and get the money into the hands of those who need it the most!
    Why give pensions to $millionaires while 36% of pensioners aren't getting enough???
    maxchugg
    10th May 2016
    11:42am
    For once Q&A was worth watching. A lowly family man wiped the floor with the experts on the panel, most of whom were totally out of touch with pensioners and those on low incomes.

    Cassandra Goldie, introduced as the head of the Council of Social Services commented that the current government was cutting pensions, cutting welfare, reducing unemployment payments which had not in creased in decades, and transferring people from invalid pensions to unemployment benefits.

    Kelly O'Dwyer, Assistant Treasurer immediately demonstrated that she was suffering from the Joe Hockey syndrome, totally out of touch with people earning less than $80,000 a year, and argued that not increasing unemployment payments is not a cut.

    If unemployment benefits do not keep place with inflation, that is effectively an income cut which can do nothing other than to take welfare recipients deeper into poverty.

    The poor in this country are being severely disadvantaged by the fact that their parliamentary representatives have been wealthy for most, if not all of their lives. They would not have a hope of understanding the point made by the lowly paid worker that a $7000 per year tax cut for someone earning $80,000 per year would make an insignificant difference to his life style. The same cut to people on the minimum wage could be the difference between deciding whether or not the kids go to the pictures.

    The time has come when those on low incomes should be able to realistically aspire to enter the parliament, thereby ensuring that all sections of society have better representation than is currently the case.

    5th May 2016
    11:16am
    "quietly confident" - just like the conman he is.
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    11:30am
    I know the LNP will get back in.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:36pm
    Straight from your employer Bronnie.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    1:42pm
    I think it will be a tragedy for Australia if either of the major parties gets in.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:15pm
    If the current batch get back then you will suffer even more. Despite claims to the contrary WHO DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO PAY FOR TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH?
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    4:35pm
    The Pension pay Rises will now be linked to the Zimbabwe CPI :-)
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:35am
    Damn, parti.. I was hoping for at least par with the Faroffistani Drachma.... a thousand of those will get you a cup of coffee a day...
    Joy
    5th May 2016
    11:25am
    It's got me beat who do you vote for .Wouldn't vote Labour in a fit and the Libs have lost my confidence .The unemployed could have done with a boost they are well below the poverty line the pensioners also should have got a rise .The politician's are in a world of their own they have no concept how ordinary people live .I always thought we should have paid out super into one pool that would cover everyone's pensions and get ride of the means test on any other assets you have worked hard to accumulate that would stop people using super to minimise their taxes .There is no incentive to work hard
    Polly Esther
    5th May 2016
    12:28pm
    Vote for?
    Might as well toss a coin in the air, but first make sure there's a string attached to it, can't afford to lose that coin at this moment.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:37pm
    Pretty simple Joy. Do you want to see higher taxes on working Australians and more tax cuts for the wealthy or not? If the answer is yes to the above then God help us.
    Snowwhite
    5th May 2016
    2:08pm
    Joy it's obvious you have never voted Labor as you can't even spell it! At least be honest.
    Vote your Conservateves in as they will need every vote they can get.
    Rae
    6th May 2016
    8:39am
    Joy there is incentive to set up a self employed business as income tax off set is now 10% and will gradually increase to 16%.

    As the population ages I see a need for young service providers at reasonable prices to do those jobs about the house that are increasingly hard for the elderly.

    Even cooking and supplying a meal that beats meals on wheels, shopping, visiting a doctor, washing, changing sheets, cleaning, windows, gardening services etc. None of which requires much training but requires effort and motivation.

    This tax off set is incentive to young workers with an idea and the back bone to have a go with it.
    maxchugg
    6th May 2016
    11:58am
    What we need is fiscal responsibility which is more likely to come Liberal than Labor. But Liberals always favour the wealthy, a trend that has been followed by Labor in recent times, hence the ongoing transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
    Politicians of all colours quickly adapt to a lifestyle where they enjoy a wonderful standard of living and no fears of unemployment thanks to the massive golden handshakes they receive if they get dumped by the electorate.
    A dose of reality in the form of fear of the dole queues in the event of a politician losing his seat would improve the performance of most of them but this won't happen because they won't allow it to happen.
    At the coming election I will not be following my usual policy of voting for the opposition but I will be attempting to ensure that the government does not control the senate. A senate under the control of the government is nothing better than a huge, expensive, useless rubber stamp, which is exactly what Malcolm wants.
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    12:08pm
    maxchugg, instead of saying "But Liberals always favour the wealthy," why not try Liberals always favour the employers and workers, because to do otherwise would be no good for Australia. It would be no good for welfare recipients as well.
    Anonymous
    7th May 2016
    6:52am
    Frank, ''Liberals always favour employers and workers'' simply isn't true, as demonstrated by the recent budget.

    A single parent WORKER on $60,000 is over $4000 worse off, while a someone $1 million a year (and please don't tell me ANYONE who earns $1 million a year works hard!) gets at tax cut of almost $17000. The LNP robbed WORKERS who slogged their whole life to save a few bob for a decent retirement, after telling them for years to invest in super. And if they do have anything left when they die, thanks to the LNP, it will be heavily taxed.

    WORKERS who don't earn high salaries are repeatedly screwed by the LNP, so please don't give us this BS about them favouring workers. Employers - yes, IF the employer is well to do, and especially IF the employer wants to dodge tax obligations by profit shifting etc. Battling SMEs? Forget it. The LNP doesn't even know what a small business is. Turncoat thinks small businesses have a $1 billion turnover!

    Favouring WORKERS would be very good for Australia. But the LNP doesn't!
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    8:05am
    Rainey the latest poll has 60% of people saying their financial position is unchanged following the budget announcement while 7% believe they will be worse off.
    Among those worse off will be the superannuation members who have a balance over $1.6m. The additional tax will also be retrospective to 2007. There are more than 95,000 people affected.
    By the way, did you notice how during the Rudd / Gillard years big business flourished while small business suffered?
    maxchugg
    7th May 2016
    2:03pm
    Frank. Please nominate one instance of a Liberal budget which has not favoured the wealthy over the poor.
    I agree that giving a slight advantage to employers is in the best interests of everyone, but what we have seen in the last few decades is a massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
    As for the latest poll producing the results you claim, it is currently meaningless because it will take a number of months before anyone is able to make a valid judgment of their new financial position until all of the flow on effects come into play.
    On the other hand, Rainey's comments are based on known facts, our millionaire PM has looked after his wealthy mates with substantial tax cuts for them and practically nothing for everyone else.
    I repeat, if those on low to middle class incomes allow the Liberals to control the senate, they should expect a hard time until the next election when a Labor win will be assured.
    Finally, a reminder. I am, and always have been, a swinging voter.
    Anonymous
    11th May 2016
    6:04pm
    Frank, the latest poll actually showed a whopping 93% of people said they would be worse off as a result of the budget. 6% said their position would be improved - and they are ALL high income earners.

    I would have thought it wouldn't take a poll to determine what percentage would be worse off. You only have to look at the numbers in the budget. When you are giving $16000+ to $1 million pa. earners and taking $4000 from $60,000 a year families, it's pretty damned obvious what the result will be. I mean, we all know there's a hell of a lot more $60,000 a year families than $1 million a year earners. Well, maybe we don't all know? Maybe the well-off are even more obtuse than we suspect.
    Adrianus
    12th May 2016
    6:36am
    Joy I don't understand? You say the unemployed should be paid more to be unemployed. Then you go on to say there is no incentive to work? Are you asking for further disincentive to work?
    bletch
    5th May 2016
    11:32am
    I voted this government in. I am so disappointed in the way they treat the pensioners in that I will not vote for them again. Nor will I vote for the Labor party either. I know one of them will invariably be voted in. I will be voting for a Senior's party and I hope my PROTEST vote will make the major parties realise that their numbers are well down this election. I hope others follow suit!
    BJ
    5th May 2016
    11:37am
    Thats what i intend to do Bletch and suggest others do the same stand up and show them we wont be pushed around
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:39pm
    I just hope that remember the intention election lies from Abbott and who this government has come after whilst giving the already wealthy huge tax cuts the other night. I will be.
    Anonymous
    6th May 2016
    6:58am
    I agree voting for minors or independents is tempting, but be very careful to check where the preferences will go. You could be voting LNP by default.
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    7:58am
    A vote for an "Independent is a vote for Labor and the Unions.
    Rae
    6th May 2016
    8:43am
    Frank as only 13% of workers are represented by a union and most of those are public servants needing a middleman to deal with the government I do believe you are very wrong.

    If unionism was as strong as the media have us believe then wages wouldn't be the stagnating mess they are right now and bosses would not be ripping workers off blithely left, right and centre.

    There would be no talk of penalty rate cuts either and skilled trades like car mechanics, hairdressers etc would pay more than the minimum wage.
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    9:54am
    You believe what you want Rae, it doesn't change the facts.
    The Unions have their own political party.
    The Unions will make any deals with anyone to gain power as we saw with the loss of border control last time they were in government. Intentional or incompetence?
    I'll let you work that one out.

    65% of preference votes go to Labor.

    You will need to explain to me please, the relationship and relevance in the size of union membership? I realise that membership has dropped from 40% of the workforce to close to your 13% during the last 20 years. Is there anyone not surprised by that?
    If you wish to turn the discussion to "the strength of the unions" then look no further than the $12m golden handshake to a union boss.
    The $20m donated to the Rudd and Gillard election campaigns.
    The $500,000 donated to the Greens.
    The $1.2m donated to GetUp.
    The Unions have increased fees to members in preparation for this election. It was the Keating government which started the decline in union membership by withdrawing from the collective bargaining process.
    Rae
    7th May 2016
    4:14pm
    Exactly Frank. I don't follow a political team. I'm afraid we live in difficult times.

    I'd like to see all three parties heaved out into the wilderness to get their act together. I know that isn't possible and your team will probably win then we will see just how much better they make it for us all. I certainly won't be holding my breathe though.
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    5:07pm
    Rae, I don't know that they're my team.
    I am considering voting for ALA.
    They are strong in traditional Australian values and have a focus on small business, which is where I think Australia's success lies.

    I am disappointed with Turnbull going retrospective to 2007 on his increased tax on high super balances. Not that it affects me. I don't place that level of faith in something that changes so often and at the whim of a politician.
    My main concern is that Bill Shorten does not win this election. I will be very much afraid for the future of this country if Labor are returned while the economy is in such an early stage of it's transitional period.
    Faith/Hope
    5th May 2016
    11:38am
    I would like to see a slap in the face for the government & opposition, & a rise in voting for Independants & minor parties. Sure, the government couldn't function as we know it, but it might mean they wake up to the fact that we, the people, need to be represented, not just the self-appointed elite.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:40pm
    Well said. Just remember to ask who the candidate is preferencing. If the current government then pick another who does not preference the Turnbull government.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    1:54pm
    I intend to vote Independents as a matter of principle following the attempt to cut them out of the electoral process and install the absolute predominance of the major parties in the Senate as well as the House. I see no value or virtue in having a House and a Senate that can be dominated by the incumbent Party - what form of government is that other than a dictatorship?

    There is and never has been any absolute mandate vested in a party to do anything it wants when in power - they are bound by their promises and by decency and common sense - government is not a free-for-all - and destroying one of the checks and balances by reducing the Senate to major parties only is a move by a government that could rightly be suspected of seeking to impose tyranny on the people.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:17pm
    You are sending a message TREBOR. That is what AUstralians who refuse to be groomed should be doing.
    ex PS
    12th May 2016
    10:48am
    We must put our faith in the Independants and hope they can control the political vampires who are systematically driving a good country into the ground.
    I will no longer be a mindless drone auomatically voting for one or the other of the so called major party's.
    I intend to one of the King makers who actually makes their vote count.
    Vote for LNP or labor if you want but they are so close in all ways your vote will be cancelled out by someone voting for the so called other side, the voters who will make the difference will be those who vote Independant.
    Adrianus
    12th May 2016
    11:10am
    ex PS, No doubt you will find an Independent who preferences Labor. What is Labor's plan to balance the budget,
    improve our balance of trade,
    strengthen the economy and create jobs?

    Only a union man would have thought of this one!

    Labor has as its spearhead policy, a panacea to cure our economic woes (which they created),

    Raise taxes and throw even more money at education and health.

    Yes that's it! throw more money at Education and health!

    I don't know how it will work, but I would imagine there would be more PS jobs and a trickle down to the unions.

    What exactly is it that the Public Service export?
    ex PS
    12th May 2016
    12:36pm
    Frank, you assume a lot don't you? I invite you to go through all of my contributions and find one instance where I have exhorted people to vote Labor.
    I will in fact vote below the line, Labor will be second last and yes LNP will be last. This is because I don't think either party has any plan that goes any further than how to win the next election, and I think that this will be the same plan either will have the day after they are elected.
    I believe in and have participated in Union activities all my working life and am and always will be proud of that. I do not support corruption by Unions or by Industries that may pay them bribes but I believe that the good Unions have done in the work place far outway the harm done by a fraction of the organisation.
    Your simplistic view of the Public Service would be laughable if it was not so tragic, but I don;t blame you, you are probably quoting directly from the LNP handbook.
    You talk about job creation, have you any idea how many of the jobs created by the LNP policy are full time and how many are part time designed to make the figures look good?
    As far as the Public Service exporting, try this, a major gas pipeline project from Queensland to PNG, TAFE organised a training plan so that PNG workers could participate in the construction, they put together the training packages, provided teachers who could go overseas and train locals to teach the locals how to work effectivley and safely and issued quality qualifications to those who passed. This has brought millions of dollars into the states coffers through the provision of training and by the sale of gas to the PNG government.
    As far as throwing money at health and education, if it needs it yes. And as far as raising taxs, I am not like you, I don't believe in relying on government handouts, if we want the government to provide services we have to pay for them, that is what taxs are for, what I don't believe in is the government taking taxs from hard workers so they can give them to people who earn $80,000 plus.
    Maybe you should pause and work out what it is you want to believe and what is true.
    Lippy
    5th May 2016
    11:44am
    We've see the ad, "Mal, pick up the phone and call MyBuget for Australia's sake".
    margie
    5th May 2016
    11:58am
    Liberals, Labor and the Greens all in it for themselves, absolute oxygen thieves. I'm sure if people all rose up and voted for the Independent parties, these greedy self serving creatures just may wake up and realise they work for us and it's our money. I realise Liberal or Labor will still get in but maybe they will be more answerable, we can only hope. It is inconceivable just how removed from the ordinary Australian these weasels are and just how little they care, well we have the power to make them care at the ballot box.
    petes2506
    5th May 2016
    12:28pm
    Have a look at the Mature Australia Party. It may not win but it will reduce support for major parties and cause them to rethink.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:42pm
    Whoever you vote for margie I implore you to make sure that the preference of that candidate does not go to the LNP. Make sure you ask before you vote as I am aware that the Abbott and Turnbull governments seem to be running a few 'Independents' who are simply trojan horses funnelling votes to the LNP. Try not to get caught out on that one.
    Sceptic
    5th May 2016
    3:55pm
    "I am aware that the Abbott and Turnbull governments seem to be running a few 'Independents' who are simply trojan horses funnelling votes to the LNP." MICK, having made that statement,please back it up with some names. In other words, put up or shut up. Or are you too afraid of the libel laws?
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    4:02pm
    Sight Impaired Freddy can see that they will be Running "Trojan Horses" in just about every seat ! :-) :-)
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:06pm
    Let's see where the preferences go Sceptic. We had an 'Independent' spruiking on this website a while ago. When I looked into that one he was 'true believer' liberal but refused to say where his preferences were going.
    I suggest that anybody who intends voting Independent to find out where the preferences are going. That way they know if the candidate is a liberal in wolf's clothing or otherwise.
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    4:42pm
    "AROOOOOOOW !"
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    6:55pm
    Labor gets 65% of preferences so the odds of an Independent giving preferences to the LNP are minimal. MICK could be right though. I suggest waiting for the next full moon before making a decision.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    9:10pm
    And a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.....
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:37am
    "AROOOOOOOW !"

    Werewolves of Cambra....
    particolor
    7th May 2016
    5:47pm
    Some honesty in Politics and some Law, Wouldn't go astray in this Country now !! All politicians should have their No1 Preference on their Propaganda Leaflet at the Polling Stations ! And if that Preference is Violated All their Votes will be Cancelled ! Stop the Outright Deliberate Lying Now !! :-(
    Snowwhite
    5th May 2016
    11:59am
    Bonny I'm truly happy you are comfortable in your retirement and support the LNP. I'm a retired midwife and worked all my life as did you I presume but I never earned more than $70000/year. Further more before you tell me I'm envious I'm not as I'm happy to have reared my five sons who are all good citizens with jobs. Now having said that I'll tell you why I will never vote for the Conservatives. Firstly this current mob definitely won't help pensioners because they have trebled the deficit in a little over 21/2 years. They didn't know what to do when they got into power so they did nothing except increase their own pay packets. They are fiscally irresponsible and have drastically made cuts to health and education in particular. Your side of politics seem to think everyone who needs a help up with welfare are bludgers. Well I don't agree. The LNP just don't care about health or low income workers who just can't afford private insurance and have to rely on the public health system which is at breaking point thanks to the savage cuts to health. And now that pathology services have been hit with cuts as well people will no longer be able to afford blood tests which may be necessary to diagnose disease. It's short sighted economics as these unfortunate people will need to be looked after when it will cost twice as much to care for them. In my opinion although you may not agree the LNP only look after the top end of town and really don't care about ordinary workers who work just as hard as millionaires to earn their money.
    And further more giving tax cuts to the top end of town hoping the trickle down theory will work has been proven not to work so inequality continues to reign supreme in Australia.
    bletch
    5th May 2016
    12:03pm
    And with the cuts to health and Doctor's fees going up etc etc.
    What will FURTHER happen now is that people with limited money will not go and see a doctor because they cannot afford it.
    They will therefore suffer and die in silence!
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:44pm
    Bronnie is posting government crap on the website. Take little notice of the posts Snowwhite as they are what they are.
    Kaz
    5th May 2016
    12:00pm
    When labor spends, it is in education and health and welfare and to get us through the GFC. When the deficit increases under liberal, it is for tax cuts for large (be truthful) companies. If you earn over $80k, you won't notice a tax cut as much as someone on a lower income. Why do those who earn large amounts want more for themselves and not others - do your bit and say you don't want it - you will never spend it all. Stop hating those on welfare - really, would you like to be in their position? I wouldn't.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:46pm
    Answer: Greed and contempt for everybody else. Welcome to class warfare initiated by the Abbott government and continued on with the Turnbull crew.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    2:11pm
    Spot on, mick - same Thatcherite nonsense, different face. These silly people actually believe that social security etc is a burden on the economy, whereas welfare for the rich and business is not - and you never 'run out of other people's money' for the simple reason that everybody pays into the tax system in many ways every day. Such utter Thatcherite/Reaganite nonsense is based on the false assertion that paying a higher INCOME tax bracket means you are 'lifting' everyone else.

    How is it LESS possible to 'run out of other people's money' by giving it to big business than by supporting the poorest in the land, the disabled and so on? Same Deal - Different Day.
    Wstaton
    5th May 2016
    6:25pm
    It's called greed Kaz. That why people who already have billions want more billions. What more they don't even want to pay there fair share to help people who resources they are using to make the billions.

    That's why they have tax havens etc.
    petes2506
    5th May 2016
    12:21pm
    I have been following the various threads on the Mature Australia Party website and Facebook and it I'd overwhelming how much disappointment there is with the coalition in particular. ABBOTT and TURNBULL have one thing in common......... the boys in the back room. It won't matter who the coalition put up as Prime Minister, the mental constipation in the back room will exist until we throw them out.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:48pm
    This government is controlled and/or owned by big business and the rich. If you follow the money trail you will see where the money is heading (to the rich) and who is expected to pay more taxes (working Australians) and who are being exempted from paying tax altogether (the rich again).
    It's not rocket science.
    petes2506
    5th May 2016
    12:21pm
    I have been following the various threads on the Mature Australia Party website and Facebook and it I'd overwhelming how much disappointment there is with the coalition in particular. ABBOTT and TURNBULL have one thing in common......... the boys in the back room. It won't matter who the coalition put up as Prime Minister, the mental constipation in the back room will exist until we throw them out.
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    12:55pm
    Instead of whinging about company tax cuts over the next ten years people would do well to look at what's in it for them.
    The 2 million low paid women should be taking advantage of the government's plan to increase tax on high end super so that they can get a $500 co-contribution.
    And finally we have guaranteed funding for Health, Education and roads.
    Posters wanted a crackdown on multinational tax evasion. You got it!
    You asked for top end super to not be a tax avoidance/estate planning product. You got it!
    So stop your whinging and look for the positives.
    If you're always envious of those who are doing better then you'll never be happy.
    KSS
    5th May 2016
    1:15pm
    Yes Frank, funny how no-one either yesterday or today actually acknowledged the positives in this budget.
    Snowwhite
    5th May 2016
    1:33pm
    Frank you're really annoying me now! All you can come up with is for people to stop whinging who don't agree with you!!Duh! The LNP have only put back into health a tenth of what they took out. Get real and at least be honest about the savage cuts the LNP have made to health. And again before you tell me I'm envious of you Fascists believe me I'm not. And don't forget the LNP have trebled the deficit and put us where we are today although I'm sure you will argue the point. Like I said in my previous post inequality reigns supreme in Australia and unfortunately you are part of the problem.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:54pm
    Always the voice of the government Frank. And as always lies, damned lies and trolling!
    So you think giving somebody earning $1 million pa a tax cut of $50,000 is fair? Or that the crumbs put back into health and education after stripping out huge sums is "funding" rather than vote buying?
    There are no positives Frank, and we all know that the real poison is being reserved for after the election: backflips and more taxes for workers.
    Australians will see through the con.
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    2:04pm
    LOL, Snowwhite they took nothing out of health. Our Health budget has been growing at 4 times the rate of inflation. It is growing 3 times the rate of our population increase.
    The ridiculous figure plucked out of Shorten's bum of $80b or what ever it was, was never funded. It was a pie in the sky booby trap. Funding has continued to increase at 6-8% each year.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:18pm
    Took nothing out of health? Really? You lie even better than this government Frank. Maybe you should be contesting again at the next election. Malcolm needs you.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    2:40pm
    What if a company simply paid tax, as a 'separate legal entity' same as you or me - on the same scale?

    I rather thought that 30% was a pretty good deal after all the working deductions.....
    Adrianus
    5th May 2016
    3:22pm
    TREBOR, no country is an island! We are competing with countries which have much lower tax rates and much higher start-up incentives. Many of our start-ups have gone to the USA where they are greeted with open arms. At least this government is prepared to do something positive for the nation. It's not always about getting votes for another 3 year term!
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:08pm
    Talk is likely all that is being done for startups. 'Show me the money'.......
    Tom Tank
    5th May 2016
    4:20pm
    Good ideas have always left Australia because Australian business would not back them as they wanted a return on capital within 2 or 3 years.
    Australian businesses have left ordinary Australians down. Globalisation opened the floodgates for them to transfer their manufacturing to the lowest cost labour country.
    Similarly with call centres being transferred to countries where the population can barely speak English.
    Please don't try to say that Australians who are trying to get a fair deal out of a Government that favours the top end of town are not doing something positive for this nation.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    9:39pm
    My point is that Turnbull is all talk and after the election all bets will be off.
    I have championed Australian ideas for at least the last decade but this is a nation run by neanderthals with no ideal. All governments in this country do well is dig holes, waste money and sell national assets to foreigners and their governments. Makes you want to cry. So much potential and so much negligence.
    Janran
    5th May 2016
    10:28pm
    Frank, it really annoys me when moneyed people tell low paid workers, women in this case, how to work the system to benefit their futures. Your comment "The 2 million low paid women should be taking advantage of the government's plan to increase tax on high end super so that they can get a $500 co-contribution."

    Well guess what, if you are genuinely "low paid" you don't have any spare cash to invest in your future retirement. You're living week to week on your pay, trying to stretch it to cover essentials like rent, food and petrol. Any spare money put aside will go to paying utilities like power, phone/internet bills and car rego. These people have no fat to play with. It seems the LNP (whomever is the leader) and rich people JUST DON"T GET IT!
    The working poor do not have the same choices as well paid people. Giving a tax break to people earning $80K-$86K is a huge slap in the face to low paid workers on the minimum wage. That money would make a small but real difference to them, but for those on $80K-$86K it means next to nothing. I remember Joe Hockey would just say "get a better job". Yeah right, that better job just appears out of the ether or you take someone elses good job, who will then be looking for your low paid job. Wake up! Those good jobs are taken and are being held on to.

    No party deserves to win this DD election unless they bring ALL AUSTRALIANS along together. Just because Turnbull is a successful businessman doesn't mean he can run a successful government. So far, he's been a useless PM. He should have sought his mandate when he first became PM, stood up to the far right of his party, implemented his true policies on marriage equality, climate change, the real NBN (full fibre) and maybe even started a real conversation about the Republic. He would have won a lot of votes for being a real and charismatic leader, but now he's been shown up to be a weak mouse.
    Politicians are OUR servants and the people expect a decent, civil society. Money isn't everything.
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:40am
    Nor should any country be an island, Frank - they should all be part of the whole, a portion of the continent........ and pay their way without being a tax haven.... and allow those who reside there to pay their way on that continent instead of being parasites and taking from the rest.
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:45am
    Let's add 'wages haven' to that list as well......

    BTW - how do these immaculate companies with all this 'innovation' reckon they are going to exist for very long by exploiting low cost labour while simultaneously creating unemployment and low wages in their 'mother' country?

    Don't they realise that market forces are moved ONLY by disparity in incomes, so that goods are transferred to those who can buy them? How many Faroffistanis are going to be buying finished high quality goods (as Julia once described Asians as doing etc)? At the same time, how many Australichinks are going to be ABLE to buy high quality finished goods?

    You get my message yet?

    Destroy your own market by off-shoring your labour so that those who once bought can no longer do so - and everybody dies. You can see all that happening right now.
    Anonymous
    6th May 2016
    7:38am
    Janran, the problem with those infected with the ''me me me'' disease is that they lose their ability to see past their twisted noses. The privileged have absolutely no idea what it's like to not have enough to cover rent and food. They think ''poor'' means you have to reduce the size of your yacht or holiday in Bali instead of Europe this year.

    Frank, battlers WERE getting $500 a year to top up their super until this vile government stopped it, preferring to give $17000 a year to millionaires. But if people did what you recommend, it would make them no better off anyway, because it would just deprive them of pension income in retirement and make them worse off than they hadn't saved it. I can't see how anyone can be obtuse enough not to see that this government is destroying the nation with it's indulgence of the rich.

    I'd love to look on the positive side - if there WAS a positive side. There isn't - unless you are among the selfish wealthy and you are happy to see everything that's good about Australia destroyed in the name of greed and stinking Neoliberal philosophy.
    Lescol
    5th May 2016
    1:05pm
    I cannot believe yet more opportunities for needed reforms get squandered for short time gain. I welcome 2 July. It will be a formal vote; anybody first and the current government will be placed last. cheers.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:56pm
    That is how is should be done Lescol. Other readers please note. This is how you end deceit, lies, corruption and class warfare!
    Wstaton
    5th May 2016
    6:36pm
    Yep Lescol, I saw the Wangaratta roadside sign that someone erected.

    " Vote For Anyone But Sophie Mirabella"
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:46am
    **rofl emoticon needed**
    Thterbl
    5th May 2016
    1:12pm
    Be careful about voting for minor parties. Look carefully at where their preferences are being directed. If they are not disclosed, steer clear of them. The changes in the voting system for the Senate are really quite cosmetic. With a "Double Dissolution" election, the quota for election to the Senate is half that of a regular senate election: a gift to micro-parties.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    1:58pm
    Wonderful post. You are on the money as I am aware that there are Independents running who have been formed for no apparent other reason other than funnelling votes to the government.
    We all need to find out who the preferences go to, either on polling day or beforehand....with a second request at the polling station.
    Lescol
    5th May 2016
    6:21pm
    NO NO NO & NO. It is you the voter who decides upon how the preferences get distributed - you do the selection by voting 'beneath the line'. Anyone first and current government last if you ever hope for a change. Then, if not happy, repeat the process the following election.

    Its simple and nothing will change unless you say 'enough'.

    Bring on 2 July.

    cheers
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    9:13pm
    The candidate or his/her party decides who preferences go to should the candidate be knocked out. That is how the preferential system works. Keeps going until one left standing. The winner!
    Kato
    5th May 2016
    1:32pm
    Nope. My vote will be below the line.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:00pm
    I respect a man who wants to make his own call. Just do not make a mistake and please remember what the current government has been trying to engineer since getting into office. The tax cuts for the rich are half of that but the taxes on workers will come if it can grab control of the senate....where it has been trying to undermine senators as well as changing the rules so that Independents find it harder to be elected.
    Rae
    6th May 2016
    8:52am
    How good would it be if we all voted, very carefully , below the line and took our own sweet time to do so.

    Send a message that messing with the democratic process won't be tolerated.
    Kato
    5th May 2016
    1:32pm
    Nope. My vote will be below the line.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    1:38pm
    'war of envy' - what a bunch of Thatcherite nonsense - nothing to do with envy and everything do with the majority expecting a fair go and not to be treated as disposable cattle. Thatcher's dead, Mal - get over it.

    All I can say about the whole election is what I always say - I do not believe that any of the major players have the answers for a solid future for Australia since they are all bound by chains of ideology and not of interest to the people first and foremost.

    I will not be voting Liberal, Labor or Greens, each one for specific reason.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:03pm
    Agree.
    Remember the Abbott chant of not engaging in "class warfare"..which is precisely what he did as soon as he attained office.
    Now this government is using the same spiel but calling it a 'war of envy'...whilst giving the rich huge tax cuts.
    If it looks like a liar, sounds like a liar and acts like a liar then one might think it is a liar!
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    2:00pm
    WAKE UP COALITION!
    Judging by Turnbull's accidentally-on-purpose bumbling since he became PM, I feel sure that he is DELIBERATELY sabotaging the Coalition's chances at the next election.

    HE IS A LABOR PLANT!

    Why, you ask?

    Well, we all know how deeply he has fallen for THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING SCAM and how he would dearly love to inflict a carbon tax on us again, he probably reasons that if he can lose the election then Labor, together with the Greens, would re-introduce his beloved carbon tax.

    He obviously thinks losing the next election would be worth it.

    I will NOT be voting Coalition whilst this leftie is the leader.

    If there is no conservative option, my vote will be INFORMAL.

    I'm sure many others are thinking the same way.

    The Coalition deserves to be taught a strong lesson for forcing such a (UNELECTED) leader upon us.
    They should wake up, and dump him ASAP before the election, otherwise defeat will strike.
    Snowwhite
    5th May 2016
    2:04pm
    Paranoia has set in Luvco2!
    What a load of codswallop!!!
    But hopefully it's true and Mal is a plant. It's the best news I've heard all day!
    Go Labor.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:05pm
    Ha, ha, ha.
    What a load of BS voice of the coal industry!
    But don't worry. If Turnbull loses he will resign and Morrison will become opposition leader. Then you'll have an even more devious person in charge. Welcome to the Liberal Party.
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    3:03pm
    Hey Snowwhite.
    So Turncoat's bumbling behaviour since becoming leader is genuine then?
    What explanation do you have?
    That he's really stupid?
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:48am
    No - he's a cunning bilge rat with no empathy and no remorse, just like every other private school twerp.
    ex PS
    12th May 2016
    11:17am
    Any one who deliberatley votes informal does not deserve the right to make any political comments. If you have not got the guts to make a decision you can't condem those that do.
    I have more respect for someone who votes for a candidate I can,t stand, than for one who throws their vote away.
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    2:05pm
    BETTER TO HAVE A REAL CONSERVATIVE OPPOSITION THAN A FAKE CONSERVATIVE GOVT!

    As long as Turnbull is in charge there will be no real alternative for conservative libertarians.
    If the “true liberal base” will put up with Turnbull and support power for Liberals regardless of principles then their vote is truly worth nothing.

    Which sensible voter really wants to pay for wind turbines in the hope they will cool the world?

    Better to have a real conservative opposition than a fake conservative government.
    Shorten gets to be PM (ugly) but the damage can be limited if the Lib-Nats hold the Senate or, better yet, a serious alternative centre-right group gains a foothold.

    Here’s a voting strategy: Choose your Representative carefully. Campaign non-left in the Senate.

    Turnbull is not on my side

    More than half of Australians don’t buy the IPCC climate position. Who speaks for them?
    Skeptics are the people who elected the Liberals. Turnbull is the one cutting off noses. Let him and those who elected him face the consequences.

    None of the cuts in the Budget of 2014 would have been necessary if not for the profligate vandalism of the Labor Party during the iron-ore boom that rescued the economy. Any idiot can hand out other people’s money. (Wayne Swan’s job. Remember him? Cost Australia an awful lot of dollars.)

    What will make me change my mind?
    Turnbull could categorically, unconditionally promise some meaningful basics (which also cost nothing). How about a blood oath? No emissions trading scheme – ever. No section 18C. No more subsidies to Big Renewables (lets do the research, not buy expensive electrons — remember the “free market”?). No more pandering to the ABC — split it to left and right wings, or demand equal time for conservative views, or better yet — privatize it and cancel some Labor debt.
    Odds of any of these? A million to nothing
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:20pm
    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.............

    I remember you posted hundreds of coal posts a few months back. Pretty clear where your interests lie. So is the coal industry worried about Labor getting back and bring back a Carbon Tax? Please explain.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    2:25pm
    Let's set another Thatcherite myth to bed.. it's not 'other people's money' - unless you are addressing 'government' money as belonging to the 'other people' called The People.

    Just because someone contributes to the money pool does not make it their money to dispense as they wish. It is there to be dispensed for the best good of the people, the country and the economy.

    You don't pay club dues and then say "I expect my fees to be spent on a piece of carpet under my feet at my favourite poker machine, and on nothing else."

    Thatcher came up with that one to throw a bone to the whining rich who were forced to pay tax.

    "Oh - look - you high enders are paying all this income tax and all these business taxes - those peasants are demanding YOUR money from us in government!"
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    2:49pm
    THE UGLY TRUTH ON RENEWABLES
    THE SEEMING NOT DOING SYNDROME
    Let’s do the maths.
    Last year wind and solar ­energy produced the equivalent of nine days of global primary energy needs. Coal produced 109 days and fossil fuels combined produced 313 days of the world’s ­annual primary needs.
    Despite all these power sources, 1.3 billion people still missed out on electricity and a further 1.7 billion only had partial access…
    Halting or limiting coal or fossil fuels output will simply mean that those with no or partial access to electricity would have to wait much longer in the dark.
    That is an uncomfortable but incontrovertible fact.
    If you limit something or make it more expensive to the poor then you are delaying or denying that access.
    Not just for weeks, months or years, but generations.
    Hundreds of millions of people will live shorter, more miserable lives as a result of the choices of the comfortable and warm.
    Pearson demonstrates how this is another case of what has long fascinated me - the Seeming not Doing syndrome.
    Brendan Pearson, chief executive of the Minerals Council, points out the harsh consequences of dreamy green demands that we ban coal and switch to renewable power:
    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/seeming_good_achieving_dark/
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    2:51pm
    Why “GREEN ENERGY” people actually mean “NO ENERGY”
    Why does the green movement oppose every practical form of energy?

    There is only one answer that can explain this.

    Greens oppose every practical form of energy not out of love for the non-existent virtues of solar and wind energy, but because they believe practical energy is inherently immoral.

    It’s in their philosophical DNA.

    To “be green” means to minimize our impact on nature. In the green philosophy, the standard of value, the metric by which we measure good and bad is human nonimpact—does an action make our environment more or less altered by humans?

    If we take that idea seriously, then practical energy is not a good thing
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    2:54pm
    Hey Mick, the toxic carbon tax was overwhelmingly voted out in 2013.

    Most Aussies don't want a bar of it!
    Most Aussies are rightly sceptical that numerous windmills will cool the climate!
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:14pm
    "The ugly truth about renewables"????

    Are you even for real? Even the lest intelligent amongst us understands that free energy is free energy and that polluting the planet, whilst a convenient method of operation from the coal industry, is NOT ON.

    I have spend countless hours replying to coa trolls who post all over the planet, The industry has spent billions to shut down renewables, without success.

    In the end coal will die except for unique specialised operations...which just like other industries will adapt in time. Coal has 50 years maximum in it....but I am not sure the planet will hold for more population using more coal for another half a century.

    Do us all a favour LUVCO2: Put a huge sign up in the front of your house saying 'I love coal' so that everybody can see where public enemy number one lives.
    LUVCO2
    6th May 2016
    2:09pm
    Renewables are POLLUTING THE PLANET!

    Brutal Truth About “Clean”, “Green” Wind Power, Disastrous Pollution!
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html

    RENEWABLES: Polluting the East to "clean up" the West! pic.twitter.com/SRuFWjtWGt

    Wind Farms Paid £53M To SWITCH OFF Last Year! VERY EFFICIENT! http://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/01/04/wind-farms-paid-53-million-to-switch-off-last-year/

    LOVE THIS! UK Wind Farms idling &Taking power from grid to prevent icing! http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/02/as-britain-freezes-wind-farms-take-power-from-grid-to-prevent-icing/

    ULTIMATE MOTHER OF ALL LIES, that renewables could answer global energy needs http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/shredding-stupidity-on-renewable-energy/story-fni0d8gi-1227054547625
    LUVCO2
    6th May 2016
    2:13pm
    Hey Mick ...
    Renewables FRAUD: Generate only 5% rated power! EXORBITANT http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/30/renewable-energy-in-perspective-solar-and-wind-power/

    Half-Truths, Lies & climate change
    http://www.thegwpf.com/doug-hoffman-half-truths-lies-climate-change/
    bebby
    5th May 2016
    2:36pm
    Bonny, I read in one of your comments that you "know" that the LNP will get back in.
    Please give me the name of your Soothsayer, as I don't want to waste my money on a Lotto ticket if I don't know if I will win.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:39pm
    An advertisement from Bronnie's mates methinks.
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    6:29pm
    So you are not going to put your 2 bob on the LNP then. Pity it's a sure thing.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    9:40pm
    The only sure things in life are death and taxes Bronny. Not even helicopter rides are a cert. Right?
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    2:44pm
    Let me say, in passing, that it is a pleasure to come here and read the discussions, even of those with whom I disagree, for the simple reason that personal vitriol is at a minimum, unlike other sites, and the very vast majority of the Seniors who comment are at least articulate and literate. Most discussion here is on the point, even if from two totally opposite viewpoints.
    Ayin
    5th May 2016
    2:45pm
    This do nothing much budget fits rather well with the doing nothing going nowhere government. I have however learned the meaning of the word "Party" attached to any political organisation? It means they all go to Canberra and have a bloody great party at our expense, I will not vote in this coming errection for anyone who represents a party as that is simply a vote for more of the same.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:52pm
    The budget did serve a couple of purposes. One it gives the rich tax cuts. Two it buys some votes from small business. Well all business for that matter.
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    3:01pm
    Hey Mick "it gives the rich tax cuts." Really?
    So someone on $80,000 is rich?

    It actually raised superannuation tax on the richest from 15% to 30%.

    Please explain.
    Tom Tank
    5th May 2016
    4:27pm
    LUVCO2 you must be out of touch with reality as $80,000 a year places a person will above the norm in this country.
    However should such a person be living a mansion with a huge mortgage with the 4WD in the garage plus the Audi/BMW/Volvo in the driveway with children at a private school then they probably do not feel rich.
    Little wonder when under those circumstances they are squandering their riches.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:27pm
    You appear illiterate LUVCO2.
    Read my response to you below (ozimarco).
    Anonymous
    6th May 2016
    7:30am
    Perhaps it would have been safer to say ''to the richer'', Mick? Since LuvCO2 chooses to make such a literal interpretation.

    LuvCO2, $80,000 a year is a lot more than $60,000 a year, but the $80,000 a year income earner gets a cut and the $60,000 a year single parent suffers a more than $4000 reduction in income. How is that NOT indulging the richer? Then there's the massive nearly $17,000 cut for the million dollar a year earner. The poor old retiree with over $1.6 million actually pays 15% on the obscene surplus, and NOTHING on returns on the $1.6 million no matter what their return rate. Anyone who sees that as adequate when we can't afford basic health and decent pension has no sense of decency at all.

    We are robbing battlers who saved a miserable few hundred thousand to last them another maybe 3 decades to line the pockets of mega-millionaires and give tax cuts to billion-dollar companies that send their profits overseas. And some here defend that? (Reading Bonny's comments makes me vomit, actually. To think that there is anyone in this country who could be so utterly self-serving and display such thorough contempt for others as to say ''it doesn't hurt me, and only about 300,000 retirees lose their nice to have extras, so it's fine.'' I don't care if an unfair measure only hurts ONE Australian. It's NOT acceptable if it's unfair.)

    As for reductions to disability pensions, how appalling for people to just assume that those cut off are rorting! There is ample evidence that the attack hurts genuinely disabled people. I can point to many examples of STUPID assessment rules that actually favour frauds.

    I know someone who didn't qualify with a serious back injury and bad bursitis in both shoulders. He had never done anything but physical labour, so because he was unable to continue what he was able to do, he was supposed - at age 64 - to suddenly and miraculously secure a job in an office! Not disabled because he could work at a desk job!

    That man was assessed by a 23-year-old dripping diamonds and giggling like a congenital idiot, with NO medical qualifications. She overruled 4 specialists to declare ''He didn't APPEAR to be in pain when he stood up, so I think with physio and occupational therapy and compulsory voluntary work 3 days a week, he could be phased back into the workforce within 3 years.'' (Yep, 2.5 years AFTER retirement!)

    That idiot earns in excess of $100,000 a year for being THOROUGHLY STUPID. And some people want to take money from the disabled! Unbelievable!
    ozimarco
    5th May 2016
    2:47pm
    Another typical LNP budget that increases inequality in our society. The gap between rich and poor is getting ever wider. I am not an activist for socialism but would like to see a society that is fair to everyone. We already know that there is no such thing as trickle-down wealth so continuously improving conditions for the wealthy is not going to do anything for the battlers. All it is going to do is increase the wealth of the rich and make the gap ever wider. That is eventually going to end in increased crime, homelessness, frustration, anger, etc. We only have to look at countries with a big gap between the haves and have-nots to see what kind of society they live in. If that's the kind of society you want, by all means keep voting LNP.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    2:54pm
    The divide has been growing for several decades. This is the next in many legislative 'adjustments' to turn Australian workers into the equivalent of the working poor in the US. You have to see these poor schmucks to appreciate the divide.
    LUVCO2
    5th May 2016
    2:59pm
    Hey ozimarco how does "Another typical LNP budget that increases inequality in our society"

    Are you saying that someone on $80,000 is rich?
    All it did was change the tax threshold from $80,000 to $87,000.

    Actually the budget raised superannuation tax on the richest.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:19pm
    Tax cuts to business flow on to big business, where they were intended to go. That is the next nail in the coffin widening the gap between rich and poor.
    We are closing in on the US. Go there and see for yourself coal man.

    The budget did NOT raise superannuation tax on the richest. No such thing. What the budget did was to close an open wound of the rich piling money into their superannuation accounts and avoiding the real tax system.
    Scrivener
    5th May 2016
    3:44pm
    I've developed a highly secret disapparation device at my front door so that when it detects a lying politician about to knock intending to set about lying to me it disapperates the body into disaggregated molecules of dust which then pass directly into a black hole never to be seen again - mmm! Maybe I'm just thinking of the bastards that have already lied to me - basically every single one, except maybe, Tanya Pliberseck.
    TREBOR
    5th May 2016
    5:06pm
    Is that last a matter of opportunity lacking but motive and means being present... or the opportunity being there but not the motive or means?

    Means is there, so that only leaves discussion of motivation...... (yer 'onnah)....
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    3:58pm
    We are about to witness the Biggest Rabble of a Government we have ever seen !! Disorganised Libs, Brain Dead Labor, Stark Raving Stupid Greens and Hot and Cold Independents running in all Directions !! :-) :-)
    bletch
    5th May 2016
    4:01pm
    Well said Particolor !
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    4:15pm
    Someone said up there somewhere ! that they will be running "Trojan Horses" in the next at Randwick !! Well tat was and Understatement !! Besides the Garbage that will come out of The 3 Amigos,The Allahmo Party and the Appeaser Party! :-) We will see the "Help Our Pensioners Party" The "No Excise on Cigarettes Party" The " Fair Go for Battlers Party" The "No More Immigration Party" And all Fakes of all descriptions ! :-) All Stooges for the Major Parties ! :-(
    Talk about Painting Themselves into a Corner :-) :-)
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:30pm
    You might be right particolor. So which nag you gonna vote for? I for one will not be backing the horse with the Point Piper address.
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    4:40pm
    I'm thing of backing Fine Cotton :-)
    Owner L. N. P. Greedbucket
    Trained by I. O. Moredosh
    Scrivener
    5th May 2016
    5:22pm
    So prescient. Made me smile.
    Joy
    5th May 2016
    4:04pm
    sorry about the spelling mistake Mick ,You mentioned higher taxes might I remind you that in the early eighties tax was 60 something cents in the dollar and the thresholds were lower and my husband and I have and still are paying our fair share of tax .My husband is a professional works over seas for months at a time .We pay tax to pay for our hospitals and schools plus .
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    4:26pm
    Plus Continues... Plus a Very Generous Amount for the Comfortable Retirement of our Much Loved Politicians :-) :-)
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    4:36pm
    I remember the 60 cents in the dollar. They were the days when we had the Bottom Of The Harbour Scheme in full swing with more and more rich folk piling in. A nice little earner.
    Now the wealthy scream poor for forking up 49 cents in the dollar with some having offshore tax shelters and until a couple of nights ago the superannuation scam.
    I cannot remember what the company tax rate was then. Do you know Joy?
    Thanks for sharing your status with the community. It is wonderful that some well to do folk do not look for ways to manipulate the system. Quite rightly we all need to pay our way and in the end the only really fair system is the percentage of gross pay which we pay in tax as that is the only way to compare apples with apples. I have never seen any rich person agree to do that.
    particolor
    5th May 2016
    5:24pm
    :-) Now we have the "Bottom Feeders Scheme" :-)
    Anonymous
    7th May 2016
    7:11am
    Probably as a result of ''Bottom of the Harbour Scheme'' and other rorts creating massive inequality that disenfranchised a large portion of the population, particolor. People don't CHOOSE to become ''bottom feeders''. It's the result of being denied fair opportunity to be anything else.
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    8:30am
    Communism will erode those opportunities.
    Anonymous
    9th May 2016
    6:53pm
    We are not threatened by Communism in Australia, Frank. No political party wants it and no political party is pursuing Communist policies. But actually I have a friend who lived under Communism and he says it was better for most workers and lower middle income earners than capitalism. Interesting comment from someone who has experienced both!
    Anonymous
    11th May 2016
    5:53pm
    Today, Frank, I talked to someone whose family was dispossessed by Communism in China. He told me how the Communists took everything his family had worked for. Sounded surprisingly like what the LNP did to struggling part pensioners actually. The lying rhetoric was almost identical.
    Adrianus
    11th May 2016
    7:02pm
    Nice try Rainey but not good enough. :)

    5th May 2016
    4:34pm
    What I am reading is that there is a number of people who have a self interest in their comments and why shouldn't they. There is something I'd like to point out about retirees whether they are self funded, totally dependent on the Age Pension or a mixture of both. I get annoyed when I hear the so called experts telling anyone who would listen that we all need $1M in super to retire successfully. I firmly believe that this is total crap.

    There is no hard and fast rule for how much a person needs to retire comfortably because, thank the Lord, we are all different and as such have different priorities in life. Say a person has the magic $1M in their super fund, they have to invest that to achieve a return to live off and in this current climate that can be difficult. Those people give the impression that they are not allowed to withdraw capital which is a nonsense, what they mean is that they don't want to withdraw capital. If they withdraw capital, they may move down financially to the people (most retirees) who have a mix of super and pension.

    Those with a mixture of super and pension can still live adequately, depending on the amount of super, because of a healthcare card and a host of rebates from various utilities. It all eventually comes down to lifestyle and may I suggest that sometimes it can be likened to the fable about the grasshopper and the ant. Please allow the generalisation that the grasshopper will always spend today and let tomorrow look after itself and for that reason cannot live as high a lifestyle on an Age Pension. The ant, on the other hand, has allowed for the future and can live comfortably on super but is reluctant to let go of what has taken them a lifetime to accumulate. They must accept the well known saying that there are no pockets in a shroud and if they don't spend it, someone else will and my bet is, not too wisely.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    5:04pm
    I can relate to your post old man and you are right. The only thing you might have added is that retiring with debt is a death sentence to the finances. Without debt one can live well on < $20,000 pa if one does not want to travel.
    What you have alluded to is the choices some people make. There are a whole host of things which one can do to eliminate expense but some people think that they 'deserve' to live like they did whilst bringing home a salary. That is of course a fallacy for almost all.
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:57am
    I'm about to retire (into two new jobs, BTW) at 67 (in June) and have a mortgage of $70k plus a car loan that is now $7000 to cater for. I only get pension due to the chicaneries of past governments, businesses with their rorting of their best workers, and the blatant abuse of this country as a whole, governed as it is by psychopaths, regardless of their party.

    I could live very well on the pension alone if allowed to. As it is, to retire with the (boat) cruiser and play golf and bowls, I have to take on a restoration project of a good solid boat, plus work on the raised garden beds to suit the 'other one' with her back and hip troubles, plus go to work, plus care for her full time as well.

    I could have retired at 32 on a 2/3 of salary government pension due to stress (read my books) indexed for life.... but a gentleman does not do such things, but makes his own way.

    I'll thank Her Majesty for the generous pension next time I'm dining at the Palace....
    Anonymous
    6th May 2016
    7:08am
    Old Man, I agree with you to a point, but where that argument falls down is that a 65-year-old retiree who may live for another 3 decades, potentially through high inflation at times and with rising health care costs and costs for care and home help might want to sensibly keep some savings for those later years. Maybe they saved in anticipation of certain high costs down the track? Maybe they saved because they have specific aspirations in regard to residential aged care? Yet they are forced to prematurely drain their savings, knowing that reducing to maybe $350,000 now means that in 30 years they might have only today's equivalent of $30,000 in reserve.

    Okay, if the nation's problems justified that sacrifice and everyone was making a fair contribution, we'd all have to grin and bear it and we'd have no cause for complaint. But the system is so grossly and cruelly unfair and discriminatory. And that's the problem I see with this LNP. They continue to indulge the haves and persecute the have nots. They refuse to tax huge retirement incomes (though they've now applied a token 15% to the most obscene surpluses), they continue to give tax cuts to the well-to-do, and they totally screw the battlers who did as they said we should all do and saved for a rainy day.

    It's about fairness and the national interest, in my view. And the LNP has let Australia down and betrayed the trust of the lifters who contributed most to building a strong economy.

    Howard and Costello gifted the proceeds of the boom to the rich. Abbott and Hockey persisted in continuing that unfairness, and Turnbull and ScoMo are making an art form of over-indulgence of the well-to-do at the expense of the nation.

    I've always voted LNP in the past, but not this time. I cannot endorse the obscene greed. I cannot tolerate Neoliberal thinking. And I cannot support a continuing slide into back to a feudal society.
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    8:04am
    Rainey you're somewhat of an enigma. You've always voted LNP in the past and yet you carry a deep and lasting hatred of all past LNP leaders?
    Anonymous
    7th May 2016
    6:59am
    Frank, you read things that aren't written! Try reading what I said for a change. I DO NOT have a ''deep and lasting hatred of all past LNP leaders''. I admired Howard, despite his mistakes. I greatly admired Fraser (and I note he, like me, decided the LNP are on the wrong path and opposed the thinking of the current leaders). There are many PAST LNP leaders who were very good for this country. The current mob of Neoliberals are VERY VERY BAD.
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    8:07am
    I'm curious now? What did you like most about Howard??
    ex PS
    12th May 2016
    11:35am
    I think where most people get it wrong with managing their Super pensions is they calculate that they may need say $40,000 a year to live on. They then proceed to use that amount every year no matter what, if they were to only take out what they needed for each year they would find that most years they would not meet the $40,000 limit and the differance could stay in the account earning more money.
    This is the amount my wife and I have decided on and we find that in retirement we are not spending any where near what we expected to. We do not lead extravigant lifestyles but we don't go without anything either.
    We are managing an overseas holiday every three years or so and take no money from the government.
    The figure needed to retire on seems to be nominated and pushed by the finnancial institutions who have a vested interest in having people invest in Super funds.
    Happy Jack
    5th May 2016
    4:52pm
    What a joke of a budget. The outcomes of the deliberations on everything that was "put on the table" by our industrious Prime Minister, Tumbles Turntable, resulted in what? A fiddling around the edges on the tax lurks of the super rich, a $4 wage for the unemployed being slaved out to business and, you guessed it!
    A whopping 65 Billion bucks on tax cuts for business. Ho, but wait a minute, how ungracious of me- existing pensioners will still receive the carbon tax offset but it will denied to any new recipients. You can bet your bottom dollar if this rabble get back in they will scrub it in the following budget on grounds of equity. So what have low income earners and pensioners received? A halt on the lifting of medical schedule fees, for one. If that ain't a back door way of having doctors introduce their co-payment, I'll go he. This LIEberal party Govt is just as sneaking as that mad Abbott's. They need to go the way of Campbell Newman, if you ask me.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    5:05pm
    Cut back on the superannuation rorts and handed out company tax cuts. The shell game of lies!
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    12:59am
    Superannuation rorting had to go - now for the public service super rort.

    I see no argument for reducing company tax.... it will 'create' no jobs, but only line the pockets of those without need while ensuring that social and economic divides will become deeper and more long-lasting.
    Rosscoe
    5th May 2016
    5:04pm
    I'll cetainly be checking out where each party places its preferences. This LNP has certainly done nothing for seniors. So I won't be voting for them! All Malcolm is concerned with is looking after his rich mates.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    5:08pm
    You are clearly an intelligent voter who understands the tricks used to subjugate the intent of voters.
    Rodent
    5th May 2016
    5:13pm
    Question -what evidence is their that the proposed Corporate Tax changes in the budget will produce the desired outcome, ie Jobs Growth, Increased employee wages

    This study , link attached seems to say - not likely, Treasury and Govt claims otherwise
    http://www.tai.org.au/sites/defualt/files/P245%20Company%20tax%20-%20what%20the%20evidence%20shows.pdf
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    8:57pm
    They won't. it's simply more money meant for the top end of town.
    TREBOR
    6th May 2016
    1:01am
    "Jobs Growth, Increased employee wages"

    ** ROFL emoticon required**
    Scrivener
    5th May 2016
    5:19pm
    It's a good thing that God hates all the same people I do! Can't win an election if you lie and lie and lie. You ask God, Scott and Malcolm. She'll tell you.
    LiveItUp
    5th May 2016
    6:53pm
    Politicians not telling lies? They have been telling them ever since I can remember.

    Not too sure that god hasn't told a few porkies too.
    MICK
    5th May 2016
    8:58pm
    Good one Scrivener.
    Eyesopen
    6th May 2016
    6:51am
    I am fed up with the two major parties altogether. I will be voting for ALA or One Nation. Parties that actually give a crap about Australia and it's people. Liberals are intent on selling off our ports and farms to the Chinese and Labor's no better. The Greens want to open our borders and flood Australia with country shoppers, many from a backward ideology, intent on making us and our children and their children pay for their welfare for years and years to come. I and many of my friends will vote for anyone patriotic enough to stand up for Australia and our way of life. The major parties can go jump.
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    7:54am
    Labor has the AMP which is hoping to draw some votes.
    Mez
    6th May 2016
    9:24am
    Interesting times ahead before our election as well as the American election.
    Rodent
    6th May 2016
    10:57am
    Just having another go
    How is a Normal Voter to determine the True Facts about the Company Tax Changes proposed by Govt. Late last night the Treasury Secretary told Senate estimates the cost over the 10 year period would be $48.2 billion cash terms. Earlier in the Day Both Malcom Turnbull and Scott Morrison REFUSED many questions, including in Parliament to disclose the facts. There is plenty of CONFLICTING evidence about whether spending money on Reducing the Company Tax rate will result in Growth, Jobs etc.
    The problem I have is determining who is right. FYI is what I posted earlier, which may be of use to some
    Question -what evidence is their that the proposed Corporate Tax changes in the budget will produce the desired outcome, ie Jobs Growth, Increased employee wages

    This study , link attached seems to say - not likely, Treasury and Govt claims otherwise
    http://www.tai.org.au/sites/defualt/files/P245%20Company%20tax%20-%20what%20the%20evidence%20shows.pdf
    Given that Labor intends to oppose these changes, this at least one significant and expensive difference between the major Parties
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    11:47am
    Where is the plenty of conflicting evidence? Sure they will disagree with LNP policy they have spent a lifetime disagreeing with the LNP. They are Bob Brown's ex staff and a couple of union bosses. If you know of any evidence, then produce it? Strange how the unions don't back a plan to grow jobs.
    Rodent
    6th May 2016
    12:20pm
    Dear Frank

    Evidence? try this
    AFR articles today- PS I don't believe what I read, but do my own research as well, and I vote based on Policy, not party

    First article by Ross Garnaut -EXTRACT only "The Business Council asserts that the Company Tax reduction will be paid for by economic growth. The most careful analysis by Janine Dixon of the Centre for Economic Policy Studies for the Melbourne Economic forum has shown that a company Tax cut will increase output in Australia but will significantly reduce budget revenue and also the average income of Australians.
    These carefully researched results have been drowned in a sea of doubtful studies produced by interested parties. The main victims of this independent analysis and evaluation of vested interests in contemporary Australia are not the Prime Ministers and Treasurers we dismiss in disappointment. The victims are all Australians as we sleepwalk through into deeply problematic country"

    Compare this to these EXTRACTED comments by Warwick McKibbin also in AFR today
    "the overwhelming balance of empirical evidence across countries and over time is clear- cutting Corporate Tax Rates raises economic growth and generates Higher incomes for workers and owners of capital (ie most Australians)

    So my question remains given what I posted previously- study by Australia Institute, and these comments above -- where does the truth lie for us normal mortals!!
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    1:13pm
    Sorry dear Rodent. That's just emotive jargon, it's not evidence. Where are the statistics?
    Anonymous
    7th May 2016
    6:12am
    It seems to me the answer is common sense. If demand is falling - and it is - companies are not going to expand. It doesn't matter what you do to their taxes. If there is no scope to sell more products, there's no point in making more products. So the LNP is screwing the buyers and reducing demand in order to facilitate more production of goods that nobody wants.

    Economists the world over are now declaring excessive inequality to be the root cause of all our economic problems. And the LNP is deliberately pursuing a calculated plan to make it worse. Why would any intelligent person vote for that?
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    7:56am
    Most economists agree that when you lower taxes and red/green tape on industry it provides a fillip to the economy. It does this by capital investment, expansion, providing additional jobs. You only need to look at countries which have lowered taxes.
    Why did Bill Shorten want to cut company tax by a whopping 5%? Has he now been instructed by the CFMEU to backflip on that?
    TREBOR
    7th May 2016
    10:26pm
    Is there a link or ten to this "capital investment, expansion, providing additional jobs", Frank?

    To be acceptable to some degree such studies and views need to be reviewed in number and all relevant data looked at carefully and evaluated.

    Who are 'most economists'? The same economists who have yet to formulate any viable approach to economics?
    TREBOR
    7th May 2016
    10:33pm
    "You only need to look at countries which have lowered taxes."

    Yes - Ireland is forked... The Caymans produce nothing..... the Channel Isles produce a few fish....

    Absolutely booming those economies....

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/expat-money/10383707/Trouble-in-paradise-social-division-in-the-Cayman-Islands.html

    http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/key-eu-policy-areas/economy/irelands-economic-crisis/index_en.htm
    Anonymous
    11th May 2016
    6:08pm
    Frank, most economists argue that for production to increase you must have demand, because nobody benefits from production that isn't consumed.

    The bottom line is that demand is falling. Consumption is falling. Don't matter how good you make business conditions taxwise or tapewise, there just ain't any point in producin' more stuff to sit on shop shelves. But then, that's common sense, and the problem with common sense is it's becoming increasingly uncommon, especially among politicians and LNP supporters.
    Adrianus
    11th May 2016
    7:12pm
    Rainey we have 200,000 immigrants arriving each year. How much more demand do you want?
    Most economists argue. Is that because they have a political bias?
    Dallas1955
    6th May 2016
    2:09pm
    If Australians don't care for the environment, then yes he probably will win.
    Rodent
    6th May 2016
    2:20pm
    Hi Frank

    The Data, graphs, numbers etc are in the various reports, of which I have only mentioned a few, there are many others. If really interested go let you fingers do some searching for you
    For instance there is a web link in the Aust Institute report where you will find an OPPOSITE view , from Deloitte, Chris Richardson's mob which is worth a read. My point remains how do we know what's correct?
    Adrianus
    6th May 2016
    3:40pm
    Good question Rodent. We are being bombarded with sales people masquerading as politicians.
    Not Senile Yet!
    6th May 2016
    3:24pm
    Well he and his Party are in for a Very Rude awakening!
    So Corrupt that THEY need Investigating!
    Happy Jack
    6th May 2016
    8:04pm
    Comes as no surprise- In Moaning Morrie's 1/2 hour budget speech:- NOT ONE SINGLE SOLARITY WORD ON CLIMATE CHANGE OR THE ENVIROMENT. If these mugs had an ounce of common sense, instead of working on their capacity's to leave a monetary legacy for their children through negative gearing, family trusts, etc, etc, they'd be working to ensure their kids had a planet that is liveable friendly. Bet that will never happen with this mob. All they can see is the almighty dollar.
    LUVCO2
    7th May 2016
    11:45am
    Too bad for you and your gullibility on the global warming scam, most Aussies aren't buying that claptrap!

    It's a non issue.

    Despite endless hype & lies, most Aussies sceptical of #climatechange pic.twitter.com/iizh834uje

    global warming SCAM DROPPED FROM POLL DUE TO LACK OF INTEREST! pic.twitter.com/uXABhfxAQx

    UN GLOBAL POLL: global warming scam DEAD LAST! Only the gullible fooled. pic.twitter.com/hGHq48oWNG

    global warming about DEAD LAST in Europe as well! pic.twitter.com/FHhjyfxz8S

    Ch9 Poll:69% Australians reject global warming DESPITE UNRELENTING WARMIST PROPAGANDA http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/nine-poll-shows-69-of-australians-dont-believe-in-man-made-global-warming/

    An INCONVENIENT News Radio Poll pic.twitter.com/cKHaa2blQR

    A wonder climate change scam is even on the list let alone at the bottom! pic.twitter.com/e4YyRUHqAg

    7th May 2016
    7:07am
    So much criticism of Labor's claimed economic mismanagement, but the LNP can't even tell us how much their obscenely generous company tax cuts program will cost the country. And they are so out of touch that they THOUGHT that a high percentage of Australians would be better off as a result of their budget, but a massive 93% say they will be worse off!

    Clearly, Turncoat and ScoMo don't even know what the average Australian income really is. Maybe they don't actually mean to favour the rich? Maybe they are just deluded enough to think we are all much wealthier than we are?
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    8:28am
    Why did Labor go to the last election with a promise to cut company tax by a massive 15%??
    Does Labor know what they are talking about??
    When the Abbott government dropped small bus tax by 1.5% Bill Shorten urged him to drop it by 5%.
    Does Labor stand for anything?
    Bill Shorten wants the budget repair tax on high income earners to continue indefinitely. Is that because he has plans to get us deeper into debt??
    Anonymous
    10th May 2016
    6:40am
    I suspect Labor wants the budget repair tax to continue because it now recognizes that tax revenue has to come from somewhere or there's no money for the services society needs. They understand that battlers simply have no more to give and the system is far too heavily weighted in favour of high income earners.

    Anyone who was around in the 50s and 60s will remember a much healthier society. Taxes on high incomes were far higher, and the well to do were still well to do, and happy. Everything worked well. Reducing taxes for the wealthy HAS NOT helped make things better.
    Happy Jack
    7th May 2016
    9:26am
    Because FRANK! we faced different financial circumstances. At that time it was affordable, now it isn't.
    Take the blinkers off Frank.
    Adrianus
    7th May 2016
    10:26am
    The Shorten Labor policy to cut the rate to 5% was only 12 months ago.
    The Rudd Labor policy to cut the rate to 15% was from memory just 2 weeks before the 2013 election.
    Labor now support the drop in corporate tax but only for small business as described by the ATO with turnover of less than $2m.
    Support Labor, fine. But understand what it is you are supporting.
    TREBOR
    7th May 2016
    10:38pm
    Sorry, lads - business has to pay tax.. if they were on the same tax scale as everyone else - THEN they'd be screaming...

    I think 30% on profit after all costs is pretty good for a business earning a profit in the millions.... anyone else would be paying top tax bracket.....

    A business is a 'separate legal entity' - there is therefore a serious argument that they be treated the same as any individual. FCS - they even wanted a vote for each business separately in elections in places like Mad Bag Sydney Central under Cloven-hoof Moore... yet do not want to pay tax on their income same as everyone else.

    Amazing.... simply amazing....
    LUVCO2
    7th May 2016
    12:50pm
    Too bad for you and your gullibility on the global warming scam, most Aussies aren't buying that claptrap!

    It's a non issue.

    Despite endless hype & lies, most Aussies sceptical of #climatechange pic.twitter.com/iizh834uje

    global warming SCAM DROPPED FROM POLL DUE TO LACK OF INTEREST! pic.twitter.com/uXABhfxAQx

    UN GLOBAL POLL: global warming scam DEAD LAST! Only the gullible fooled. pic.twitter.com/hGHq48oWNG

    global warming about DEAD LAST in Europe as well! pic.twitter.com/FHhjyfxz8S

    Ch9 Poll:69% Australians reject global warming DESPITE UNRELENTING WARMIST PROPAGANDA http://joannenova.com.au/2014/11/nine-poll-shows-69-of-australians-dont-believe-in-man-made-global-warming/

    An INCONVENIENT News Radio Poll pic.twitter.com/cKHaa2blQR

    A wonder climate change scam is even on the list let alone at the bottom! pic.twitter.com/e4YyRUHqAg
    Adrianus
    8th May 2016
    9:48am
    I am very disappointed with the Turnbull government. I expect this sort of corruption from Layba but the ellenpee is supposed to be fairer in it's wealth redistribution. Now we have another reduction in TV licence fees. Why is it that during the last 3 federal elections Free to air channels 10, 9 and 7 get a multimillion dollar fee reduction??? Turnbull has lowered himself to layba standards. It's not a good look!
    Adrianus
    11th May 2016
    7:14pm
    My apologies. I got it wrong. This reduction in fess was from the Labor government.
    ex PS
    10th May 2016
    12:30pm
    A pox on both their houses I say. The difference between the so called major party's is negligible.
    We see the same old drones banging on about how one political party is evil and can't do anything right and how the one they support has been sent from heaven and will turn water into wine and give us all an unlimited supply.
    What a childlike faith these people have, such a bountiful crop for the con men of this world to reap.
    I think it is time that voters stopped voting along tribal lines and really thought about the party they are supporting, especially time to stop this simpleton belief that when you vote you are voting for a leader that is going to act in a way that is guided by their own moral compass.
    I supported one leader that I believed thought more or less the way I did only to find that in order to gain power he had sold out and agreed to tow the party line.
    If we support on of the so called major party's we perpetuate a political corruption that will destroy us in the end. It is time to show some gumption and look at alternative political organisations, they may not win but they will provide some protection from political ineptitude and feckless policies.

    11th May 2016
    2:33pm
    Chris Bowen noted in his budget reply that Labor WILL be reversing the cruel and unfair pension assets test changes. Good to hear that common sense prevails on at least one side of politics and taxpayers can have some hope of not having to pay 7.8% dividends (indexed to inflation) to savers who hoard their money under the mattress or decide to go on spending sprees because there's no longer any benefit in saving.
    gravy
    11th May 2016
    3:48pm
    Just an aside to the budget and election I was notified of a petition on Change.org about retired/ousted politicians and their post parliamentary entitlements. This is found at https://www.change.org/p/house-of-representatives-stop-payments-for-non-currently-serving-politicians/u/16535924?tk=xTGI2svAEWohSYCU2qwFaZkjblFZva3mdfOi7zExzjY&utm_source=petition_update&utm_medium=email . You may be interested in signing it or at least reading about it.
    Adrianus
    11th May 2016
    5:46pm
    Sorry gravy, I could never bring myself to vote for the Greens. Not after they joined with Labor in formulating a policy which caused the deaths of 1200 asylum seekers.
    I hope they don't get in again. It was heart breaking for me.
    gravy
    11th May 2016
    7:12pm
    Dear Frank

    The petition I referred to is not about the Greens nor about voting for or against them, it is a petition about all politicians and their post parliamentary entitlements. I encourage you to go and read about it and if it appeals to you sign it. If you think Change.org is a Green Party platform I recommend you read about what Change.org is and maybe you will change your mind.
    gravy
    12th May 2016
    1:38pm
    Mr Turnbull was mentioned in last nights public release of names, to have been a Director in a Company that was part of the Panama Papers release. Not a good start!
    Adrianus
    12th May 2016
    2:20pm
    Oh dear, gravy, what does that mean?
    LUVCO2
    13th May 2016
    10:27am
    Voting Suggestions Now That Leftie "LaborLite" Turncoat Is The UNELECTED Leader of The LNP

    Rule 1: For the House of Representatives, wherever possible vote National. National Party Coalition members ... had no hand in Turnbull’s conspiracy last September…

    Rule 2: Obtain a list of those 56 Liberals who, last September, voted (or in two cases would have voted if present) to oust Abbott. Andrew Bolt recently referred to such a list at http://www.trueblueNZ.com, naming 40 Members and 16 Senators....Those people – the Mark of Cain upon their foreheads – are your targets.

    Rule 3: Ascertain whether your own Liberal MP is on that list. If not, vote for him or her with a clear conscience; but if so, when completing your ballot paper you must put that miscreant last.... Similar rules are needed for the Senate, where all 12 places in each State will be contested.

    EXAMPLE
    Suppose you reside in New South Wales. Your list includes three NSW Liberal Senators (Heffernan, Payne and Sinodinos), one of whom (Heffernan) is retiring. The joint Liberal/National NSW Senate list for the election has not yet been finalized, but assume it contains (say) seven names – five Liberals, including your two remaining targets, Payne and Sinodinos, and two Nationals.

    Under this Rule it is now imperative that you vote below the line. The new Senate voting procedures make it relatively easy to do so by numbering, in order, only 12 squares. So you can begin (see Rule 1) by numbering the two Nationals 1 and 2, and then three of those Liberals from 3 through 5, but – and this is the key point – omitting Payne and Sinodinos. Finding seven more candidates from acceptably ‘conservative’ parties to make up your 12 will be easy – Family First, Australian Liberty Alliance, Christian Democrats, Liberal Democrats, Shooters and Fishers and so on.
    LUVCO2
    16th May 2016
    9:39am
    From the US, here’s what an honest politician sounds like. DITTO FOR AUSTRALIA!

    FROM THE US, AT LAST AN HONEST POLITICIAN – SCREW THE ENEXT GENERATION!
    Congressman X is the nom de plume of an anonymous Democratic congressman who’s just written a scandalous new tell-all book.
    And it packs enough dynamite to bring down the walls of Jericho!
    Titled The Confessions of Congressman X, it’s a “devastating inside look at the dark side of Congress as revealed by one of its own,” as the book’s publisher styles it.
    Here you have confirmation of everything you’ve ever suspected about politicians — their .50-caliber dishonesty… their bottomless corruption… their finger-in-the-wind convictions. You name it.

    Here are a few choice snippets. And we hope you’ve digested your breakfast:

    “Most of my colleagues are dishonest career politicians who revel in the power and special-interest money that’s lavished upon them.”

    “My main job is to keep my job, to get reelected. It takes precedence over everything.”

    “Fundraising is so time-consuming I seldom read any bills I vote on. Like many of my colleagues, I don’t know how the legislation will be implemented, or what it’ll cost.”

    “My staff gives me a last-minute briefing before I go to the floor and tells me whether to vote yea or nay. How bad is that?”

    “I sometimes vote ‘yes’ on a motion and ‘no’ on an amendment so I can claim I’m on either side of an issue.”

    “It’s the old shell game: If you can’t convince ’em, confuse ’em.”

    Bravo, bravo. At last, an honest fraud!

    But it’s more you want? Here Congressman X trains his guns right on the American people. Brace yourself:

    “Voters claim they want substance and detailed position papers, but what they really crave are cutesy cat videos, celebrity gossip, top 10 lists, reality TV shows, tabloid tripe and the next f***ing Twitter message.”

    “Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works.”

    “It’s far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification.”

    Don’t hold back, Congressman X. Tell us what you really think. But here he really takes an ax to the root of the tree. And doesn’t it just say it all?
    “We spend money we don’t have and blithely mortgage the future with a wink and a nod. Screw the next generation.”

    Screw the next generation…
    Daily Reckoning newsletter 14 May 2016


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles