Jump to content

Skyrazer

Members
  • Posts

    993
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Skyrazer

  1. You have to take a look at who they lost votes/seats to - Teals, Greens, Labor. These are left or centrist parties/candidates with progressive streaks. So the argument that they weren't right-wing enough flies in the face of what actually happened. If they weren't right-wing enough, we would've seen substantial swings towards parties like PHON and UAP instead which just wasn't the case.
  2. I wouldn't necessarily say so since even in the electorates that they retained, they still saw sizable swings against them. I'd argue that the seats they retained are just more dyed-on blue who'd vote for libs regardless. If the party was more moderate and in line with the teals, these seats would've still voted Lib and with probably less of a swing against them than they saw.
  3. Don't disagree here. We tend to be spooked easily over something or another and go running back to conservatism. The Libs tend to get held to a lower standard as well compared to Labor and are let off the hook more. I don't doubt the LNP will come back eventually in one guise or another. I just believe that if they continue shifting into the conservative deep end and Labor don't implode, it may be awhile before they're viable again. I doubt they'll be getting back those teal seats any time soon and without them, it's going to be difficult.
  4. Trust me, I'm not getting my hopes up too much. I'm fully aware how short people's memories can be and how unpredictable politics can be. I'm not expecting the ALP to set the world on fire but to keep a healthy equilibrium with Greens/Teals which will be enough to isolate the LNP if they continue to veer right and the ALP are playing it pretty safe for the time being. I'm well aware that if the ALP start stumbling or even if the LNP get their shit together, anything can happen.
  5. As I said before, if this makeup of parliament works out decently and the public generally warm up to it which leads to similar results next election, leading to a solidifying of ALP + healthy number of independents, the LNP may find themselves in an existential crisis. The hard-right/culture-war/divisive style of politics works better in a 2-party system where it can paint an us-vs-them picture and use it to its advantage. Seeing that we are shifting away from a 2-party dominated landscape to something more mixed akin to what you see in EU nations for instance, the republican style of politicking becomes more muted and something the LNP can no longer rely on (which they have been to an extent). I know when Rudd won in '07, people were pronouncing the end of the LNP for atleast a decade or whatever so I do have my doubts. But the scene has changed alot since then and now that the electorate has caught on that you can viably vote in an independent if one of the majors piss you off, it's a whole different ball game compared to elections before. Hopefully the ALP can just keep a steady course and not blow itself up which it has a bit of a tendency to do.
  6. I just don't see how that's a realistic strategy to get the Libs back into govt. How many of these outer-suburban seats that are swaying conservative are there to make up for the huge deficit this election has left them in? Across the board, we saw swings towards left/progressive candidates and the parliament as a whole has mostly shifted away from hard conservatism. Suburban Qld and Sydney may have some here or there, but Melb, Adelaide and even Perth seem like they have no taste for the current Liberal brand. If we saw the seats that the Libs lost shifting to more right-wing candidates like UAP/PHON, then I can understand the logic in shifting right. But we saw the opposite occur. Yes they need to distinguish themselves somehow, but the challenge is going to be doing it in a way that doesn't make them less relevant and from what I can see coming out of this election, shifting further right is not going to get them very far or even set them backwards.
  7. Since COVID, I think there simply isn't any fuss anymore around fixing the budget. Pretty much every county around the world went neck-deep into debt to save their economies during the outbreak and any notion of attaining a surplus is so far out, it's off people's minds. Inflation though is proving to be the clincher and is going to be the major economic issue going forward in the immediate-term. On another note, I hope to god Hanson loses her seat. That'll put the cherry on top of this whole election for me, especially if it's to Legalise Cannabis.
  8. Now there's apparently whispers that some Lib members want to divorce from the Nats. No doubt the Nats are a big reason for the devastating loss and continue being stubborn on their stance with climate action. Outside of their own safe electorates, the Nats are generally disliked, especially in the urban electorates and their failure to get with the times is hurting the coalition. I don't know, we'll see how this seemingly progressive and quite diverse parliament goes over the next 3 years. But if it works out and turns out to be a hit, the Coalition are going to need to overhaul themselves or risk being left behind. I'm very cautiously optimistic about this latest iteration of our Parliament, but we've never had a makeup like this before so who knows how things will go.
  9. It does kinda suck for the moderate Libs though. Their electorates punished the party for being too conservative, but it's the moderates who end up on the receiving end while the actual conservatives hold on.
  10. ABC site has a good rundown: https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/results?filter=indoubt&sort=az&state=all
  11. Looks like Dutton will retain his seat and become leader....which doesn't bode all that well for the Libs to be honest. He's not very liked amongst the electorate. Libs really need a moderate leader and Dutton is pretty hard-right.
  12. Counting is very early, but anyone brave enough to make any predictions? From what I can discern, there's a big swing against the LNP, minor swing against ALP and a big swing towards independents. Could be looking at a minority govt which I believe is going to become a common feature of our parliament going forward.
  13. Going to do all my chores and then vote later in the afternoon. Morning is usually when it's busiest, so should hopefully be minimal wait if I go in the afternoon. Last election I went in the morning and had to line up for ages. My area though just recently got redistributed from seat of Melbourne (Bandt) to Maribyrnong (Shorten). It's super safe Labor, but I wonder if the redistribution will bump up the Green vote somewhat in the electorate since inner-Melbourne is full of Greenies.
  14. As Anti-Targ said, lots of people pull loans against their houses, and not just for discretionary stuff like cars and holidays but for things like opening/expanding businesses and such. If people start falling into negative equity en-masse, it'll gut much of the economy as they won't be able to pull loans against their properties anymore. Confidence and sentiment is also a big driver of the economy and nothing will kill confidence and sentiment than being in negative equity. Look, I agree with much of what you're saying. Prices coming down to more affordable levels will overall be ideal and something we should definitely be aiming for. We've just gotten to a stage where it's nearly impossible to do without any short-term pain and if you're a politician trying to get elected and stay elected, it's just not very politically palatable to induce the old "recession we had to have" with the electorate. Hence why we continue to get policies implemented that perpetually kick the can down the road instead of actually trying to solve underlying issues.
  15. In the long run yes, lower house prices will be beneficial. As it is though, most Australians wind up having the majority of their wealth tied up in housing, so dropping prices means dropping wealth for the country overall which means bad news for the economy as a whole. Not to mention, Australians carry something like the second highest debt-per-capita in the world with the vast majority of that debt being mortgages so a crash in prices will mean lots of people going into negative equity which again, will trash the overall economy. We've turned the basic necessity of housing into a massive wealth instrument unfortunately and it's left us in the predicament we are in now where it's become prohibitively unaffordable, but too costly to make affordable. As Jeor said, the best we could probably do to achieve more affordable housing without wrecking our wealth would be a long-term stagnation where prices barely move and general inflation catches up. Yes it will take awhile and it sucks for the FHBs who have bought recently or need to buy something soon, but this problem has been steadily building over the past couple decades or so, so correcting it will be a long grind.
  16. Quartering off a segment of the market to cater to supplying FHBs with affordable housing would be a good solution. The fact that FHBs have to compete with much wealthier investors or established buyers means the deck is majorly stacked against them. But it's ambitious and progressive and this country doesn't seem to have the appetite for drastic things like this. And as I mentioned before, this could potentially mean upsetting existing homeowners as it pulls FHBs out of the private market which would put downward pressure on prices and parties of all stripes are simply too afraid of rocking that cart.
  17. Prices are also heavily predicated on the purchasing power of buyers. Govts keep continuing to hand out incentives/tax breaks to buyers, giving them more purchasing power which contributes to driving up prices. Yes supply is a major factor in the equation. But as Karaddin says, our issue is less about lack of supply and more bad govt policy driving up demand. If we didn't have all the incentives and tax breaks, you'd probably find our supposed lack of supply would not be nearly as bad as it seems.
  18. I don't consider NZ a good example to follow as housing affordability there is as borked as it is over here. I can understand the thought that retiring while owning your own home means a more secure retirement. But rising prices is kinda a zero-sum game in this regard - the most likely reason you'd sell the home you live in is to move and while it's great your home has gone up in value, so has the the place you want to buy, so you don't really end up ahead. Not to mention we have worsening demographics with the ratio of young-to-old people slanting more and more to the latter. We desperately need people retiring with healthy supers.
  19. It's a massive socio-economic issue that's become too ingrained culturally to properly fix. Guaranteeing affordable housing would come at the cost of home-owners and that's something this country just can not stomach (politically and electorally). And I'm saying this as a home-owner myself. We don't want prices to crash as that would be disastrous, but govts should atleast be aiming to prevent prices outpace inflation while wages catch up. The 20% or so gain we saw over COVID is something that shouldn't be happening and it should be curtailed. That should be causing govts to freak out just like soaring food and petrol prices are. Instead we have policies being put into place that are trying to achieve just that....
  20. Successive govts here haven't left it to the market though - they pump it up every time a correction comes looming (like it is now with IRs heading upwards) with silly incentives. It's half the reason housing affordability has been at crisis point for so long. Adequate and affordable housing should be a right I agree, just like it is with health and education. Something like Singapore's HDB system would be nice, but something like that would hit the private property market as it will pull a vast swathe of FHBs out of the market and no govt wants to do that.
  21. *sigh* Trying to make home ownership more "affordable" by putting more money into it....again. FFS I really wish parties would just leave the housing market alone. Allowing FHBs to dip into their super is probably the worst policy of this kind yet though. FHBs are mostly in their 20s/early 30s and don't have much super anyway and it's just going to create more issues down the track when they retire with a smaller nest egg. Not to mention it'll likely push up prices beyond the meager amounts of super they have anyway, so they'll end up actually worse off. Talk about lose-lose.
  22. Absolutely the LNP are way more guilty with weaponising rates and it's going to be kind of karmic to watch it basically come around and bite them in the ass.
  23. RBA have heavily signaled that there is more to come sooner rather than later. If each month comes with a 25 point raise for the rest of the year, we'll hit 2%. I just find it dumb though that governments have turned rates into a political issue. "Rates will be lower under us cus we're so good wif da economee" is so fucking stupid. As much as I hope the LNP loses in 3 weeks, this rate rise realistically shouldn't have an impact on the election even though it will.
  24. The change in Labor's direction was entirely predictable though. After they lost ground in the last election, it's kind of understandable they would just say "You know what, fuck it. We'll just take the easy path like the LNP and just scare voters into voting for us". It takes more effort to convince voters on why they should be voting for you rather than just convincing them on why they shouldn't vote for the other guys. Labor took the former while the LNP took the latter at the last election and it worked out in the LNP's favor. If Labor have to lower their standards to meet voter expectations, well then I guess that's what they'll do (as unfortunate as it is).
×
×
  • Create New...