Voting shenanigans have always existed, but as everything, seems to be getting more exaggerated. Particularly with so many early votes - fewer polling stations and more idle volunteers.
I take a HTV from everyone, don't engage and vote however I decide and ignore the HTV.
Against WC, they were able to start moving the ball with a bit of confidence, but (by reports) still quite sloppy. Against North, they were a lot more ruthless and used the confidence from the WC win. Yesterday, they built again.
It was a great performance with so many doing well - and many team oriented acts for the entirety of the game.
The first few games we spent more petrol tickets early due to our inefficiency. We seemed to be much better yesterday.
What I hated was the Foxtel commentators reminding us that we 'only' beat North & WC - with a very strong implication we were going to get run over.
Free kick count apparently was 12-2 to us in the 2nd half. Cats kicked a lot OOF - apart from re-watching, is there a way to find out how many?
This morning [Sunday] on ABC’s Insider’s program, Shadow Infrastructure minister Bridget McKenzie said that Electric Vehicle drivers should pay a road usage charge and that this will be considered should they win Government at the upcoming Federal Election.
The announcement comes during an interview with host David Speers.
Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers reportedly told a Business Council of Australia dinner in Canberra last week an EV road user charge is on the agenda This was at a Business Council Australia lunch
Not only that - but who really cares. It is not important that he wore a blue suit (as did William, and Biden a blue tie). It's not like he wore shorts and a t shirt.
When people get tied up with this bs, the real issues get tucked away.
There are already diesel rebates for vehicles over 4.5t. However, it will only impact supply chain if the savings are passed on through cheaper prices. Corporate Australia hasn't got a great track record for passing on savings. The LNP page doesn't say anything about this - just talks about savings to families at the pump and small businesses.
Yes, we are at the very light end of travel - nearly all of our driving is local, but to save $1,500 a year is 6,000 litres - 3,000 litres per car. If you get 10l/100k, that is 60,000k for the two cars. How many really do that.
Prices of staples is a stupid, lazy question and is not related to reality for politicians. Doesn't mean they're out of touch. When it is policy related, that is different.
When they tell me that I will save $1500 a year on fuel excise, I am suspicious: 2 cars. One takes ~45 litres, the other 55. Fill them every 3rd week or so. 100 litres @ $0.25 = $25 saving both tanks. Times 17 weeks = $425. Or: if petrol prices are $1.80 for 91, do they only go down to $1.70, because private companies don't pass on the 25c? And as many enquiries have found out, there are few controls gov has on petrol prices.
I haven't heard or seen (I haven't looked either) anything about vision for Australia. LNP has get Aus back on track - but to what and where - when was Aus last on track - just pick up and continue from there? What do the parties want Aus to look like?
Tax cuts/rebates (incl excise)? Instead of minimal bribes, why don't you tackle genuine tax reform? Too hard, too much vested interest?
Instead of energy rebates - tackle the issue of high prices. Why do the regulators not step in and reduce increases? (Same with private health).
Vic tried to introduce cents per km charge for EVs, but didn't have jurisdiction. How is the fuel excise lost from EVs going to be replaced? Yet, there are gov incentives to buy EVs.
Can either party explain their immigration policy? Yes, we need students (if not Uni funding needs to jncrease), need backpackers for fruitpicking etc, need professionals to cover skill shortages etc. How does this fit with their vision for Aust?
LNP - if you are serious about nuclear energy, tell us and answer questions - how much will it cost, how will it be funded, will it be private or public, where are the skills to make the plants going to come from, what % of power will this provide, how does it fit with closure of coal stations?
What are the water policies? How do they both preserve the environment, assist farmers and supply people? It feels in Melb that days of rain is much reduced, but when it rains there is a lot.
There's more, but my rant is too long. Lack of vision is disturbing.
A couple of things that I think have generally been good: - RFK announced the banning of some food colourings (in line with Europe) - We will know what 'causes' autism by October (yeah, right) - tipping he's going to announce vaccinations. Yep that'd be it. - The deportation of some people. BUT why can't you just say we f***ed up on a couple and let them back in? There's no loss of face doing that. - The implementation of A1 in schools - from the Education person, whose job it is to shut down the federal department (oh, dear)
But, how on earth could you possibly run any business that relies on imports to either manufacture into goods, or sell directly to the public. The uncertainty kills any planning - how much will it cost? Do I need to add 20% tariff, or 80%? Can I source product that has a lower tariff? Can I get a manufacturing plant to make my goods up and running to meet Christmas production requirements? (no), can I increase my local production by enough in time (unlikely) Are there skilled people in US that can do this? (less and less). China's big advantage now is that they have masses of skilled manufacturing jobs - tooling, fitting and turning, engineering and people to do them. The US doesn't with the decline fo manufacturing. Dare say, like here.
Fruit & Veg - The USA imports heaps, much more cheaply than the local farmers can supply the market for. So in price sensitive times, the US farmers struggle. Tariffs will bring the price of the imported stuff up, making the gap between local and imported less obvious. Good for the locals, as they may sell more and keep there businesses afloat - some may boom (and increase employment - often immigrants on farms). But the grocery spend for everyone will be up - meaning that spending decreases will be on the cards.
Don has started to find out that the world doesn't need the US as much as he thinks - which is a bit of a shock to him. Apparently the G7 group (Canada, USA, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK) has something like 30% of the world's GDP. BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, Sth Africa) is about 35% - do we need to start getting used to a new world?
Most has already been said. It was pretty close to a 4 qtr effort, and really pleasing that we didn't win by 5 goals after our lead at 3/4 time.
We also were able to revert to the high pressure footy when it lapsed a couple of times. The team should see the reward for effort now and hopefully it drives them.
Interesting Xerri got 116 AF points, TDK got 62. I thought TDK beat Xerri. A great all round effort not reliant on anyone.
World markets hate uncertainty, which Trump offers (with certainty). Eventually other countries will tire of his game and not be bothered with him and create new markets excluding US.
Mostly tarriffs are added to protect an industry that already exists. Adding a tarriff to Champagne only increases the cost of Champagne, because by definition, it can only be made in a particular region of France.
There are a heap of products that are going to be more expensive because the US can't manufacture them. How long does it take to set up the infrastructure to enable the US to make it all - and then - at what cost - to the public and employees. Is their industry going to be big enough for significant competition?
For those that have retired with their super now - hope you can all hang on - it may be a little bumpy for a while.
Or is it just a big money making opportunity for the already very wealthy that are in his pocket?