ajm @[email protected]

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

To most Libs, "Productivity" = (small) business profits. Nothing to do with the economic concept of the same name

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Mark_Graph @ChrisEconomist Should have called it an excess profits tax. "Super" was technical term misunderstood by the public - who wants a super tax? But "excess" would have played well with tall poppy syndrome.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Mark_Graph @AvidCommentator @750kin1year Or lower profits. The capital and labour shares of national income are not enshrined in some unchangeable lump of concrete.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Mark_Graph @AvidCommentator Whatever makes you think the coalition is even capable of that level of sophistication in policy making. They are hollowed out and increasingly captured by the far right.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@mumbletwits Or perhaps they are just trying to make as much bank as possible and then decamp to another jurisdiction (or charter city or private island) to enjoy the ill-gotten gains.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@mumbletwits Perhaps they are stupid enough to think the whole country will have a "Come to Jesus" moment and vote for them despite everything. There is some evidence they may be that stupid.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Mark_Graph @PeteWargent It's difficult to know, but a combination of disincentives for fossil fuels and growing incentives/direct investment for renewables may well have been the optimum combination.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Mark_Graph @PeteWargent Agree with most of that, but the carbon tax was part of a suite of policies (eg the CEFC). The carbon tax was actually choked off pretty fast by the election of the Abbott government, which also tried to hobble renewables.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@kevinbonham Surely they're very unlikely to do it now, since it's pretty clear they would be disadvantaged. At the very least it would be a huge risk.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Mark_Graph @PeteWargent Surely the point of the carbon tax was to rebalance investment towards renewables, which is what you say should have happened. That's certainly the way I always saw it, as I'm sure did most people.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@noplaceforsheep @MichaelSpring17 Quite likely a lot of those trips were for her 18 year old daughter - it apparently only says " family member"

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@mumbletwits It just shows the shareholders are dumb and/or greedy

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@R_Chirgwin Don't know. It would be interesting to see the ratings figures. Suspect it might vary a fair bit between different demographics. I tend to hear AM more often than PM but I may not be typical

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@awelder A very large amount of desperate thrashing about for a campaign seemingly leading in the polls by such a large margin.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@awelder Probably too late but yes anyway

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Leo_Puglisi6 At that time (1920s) I think the NSW Legislative Council at least was entirely appointed.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@awelder Yep

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@DavidSligar Most reported "sackings" such as mentioned involve calling in the sackee, telling them to resign or we'll start proceedings, and the sackee almost inevitably resigns rather than go through the drama. You'd need to know the precise events involved in the "sackings" you menion.

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@Thefinnigans @AlboMP The most important ones in a procession are those who are at the end

[ajm @[email protected] @a1m7]

@pceebee23 The Redcliffe train line in Queensland was first promised in 1895 and frequently repromised by all sides of politics until it finally opened in 2016. Patience, patience