Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well the taboo on discussing money is an inheritance from our British heritage. I got a shock when my husband's European relatives would ask me how much I paid for the clothes I was wearing, etc.
It is complex, you can tell someone what you paid for your new house but it is rude to ask someone what they paid. Public servants will discuss salary as it is al available online, at least at the lower and middle levels.
But I would never ask my sons-in-law what they are paid. Many Sydney families will lose all child care subsidy as both parents are working and many people firstly, become parents when late thirties and secondly, may earn say $180k each. They thing is, they are probably already paying six figure amounts in tax.
The Aussie battler thing is more a social class issue, I believe.
Well the taboo on discussing money is an inheritance from our British heritage. I got a shock when my husband's European relatives would ask me how much I paid for the clothes I was wearing, etc.
It is complex, you can tell someone what you paid for your new house but it is rude to ask someone what they paid. Public servants will discuss salary as it is al available online, at least at the lower and middle levels.
But I would never ask my sons-in-law what they are paid. Many Sydney families will lose all child care subsidy as both parents are working and many people firstly, become parents when late thirties and secondly, may earn say $180k each. They thing is, they are probably already paying six figure amounts in tax.
The Aussie battler thing is more a social class issue, I believe.
Well I suspect a class matter perhaps, and few Europeans in my orbit would ever be so crass as to ask the cost of something .
Same would apply to English, if of course possessing an iota of class. Now Americans,often shocked us. Very direct in professional position and money earned, or telling you how much they earned, or house was worth. Totally not something mentioned in polite company. As I say judged to be crass and not a little crude.
Of course more recent times with talks on how much of a bonus was paid for the particular year, and things akin to the virtues of ostentatious wealth clearly more verbalised and on display, the barriers to good manners and rise of crassness rather more evident across the board.
Australians, have always been rather more materialistic than the English say, whom have done their best to make up for lost time in more recent decades admittingly.
Usually the high earners operate tax minimisation schemes so do not pay hefty amounts into government coffers. Creative taxation is rather a popular area of endeavour in Australia, not to say very lucrative for the operators.
As for The Aussie Battler, a term largely in disuse these days. In a time of winners and losers , a group of such 'name sentiment' does not find a place in modern day Australia, that some how promotes an idea that there are people, not a victim of poor policy, but somehow reserving of their 'failed' status.
It can be a class issue. (so much for the once pushed myth of a classless Australia' ) or increasing Middle Class down on their luck due to no fault of their own usually. but by such variables as age/business breakdown/ mental health issues/ marital breakup/ restructured out of position/not being compliant to 'goings on' around them/speaking out/ not fitting in to corporate culture/burnt out/bullied out/ Need I go on? A host of reasons why the once 'noble' sentiments as to why 'The Aussie Battler' of old has ben turned on its head.
The government can have all the will it likes, but are the Australia people and Senate also willing to support hard policies, that negatively affect them?
Even with rent caps and inheritance taxes we will no doubt hear about how it affects "Aussie Batlers", and our media will be among the biggest offender.
We live in an age where strong leadership is generally frowned upon, and a strong victim mentality.
Just last week when the new childcare subsidy comming in, we had women complaining because they are married to men who earn more than $300,000 p.a, and could no longer afford to work because they no longer get the subsidy. It came with all the usual feminst stuff about pay gaps and motherhood penalties.
The easiest way is to just take the government out of the equation, and let the RBA and APRA do there bit.
The government has its own agenda and not always, if often, giving much considering to those least able to 'benefit' in fact, prove to be more the 'victim' of' hard' policy which increasingly favours those more minted or corporations with continued belief in the 'trickle down economics' to which conservatives seem un willing/able to conclude has been shown to be a failure.
Of course when in 'own interests', governments will claim certain sectors of society will hurt, but there is less concern for fairness these days clearly.
Media generally is part of the problem, being in the hands of big business themselves in the main, not always the compete picture, especially, if disadvantageous to business/corporate interests is much in evidence.
Which is why certain 'social issues' such as Gay marriage, can divide the right wing vote, and give the appearance of progressive attitudes, as completely harmless to 'interests' on the larger scale.
Do where really live in an age where strong leadership is generally frowned upon? Do you prefer dictatorship? Certainly an alternative form of government.
In Australia, we labour under a government with an agenda, it finds difficult to sell. It is not in the interests of the majority a lot of proposed policy, resulting in a government that appears somewhat divided, rudderless, less transparency. and so.
On a world level 'strong government' in the reference to populist usually right wing parties have certainly gained momentum. From America to Hungry to Poland and Denmark, with extremes on both ends of the spectrum building in an assortment of countries.
One could of course argue that this is the result a failure of mainstream political parties to remain relevant to the average voter in times of falling living standards and at times manufactured fear.
Easiest way? Are you joking? The RBA has been showing to be lacking in clear judgement in allowing the crisis to reach such a point.
Probably kept interest rates too high for too long, but certainly should have acted long before to stem housing inflation by increasing rates and watering down speculation.
The government should have enforced policy already in place to 'police' overseas buying abuse starting with overseas student supposed to sell property on departure from Australia.
The 'laundering' of foreign money within the property market should have long ago been called out.
No thanks, the RBA have 'done their bit' and appear shell shocked or/and stunned into any policy or direction of how to get over the 'mess'.
The government has its own agenda and not always, if often, giving much considering to those least able to 'benefit' in fact, prove to be more the 'victim' of' hard' policy which increasingly favours those more minted or corporations with continued belief in the 'trickle down economics' to which conservatives seem un willing/able to conclude has been shown to be a failure.
Of course when in 'own interests', governments will claim certain sectors of society will hurt, but there is less concern for fairness these days clearly.
Media generally is part of the problem, being in the hands of big business themselves in the main, not always the compete picture, especially, if disadvantageous to business/corporate interests is much in evidence.
Which is why certain 'social issues' such as Gay marriage, can divide the right wing vote, and give the appearance of progressive attitudes, as completely harmless to 'interests' on the larger scale.
Do where really live in an age where strong leadership is generally frowned upon? Do you prefer dictatorship? Certainly an alternative form of government.
In Australia, we labour under a government with an agenda, it finds difficult to sell. It is not in the interests of the majority a lot of proposed policy, resulting in a government that appears somewhat divided, rudderless, less transparency. and so.
On a world level 'strong government' in the reference to populist usually right wing parties have certainly gained momentum. From America to Hungry to Poland and Denmark, with extremes on both ends of the spectrum building in an assortment of countries.
One could of course argue that this is the result a failure of mainstream political parties to remain relevant to the average voter in times of falling living standards and at times manufactured fear.
Easiest way? Are you joking? The RBA has been showing to be lacking in clear judgement in allowing the crisis to reach such a point.
Probably kept interest rates too high for too long, but certainly should have acted long before to stem housing inflation by increasing rates and watering down speculation.
The government should have enforced policy already in place to 'police' overseas buying abuse starting with overseas student supposed to sell property on departure from Australia.
The 'laundering' of foreign money within the property market should have long ago been called out.
No thanks, the RBA have 'done their bit' and appear shell shocked or/and stunned into any policy or direction of how to get over the 'mess'.
No I am not joking, tightening lending standards and increasing interest rates is a sure fire way to burst a housing bubble.
We have had about 5 or 6 prime minister's representing both sides of politics who have done nothing for the last decade, do you not see a pattern? Neither side wants to touch it.
I did not mention strong government I said strong leadership, two very different things.
Personally i see a strong leader as someone who tells all these extremists and populists to go stick it or at least successfully negotiate with them. Like if Malcolm Turnbull actually stood up against, the far right of his own government and just introduced the marriage legislation he and many other liberals were always in favour of.
Last edited by danielsa1775; 07-08-2018 at 11:06 PM..
No I am not joking, tightening lending standards and increasing interest rates is a sure fire way to burst a housing bubble.
We have had about 5 or 6 prime minister's representing both sides of politics who have done nothing for the last decade, do you not see a pattern? Neither side wants to touch it.
I did not mention strong government I said strong leadership, two very different things.
Personally i see a strong leader as someone who tells all these extremists and populists to go stick it or at least successfully negotiate with them. Like if Malcolm Turnbull actually stood up against, the far right of his own government and just introduced the marriage legislation he and many other liberals were always in favour of.
The pattern I see is both sides of politics beholden to maintain to the real estate industry, financial institutions and other rent seekers and as such clueless of how to dampen speculative Ponzi housing rises.
I get the impression neither party wants a 'melt down' on their watch and will continue to 'kick the can' down the road until well no longer possible. All very well living of hope and the wing of a prayer, but a government is in that role to govern. Not allowing events to dictate events.
While both major parties have shown compete disregard and worse it not bringing to heel, runaway housing inflation, it was if you recall the Howard government in 1999, by introducing a range of policy where things really took off.
So you distinguish strong leadership from government? How does that come about? In a democracy no single person calls all, hence the Italian style of changing leadership within the Australian context.
I have clearly stated what I think about the gay marriage legislation. To my thinking neither here nor there, but a useful ploy to sell oneself as a 'progressive' and appear cool in area of to often stodgy elderly men, without the foresight to see the advantages of appearing 'progressive' in an area, where corporates were even supporting. No harm to Big Business to support such a motion as doesn't impact on their mode of reason to be' in any shape of form
Turnbull, is far removed from a progressive. (liberal)I personally wonder if he'll last. Just not sure anybody else would put there hand up for the position, seeing the state of things.
In fact the policy they would want to unleash would be probably the most regressive since the war.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
