Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Grown up adult whinge

I'm so totally not prepared enough for this election.

Adam has touched on this a bit, and I do think I'm a bit of a product of my environment. My parents vote Labor, so I'm predisposed to voting Labor. But I don't really know why... I DO know that I disagree with us being involved in the war, I disagree with the manner in which immigration and indigenous Australians have been 'managed', and although I felt a little bit sorry for him during the debate, I don't think I really trust the man to run the country.

On a note closer to home, there has long been rumor hanging over our heads that the existing government pretty wants to be rid of the area I work in. And although it sucks for me, I can understand. When it comes down to it, the money you pay in tax goes to paying my salary. And the more of me there are, the less your money goes toward good and important things. And the more inefficient the people and the processes are, the more right you have to be p!ssed off at the manner in which things are being run.

We found out this morning that this is just as likely, if not more, to occur under a Labor government - damned if you do, damned if you don't I guess. But, it's not going to make me all of a sudden vote Liberal to hedge my bets.

Is ANYONE aware of an easy/simple way for me to find out what I would be voting for, depending on who I vote for? I've heard rumour that Greens and/or Democrats were against tax cuts, instead planning to use the money for hospitals and education. Doesn't that make sense?! How do I get that to happen?!

Any help would be much appreciated - I really would hate to stuff up my chance this year.

PS - How on earth is negative gearing allowed?! From my understanding: if you get greedy and buy a house to rent it out, whilst paying rent at another place, the government covers the difference between what the renter is paying you and what your mortgage is. No wonder it's so hard to find frickin' housing!

11 comments:

Adam said...

I have to admit, I still don't quite have my head around negative gearing either. I think it only applies if you actually run at a loss (rent less than repayments?) and that loss is deductable. If that's right I don't understand why so many people would want to run at a loss, even if it is deductable.

I'm so many years off affording any house anything so I'm not really sure.

I am so watching this space on how to figure out this whole politics bizzo. I'd pretty much like an impartial e-mail that summarises the whole thing in a table (or cartoon) form.

Anonymous said...

hi hi.

supporters of a two-party system (and i'm not one of them!) believe that it is a good way to run a democracy because there are two opposing (ideological) groups constantly compromising policy (whether this occurs when a government is in power with a majority in the senate -- as is the case now -- is quite unlikely). at the moment, the two-party model is made ineffectual by the fact that the two major party's policies are actually very similar. there are differences, of course, but the differences are largely rhetorical. for the liberal party, the fundamental rhetoric is that of the individual's right to choose how they manage their own life: so if the taxes are lower, and it is easy to make a buck, then people can choose the services they want. the labor party has traditionally been more in favour of slightly higher taxes (especially for the high income earners) and more public services. the liberals are keen to privatise public services so that things like health care, education, etc. are run by corporations rather than being state-funded. labor is (in theory) keen to improve state-funded services so that people who can not afford private health and education, for example, are not disadvantaged.

having said all of this, there is no way of ever knowing what each of the party is willing or desiring to do on any one particular policy. rudd is a conservative, perhaps not in the same old-school sense that howard is, but he is still a conservative. his policies on same-sex marriage, for example, would not be as progressive as one might imagine for the opposition leader in an election against a conservative.


now, onto the matter of the greens and democrats. both these parties (with the greens enjoying a very successful period at the moment) are much more progressive and small 'l' liberal than labor. their policies vary, obviously, since they are different parties. i don't know a great deal about the democrats these days, but the greens lately have worked hard on their campaigns in all areas -- not just the environment. if you vote green, your vote will be preferenced to labor, but the primary vote will go to the greens. that will mean that if their member is not elected, labor will receive your vote. however, in the senate, where the greens have a good chance of winning seats, they may well balance the majority that the liberals now hold so that bills will not be passed automatically by a liberal majority in the senate. this is quite significant. also, the more greens votes means more support which means more money for more campaigns, etc.

having said all this, i am not a fan of political parties in general, and although i vote green i am not a party hack or anything. i am very much in favour of a change of government, not in support of rudd, but because the vast majority of howard's policies have been extremely detrimental to this country.

anyway, hope that's useful.

Enny said...

adam - doesn't it then mean they can own a house and not pay all of their mortage themselves? That's greedy! I hope you kept your eyes peeled.

anon - I wish I knew who you were so I could thank you! Your point on Rudd is quite what I felt - I could not BELIEVE his stance on gay marriage as well... I guess I had too much faith in them being opposites. That is SO helpful and has inspired me to try and have more of a look around at what else I can find. Thankyou SO much :o)

Anonymous said...

hi, sorry to post anonymously, i didn't mean to but blogger has a funny time when i try to comment sometimes. my name is astrid and i happened on your blog through cristy and paul's blog (who i don't know either, they're linked to my friend anna's blog!) i saw that post and felt inspired to answer. i'm pretty interested in this election, needless to say... glad it helped, astrid.

Enny said...

Astrid - curiously, I thought there'd be a link to C&P :o) It really did help - thanks again :o)

Desci said...

Labour in the lower house, Greens in the Senate. Trust me.

Aurelius said...

Enny,

Rather than tell you who to vote for (for a party member, I am terribly against that kind of idea) I think it much better if you work it out for yourself, based on what you believe, and how important you rate the issues.
Google "Political Compass" and "Australia" and you should find something that should help.
Political compasses came out a few years ago and are designed to show you who is most likely to best represent the issues you consider important.

Anonymous said...

Without people owning investment properties, there would be NO rentals available. There has to be some incentive for people to invest in property, be it a tax advantage or making gains on the value of the property. Negative gear means just that, after all of their expenses taken into consideration it's less than what they are earning on a property in rent. Why do they do it? To concentrate their funds on paying off their personal mortgage, have the rental on interest only, and once they have no personal debt then concentrate on paying the investment property off - or invest in further things.

As for the above comment stating that the vast of Howard's policies having been detrimental to this country - you've got to be kidding me! This country has been running far more efficiently than it ever did under a Labour government!

Enny said...

desci - why thankyou, miss!

Mr Aurelius - I had a look, thankyou! I will be spending a bit more time next week going through the internets to get more of an idea :o)

anon - Valid point - thanks! Unfortch, I'm not really the one to comment on the political debate, but you're welcome to carry it on :o)

LaLa said...

Thanks for asking the question Enny, I am confused too.

I tend to distrust all of them.

Enny said...

lala - that tends to be one of the initial thoughts too - the question to what degree you should believe the things will ACTUALLY happen...!