The Policy Guy

This ALP government simply cannot get anything right. I am all for data centres. They should have seen the growth potential many moons ago. But you can't establish a DC ecosystem when you've crippled your national power grid, in the name of ideology. And you can't expect industry will accept terms that new power sources must be privately funded AND based around solar and firming. Albanese is crippling every sector of this economy

Seems they've pushed an update. Timely. We're all aware that UCAN sources good revenue running transgenderism studies, specifically targetted at public servants in Canberra, who use your taxpayer dollars to sit these crap courses because it actually enhances their career prospects. We pay for this sh*t. Clown world

Without getting into needless pejoratives, there's a fella on here @MungoManic - who is about as grounded in indigenous history as you could imagine. Loads of detailed work. Come to think of it...I'm not following him myself. Follow

woohoo! since I am not, abolish all taxes

PRODUCTIVITY TIPS #27.x8 I posted this last year when I had 3 followers and got no response. Maybe now I have 14 followers it will be seismic. Having coffee with some One Nation committee members yesterday talking tax, 'as you do'. Up came the topic of public perception on double tax on second (or more) jobs. For clarity - you do not pay 50% tax on your second job. LOTS of people think you do. WHAT YOU ACTUALLY PAY - is the tax rate on your marginal income, minus the tax free threshold. To explain, if you earn $80K, then take a second job at $50K, you do NOT pay 50% tax on this. You pay (essentially) 32% - which is your marginal tax rate plus medicare levy minus the tax free threshold. if more Australians knew this, potentially more would work. Which improves productivity. Reduces the need for migration. This is a failure of uniparty to educate its citizens

Almost 5 years out of 6 into their rotten, autocratic reign, there is no way on god's green earth One Nation should endorse any move by the PM to rectify staffing number imbalances so late in the game. He's on his way out. Endure. Thrive. Then give that bastard back his own medicine. Teach them a lesson they'll never forget. **The ALP will lose close to 1000 staffers at the next election. They can damn well pick fruit** #HoldTheLine

💯 For those not seeing the rorts in the NGO sector, I presume it is circa $10B per annum plus. Certainly the 'ODA' (overseas development assistance) packages ($5B pa) are largely channelled through NGO Here's an example. A friend of mine 'works' for an Australian NGO outside of Indonesia, deep sea diving from a remote island, sucking down local beer and feeding on Nasi Goreng, whilst building the occasional artificial reef and helping turtle hatchlings. wtaf? He was telling me about his ex, who works as an indigenous community liaison and wildlife monitoring officer - basically driving around outback WA making sure wire fencing is intact. "Nation Building" Australia, they're taking the p*ss out of you. Shut down all NGO funding. Shut down *all* grants. Smaller government - so the waste becomes evident. PFA

As always, it is purportedly Sun Tzu who first schooled civilisation on the distinction, and occasional incongruence, between strategic objectives and tactical deployment. Fabius Maximus is also revered for his prescience, but modern military science expands this plane to the notion of grand strategy – there are battles, there is the war (the military conflict), and ultimately – there is hegemony. Control. And that is why, at this moment, we sit at one of the most exciting and indeed opportune moments in Australian political history. It warrants James Ashby hitting his speed dial and getting on the phone to either Brian Loughnane or Peta Credlin – either would do. It involves James offering an olive branch, which requires Brian and Peta to make that initial sacrifice – to cede the occasional battle, in the interests of grand strategy. So, you can better understand the dynamic, I ask you this: - If you are a One Nation supporter, do you believe the LNP would be more effective with ON as the formal opposition, or with the ALP in this role? - Similarly, in the unlikely event that ON can wrest power, would it be more effective with providing the initial oversight? - How do you think Peta and Brian feel? Do you think they fancy their chances against the ALP, or with ON? Sadly, Peta is no Sun Tzu. Far from it. She was an advisor to Tony Abbott, who had his backside handed to him in short time by a treasonous Malcolm Turnbull, aided by some shockingly ill-conceived ideas and actions. She’s been of little help righting either the Federal or State LNP since. ALP strategists are simply much better (I’m looking at you Bruce). They work the board until it’s time to surrender their pieces, take a hiatus, and return to the plunder. So here is a scenario. Of the 88 seats in Victoria’s lower house, let us assume we see an LNP majority (all polls point to this outcome). But the pivotal question is ‘how is the rest of the board carved up?’. To which only two questions matter: 1. Does the LNP secure a majority and 2. Who wins the second highest number of seats If I were Brian or Peta, I would be wanting One Nation in Opposition. They (B&P) both have a solid history of failing to secure the reign once in power, and they’ll be no better this time around. Let’s examine the arguments for wanting a One Nation opposition, by asking some questions: 1. Which party will best support radical public service cuts? 2. Which party will best guarantee supply? 3. Which party will either facilitate or possibly refine the legislative agenda? 4. Which party will likely oppose based on performance rather than pure petty politicking? 5. Which party will work to mitigate risks associated with unionised industrial action which seeks to undermine democratic intent? At this juncture, my question for Peta and Brian is - simply - are you doing this for Victorians? Of for yourselves? Or will this just be craven uniparty business as usual? I am confident in saying that there’d almost be complete consensus here - The LNP would be a substantially more effective government with One Nation in opposition. Similarly, One Nation would be a significantly better government with the LNP holding them to genuine account, rather than ALP stonewalling. In short, One Nation wants to win, and should want LNP in Opposition. The LNP wants to win, but if it consigns One Nation to third, it may win a series of battles, and it may even win the war – but there is no hegemony to be had. It will be four years of tumult – with orchestrated union protestation, street protests, shutdowns, demands, and never-ending criticism of ‘absolutely whatever’. When not in opposition, you have less oxygen for this activity. Ultimately, this is up to voters. Ideally, undecided Victorians should realise the supreme benefit in having an unprecedented 1-2 combo of LNP and One Nation. I know many people whose primary concern is ‘not ALP’, as opposed to ‘which right wing party’. I am not one of them, but this is a potent sentiment. But if may be worth James and Brian having that chat, to ask themselves: “What could day 1 look like?” For mine, I will say this much. If the LNP steer ahead arrogantly, unrelenting – then at the first sign of having screwed the pooch, I will be all over them like a rash. Channel the dirt through ALP networks. Bring the LNP (back…again) to its knees. And in doing so? Absolutely obliterate any chance of their winning NSW, of Federal elections. Likely putting David Crisafulli, an eminently satisfactory Premier – needlessly in the cross hairs. It’s over to you Brian. Your members won’t accept failure from you at this juncture, so yours could be a vanishingly short tenure if you muck this up. Show yourself to be the grand strategist. Take James' call and figure out a seat allocation strategy. As Abbott and Costello (no relation!) said “I don’t give a flying fork who's on second! ALP on third!” @RitaPanahi @PMOnAir @pm_live @LoughnaneB @SharriMarkson @jamesmacpherson @TheCalebBond @rowandean @FreyaThinks @jamesashby

Here's an interesting question or two. 1. Allowing back office government workers to work from home inarguably saves them money 2. Allowing back office government workers to work from home should - per their assertions - have lead to substantial productivity gains. here's the rationale. I for example have a $30pd parking fee, $20 in tolls, and circa $30 in fuel. That's $80pd, before considering reduced vehicle maintenance and insurance costs. Add to that coffee is cheaper at home, etc etc. I am essentially $100 pd, $500 pw, $25K pa better off WFH. So can someone please explain why public servants have been given *above CPI* pay rises (often multiples of) - when in all seriousness they should have been assigned pay cuts or pay freezes? I repeat - the savings are substantial, and employers should have shared some of this benefit. So now to the productivity issue. They'll tell you they are so much more efficient at home..... and yet .... remarkably, public service headcount has blown own, by multiples of the underlying service demand. Again, here's the rationale - it takes me 90 minutes door to door each way. Times that by 10, and I save *15 hours* a week by working from home. So I should be **inordinately** more productive right? Wrong? I am forced to wait and wait, either for executive level decisions, or operational level task completion. Now allow me to explain in one paragraph what has happened to the Australian economy: By allowing work from home, public servants have significantly more disposable income, which they spend on e-commerce, thereby boosting inflation. But there has been no commensurate increase in productivity - moreover, this has actually gone backwards, requiring EVEN MORE public servants, at the higher salaries, just to get the work done. There is no better immediate solution this country can implement other than 'all public servants back to the office'

There is something particularly sick with Martina Navratilova. An agitated lesbian, she seems comfortable in suggesting 'mostly men' are to be blame for the gender dystopia we find ourselves in. Overwhelmingly, the data shiws us that it is white western women who are the 'critical mass' in support of radical gender theory. To explain Imane Khelif. This person is 'I' on the LGBTIQ+ rainbow. I is a legitimate physical anomaly. We should not harangue these people. However, unfortunately, Imane's condition still points to him having male biological basis. Indisputable. So it is inappropriate he participate in female sports.

Talking to some peeps today about productivity and the public sector (mutually exclusive concepts?) Turns out quite a few of us know people working multiple jobs simultaneously We know those running desktop services against their MoE ('green dotting') So why not demand public servants get the hell back to the office? If we're going to talk about helping struggling small businesses - I imagine the trainside vendors, CBD bars and restaurants and coffee shops, etc - they might all appreciate the business. There is ZERO mystery why we have a productivity crisis in Australia - a bloated public service accountable for zero and responsible for little more than that. Back to the damned office @Adam_Creighton @matt_barrie @Matt_Camenzuli @DHughesy @LiberalAus @LiberalVictoria @OneNationAus @WarrenPHON_VIC @DrCameronMurray @cmkusher

Does the $16M include a retrospective component (i.e "thanks for the hatchet job on BRS!" - or is this forward funding only?