Liberal democratic Party and Victorian elections 2015

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by mmm....shiney!, Oct 18, 2014.

  1. LeslieHughesLDP

    LeslieHughesLDP New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No idea. Federal policy isn't something I've worked on, and when it comes to Tax Policy, we are a party full of economists, and I trust the figures they come up with. To me though, it's still too much tax :p

    Nope.

    Totally.

    Sure, but if you own that land, that should be your decision, not some bureaucrat. Just because some people will do silly things shouldn't mean 100% of the population are at the whims of bureaucrats who clip your coin on each pass.

    Fair enough, but there'd be a huge market for builders who could have someone survey the land and check for risks, and include a premium in their price to guarantee their accurateness on soil, flooding, etc. Insurance companies too.

    Not really. The system we have now grew out of feudalism and then monarchy, where the lord/royalty own everything, and the peasants can only do things where they have permission to do so.

    This is getting a little silly. If people can afford houses now, when land is a lot cheaper, they'll have even more money to build their houses. If someone wants to live in 3rd world conditions than that is up to them, but if they do, it's because they are choosing that over the alternatives.

    What really annoys me is when people will snub their nose at someone's crappy house, and as a solution would have them homeless.

    When it's understood how wealth is created and how it's improved upon, it's clear that this "3rd world house" scenario is not realistic, especially in a country such as this.

    Once again, I disagree. One reason why people cram in now is because of how expensive land is, increase the supply and suddenly that disappears. People also value nature, and if they chose to cram together, it's because they've made a choice that fits their budget.

    At the moment I still rent, and will most likely be renting for a long time. Living in a crammed house/area which is *my own*, where I have the chance to build capital and improve my fixtures, and I'll be better off.

    So because you have standards, you are going to tell me what I can do on my own property with my own money?

    ------------

    Anyway, to sum up, I couldn't disagree more with restricting housing to protect people from themselves. The LDP support strong property rights, and that means being able to do stupid things.

    While our policy is still under development and will be finished for the start of the election period, here is some text from a draft version.

    -----------

    Removing the urban growth boundary.

    Allowing mixed-use zoning to enable vibrant and dynamic cities and towns to grow without the heavy hand of government

    Moving to a 'shall-issue' system of planning permission where the default position is to issue planning permission unless there is a significant reason not to.

    Exempting single dwelling construction projects and minor property improvements such as gazebos and carports from the planning process

    Allowing qualified town planners to endorse projects that meet the requirements of the Local Council's planning scheme. Regulatory competition should be encouraged, not prohibited

    ----------

    The LDP Victoria's awesome PR guru also wrote an article here describing some of the issues with housing/etc http://catallaxyfiles.com/2014/10/2...te-to-victorias-housing-affordability-crisis/
     
  2. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    Ok ...enjoy living next door to the beverly hillbillies . :lol: in boganville :p:
     
  3. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
  4. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    Damn i had a real response typed & lost the lot ! I hate computers sometimes
     
  5. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    yeah just needs a sign " this dwelling brought to you by the LDP's new housing legislation . :p:

    As someone mentioned earlier as many people as the LDP attracts it is going to scare of more imo .

    Imagine having built a nice house then that guys comes & lives next door .
     
  6. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    I don't think this would be approved under the LDP policy.

    Personally, I think it should be, but that's different to LDP policy based on what Leslie has posted.
     
  7. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    117
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    His words were

    "So because you have standards, you are going to tell me what I can do on my own property with my own money?"

    So im not sure how else to interpret that other than "i will build what i want "

    Also
    .
    "Exempting single dwelling construction projects and minor property improvements such as gazebos and carports from the planning process"

    So as long as its a single dwelling no plans should be submitted ?

    That picture could be argued all on the left is a single dwelling . Under the current rules in some places as long as its joined it is a single dwelling ( most times its by the roof ) but that building ( if we can call it that )does not have a common roofline. Ive seen approvals for 2 dwellings but they have a covered walkway joined to both buildings between them so it still passed as a single dwelling & shows the current planning is do-able even if on face value it looks like its not .

    i agree people should be able to do whatever they want ..its "where they want" that bothers me . Thats why theres building covenants in a lot of estates to protect others investments .

    Sure gazette a few acres per hundred for open slather building & you can all build what u want but having something like that built next to your nice house wouldnt be good for the resale of your house if you ever wanted to move .There is a limited number of people that want to live next to that monstrosity & without planning approval im sure thats what would happen occasionally Personally i wouldnt want to be the person it happened to on that occasion.
     
  8. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    Then there would be a market for planned communities and individuals and developers would adjust supply accordingly. As you said, building covenants on estates will have a market and as far as LDP policy are totally fine as they are a private solution to your problem of living next to "that monstrosity". :)
     
  9. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    I wondered how anyone from the LDP being a fringe party, also when I heard of the Liberal Democratic Party I was a little "WTF"? The Liberal Party and the Democrat party? They are different parties and would never merg then sort of forgot about it and moved on but it seemed really strange.

    Found an Article in "The Age" - How Mistaken Identity and Luck Stole The Day"

    Read the article and then thought that makes total sense - all the pieces come together. Nothing deceptive at all in how the party name was chosen lol. As mentioned I am not a Scholar but I am not stupid.

    An excerpt from the article.

    In 2007, David Leyonhjelm, an agricultural consultant with a love of guns and finely hewn libertarian views, stood for Bennelong against then prime minister John Howard. As the candidate of the Liberty and Democracy Party (LDP), he came 12th in a field of 13. He won just 89 votes.
    The LDP's Senate team in NSW had won just 7772 votes, 0.19 per cent. But a few months later, the party applied to change its name to the Liberal Democratic Party. The Liberal party objected strongly, warning that the new name could confuse intending Liberal voters. But on legal advice, the Australian Electoral Commission allowed the change.
    In 2013, the Liberal Democrats, headed by Leyonhjelm, drew first place in the 45 columns on the NSW ballot paper. Hundreds of thousands of voters saw the size of the ballot paper, saw the word ''Liberal'' in the first box, and just put a 1 against it. The LDP won 434,002 votes, or 9.5 per cent - 50 times the vote it won in 2007 before it adopted the name ''Liberal Democrats''.
    Leyonhjelm, an articulate 62-year-old who has previously been a member of the Labor Party, the Liberal Party and the Shooters and Fishers - and is also the registered officer for the Outdoor Recreation Party - will now have a seat in the Senate, a platform to spread his views, a salary of $190,000 a year, and, as Fairfax Media reported this week, a $1 million payout from the Electoral Commission to assist with his (minimal) campaign costs.
    In this strangest of all Senate elections, he is probably the only senator elected because people mistook his party for another.
    In NSW seats in the House of Representatives, the Liberals and Nationals won 47.3 per cent of the vote. Yet in the Senate, they won just 34.2 per cent. It's a reasonable inference that almost one in five people who voted for the Liberals or Nationals in the lower house mistakenly put a 1 in the box of the Liberal Democrats when it was the first thing they saw on that congested Senate ballot paper.
    By contrast, in Victoria, where the Liberal Democrats faxed their Senate voting ticket to the wrong number and were listed only below the line, they won just 363 votes. The Coalition polled much the same in both houses: 42.7 per cent in the House, 40.1 per cent in the Senate. The comparison suggests the confusion of names between Liberals and Liberal Democrats cost the Liberals half a million votes in other states - and a Senate seat in Tasmania.


    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/h...-on-the-day-20131004-2uzse.html#ixzz3HDjUWWCo

    Nice payday there out of the public purse - a million dollars lol, a million dollars and $190,000.00 a year to someone who runs on a platform of bloated Govt spending. Good job mate.
     
  10. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,822
    Likes Received:
    2,141
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    That has been discussed before.

    However, Mark Tier's mythical character Karla Preston has penned a piece in her typical acidic journalistic tone:

    ;)

    http://marktier.com/eclecticinvestor/mischief/politics/“libertarian”-pigs-in-the-trough.html
     
  11. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    Hey Shiney did you see the Priest who was the son of a Priest who Molested kids, the son said it was the kids who tempted his father into Molesting them and it was the kids fault that they were molested. It was on ABC news 24 hr awhile back.

    I suppose people can put a spin on anything can't they?
     
  12. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    :lol: Classic. Nothing like liberty-loving people attacking other liberty-loving people and the illiberals among us then claiming that their morality is sooooo much better because they support the laws for laundering the proceeds of crime. Laundered money always smells so much sweeter :p

    Although it's a fair question to ask how much of that money was actually from past taxes that David L. and other party members have paid over the years, hence are they just getting their own property back with less fear of violent reprisal from the thieves?
     
  13. mmm....shiney!

    mmm....shiney! Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,822
    Likes Received:
    2,141
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    昆士蘭
    If I was to receive a government handout (granted I probably do indirectly although i would say I'm a net loser) then I would justify it along the lines of what you are saying bordie and newtosilver, if that "spin" appears logical to rational human beings, then unlike the priest's predicament, it probably is not "spin" at all.
     
  14. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    I'm more shocked that it's that much money. If he's getting that much, how much are the Labour and Liberal parties getting? If that's a pig then what do you call the major party politicians?

    We need to get someone in who will try and pull back all this spending. And look, that's exactly what David L is attempting to do. Is anyone else in the parliament even attempting to rein in crazy spending? Who are the real pigs?

    No, because that money that was stolen was spent and he is now getting other people's money.

    But it's like anything else, government dominates this society. None of us can avoid it. He could probably address it in the most appropriate way and then we all move on. Was the 1 million dollars all spent, etc... Maybe there already is accounting for all I know...

    I think David Friedman said it best, paraphrasing "We don't live in a free market, we live in a thieve's market"
     
  15. bordsilver

    bordsilver Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    Messages:
    9,618
    Likes Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The rocks
    But you have no evidence that the money was not stolen from him (or the other LDP members), even if from the past. All we know is that taxes are taken from a large number of individuals over a long period of time, and then, as a result of the non-unique nature of the electronic digits and by going through "consolidated revenue" it is no longer traceable.
     
  16. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    Stolen money are you people retarded? Do you walk on footpaths? Do you use the electricity grid? Do you use roads? Do police enforce laws and keep you safe? Stolen money?

    "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
    John Rogers, on the blog Kung Fu Monkey
     
  17. col0016

    col0016 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,546
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Australia, Melbourne
    I lol'd. Check out the other thread on "civil asset forfeiture".
     
  18. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    Well, now you are talking about the circulation of money. Is it likely that every dollar that is received by each person was stolen at some point? Yes, almost certainly. In that sense, it comes back to my initial point that we are all kind of trapped in a thieves market atm.

    What money is used for and how it was obtained are 2 entirely separate things. You are mixing the 2 up.

    As an exercise try this, let's say there was a guy who had 5 million in his bank account. Let's say a thief stole half of it and donated it to a children's hospital. The hospital used the money to fly in experts from overseas and several children received life saving operations as a result. Was the initial theft justified?
     
  19. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    Change the name of a Party to something that will be confused with the Liberal Party and the number of votes goes up by 50 times. If you have really crappy policy and you get 0.19% of the vote you need to do something.
    If you have pretty dodgy morals you can just deceive the public. So much for libertarians being all high and mighty.
    Being a member of the Labour Party, the Liberal Party then the shooters Party etc then the LDP looks like someone looking to get pre selection so they can get a pay packet as a politician. Can't get your name on a ticket with one party move onto the next.
     
  20. Newtosilver

    Newtosilver Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,729
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    QLD
    I am amazed how something so basic in concept can become so twisted and confused. Something I read that sort of sums it up.

    "Well, if flip answers could win victory for libertarianism, we would have been in power long ago."
    Bob Waldrop
     

Share This Page