Labor have a vested interest in keeping property prices high as they themselves are all landlords.
This is the dumbest theory that only a child would believe.
Australians have a vested interest in keeping property prices high. Everyone owns property, not just Labor candidates.
No it doesn’t. Our tax system works the same way. It doesn’t lead to overzealous deduction denial because people are worried about getting it wrong.
Its an efficient and transparent approach.
Labor are a party of and for Landlords.
Bullshit.
It was only 8 years ago Labor campaigned on removing capital gains tax discounts which would’ve been a huge kick up the ass for landlords.
They lost that election in spectacular fashion.
This is the right way to make laws and rules.
It’s the same way we do tax - self compliance. You self report but if you’re caught breaking the rules then you face punishments.
If the administration just made a list of who’s effected, it would be perpetually incomplete. This way, everyone is effected.
They can’t just unilaterally decide that your self assessment is “wrong” without explanation. Also their decisions about who is effected are public, and can be relied on by others to self assess.
I don’t think Brave has any special magic that other browsers don’t.
My understanding is, all the workarounds in use recently work or fail depending on the IP address you have.
I don’t know anything about this change but it seems to simply require a JS engine in your client. Any browser has that, so the browser addons probably aren’t effected by this change.
However, it’s clear that YT is waging an incremental campaign here. Today it’s yt-dlp, next week… who knows.
invidious, yt-dlp, and freetube have broken so many times for me over the last 6 months, I’ve fallen out of the habit of using YT lately anyway.
It sucks because there is content there that I want but I’m not going to whore myself for it.
Yeah but I’m sure they can acquire their own local slaves for free.
They’re not paying the US for slaves. The US would be paying them to take them.
Nah. Why would Ghana want slaves from the US?
Not really, that’s just how Trump does things, like the tariffs.
All the ones that will still be more expensive than Chinese ones I guess.
LOL. This isn’t going to happen. Trump himself is an idiot but I’m sure there’s someone on his staff who realises that this would decimate the US tech industry. This is another one of those TACO art of the deal type situations.
Not really. The desire to under pay people is stronger than the desire to have a workforce in the US.
Also, the term “under pay people” is a complex one. Sure, it might be below average for a US citizen, but a great opportunity for someone from somewhere else.
I’m from the colonies.
Sure is an embarrassment. Shameful.
Oh well. That’s it then I guess.
I don’t think Robinson really fits neatly into a categorisation.
Its hard to know what reporting I’ve read is accurate, and which isn’t, but he seems like a person with a complex story.
I still do not think he deserved to die.
That’s fine, but I think you can probably understand why other commenters do feel that way, given his profiting from hatred and the deaths of others.
Oh man. This just obfuscates the corruption.
Here in Australia there’s a few Trump sycophants that pull this type of stuff occasionally, or try saying “make Australia great again”, and just nutters that put Trump stickers and whatever on their cars.
The only explanation I’ve been able to develop is that they enjoy the reactions they get from people. In the same way siblings antagonise each other for a cheap thrill, these guys just like the feeling of antagonising people.
Our recent election has shown that Trumpism doesn’t get much love here in Australia.
your statement which mentions that someone can « deserve to die » because of his political view opposed to your
That’s not what I said at all though, is it.
Conservatives don’t deserve to die, disingenuous manipulator recruiting young adults to fascism do.
If all you see is someone debating asking to be proven wrong then you’re a naive idiot.
Sorry I don’t really understand what your argument actually is.
Since the dawn of writing, legislators (kings / politicians) have laid down the rules. Regulators (police, tax office) have enforced the rules. And courts decide whether the rules have actually been broken and what the penalties ought to be.
In the vast majority of self assessment situations, it’s very obvious how the law applies to ones situation, there is very little doubt. You just follow the rules and face penalties for breaches.
In those few situations which are unclear, you generally have a range of options:
Finally, most legislation relating to corporate behavior has safe harbor clauses. That is, where someone has acted reasonably, taken reasonable steps, and made a good-faith attempt to interpret and apply the rules correctly, the regulator won’t penalise them even if they’re found to have breached the rules.
That is to say penalties are usually only applied where there’s a breach, and there’s no scope to argue that it was a reasonable error.
This is a fair and transparent structure with which to ensure the rules are applied fairly to everyone. It’s very robust, tolerant of edge cases, and the most efficient compliance structure we have.
I don’t really know what an alternative would be? If you want a regulator to publish a list of which apps / companies are effected in what way, that’s just nuts. The antithesis of modern democratic economic regulation.