freediver wrote on Dec 27^th, 2024 at 5:50pm:


And yet that is something they haven't done with the cost-of-living payments. Perhaps you can explain why not?

freediver wrote on Dec 27^th, 2024 at 5:50pm:


You are the one calling them tax cuts, not me.

Quote:


Because they are two different things Lee. Do I need to explain everything the government has ever done to get you to stop dribbling? Do I need to explain why building roads is not a tax cut?

Quote:


I am calling tax cuts tax cuts Lee. What are you calling them? And why do you think income tax cuts are such a bad thing that you try to twist them into a subsidy?

lee wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 5:10pm:


The easiest way to distribute it to taxpayers generally is to reduce income tax Lee. Not sure how you manage to turn that into some kind of subsidy. Do you have a problem with tax cuts, or are you just dribbling? And what do you think is being subsidised?

Only allowed 3 strikes for repetition, then it's trolling.
FD you might get banned.

Energy Minister Chris Bowen “weaponised” the public service by instructing his department to produce “entirely flawed” figures to allege Peter Dutton’s nuclear energy plan would see a 49 per cent electricity shortfall by 2035, the Coalition claims.

Mr Bowen in September last year said “detailed government analysis of (Australian Energy Market Operator) forecasts show the Coalition’s plan … will result in massive supply short­ages over the next decade”.

The Department of Climate Change and Energy now says what it did was “not an analysis of the Coalition’s nuclear energy proposals” but an “assumption-driven calculation”.

Those assumptions, it said, were provided by Mr Bowen’s office. The department, in a response to a question on notice during Senate estimates, revealed those five assumptions about the Coalition’s energy plan and its calculations.



Ah. How did Chwissy Bowels do that.
Let's read on.




Mr Bowen, on the back of those calculations, asserted the Coalition’s energy plan would “result in a staggering 49 per cent gap between demand and the supply available to meet it”.

Frontier Energy managing director Danny Price – whose firm recently released commissioned modelling of the ­Coalition’s nuclear energy plan and had previously advised parties on either side of the political aisle on energy policy – said Mr Bowen “dreamt up his own method” to assert the Coalition’s nuclear energy plan would result in energy shortfalls in a “half-arsed” way that produced a “meaningless bunch of numbers”.

Opposition energy spokesman Ted O’Brien accused Mr Bowen of “weaponising the public service” and the department’s testimony showed “Labor lacks any intellectual argument against the Coalition’s plan”.

“Chris Bowen has decided to weaponise the public service by unfairly instructing them to do a calculation based on his own flawed assumptions about the Coalition’s plan and then packaging it up for the Australian public as if it is the calculation of the department itself, as if it’s departmental modelling, but it’s not departmental modelling,” he told The Australian.

lee wrote on Dec 27^th, 2024 at 4:41pm:

tried to stop them but were shouted down by murdochs minions

lee wrote on Jan 10^th, 2025 at 12:18pm:


your link is paywalled you dumbarse

lee wrote on Jan 10^th, 2025 at 12:35pm:


ohh, i thought you wanted a comment on the article, i didn't realise we were playing word match