Anonbal185

With Dutton in the opposition Albanese doesn't even need to try. He can practically do whatever he wants and be re-elected next time.

Trams can also have right of way. For example Dulwich Hill line is a tram the entire section.

However it would prove a conundrum for tfnsw, the T sign is already taken by trains.

I think if they passed the legislation first as a trial and then if it went well put it through a referendum there would be more support.

I'm not saying he would but he could just force it through legislation now, with the greens support and independents support, Pocock is in ACT who was the only place to vote yes, I think they have enough to pass.

Sure it will go against the results of the referendum, or "the will of the people" but it will be a legal way to do it. I think if it went through legislation it would become like GST, deeply unpopular at the time but it just becomes fait accompli and noone would dare reverse it. Because once in noone wants the optics of being "the racist in the parliament" besides maybe ONP.

For some unknown reason the parties are swapped in NSW.

For example LNP in NSW would bring in policies that the Labor party would bring in other states, whereas the opposite is true for NSW Labor.

NSW LNP had very good policies like the electric vehicle policy, electric vehicle charging grants, they are the party of infrastructure with the westconnex and metro projects up, Parramatta light rail.

Whereas Chris Minns and Labor I'd actually compare Minns with the onion eater of all people. Very good at cancelling projects because he didn't think of it first and provides no policies or thoughts of his own.

Wanted to cancel the metro, whilst providing nothing in replacement (only saved because the project is too far to be cancelled), too scared to do anything in regards to housing policy, no pill testing is the latest one. Cancelled the ev grants. In fact I'm not sure of anything that they've done through their own policies since they came in. Hopefully an one term government because they seriously lack vision.

Funny they're all very patriotic when it comes to these things. However when asked if they personally want to go to war...well, not so patriotic when you have to put your life on the line.

Actually for me it's quite good. Get like 1/3 back from dental. Then a bit back from gym fees. Optical is another one I use regularly and I get a massage a year. And most importantly ambulance cover just in case.

Granted one or two of them I would have skipped if I wasn't paying private health (optical and massage).

At the higher salaries if people didn't want to pay the Medicare surcharge and having to buy junk policies they can funnel their discretionary income into investments, the costs of the investments can be negatively geared so you can earn for example a million dollars and only pay 90000 taxable income worth of tax (an extreme example I know). ASX, property, into the business etc. where you reduce your taxable income in exchange for gaining (investable) assets.

I like NSW governments policy. Highrise depends on infrastructure and not how far it is from the CBD. But it is still not good enough.

We have 220m+ in Parramatta which is 20km from CBD and from what I understand the application for it to be higher was denied because it was too close to the airport.

Macquarie Park, Rhodes are new suburbs with 150m+ (definition for a skyscraper). Many others are getting 100m+, Olympic Park, Liverpool etc.

So it is quite spread out already. Even places very far away from Sydney like Penrith, Rouse Hill, Edmondson Park and Leppington will be zoned for high rise.

But we need to overhaul the zoning laws for the missing middle. In Sydney Bankstown to Marrickville and Revesby to Turella should all be up for 100m towers or maximum allowed due to proximity to airport.

Three times the minimum salary doesn't seem too enticing to go into a warzone. Money is useless if you're dead and won't cover for your disabilities if you get injured. But hey that's just me, each to their own I guess.

I don't get what's so special about Grindr. I only knew about it because it was on the news one time and was known as the gay tinder ripoff. Even down to the name.

If the app was known by something else that doesn't sound like a Tinder ripoff most people wouldn't even hear about it.

Not my type of app so I've never used it but I can't think of anything that tinder couldn't do. All tinder has to do is to have a new column in the database

All the other apps need to do is to check if the person's gender== their preferred gender then that person is gay. If gay show people of same gender otherwise show opposite gender. Any app can do this.

I hope they lose alot of revenue for forcing people back into the office.

It's nowhere near a good salary to be potentially shot at blown up and killed. You can get way more than that sitting at an office (most likely at home now due to WFH).

I wouldn't go at all but if I were to go I would probably want 5x+ that amount minimum due to the inheritent danger.

Edit: since you're at war you're effectively working 24/7, I fail to see how anything less than minimum 15-20x the amount is a good salary all things considered.

I wonder how this affects countries like China and Russia. I would think this would be a good plan maybe a decade ago when whilst still a dictatorship it was governed by more than one person.

Now with those countries it's basically governed by one person who obviously has many internal enemies. If they change course then Xi is a dead man, same as Putin and Fatman Kim.

In China's instance Xi has ruined many of his fellow citizens lives (by clamping down on a few industries causing significant job losses because they were a threat to his power). Basically as time goes on their policy would be influenced by the survival of one man.

It's France they're very xenophobic. Just look at how they treat the Corsicans, Brentons, Basques and Catalans.

Night and day to even a few hundred metres across the road in Spain or Andorra.