National housing campaign Everybody’s Home said pressure is mounting on the federal government to reform unfair investor tax breaks, as the union movement adds to growing national support.
The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) has today called for the winding back of negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount as the government prepares to hold its economic reform roundtable this month.
The union’s call adds to mounting pressure from politicians, economists, think tanks, housing advocates and other organisations and experts demanding housing tax reform.
Everybody’s Home spokesperson Maiy Azize said ending property investor tax concessions is good for housing affordability, wealth equality and productivity.
“The union movement is showing real leadership by calling for property tax breaks to be wound back. Workers across Australia are being priced out by investor breaks, so the union’s push for reform makes perfect sense,” Ms Azize said.
“These tax breaks most benefit those who don’t need it, while the majority of hardworking Australians pay the price. Billions of taxpayer dollars are lost every year to these tax breaks that are making housing more expensive for everyone – and making inequality worse
Women are from Portland, men are from Oklahoma City
Men and women perceive cities differently: Women like some cities much more than men do; and vice-versa
A new survey of net favorability ratings of cities show Portland and handful of other cities are perceived much more positively by women than men.
Gender differences in perceived favorability of cities vary geographically; overall, women regard Western cities more favorably than men; men regard cities in the South, and especially Texas, more favorably than do women.
A relative handful of cities are regarded similarly by both men and women.
Women view Portland, Chicago, Los Angeles, and San Francisco most favorably, relative to men’s view of the same cities. Nationally, women were about 30 percentage points more likely to rate Portland favorably compared to men; the other four cities had more than 20 percent higher net favorable ratings among women than men. Men had higher net favorability ratings for some cities than women, notably cities in Texas and Oklahoma. The following chart shows the highest and lowest cities for net favorability for women compared to men.
What’s On around Naarm/Melbourne & Regional Victoria: July 28-Aug 3, 2025 With thanks to the dedicated activists at Friends of the Earth Melbourne! . . See also these Palestine events listings from around the country: 9378
Introduction In 2017 the 1forEquality campaign was launched. The campaign seeks the effective commencement, implementation and enforcement of Section 1 the Equality Act – the socio-economic duty – across Great Britain in order to improve the fulfilment and protection of everyday rights, and reduce inequality. This response has been developed by members of the campaign […]
If there is one thing you can bank on, it is that conservative governments know how to use power.
They never shy away from it.
If a conservative government wants to change something, it will, and it won’t worry about who it is annoying, or the pushback, or whether or not it is the smart move. It will do it, knowing that it will very quickly become the new normal and people, more likely than not, will move on.
John Howard did it for 11 years. Howard changed this country more in the last three decades than almost any other modern politician. While he eventually pushed the electorate too far with Work Choices, he would probably say it was worth it – because many of the changes he went to the wall for still exist today. Why?
Because the left never uses power the same way. And conservatives know it.
President Donald Trump unveiled his AI Action Plan last week, an ambitious and strategically framed document that signals artificial intelligence is no longer a niche issue for technocrats. It has become the defining arena of great-power competition.
As AI has become more deeply embedded in governance, a critical question has emerged: Will this revolutionary technology tip the scales in favor of authoritarian regimes or empower democracies? History offers no easy answers. Past innovations have demonstrated both emancipatory and repressive potential. Theoretically, AI could enhance transparency, participation, and accountability.
Theory, however, is conjecture. There are underlying authoritarian advantages at a cognitive and structural level that cannot be wished away.
AI competition is not merely a race for innovation—it is a contest of governance models.
Autocracies—particularly China—are poised to benefit disproportionately from AI’s capabilities: pervasive surveillance, granular social control, and predictive state planning. It is time the United States openly acknowledges this truth.
This article is read by Eunice Wong, a Juilliard-trained actor, featured on Audible's list of Best Women Narrators. Her work is on the annual Best Audiobooks lists of the New York Times, Audible, AudioFile, & Library Journal. www.eunicewong.actor
ODOT”s big lie about transportation spending. ODOT’s claim that Oregon spends less on roads than neighboring states was a key talking point in trying to sell a higher transportation tax in the 2025 Legislature.
Based on ODOT”s data, legislators repeatedly claimed that Oregon spends less on roads than other Western states.
The trouble is it’s not true. The biggest source of the apparent difference is state sales taxes on cars–which Oregon doesn’t have. Other states do charge sales taxes on car sales, but this money goes to general funds, not to road construction and repair.
Independent national comparisons prepared by the widely respected Brookings Institution, using Census Bureau data from all 50 states shows Oregon spends almost the same on roads as neighboring states, about $630 per capita in 2021.
PM slams Israel over Gaza starvation The Age (& SMH) | Paul Sakkai | 30 July 2025 https://edition.theage.com.au/shortcode/THE965/edition/45ce0617-fd09-6671-fd2b-9054e572af46?page=39414d02-f749-50f4-bf3a-5baf9bafaf23& Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has signalled he believes Gaza will be freed from Hamas’ rule, paving the way for recognition of a Palestinian state, as he slammed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claims that Gazans were not […]
Two leading Israeli human rights groups accuse their country of committing genocide in Gaza ABC | Matthew Doran | 29 July 2025 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-29/israeli-orgs-label-gaza-situation-genocide/105584184 Two Israeli human rights organisations, B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel, have labelled the country’s actions in Gaza as “genocide”. B’Tselem compiled testimony as well as details of mass killings, destruction […]
Donald Trump says Hamas doesn’t want Gaza ceasefire deal and will be ‘hunted down’ https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-26/netanyahu-trump-appear-to-abandon-gaza-ceasefire-negotiations/105575888 Donald Trump spoke to reporters about Gaza ceasefire talks as he prepared to leave Washington for the UK. (Reuters: Kent Nishimura) In short: US President Donald Trump has said Hamas does not want to make a Gaza ceasefire deal and […]
17 July 2025: Free Palestine Melbourne is deeply concerned by the Australian government’s silence regarding the Freedom Flotilla vessel Handala, carrying desperately needed humanitarian supplies to the besieged, brutalised people of the Gaza Strip.
It’s pleasing to see a real competition emerging for government in Tasmania the state election a fortnight ago. The Labor Party is finally off the bench and in the game – making a play for crossbench support to form government after refusing the last two opportunities to do so.
So far, negotiations are focusing on procedural changes. But if the numbers in the House of Assembly pan out as expected, it will take more than a conflict resolution process to win over the crossbenchers needed for stable government.
Tasmanians have elected a power-sharing government for the second time in a row. They clearly no longer want Liberal or Labor to act as if they are in majority. Former Premier David Bartlett said recently that he doesn’t think there will be another majority government in his lifetime.
Tasmanian parliamentarians need to get on with making power-sharing government work. A conflict resolution process is necessary, but it’s small beer. Crossbench members know their worth and will likely demand more in exchange for their support.
Both re-elected and new Green and independent crossbenchers have fought to gain traction on issues that matter to their constituents. At least some of them will hold the balance of power, and influence not just who forms government but also what issues will be addressed by Tasmania’s 52nd Parliament.
When crossbenchers and major parties struck successful power-sharing agreements in other Australian parliaments, they covered policy as well as procedure.
Given the heated back-and-forth over the Trump Administration’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and continued support for Ukraine, it is clear that matters of foreign policy will be a major factor in defining the character of American conservatism moving forward.
There is bound to be disagreement over the relative geopolitical merits of supporting Ukraine or Israel, as well as the appropriate level of support. However, one principle is undeniable: an advocate of a given course of action must demonstrate its connection to the interests of the people of the United States alone. That doesn’t mean it can’t be mutually beneficial for an international partner. But the very purpose of statesmanship is to navigate events and relationships in a manner that maximizes the advantage accruing to one’s own nation. Absent a clear definition of the specific interests served by an existing alliance, there will always be a danger of the tail wagging the dog.
The first order of business is therefore to establish such a definition. What do we gain by a given course of action in service of a foreign nation? This is as much a question of theory as of practice: What are we fighting for, and what are the best means to obtain it? As so often tends to be the case, the best place to look for an illustration of the principles that can help guide our thinking is the American Founding—although perhaps not in the way it is normally considered.
A great question we have been asked a few times is, “Are ‘dynamic capabilities’ just ‘public sector innovation’ with a different name?”. The simple answer is that they are very closely connected, but they are not the same. Dynamic capabilities are the engine that enables an organisation to move from one-off innovation efforts to innovating and adapting repeatedly as standard. These are the must-have capabilities that no city government can choose to ignore.
By contrast, in 1903 there were just 25,000 voters per MP (this being the first election where most women could vote).
In the intervening 122 years, the federal parliament has significantly expanded twice: from 74 to 121 seats in 1949, and from 125 to 148 in 1984. Both times, the number of people per seat sat at a then record high: 64,000 and 75,000 respectively.
Voting rights have also expanded: women’s suffrage came in 1903 (though not for all women), Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voting rights took until 1963, and the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in 1974.
But while there are nine times as many registered voters today as in 1903, the number of electorates has only doubled.
And the more voters there are in an electorate, the larger a campaign needs to be to make any difference to the result, giving communities less power to kick out an unrepresentative or under-performing MP.
On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg and Elinor unpack how the latest inflation figures only make it more obvious the RBA should have cut interest rates at their last meeting, and why some people who are unemployed are not looking for work (and it’s not because they’re ‘dole bludgers’).
This discussion was recorded on Thursday 31 July 2025 and things may have changed since recording.
Host: Greg Jericho, Chief Economist, the Australia Institute // @grogsgamut
Host: Elinor Johnston-Leek, Senior Content Producer, the Australia Institute // @elinorjohnstonleek
The American Mind’s ‘Editorial Roundtable’ podcast is a weekly conversation with Ryan Williams, Spencer Klavan, and Mike Sabo devoted to uncovering the ideas and principles that drive American political life. Stream here or download from your favorite podcast host.
The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has a target to keep headline inflation between 2% and 3%. By any reasonable measure it has completely failed on this over the last decade.
The June quarter released this week shows that inflation has been within the band for the last four consecutive quarters. This is the first time we have seen four consecutive quarters in the RBA target band since 2014.
Since the end of 2014 there have been just eight quarters where inflation has been in the target band and half of those are the four most recent ones. That means just eight of the last 43 quarters have been in the band. How can that be judged as anything but a complete failure?
Most recently, the inflation rate has been higher than 3%, but for most of the past decade, it has been outside the band because it has been below 2%.
In the 43 quarters since December 2014, inflation has been too high for 12 quarters, but too low for 23 quarters.
You might think that inflation is bad, and so having inflation below 2% is a good thing. But there is a reason that the RBA inflation target has a lower limit.
Low inflation comes with sluggish economic growth and higher unemployment. The 2022 RBA review actually rebuked the RBA for not doing enough to increase inflation in the years before the pandemic. They said that the RBA had kept interest rates too high for too long when inflation was below 2% which resulted in more people being unemployed.
Summary To improve productivity Australia needs to shift taxes off work and enterprise and onto the economic rents from land, natural resources, and monopolies. This principle should be at the heart of any economic reform agenda. Income tax should be rebalanced to favour productive effort over unearned gains, beginning by scrapping CGT concessions. States should […]
ODOT’s claim that Oregon spends less on roads than neighboring states was a key talking point in trying to sell a higher transportation tax in the 2025 Legislature
Based on ODOT”s data, legislators repeatedly claimed that Oregon spends less on roads than other Western states
The trouble is it’s not true. Big state sales taxes on cars warp the comparison. Other states do charge sales taxes on car sales, but this money goes to general funds, not to road construction and repair
Independent national comparisons prepared by the widely respected Brookings Institution, using Census Bureau data from all 50 states shows Oregon spends almost the same on roads as neighboring states, about $630 per capita in 2021.
ODOT’s numbers are a bogus and deceptive sales technique, not an objective analysis
ODOT’s Big Lie: Oregon spends less on roads than other states
The idea that Oregon’s taxes for transportation are much lower than neighboring states has become a widely repeated talking point in the State Capitol.
Today in the AFR, the head of the private health insurance lobby group “PrivateHealth Australia” showed the industry is very worried by suggestions by The Australia Instituteand others that private health insurance fees should be subject to GST.
When the GST was introduced, John Howard ensured private health insurance fees were not subject to GST, and at essentially the same time, he introduced the “Lifetime Health Cover”, which meant if you did not join private health insurance by the time you were 30 you would have to pay higher fees were you to join it later.
The problem is that even with this virtual forcing of people onto health insurance, most people take out the minimum health insurance they need to qualify for the lifetime health cover, and usually this means lots of things are excluded from the cover, and also you have to pay a lot of excess payments should you actually need to use it. It is not health insurance in any true sense, but it is wonderful for private health insurers.
Fame and fortune are often corrupting forces, ones that beget power and comfort. To stand with the afflicted requires sacrificing this privilege and few embody that sacrifice more profoundly than the legendary musician of Pink Floyd Roger Waters.
For years, through his music and political action, Waters has amplified the voices of the oppressed. He has championed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, defended attorney Steven Donziger, demanded the closure of Guantánamo Bay, has long stood against the apartheid state of Israel and now unwaveringly against the genocide of Palestinians.
In Sugar Land, Texas, a giant statue depicting the monkey-faced Hindu deity, Hanuman, was erected in August 2024. Officially titled Statue of Union, many Texans and Americans elsewhere have found this monument to be an aberration. For some it is the aesthetic unsightliness. For others it is a religious aversion to having a pagan idol be raised to such heights. And for others it is a demonstration of just how many foreigners now live in Texas.
I see each of these points as pins on a board that, when connected, reveal a fault line in American civic life: we are divided culturally—and the divide is widening.
On this episode of Follow the Money, Alice Grundy and Skye Predavec join Ebony Bennett to discuss how the Howard Government’s brave reforms in the aftermath of the Port Arthur massacre are falling short of its aims – and what federal, state and territory governments can do to keep Australians safe.
1800RESPECT is the national domestic, family and sexual violence counselling, information and support service. Call 1800 737 732, text 0458 737 732, chat online or video call via their website.
Correction: This podcast was updated to remove a reference to buying firearms and ammunition interstate when there is a limit on the licence, which does not appear in our research. What is possible is for a licence-holder to buy firearms and travel to another state.
Dead Centre: How political pragmatism is killing us by Richard Denniss is available for pre-order now via the Australia Institute website.
Guest: Alice Grundy, Research Manager and Managing Editor, the Australia Institute // @alicektg
Guest: Skye Predavec, Anne Kantor Fellow, the Australia Institute // @skyelark
‘Money talks, and fear is a great motivator’ — Christopher Rufo, 2025
This quote from Christipher Rufo, one of the most influential architects of Donald Trump’s current assault on ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ in education, succinctly distils the key techniques in what has become a global war on higher education.
This war takes on different forms in different jurisdictions, but it finds expression, to a greater or lesser extent, right across the globe.
For Trump, it is now quite clear that the goal of this war is to eliminate academic freedom, and open enquiry – the bedrock of higher education. If this goal is not fully expressed outside of authoritarian regimes, it is nonetheless a lens through which to view how higher education, and higher education workers, are increasingly being regulated.
Like all workplaces, universities are sites of power and contestation, where managers have an imperative to exercise control over the labour process. It might sound odd to describe universities as workplaces, but that’s exactly what they are. It is workers – academic and non-academic – who teach the students, conduct the research that make universities what they are.
Yet, as higher education managers are impelled to control their workforces, there are constituent elements of universities this potentially conflicts with, especially academic freedom and collegial decision making.
In typical fashion, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals completely misread the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause and the congressional speech of its principal framers in a July 27 decision, State of Washington, et al. v. Donald Trump, et al. This ideologically motivated opinion was written by a three-judge panel, composed of two Clinton appointees and a Trump appointee who registered a “partial concurrence and a partial dissent.” Overall, however, it was an embarrassment to the canons of legal reasoning and historical truth. It surely will be overruled by the Supreme Court—hopefully on an expedited basis.
On January 20, 2025, President Trump acted expeditiously to fulfill a campaign promise by issuing an executive order redefining who is “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” I believe Trump is to be applauded for bringing the question of birthright citizenship to the attention of the public and provoking debate on this crucial issue. I have questions, however, as to whether an executive order in isolation is a constitutional means of pursuing the cause.
Congress clearly has power under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment “to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” One provision is that “no State shall make or enforce any law which abridges the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” This has been controversial, because the language of the amendment is couched in negative terms.
It is fitting that what was arguably Hulk Hogan’s most memorable late-career public appearance at the 2024 Republican National Convention happened almost exactly a year before his death. In his speech, Terry Bollea (Hulk’s real name) expressed his reluctance to speak on politics. But he said that the humiliations and degradations that had been inflicted upon the American people compelled him to speak out.
Mentioning America’s former greatness, Hogan lamented that “we lost it all in the blink of an eye” when Joe Biden took over. But pointing at Donald Trump, the once-and-future president, Hogan announced, “With our leader up there, my hero, that gladiator, we’re going to bring America back together, one real American at a time, brother!”
Hulk Hogan’s meteoric rise coincided with Trump’s in the 1980s. That era is almost certainly the one that Trump’s political motto—Make America Great Again—implicitly references as our bygone halcyon days. It was a period of unbridled optimism. Ronald Reagan announced it was “morning again in America.” The economy was thriving, and Donald Trump was living proof that the possibilities in America were limitless. We were on the verge of winning the Cold War. Movies like Rocky, Top Gun, Red Dawn, and so many more were unabashedly nationalist and patriotic; children watched cartoons like G.I. Joe.
Indeed, Australia Institute research finds most Australians support federal legislation to protect the right to protest and maintain that peaceful protest has a role to play in Australia’s democracy.
The rhetoric of Australian politicians, by contrast, feels increasingly hostile to protesters, even to peaceful protesters.
South Australian Labor Premier Peter Malinauskas workshopped anti-protest laws on talkback radio before rushing them through the lower house just a day later.
Over the last five years, most states have introduced anti-protest laws. Protestors can be charged much higher fines for expressing their views in the open than lobbyists are charged to express their views privately in exclusive dinners with government ministers.
But non-violent protests, including disruptive and impolite protests, are a key part of the Australian tradition.
The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) have today published an updated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), to further strengthen their cooperation and coordination arrangements in support of financial stability in Australia.
Everyone knows things got bad after David Bowie died in January 2016. They got worse after the first solar eclipse in August 2017, and I harbored hope that after the second solar eclipse in April 2024, they would start to turn around. When David Lynch died in January 2025, it felt like a demarcation. Lynch was the end point to match Bowie: he was the other eclipse.
But nothing got better. These are only the thoughts of someone who spends too much time listening to David Bowie and watching David Lynch. Moonage daydreams and terrible nightmares all at once.
Sarah Kendzior’s Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
The Australian and Queensland governments’ decisions in 2010 to allow large-scale exporting of Australian gas from Queensland exposed Australians to high global prices, ending decades of abundant, low-cost gas for Australians, leading to higher energy bills, gas shortages and manufacturing closures.
Gas price increases due to excessive exports have also caused electricity prices to rise because gas power stations often set electricity prices.
“When you get your next energy bill, blame the gas industry and your governments for opening the gas export floodgates despite being warned it would drive up energy bills for Australians,” said Mark Ogge, Principal Adviser at The Australia Institute.
“Gas exports have meant Australian households and businesses have paid billions of dollars more for energy over the last decade, all of which went to the profits of a handful of predominantly foreign-owned gas corporations.
“The gas industry’s deliberate plan to increase domestic gas prices for Australians, by exposing us to global gas prices, has been a massive transfer of wealth from Australian households and businesses to Big Gas.
“Gas exports have led to manufacturing closures in Australia. Gas exporters manufacture nothing except gas shortages and higher energy bills for Australians.
On this episode of After America, Assistant Professor Musa Al-Gharbi joins Dr Emma Shortis to discuss the catastrophic failure of the Democrats to effectively resist Trump’s agenda and whether a new generation of leaders can turn the party around.
This discussion was recorded on Wednesday 9 July 2025.
Emma and Musa also did a live event with Alex Sloan in Canberra – the recording is available here.
Dead Centre: How political pragmatism is killing us by Richard Denniss is available for pre-order now via the Australia Institute website.
Guest: Musa al-Gharbi, Assistant Professor in the School of Communication and Journalism, Stony Brook University // @musaalgharbi
Host: Emma Shortis, Director, International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @emmashortis
