Artwork for podcast The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
Episode 424 - Housing and Gaza
15th April 2024 • The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove • The Iron Fist and the Velvet Glove
00:00:00 01:21:15

Share Episode

Shownotes

Topics:

00:43 Technical Troubles and Audio Adventures

01:14 Introducing the Cast: From Velvet Glove to Tech Guy

01:43 A Week in Review: From Housing Affordability to Global Politics

02:57 Board Games and Gratitude: Quiddler and More

06:01 The Luhrmann Case: A Deep Dive into Defamation and Justice

18:29 Housing Crisis in Australia: Policies, Problems, and Public Opinion

34:41 The Role of Public Housing and Foreign Investment in the Housing Market

38:22 Reflecting on Australia's Housing Crisis and Policy Impacts

38:47 The Role of Land Costs and Construction in Housing Prices

40:52 Government Policies and Their Effect on Housing Affordability

41:26 Historical Perspectives on Home Ownership and Policy Changes

43:49 The Boomer Generation's Influence on Housing and Retirement

47:33 Exploring Solutions to the Housing Crisis and Negative Gearing Debate

52:27 The Global Stage: AUKUS, Japan, and International Relations

56:12 International Comparisons and the Complexity of Housing Markets

01:03:01 The Middle East Conflict: Perspectives, Reactions, and Media Coverage

01:19:28 Concluding Thoughts and the Australian Government's Stance

To financially support the Podcast you can make:

We Livestream every Monday night at 7:30 pm Brisbane time. Follow us on Facebook or YouTube. Watch us live and join the discussion in the chat room.

We have a website. www.ironfistvelvetglove.com.au

You can email us. The address is trevor@ironfistvelvetglove.com.au



Transcripts

Sir David:

Suburban Eastern Australia, an environment that has, over

Sir David:

time, evolved some extraordinarily unique groups of homosapiens.

Sir David:

But today, we observe a small tribe, akin to a group of Meerkats that

Sir David:

gather together atop a small mound to watch question and discuss the

Sir David:

current events of their city, their country, and their world at large.

Sir David:

Let's listen keenly and observe this group fondly known as the

Sir David:

Iron Fist and the velvet glove.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

And after 423 episodes, we are still trying to figure out audio.

Trev:

technical issues, despite all of the practice, dear listener.

Trev:

So yes, sorry about the audio last week.

Trev:

Um, and it still turns out I had errors in it, which I might get to fixing tomorrow.

Trev:

And now we're just trying to deal with Joe's audio, which was soft

Trev:

and muddy and trying to fix it.

Trev:

And we're doing that in a mad panic before the start time of eight o'clock.

Trev:

So, well, coming through loud and clear.

Trev:

From regional Queensland, Scott the Velvet Glove.

Trev:

Scott, how are you?

Scott:

Not too bad.

Scott:

G'day Trevor, g'day Joe, g'day listeners.

Scott:

I hope everyone's well.

Trev:

And possibly sabotaged by Peter Dutton for the abuse that Joe gives him as

Trev:

a member in his electorate or as a voter.

Trev:

Joe the Tech Guy, are you coming through loud and clear?

Trev:

I'm hoping so.

Trev:

That's better.

Trev:

Yes, that's better.

Trev:

Okay.

Trev:

So good.

Trev:

All right.

Trev:

We'll keep working on that as we go.

Trev:

So dear listener, Oh, what a week.

Trev:

Hey, what a week.

Trev:

We'll work our way through the different issues, have a chat

Trev:

about them, see where we end up.

Trev:

We'll talk a little bit about my anecdote in relation to the Bondi tragedy.

Trev:

Uh, we'll kick off a bit about housing affordability.

Trev:

I know we've done it lots, but there's more stuff come out.

Trev:

Um, and I think we'll get onto.

Trev:

Um, just the way that the Labor and the Coalition are really now sort of reduced

Trev:

town to about a third of the vote each, which leaves a third for Independents and

Trev:

how we're moving to perhaps a European style of Parliament that nobody's

Trev:

quite ready for yet, and Tasmania is the first example of that perhaps.

Trev:

And then we'll get on to Gaza and Israel and Iran and.

Trev:

All that sort of stuff, and, yeah, there we go.

Trev:

So if you're in the chat room, say hello.

Trev:

John's in there.

Trev:

Uh, he's calling in from Glen Innes.

Trev:

Good on ya, John.

Trev:

So, okay.

Trev:

Um, kicking off.

Trev:

Grateful for.

Trev:

I'm grateful for the game of Quiddler.

Trev:

You guys ever played Quiddler?

Trev:

No.

Trev:

No?

Trev:

Little board game, not that expensive, you can get it for under 20 bucks.

Trev:

Basically, uh, you get dealt cards that have letters on them.

Trev:

The letters have a value, a bit like Scrabble, in that hard to

Trev:

use letters have more points.

Trev:

You've got to form words.

Trev:

It's just a fun game.

Trev:

My wife and I have been playing it heaps and Yeah, getting a

Trev:

lot of fun out of that one.

Trev:

So if you're looking for a board game, dear listener, I highly recommend Quiddla.

Trev:

So Q U I D D L E R I don't get any commission or receive

Trev:

any royalties for that.

Trev:

It's an honest review.

Trev:

You guys got anything that you're grateful for?

Trev:

Anything good happen?

Trev:

Anything you want to share of your personal lives before we move on?

Scott:

I've had a couple of interviews just recently.

Scott:

I've still got to wait back to hear from one and another one that's coming

Scott:

up for me on Wednesday afternoon.

Trev:

Thoughts and prayers, Scott?

Scott:

Yeah, we can shove your thoughts.

Joe:

Joe, anything for you?

Joe:

Ah, nothing exciting, um There are a couple of games that I do play.

Joe:

Um, there's a word game that someone I know in the UK has

Joe:

written, I've just shared it in the chat, which is called Cell Tower.

Joe:

Um, which is just a little brain teaser.

Joe:

Uh, renews every 24 hours and you can work your way through trying to work out.

Joe:

Basically, there's however many words in a block.

Joe:

of letters, and you just have to work your way out the right number

Joe:

so you don't paint yourself in a corner by picking the wrong words

Joe:

and end up with letters left over.

Trev:

Very good.

Joe:

But that's a single player game.

Joe:

There's also an online jigsaw puzzle game, which you can actually play with

Joe:

multiple players, which we've done.

Joe:

It does kind of stifle the conversation though.

Trev:

Just back to Quiddla, um, you obviously have arguments about

Trev:

whether a word is a valid word.

Trev:

So we bought an old dictionary from a second hand bookshop.

Trev:

And if it's not in that dictionary, it's not a word.

Trev:

Because you can go online and there's all sorts of BS words online, on these

Trev:

online dictionaries, so, if you do end up with Quiddla, buy yourself a, get

Trev:

a hard copy dictionary, so you don't have to look up phones and, yeah,

Trev:

there's a little tip there, so, right.

Trev:

I,

Joe:

I remember playing Scrabble with mum's partner and he refused to

Joe:

accept that quoll was a valid word.

Joe:

Okay, well okay, it's just an animal, isn't it?

Joe:

It's a quoll.

Joe:

Well, yeah, yeah, but I mean, he's from the UK, nobody's ever heard of it.

Joe:

Yeah.

Trev:

Well, if you're using a UK dictionary, he might have challenged

Trev:

you, because it may not be in there.

Trev:

I

Joe:

think it, I think it's in the Oxford English.

Trev:

There you go, so yeah.

Trev:

Alright, um.

Trev:

John in the chat room says, are you going anywhere near the Luhrmann result?

Trev:

And the answer is no, cause I haven't even heard the result.

Trev:

What was it?

Trev:

Well, maybe we are.

Trev:

Scott, be careful, be careful Scott, not to commit any acts of defamation.

Scott:

Well, I'm not going to commit any, I'm just going to

Scott:

repeat what the judge said.

Scott:

The judge said that as far as he can tell that, uh, she was, that she and Luhrmann

Scott:

had sex in the, um, in Parliament House.

Scott:

And that he also couldn't, he also said that he didn't

Scott:

believe that it was consensual.

Scott:

So he had actually, it certainly sounds like the judge has come down on the

Scott:

side of the, uh, prosecution, but the judge, he actually was at pains to

Scott:

say that, that the burden of proof in a civil case is a lot lower than the

Scott:

burden of proof in a criminal case.

Scott:

So as far as he was concerned, there was no.

Scott:

Judgment of his guilt or innocence, but it was just saying on the balance of

Scott:

probabilities, he probably raped her.

Trev:

Therefore, the defamation case failed.

Trev:

Was thrown out, yes.

Trev:

Oh,

Joe:

wow.

Joe:

And said that he had doubts about the credibility of both witnesses.

Joe:

Uh, but that Lerman was, uh, I think he said something like, economical

Joe:

with the truth when it suited him, something along those lines.

Joe:

Hmm.

Joe:

But he said he didn't believe that, I think, uh, either

Joe:

witness was completely truthful.

Trev:

There we go.

Trev:

Well, I mean,

Scott:

it's one of those things, it's just, you know,

Scott:

like I said, it's not a burden.

Scott:

The burden of proof is very different under a civil case

Scott:

than what is in a criminal case.

Scott:

So the judge was at pains to actually point that out.

Joe:

Yeah.

Joe:

Uh, whatever article I was reading basically said, in a

Joe:

civil case, you can just say, this is the most likely explanation.

Joe:

It's a burden.

Joe:

Whereas in a criminal case, you have to say you've excluded

Joe:

all other explanations.

Trev:

And so the Lerman case starts to, um, joins up now with what's

Trev:

becoming a longer list of defamation actions that were started and that

Trev:

backfired on the people who started it.

Scott:

It's blown up in his face, and the judge even said something about, um,

Scott:

I can't remember exactly what he said, but he said something about, you know,

Scott:

he's come in here to collect his hat, and it's been thrown back in his face.

Scott:

You know, which is just one of those things, it's, uh.

Joe:

And there's still the Toowoomba trial to go, isn't there?

Scott:

Uh, I believe so, yeah.

Trev:

Yeah, because it has been a weapon, this sort of defamation threat,

Trev:

that these huge payouts are possible.

Trev:

I sometimes have to question whether they were in line with the

Trev:

actual damaged reputation or not.

Trev:

But, uh, anyway, people might maybe start to think twice, a bit more.

Trev:

I mean, I

Scott:

think, um, Well, that's two, two high profile cases that

Scott:

have blown up in their faces.

Scott:

You know, like you've got, um, the soldier, can't remember his name.

Scott:

Robert Sazer.

Scott:

Sorry?

Scott:

Robert Smith.

Scott:

Robert Smith.

Scott:

Yeah.

Scott:

You know, he sued and that soldier's blown up in his face.

Scott:

And then you've got Lerman's sued and that's blown up in his face.

Scott:

And

Trev:

I think there was a

Scott:

recent

Trev:

thing where there was reports made about Alan Jones.

Trev:

And, um, basically he hasn't started a defamation suit, and maybe in past

Trev:

times he might have thought about it, maybe learning some lessons from the

Trev:

current, you know, from those two cases.

Trev:

So, yeah.

Scott:

Well, I would hope so, because it's just, I, I'm just a little bit concerned

Scott:

about the level of, um, Litigiousness that's already going on in Australia,

Scott:

becoming a very litigious community just like the United States, which I just

Scott:

don't think is actually good for us.

Scott:

Yeah,

Trev:

you just want a genuine assessment of somebody's reputation and how

Trev:

it's been damaged and, you know.

Joe:

I'm thinking, you know, um, I would never have assumed that a

Joe:

defamation case was going to win because I remember the Geoffrey Archer case.

Trev:

Who's that?

Trev:

Geoffrey Archer.

Trev:

Geoffrey Archer, he

Joe:

was a novelist back in the UK, and he was accused of,

Joe:

I think, cheating on his wife.

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

And he, he basically sued for defamation, lost, and then was,

Joe:

I think, jailed for, uh, perjury.

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

He was jailed anyway, and I'm fairly sure it was in relation to that case.

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

Um, so, yeah, that was in the 1980s in the UK.

Joe:

Right.

Joe:

Right.

Joe:

And kind of said, you can't just, the thing about defamation is very

Joe:

much, if it's a person who's rich and threatening somebody who's poor, they

Joe:

can't afford to defend themselves.

Trev:

And then there was Lance Armstrong was basically warding off enquiries from

Trev:

people with threats of defamation when people were writing things or wanting

Trev:

to write things about his doping.

Trev:

I think he was threatening defamation as a means of Stopping, um,

Scott:

that

Trev:

being exposed, so, yeah.

Scott:

The US has got a very different defamation system over there, don't

Trev:

they?

Trev:

Particularly if you're a public figure, it's kind of, um, almost all bets

Trev:

are off if you're a public figure.

Joe:

Well, you have to prove that they knowingly told a falsehood.

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

Or that they acted in such a way that they should have reasonably known.

Joe:

Yeah.

Joe:

Yeah.

Joe:

So that they were, they were not just, oh well I thought it was different.

Joe:

You have to prove that they, they should have known better.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Maybe one of those rare areas where the US legal system might be, might be

Trev:

closer to the mark of what's the best.

Trev:

So yeah, oh there we go.

Trev:

So John, I wasn't planning on it, but um, there you go, some

Trev:

hot takes on that decision.

Trev:

Um, A sorry state of affairs really for our media, just the, I don't read the

Trev:

nuts and bolts of it, but just the way that he was entertained and rent paid.

Trev:

Yeah, that

Scott:

was bloody disgusting.

Trev:

Allegedly, thank you, Joe, allegedly entertained.

Trev:

They were

Scott:

allegedly entertained with, allegedly by hookers

Scott:

and drugs and everything else.

Scott:

Those were the allegations that were made.

Trev:

Yes, just.

Trev:

Uh, doesn't paint a good picture of, um, journalism in this country.

Trev:

Mmm.

Trev:

Mmm.

Trev:

Now, um, oh, the Bondi Junction, um, stabbings.

Joe:

Mmm.

Joe:

Yes, did you notice in a certain private Facebook group that

Joe:

somebody had posted some discussion literally hours after it happened?

Joe:

going on about the religion of peace and how it was obviously a muslim

Joe:

because he had a big thick beard

Trev:

No, I didn't

Joe:

Okay

Trev:

Yeah, you

Scott:

know I saw an interview with the mother and that sort of

Scott:

stuff of him and she did not look like Islamic or anything like that.

Scott:

She just looked like,

Joe:

you

Scott:

know, it's one of those things.

Scott:

I'm not sure where you legit stand on this, but, um, I said years and years

Scott:

ago to my brother, who's a psychiatric nurse, I said to him, you know,

Scott:

speaking is a purely non Professional from that field, I would suggest that

Scott:

the closure of asylums and everything else in Australia was a mistake.

Scott:

And he said, yes, I agree with you.

Scott:

So he actually reckons that, uh We don't have

Trev:

asylums?

Scott:

Sorry?

Trev:

We, we don't have asylums?

Scott:

We don't have them.

Scott:

No, you have to actually, you have to be a threat to yourself and

Scott:

others to get locked up in them.

Scott:

Right.

Scott:

See, whereas prior to that, you could actually commit someone who wasn't

Scott:

a threat to themself or others.

Scott:

Ah.

Scott:

So I would have thought that this bloke who had been under the treatment

Scott:

of physicians and everything for about 18 years, that they would have

Scott:

actually said, well, that's serious enough that we've got to lock him up.

Scott:

But anyway, they, the government chose to close them down many, many moons ago.

Joe:

The argument was the modern medications meant that a people could

Joe:

live a full and active life in community.

Joe:

However,

Scott:

only if they're taking the drugs.

Scott:

Yeah, exactly.

Scott:

Which is one of the things, if you're not going to take the drugs, you're going to

Scott:

end up falling off that wagon and you end up fucked up again, which means you're

Scott:

sleeping on the street, you're potentially a victim of violence, or you're

Scott:

potentially a perpetrator of violence.

Scott:

I think to myself, what would that mother actually prefer?

Scott:

Would she prefer to go and visit her son once a week?

Scott:

In a mental hospital, where she knows that her son was being medicated and

Scott:

looked after and everything else.

Scott:

Or would she prefer just to go and visit his grave now?

Joe:

Having been on psychiatric wards, they're not a place you'd want to be.

Scott:

No, I agree wholeheartedly.

Scott:

I agree wholeheartedly.

Scott:

They're not very nice places at all.

Scott:

But if you compare that to the number of people that are living

Scott:

on the streets now, um, you know, it's just one of those things.

Trev:

Well, my experience was that I was getting into an elevator in this

Trev:

apartment building and there's an elderly couple on the same floor who

Trev:

I know, and Um, they said, oh, they were, uh, heading in the elevator to go

Trev:

down to the shops to buy the newspaper.

Trev:

And I immediately was like, rolling my eyes, because that

Trev:

clearly meant only one newspaper, which was, uh, The Courier Fail.

Trev:

And um, as we got in the, in the elevator, um, the lady said, oh, I

Trev:

think we just, oh, wasn't that terrible what happened in Bondi, and she

Trev:

said, yeah, terrible, and, you know, Somebody should tell that Albanese

Trev:

that that was one of his immigrants.

Trev:

That's, you know, somebody should tell him.

Trev:

I was like, born in Australia at, at that point I'd only sort of just

Trev:

heard that he was a Queenslander.

Trev:

I said, well, I just heard he's a Queenslander.

Trev:

And she was like, oh, really?

Trev:

But I just thought, man.

Trev:

Yeah, that's people from Toowoomba, you can't trust them.

Trev:

Scott being from Toowoomba.

Trev:

Yeah, I was from Toowoomba.

Trev:

And I thought, wow, on a matter like this, we have, people are prepared

Trev:

to reduce that to party politics.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

And just, it was really disappointing.

Trev:

And, you know, they're a nice couple and, but I just thought this

Trev:

fucking Murdoch rag, if it, just the, the way it's, Propagandise

Trev:

people into being able to take that

Joe:

view.

Joe:

I don't think it's just that.

Joe:

I think whoever you hate the most, you're going to, if you're small

Joe:

minded, you're going to immediately assume it's whoever you hate.

Trev:

And you're looking for an excuse to blame whoever you hate.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

For everything that happens that's bad.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

It's like, really?

Trev:

Just on a day like this and you're ready to lay it at Albanese feet.

Trev:

And I was thinking, I was thinking to myself afterwards, I should

Trev:

have thought even quicker.

Trev:

Like I should have told her.

Trev:

No, it was one of, uh, Morrison's, um, immigrants, actually, it might be one of

Trev:

Dutton's, um, not Dutton, um, Costello's.

Trev:

Yeah, Abbott's.

Trev:

Oh.

Trev:

Or uh, somebody like that.

Trev:

'cause it was just the assumption that it had to be Albanese immigrant.

Trev:

It was just really.

Trev:

Depressing, but there we go.

Trev:

Yeah,

Joe:

uh,

Trev:

right, anyone got anything more to add on that or we'll just move on?

Joe:

Well, um, so which immigrants were the William Biller shooters?

Trev:

Uh, were they the ones out past Dolby?

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

I don't think there are any immigrant from anywhere except, um, White Anglo

Trev:

Saxon fridge from Yeah, well, exactly.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Well, maybe they weren't, Joe.

Trev:

I don't know.

Trev:

Just, you can't say that by looking at somebody, can you?

Joe:

Well, that's true.

Joe:

They might have

Trev:

identified as Indigenous.

Trev:

I don't know.

Trev:

Didn't hear that come out, but, um Yeah, that was depressing.

Trev:

All right.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

We're going to talk about housing now.

Trev:

So, there was A poll out from Essential asking people about, um, to what

Trev:

extent would you support or oppose the following housing policies in Australia?

Trev:

And, um, remove tax concessions like negative gearing and capital gains

Trev:

tax discounts for property investors.

Trev:

Overall, 24 percent strongly support and 27 percent somewhat support.

Trev:

and 30 percent were neutral.

Trev:

Only 19 percent would oppose that.

Trev:

So we're reaching the point where the majority of Australians are ready to

Trev:

remove negative gearing and capital gains tax according to this, uh, essential poll.

Trev:

So there's a mood out there for change is brewing, I think.

Trev:

Um, Unfortunately, in the same poll, I asked people about a policy

Trev:

of allowing first home buyers to access their superannuation to help

Trev:

them purchase their first home.

Trev:

And unfortunately, 57 percent of people were in favour of that,

Trev:

and 25 percent were neutral.

Trev:

Dear listener, all that will do, allowing young is boost up the price of housing.

Trev:

Saul Eslake.

Trev:

Scott, you listened to the 7am podcast.

Trev:

Yeah, and I listened

Scott:

to him this morning.

Scott:

He was very articulate.

Scott:

He laid the blame right at Howard's feet.

Trev:

And he said

Scott:

that, you know, everything Howard did was just going to inflate the prices.

Trev:

Yeah.

Scott:

Which is exactly what has happened.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

So he was

Scott:

It's one of those things.

Scott:

Howard has never made any secret that he hated the capital gains tax.

Scott:

He hates

Trev:

it.

Scott:

And he actually tried to He wanted to repeal it, but they

Scott:

all said no, you can't repeal it.

Scott:

So we did the next best thing, which is where he gutted it.

Trev:

You

Scott:

know, it's

Trev:

Now, were you a card carrying member of the Liberal Party at the time, Scott?

Trev:

Oh, I

Scott:

was, yes, a card carrying member of the Liberal Party.

Scott:

Did

Trev:

you think at the time, well, that's a good idea.

Scott:

No, not really.

Trev:

Right.

Scott:

I did actually have some questions of it.

Trev:

Okay.

Scott:

Because I didn't think it was that bad what they're asking

Scott:

you to do, to calculate the post.

Scott:

The post inflationary gain was all you paid tax on.

Scott:

Yes.

Scott:

Which was very reasonable.

Trev:

Mm.

Scott:

So if your property price is, uh, If your property price went up above

Scott:

the, above the, above the inflation rate, then you pay tax on that.

Scott:

And then they also had another thing that, um, said that that couldn't

Scott:

push you up into the next tax bracket or anything like they calculated the

Scott:

total tax on that at the highest rate of tax that you're currently getting

Scott:

charged, which was quite reasonable.

Scott:

Now what they've done is they have just slashed it and they've said

Scott:

that, you know, you hold something for 12 months, you sell it and you

Scott:

make a profit on it, you only have to pay tax on 50 percent of that.

Scott:

Now I don't know whether or not you still, um, I don't know where you actually

Scott:

get that, um, whether or not it, uh, I can't remember what it was called,

Scott:

I think it was, anyway, averaging or something like that on the income tax,

Scott:

you know, I'm not sure if you still get that averaging or whether or not

Scott:

you, you actually pay tax at the end.

Trev:

I think people who have a very variable income can average it out

Trev:

over a few years if they've had a spike for some reason of some sort.

Trev:

Yeah, but that's a I don't know if that's still the case.

Trev:

It used to be.

Scott:

That only relates to farmers and those sorts of people.

Scott:

You've got, um, that was where you average your income out over a few years.

Scott:

Is

Trev:

that what you're talking about?

Scott:

No, but the averaging was, averaging was something

Scott:

that was, was given to you if you were in receipt of capital gains.

Scott:

And that was to make sure that you didn't actually get boosted up into

Scott:

the top capital, and you didn't actually pay tax at the top rate.

Scott:

on the capital gain, it was at a lower rate because they averaged it out.

Scott:

So I'm just not sure if that's still the case or whether or not

Scott:

they just throw the 50 percent of it into your, into your income tax

Scott:

and you just pay the tax on that.

Scott:

I couldn't tell you.

Scott:

My

Trev:

memory, Scott, when capital gains was first introduced by Keating?

Trev:

I think,

Scott:

I

Trev:

think

Scott:

it was September 1985 was when it started.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

And basically it was announced that night, like in a budget or something like that.

Scott:

I don't know where it was announced.

Scott:

It was, it was either announced by, um, media conference or it

Scott:

was announced in the budget.

Scott:

I couldn't tell you.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

But it was pretty much the day of the change, which was from now on.

Trev:

Exactly.

Trev:

From this moment onwards.

Scott:

19th of September 1985.

Trev:

Yeah, um, there was, uh, assets bought prior to that time would be exempt.

Trev:

Pre

Scott:

CGT and they're exempt.

Trev:

Correct.

Trev:

And assets bought after that time would then be subject to

Trev:

the new capital gains tax regime.

Trev:

And it was, I don't know, I just have a memory of it being a, A bit of a shock

Trev:

and a bit of a well kept secret, or just, it sort of was just announced very

Trev:

suddenly and there was no opportunity for people to quickly acquire assets.

Scott:

No, there wasn't, because the assets and everything, if

Scott:

you didn't own it by September 1985, then you were fucked.

Trev:

Yeah, yeah.

Trev:

So, it was done in a way that stopped people from quickly buying assets

Trev:

to get in a pre CGT situation.

Trev:

No, I agree.

Trev:

And it

Scott:

was done like that.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Okay.

Trev:

Those were the days when people made decisions and said, boom, here it

Joe:

is.

Joe:

Did that have a depressionary effect on assets that people were investing in?

Scott:

I couldn't tell you.

Scott:

It's been years, so I couldn't tell you.

Scott:

It's just one of those things, like, you know, I don't understand

Scott:

why Howard had such a physic A philosophical hatred of it.

Scott:

It was just trying to take something Because it makes

Joe:

rich people less rich.

Joe:

Yes.

Scott:

I suppose so, but anyway, it's one of those things, like, see, up

Scott:

until then, there was a reason why you had to There were all these cases about

Scott:

whether or not something was capital, whether or not something was income.

Scott:

If it was capital, it was exempt from income tax because

Scott:

it was only a capital gain.

Scott:

So you didn't actually get taxed on it.

Scott:

After that, it didn't really matter because, you know, the posts, uh,

Scott:

the profit that was in excess of the inflation rate was what you paid tax on.

Trev:

Yes, wasn't it?

Trev:

Which was

Scott:

quite reasonable.

Scott:

It was, it was quite reasonable.

Scott:

And I don't understand why the hell they didn't want to actually maintain that.

Trev:

Yeah, well, you know, yeah, well, just on the essential polls

Trev:

still, you know, when we, the figure I gave before was for, um, just the

Trev:

overall sample that they took, so all people, all ages, all genders.

Trev:

And looking where it breaks up, say, by age, pretty much,

Trev:

there's not a lot of change.

Trev:

Um, people's views on, um, on getting rid of capital gain stacks and

Trev:

negative gearing, um, you know, very minor differences in the age groups.

Trev:

So, I found that interesting.

Trev:

And even in voting intention, Not a lot of difference amongst

Trev:

the different, um, groups.

Trev:

Greens, Labor, Coalition, Independents.

Trev:

You know, as far as these things go, in kind of agreement on this.

Trev:

So, we've reached a point.

Joe:

I did notice, actually, it was the 35 to 54 year olds that

Joe:

were most against any change.

Joe:

Um, uh, whereas the pensioners seem to be.

Joe:

As happy that things changed as the young people.

Trev:

Yeah, um, let me just see here, so, for the removal of the capital gains

Trev:

and the negative gearing, um, you say by age, um, so in the younger cohort,

Trev:

18 to 34, uh, 55 percent were in favour.

Trev:

Um, And in the older cohort, the 55 plus, it was still 48 percent were in

Trev:

favour of changing negative gearing and capital gains tax, so given the

Trev:

divide often in the age groups on other issues that we've looked at, I thought

Trev:

that was a relatively small difference.

Joe:

Yeah, I think it is, but I was surprised that, I was expecting

Joe:

the OEPs to be the reactionaries and go, I don't want any change.

Joe:

And it seems to be, um, 35 to 54, which is going to be families, sort of.

Joe:

You're already set up, you're in your house, and you're just

Joe:

hanging on, you don't want any depreciation of your assets, maybe.

Scott:

Which is one of the things that I do worry about, you know, because we can

Scott:

all talk about everything with housing prices and all that sort of stuff.

Scott:

However, if they do actually go down, and if they go down by a substantial

Scott:

amount, then that will depress the economy, because people will no

Scott:

longer feel as wealthy, because their housing prices have gone backwards.

Scott:

It's one of those things.

Scott:

Well, well,

Trev:

Scott, if they're not

Scott:

owning a house

Trev:

though

Scott:

If they're not owning a house, I agree, they're going to love that.

Scott:

They're going to love that, because the prices have come

Scott:

down, which will make them, make them more affordable for people.

Trev:

And that'll be a boost to the economy.

Trev:

If in fact we get to the position where more people If people don't

Trev:

own a house, then that sort of policy could be expansionary.

Trev:

Um,

Scott:

I don't see how it could be expansionary.

Scott:

It wouldn't be expansionary because all you're just doing is, you're

Scott:

taking established homes and making them belong to someone else.

Scott:

And you've also got these other people that are going to record

Scott:

losses and all that type of thing.

Scott:

And this is the other thing, Capital Gains Tax.

Scott:

You pay tax on the gain.

Scott:

You don't, you don't get a tax reduction for the loss.

Trev:

Nobody's going to suffer a loss though.

Scott:

I know that, not now, but anyway, it's one of those things.

Scott:

If you were to actually, if you were to actually depress house prices

Scott:

enough that it comes down, then, you know, you're not going to be able to.

Scott:

So you're arguing,

Joe:

one of those reports actually said, uh, that the removal of

Joe:

capital gains and negative gearing.

Joe:

create a 2 percent change in the value of houses.

Scott:

Which is no problem at all.

Joe:

Well, exactly.

Joe:

And that, yes, there would be a big shift in the ownership of houses, so people

Joe:

would get out of the investment market, but that that slack would be taken up

Joe:

by people who are currently renting.

Joe:

So really, it would have very little effect on the cost of houses.

Joe:

It just means that more people would be in, would be living

Joe:

in a house that they owned.

Scott:

Ah, John Seamans, where do you listen to Eastlake Scott?

Scott:

I listened to him on the 7am podcast this morning, they've got a Five part series on

Scott:

the housing disaster, I think it's called.

Scott:

So, yeah.

Scott:

Part one

Trev:

was today.

Trev:

It was very good.

Scott:

Yeah, part one was today.

Scott:

It's very much worth looking at, you know, worth listening to.

Scott:

It was very good.

Trev:

And the Saturday paper had an article, the Saturday paper

Trev:

and the 7am podcast are both

Scott:

Schwartz Media.

Scott:

Yeah.

Trev:

So, um, yeah, that was where that came from.

Trev:

And Salt Lake's very good.

Trev:

Um, Paying tax is

Scott:

never really reasonable according to

Trev:

Landon Hardbottom.

Trev:

Hello Landon.

Trev:

So, um, just, just on house prices then, in the same poll they asked people, Huh?

Trev:

Would you like to see house prices continue to rise, reduce, or stabilise?

Trev:

And overall, 15 percent wanted continue to rise, 45 percent wanted

Trev:

stabilise, and 40 percent of those surveyed wanted prices to reduce.

Trev:

That was a significant number, and probably matches the number

Trev:

of people who don't own a house, I would say, at this point.

Trev:

So yeah, um, that one of course, sorry Joe.

Joe:

Look, if you're a housing market, you don't care whether

Joe:

your house goes up or down, really.

Joe:

Um, but you might want it to go down for your kids.

Trev:

Yeah,

Joe:

true.

Joe:

So unless you're leaving an area, unless you're leaving the bubble, do

Joe:

you care about where the bubble is?

Trev:

Yes, true.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

What else was on here?

Trev:

Um, views on the Australian housing system.

Trev:

So, these were the options people were asked.

Trev:

Our housing system is working well, doesn't require change.

Trev:

Or, the housing system is not working in some parts and

Trev:

needs change in those areas.

Trev:

Or, the housing system is broken and needs to be fundamentally rethought.

Trev:

End.

Trev:

Only 9 percent of people thought the housing system was going well, 47

Trev:

percent wanted some tinkering, and 43 percent say the system's broken and

Trev:

needs to be fundamentally rethought.

Trev:

So, and that, um, what about being fundamentally rethought, was pretty

Trev:

much even across the age groups.

Trev:

Like, um, Uh, 42%, 45%, 44 percent from the young, middle aged to

Trev:

elderly all thought the same thing.

Trev:

So again, pretty common, unusually sort of uniform thinking by

Trev:

Australians on this issue, um, that the system has got some real problems.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

So, um.

Scott:

It's one

Trev:

of

Scott:

those things, like, you know, um.

Scott:

I know what Landon's saying, you've either got to have fewer

Scott:

people or more houses, well

Joe:

Well, the Bondi guy was trying to remedy that.

Scott:

Yeah, I know that.

Scott:

Too early,

Joe:

Joe.

Joe:

Too soon.

Scott:

It's one of those things, you can't, um, you can't actually

Scott:

You can't actually have a population that goes backwards because that

Scott:

will end up fucking up the economy.

Scott:

And if the houses and everything that we've got and that sort of stuff, if they

Scott:

become some kind of Runaway excuse to make a hell of a lot of money on, then,

Scott:

you know, it's just one of those things.

Scott:

You've just got to make a decision as to which is, which is better for you.

Scott:

You know, um, anyway, it's, I'm not sure why it has got to this sort of level

Scott:

because we have had high migration in the past and we have coped as a country.

Scott:

We have managed to put everyone in, we've managed to put everyone in

Scott:

under a roof and everything else.

Scott:

And we also managed to employ them and everything else.

Scott:

It's just, I just don't understand where it's all gone wrong.

Trev:

Well, we're trying to work that out in this podcast, aren't we?

Trev:

So we've, we've blamed, uh, negative gearing and capital gains, but, uh, we've

Trev:

blamed also land banking that we looked at last week where it's, uh, developers

Trev:

sitting on, on approvals and not actually releasing the land because to do so would

Trev:

cause a drop in prices if you had too much supply, so there's that issue, there's

Trev:

the way to counteract that is to have more public housing put onto the market

Trev:

supplied by the government because the government doesn't need to make a profit

Trev:

from it, in fact wants to depress it.

Trev:

say.

Trev:

If you were to, to get the government to be creating more public

Trev:

housing, that would be a solution.

Trev:

And in the podcast this morning, Scott, saw less like I think, or one of the

Trev:

commentators was saying how There was a significant amount of public

Trev:

housing built during the Menzies era.

Scott:

Yeah, I know.

Scott:

It's one of those things.

Scott:

It's something that Menzies was very proud of.

Trev:

Yeah, and it was the neo liberal policy of privatising everything, less

Trev:

government, that led to Australia, as well as other countries, but Australia

Trev:

in particular, pulling back and ceasing that sort of public housing.

Trev:

Um, building that had been a significant component of, of sort of the Menzies era,

Trev:

and unfortunately the tax concessions that were brought in, one of the arguments

Trev:

was it would lead to the creation of more housing, but it turns out the investors

Trev:

just bought existing houses and didn't actually create that many new houses.

Scott:

Exactly.

Scott:

It's one of those things.

Scott:

I don't understand what the hell was the problem with, um Public housing?

Scott:

No, what the hell was it?

Scott:

What the hell was the opposition leader's name at the time?

Scott:

Shorten?

Trev:

I

Scott:

don't understand what the hell, what the hell the problem

Scott:

was with his, um, with his policy.

Scott:

You know, he just said that he wasn't going to, he wasn't going to

Trev:

Murdoch didn't like it and he created a great scare campaign.

Trev:

Yeah, I know.

Trev:

And we got Morrison.

Scott:

We got Morrison instead, which is, you know, that's history.

Scott:

But you've just got to look at him.

Scott:

What he was actually saying was he just wanted to have negative gearing

Scott:

only available for new builds.

Scott:

Which honestly I think makes perfect sense.

Trev:

Um, yeah.

Trev:

Interestingly, our foreign investment laws, um, when people want to buy

Trev:

residential property, they could buy new units, for example, but they

Trev:

couldn't buy existing properties.

Trev:

So that was a way of Is that still the case?

Trev:

I'm pretty sure it would be, but I haven't looked at it for a long time.

Trev:

But, uh, that was done as a way of at least foreigners buying property

Trev:

would have to be encouraging some sort of new building.

Trev:

They couldn't buy existing ones.

Joe:

So, um, I know in London that there are laws saying that for every

Joe:

Yeah, whatever it is, ten high value apartments that you build, you have

Joe:

to buy five affordable apartments.

Joe:

Right.

Joe:

Uh, and so friends in London have said, basically you get a tower block with one

Joe:

entrance on one side, which is for all the rich apartments, and one entrance on the

Joe:

other side that's for all the poor people.

Joe:

Well, at least it's there.

Joe:

Well, absolutely.

Joe:

It's basically saying, yeah, to get approval for X number of houses,

Joe:

you have to provide affordable housing in an equivalent amount.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

There was an article in the John Menendee blog by a guy, Michael Keating.

Trev:

He put forward some interesting ideas.

Trev:

Um, One of them was looking at the increase in population versus the increase

Trev:

in the number of dwellings since 2017.

Trev:

And um, over the last seven years, the increase in the number of dwellings has

Trev:

exceeded the rate of population growth.

Trev:

So, um, so, where people like Peter Dutton want to blame immigration

Trev:

for the housing crisis, he's got the statistics that show that

Joe:

basically How many kids does Dutton have?

Trev:

Yeah, I don't know.

Joe:

Well, maybe it's his fault for breeding too many.

Scott:

See, that's one of the things that I just don't understand, is that if

Scott:

they actually looked back on the proudest days of the Liberal Party, which was

Scott:

when Menzies was in charge, apparently, you know, you've just got to look at us.

Scott:

We were awash with migrants.

Scott:

We were awash with public housing.

Scott:

We did those two things at once.

Scott:

Why the hell aren't they trying to copy that again?

Trev:

Mmm, yeah.

Trev:

Another statistic he gave here was the increase in house prices and the

Trev:

increase in dwelling construction costs.

Trev:

And, somewhere like Melbourne, for example, between 2002 and 2010,

Trev:

median house price increased by 8.

Trev:

6%, but dwelling construction costs Increased by 4.6%.

Trev:

So that meant the land cost increased by 4%.

Trev:

Um, in the following 10 years, the Melbourne million

Trev:

house price increased 4.5%.

Trev:

Construction costs increased 2.4.

Trev:

That meant that the land increased, had to be 2.1.

Trev:

And from, um, 2020 to 2023, the median house price in Melbourne Rose 18%.

Trev:

Dwelling construction costs rose 7.

Trev:

7, so basically the cost of land increased by 11.

Trev:

3.

Trev:

So some of these statistics show, okay, we've had some periods of high

Trev:

construction costs, but there's also been in there periods of very high

Trev:

increase in the actual land component, not just the cost of housing.

Trev:

So, um So that's adding more information to the puzzle of why prices have gone

Trev:

up and he argues that we need more higher density sort of suburbs using

Trev:

less land, therefore Yeah, I agree.

Trev:

Yeah, makes sense.

Trev:

It's

Scott:

one of those things that when my, when my place was in Brisbane and that

Scott:

sort of stuff, that was supposed to be zoned for units and that type of thing,

Scott:

but um, the LNP government knocked that on the head and they said you can only

Scott:

have units up on the um, Logan Road.

Scott:

So anything that was off Logan Road was deemed to be,

Scott:

you gotta have bigger blocks.

Trev:

So

Scott:

I was able to split my block, but yeah, it's just one of those things.

Trev:

Um, in the same article, makes the point, first homeowner grants, um,

Trev:

stamp duty exemptions, things like that, they just, uh, don't lead to poor people

Trev:

getting houses, they just lead to higher house prices, because these people are

Trev:

now competing with each other, so if you give them a 50, 000, um, Sort of both.

Joe:

Or robbing your superannuation.

Trev:

Yes.

Joe:

It just means you have less superannuation.

Joe:

Yes.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

So, um, so yeah.

Trev:

And then in the Saturday paper was an article, The Men and Decisions Behind

Trev:

Australia's Housing Crisis, And that sort of was, um, following along the same lines

Trev:

as the podcast you listened to, uh, Scott.

Trev:

One of the interesting anecdotes in that was that, um, Howard was

Trev:

interviewed on a radio program, um, And, um, so, yeah, Brisbane Radio,

Trev:

2003, John Howard was being interviewed.

Trev:

Since the election of the coalition government, uh, seven years

Trev:

earlier, house prices had doubled.

Trev:

And Howard's interviewer wanted to know what the government

Trev:

planned to do about it.

Trev:

And he, Howard said nothing.

Trev:

Howard said, quote, I haven't found anybody in seven and a half years

Trev:

shake their fist at me and say, Howard, I'm angry with you for letting

Trev:

the value of my house increase.

Trev:

And, um, So that's been sort of cited with frequency over time, but the,

Trev:

um, There was actually something that followed that statement and the

Trev:

interviewer responded and said well Let me be the first to complain.

Trev:

People like myself are actually being forced to face the possibility

Trev:

We may be renting for the rest of our lives because getting into, and

Trev:

he was interrupted at that point, and Howard said Do you own a home?

Trev:

And the host said, no, I rent.

Trev:

And Howard said, no, well, I'm sorry.

Trev:

I was talking about people who own a home.

Trev:

So essentially his concern was only for people who owned a home and,

Trev:

uh, well, nobody's complained to me.

Trev:

And the interviewer is saying, well, I want to

Joe:

complain.

Trev:

And Howard goes,

Joe:

well, also, I suspect.

Joe:

Brisbane prices went up in that period because they were incredibly

Joe:

undervalued because of Sir Joe's legacy.

Joe:

Yeah, possibly.

Joe:

And people finally realised, the southern states finally

Joe:

realised that Sir Joe was gone.

Trev:

Mm.

Joe:

And that they could take their money from selling a Sydney or Melbourne

Joe:

house and retire on the difference.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

Mm.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

But at that point At that point, it made sense politically for Howard

Trev:

to favour people who owned a home, because they were the majority.

Trev:

And you got the most votes by pandering to that cohort.

Scott:

But now that majority has got their adult children still living with

Scott:

them at home, it's starting to turn.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

This is just one of the ongoing problems about the boomer generation

Trev:

is that they were such a large voting bloc who by age and circumstances had

Trev:

similar interests that governments were forced around the world to kind of.

Trev:

You know, uh, okay, all those guys are educated, let's now charge people

Trev:

for their university degrees, because it's not affecting the boomers.

Trev:

Let's now introduce superannuation, because that's what the boomers want.

Trev:

And just a range of policy decisions that were made, um, uh,

Trev:

with an eye to democracy, Scott.

Trev:

You know, like, we make decisions.

Trev:

That best help the majority of people.

Joe:

The tyranny of the majority?

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

Tyranny of the mass?

Joe:

I can't remember all the phrases.

Trev:

But unfortunately that meant a particular large voting group

Trev:

got particular favours and that was perhaps detrimental to the

Trev:

long term viability of the country.

Trev:

That's sort of one of the failings of a democracy.

Scott:

Yeah, but I'd still prefer to live in Australia's failed democracy than

Scott:

live in the People's Republic of China.

Trev:

Yeah, but I'm just saying it's one of the Or the

Scott:

Russian Federation.

Trev:

Yeah, yeah, but I'm just, um, just saying it's one of the things to consider.

Trev:

Hmm.

Trev:

Um, uh, what else did it say in here?

Trev:

Um, when Howard came into power, 42 percent of people Owned their home,

Trev:

free and clear, with no mortgage, 42%, um, and 28 percent had mortgages.

Trev:

Um,

Joe:

let me just see, uh, yeah, but they were mortgages of 18%.

Joe:

It was a different mortgage than you get these days.

Joe:

Yeah,

Scott:

they weren't that high back then.

Scott:

You know, it's, it's one of those things.

Scott:

It's the boomers would love to, we'd love to have you believe that they paid

Scott:

22 percent interest on a 400, 000 house.

Scott:

They paid 22 percent interest on a six on a 60, 000 mortgage.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

You know?

Trev:

Um, so in 2002, the average retirement age was 55.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Yeah, that was low, wasn't it?

Trev:

It was very low, but you know, it's,

Scott:

it's, what's going on in this world?

Scott:

I don't know.

Scott:

We're going backwards.

Scott:

I'm very, very pissed off about it because it's one of those things

Scott:

I just think to myself, you know.

Scott:

Yeah.

Scott:

In a happier bygone era, I'd be thinking to myself, I've only

Scott:

got five years left of this shit.

Scott:

So, you know.

Trev:

Oh, that was the other thing.

Trev:

As the boomers have got older, the retirement age has been bumped up.

Trev:

Yeah,

Scott:

and they have bumped it up and up and up.

Scott:

And I just think to myself, if you actually want to solve the

Scott:

youth unemployment problem in this country, you've actually got to

Scott:

encourage some of those boomers.

Scott:

To pull outta the workforce now.

Trev:

Mm.

Trev:

Okay.

Trev:

Let me just finish the statistic here.

Trev:

2012, average retirement age was 55 and only 4% of homeowners aged over

Trev:

65 carried mortgage debt by 2020.

Trev:

So 18 years later, the average retirement age was 64 and more

Trev:

than 50% of homeowners, um, aged 55 to 64 still had mortgage debt.

Trev:

So within 20 years.

Trev:

Significant mortgage debt on those people.

Trev:

Hmm.

Trev:

Hmm.

Trev:

Ah, what else have we got here?

Trev:

Um,

Trev:

uh, oh, negative gearing.

Trev:

So, one of the arguments is that if you were to get rid of negative

Trev:

gearing, then rents would go up.

Trev:

And, you may ask yourself, dear listener, well we'll never know,

Trev:

will we, until it actually happens.

Trev:

And in this article they make the point that there's, the experiment has already

Trev:

been run, so the Hawke government, um, dropped negative gearing in 1985, and

Trev:

reinstated it in 1987, following sharp rises in rents in Sydney and Perth.

Trev:

So that seems to be an argument against abolishing negative gearing.

Trev:

But Saul S Lake and others point out that, um, rises in those two cities, Sydney and

Trev:

Perth, were a consequence of a shortage of supply and contrary to that Adelaide

Trev:

rents actually fell and the abolition had no impact anywhere else in the country.

Trev:

So if you want to take that experiment and the word of Saul S Lake, their negative

Trev:

gearing, if it was to be, dropped.

Trev:

would not lead to increases in rent.

Trev:

So at the time, Labor buckled in the face of a thorough, well, in what Saul

Trev:

Eslake calls a thoroughly dishonest campaign by the opposition leader, John

Trev:

Howard, uh, invested property interests, uh, in the usual media suspects.

Trev:

And they restored negative gearing and of course introduced

Trev:

a halving of the capital gains.

Trev:

So, um, What else is in this article that's of interest?

Trev:

Um, we've mentioned before how much it costs to have these deductions.

Trev:

Um,

Joe:

I

Trev:

told you

Joe:

about land valuation, by the way.

Joe:

Uh, what part was that, Joe?

Joe:

My, my recent land valuation went up 30%.

Joe:

Yeah, it's two years.

Joe:

So it's 15 percent per annum.

Joe:

Congratulations.

Joe:

No, not really.

Joe:

It means absolutely nothing.

Joe:

Congratulations

Trev:

on your higher rates, Phil.

Trev:

Pass that on to your tenants.

Trev:

Oh wait, you don't have any.

Joe:

Exactly.

Joe:

Can't claim it on negative

Trev:

gearing either.

Trev:

Uh, anything else of interest in this?

Trev:

Um, I think that's enough sort of stuff to have in your head at the moment

Trev:

about, uh, oh, here's an interesting one.

Trev:

In the seven years to the mid 2019, the median Sydney home Earned more

Trev:

than the median full time worker.

Trev:

So basically the average Sydney home in a seven year period increased in

Trev:

value at a yearly rate greater than the average median full time worker.

Joe:

And it only paid half the tax on that.

Trev:

Yes, indeed.

Trev:

There's some amazing statistics, isn't there?

Trev:

Um, yeah.

Trev:

Um, uh,

Joe:

what else was there?

Joe:

Well, it would be interesting to put together how much foregone tax, negative

Joe:

gearing and halving the capital gains.

Scott:

Um, it hasn't actually halved the capital gains tax because, you

Scott:

know, you would assume that you would be paying tax on 100 percent of the gain.

Scott:

You never were.

Scott:

You were only paying tax on the post inflationary gain.

Scott:

Yes.

Scott:

Which was probably 80 to 90 percent of what you were paying.

Scott:

So you've probably cut it by around about 30%.

Scott:

You haven't actually halved it.

Trev:

Well, according to this article, negative gearing costs 27 billion per

Trev:

annum and the cap, the CGT discount costs 19 billion per annum, uh, 20

Trev:

or 30, roughly 50 billion per annum.

Trev:

How many subs is that?

Trev:

50 billion used to get you 12 subs, and at that time it was outrageous.

Scott:

Yeah, but now you're talking about 300 billion for 10, wasn't it?

Trev:

That you'll, that we'll never get.

Scott:

Yeah, exactly.

Scott:

Uh,

Trev:

360 Yeah, so that's

Joe:

30 billion a sub.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

So yeah, uh, 50 billion a year, um, is what that's cost us.

Trev:

So one and a half submarines a year.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Look, you know, it's actually It's probably 10 Japanese

Trev:

subs a year, isn't it?

Trev:

Yeah,

Scott:

exactly.

Trev:

Ah, okay, um

Joe:

So what's the question, that now the Japanese are joining Orcus?

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

Do we get a discount on the subs?

Trev:

Maybe we could get Japanese subs now.

Joe:

Well, no, no, it's more, can we get a group rate?

Trev:

Between Japan and us, yeah.

Trev:

But Japan makes their own.

Trev:

They don't need to buy them.

Trev:

Yeah,

Scott:

but Japan doesn't make nuclear powered submarines.

Scott:

Well, exactly.

Scott:

So why are they joining AUKUS, if not?

Trev:

Because JAUKUS just sounds so good.

Scott:

No, they are joining to get access to American

Scott:

technology, which is hypersonic missiles and that type of thing.

Scott:

And they're also joining to get a greater air defence shield

Scott:

and everything like that.

Scott:

It's just, um, And they really don't like the Chinese.

Scott:

Well, they really don't like the Chinese, but they do have a

Scott:

fairly vexed history with China.

Scott:

Now, I know Japan started that war, but China has never forgiven them for it.

Scott:

No, they're

Trev:

very, they're very bitter

Scott:

about that.

Scott:

Oh God, yeah, they are very bitter about it.

Trev:

I remember my, um, homestay boys, Chinese, were very bitter about Japan.

Scott:

Yeah.

Scott:

It's one of those things, like, you know, I was in China, I don't

Scott:

know, when I went over there years ago to go visit my brother.

Scott:

And there was a, um, there was a television show that was highlighting

Scott:

the atrocities committed by Japan.

Scott:

And they had it in, they had English subtitles, Japanese

Scott:

subtitles, Korean subtitles.

Scott:

They had all the subtitles on there just to actually try and get the message across

Scott:

that the Japanese were bastards, you know?

Trev:

Yeah, they're big on that.

Trev:

I've

Scott:

got no doubt that they were pricks to them, for sure.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Um, actually in this article there was another interesting, um, anecdote,

Trev:

uh, so, around Halloween, uh, October 31, 2020, we had, uh, big, uh, storms

Trev:

in South East Queensland cause a billion dollars worth of damage.

Trev:

A lot of that was down sort of Springfield way, as I recall.

Trev:

Just, just every house in the suburb lost, you know, badly damaged

Trev:

roof, uh, lots of hail damage.

Trev:

And what he says is, it took two weeks for the increase in demand for

Trev:

roof plumbers in Brisbane to hit the price of roof plumbers in Melbourne.

Trev:

It literally just swept down the country.

Trev:

So incredible demand for roof plumbers in Brisbane.

Trev:

And um, Two weeks later, in Melbourne, uh, price of roof plumbers went up.

Trev:

Anyway, um, all these interesting things that come into play, um,

Joe:

So the two weeks was for the southerners to realise there was a quick

Joe:

buck to be made and jump on a plane?

Trev:

Yes, or they could simply say to their boss, Um, well, you pay

Trev:

me extra or I will go on a plane to Brisbane and, um, I've got two

Trev:

years worth of work up there at this crazy rate, so you have to match it.

Joe:

I remember when the cyclone came into Yippoon, and a mate of mine who is

Joe:

up there said, a big truck turned up two days after whilst things were still shit,

Joe:

um, filled up with Bunnings generators.

Joe:

That he'd bought at 500 pound, uh, 500 a pop at Bunnings in Brisbane, stuck on

Joe:

the back of a truck, drove up to Rocky, and was flogging him at 2000 a pop.

Joe:

Right.

Trev:

Because the power lines were down

Joe:

there.

Trev:

There you go, yeah.

Scott:

What a prick.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Anyway, uh, so that's more information to put in your kit bag about trying to

Trev:

explain Australia's housing situation.

Trev:

Yeah,

Scott:

I, I just, I still don't think that negative gearing is entirely to

Scott:

blame because Canada doesn't have negative gearing and Canada is also suffering the

Scott:

same sort of housing crisis that we are.

Trev:

Now

Scott:

I can't remember which city is, I think it's Vancouver where prices have

Scott:

shot up ridiculously high over there.

Scott:

Just one city?

Scott:

I don't know if it's just one city or whether there's all the cities.

Scott:

It's just, it is what it is.

Scott:

It's, I, I, you know, I'm not, I've got a negatively geared

Scott:

property in South Ripley.

Scott:

There's no doubt about that.

Scott:

So it could be, you could be ignoring everything I have to say here, but

Scott:

it's just, I just don't think it's entirely the fault of negative gearing.

Scott:

I think it is, I think it is certainly to blame, but it is not entirely to blame.

Scott:

Well,

Trev:

that's the whole point of this conversation is we're

Trev:

saying there's a whole host of.

Trev:

Factors involved.

Trev:

Oh God, yeah.

Trev:

There's a shit load of

Scott:

Hef.

Scott:

There's a shit load of factors involved.

Trev:

And, and the, um, podcast with 7:00 AM made a good point

Trev:

about culture that Australia has, you know, for various reasons

Trev:

become a, a culture of, of property speculators and of DIY improvement.

Trev:

So we are way into DIY improvement much more than a lot of other

Trev:

cultures around the world.

Scott:

I agree.

Scott:

But,

Trev:

but also.

Joe:

Um, our rental system is set up for short term rentals.

Joe:

So, uh, yeah, I've got a friend who's just moved into an apartment

Joe:

in Germany, and the landlord was basically talking about ten years time.

Joe:

Right.

Joe:

Yep.

Joe:

Yeah, the expectation was that, and it's, it's, it's a studio.

Joe:

It's not even a one bedroom apartment.

Trev:

Right.

Joe:

And, you know, I wouldn't expect anyone to be in a studio for ten years.

Joe:

Right.

Joe:

You'd be thinking you're going to be married and have a family and

Joe:

you can't have kids in a studio.

Joe:

You want a slightly bigger place.

Joe:

But yeah, the assumption was that he was going to be in there long term.

Joe:

There was, there was no, this is a six month lease.

Joe:

And at the end of six months, we're going to jack your rent up.

Scott:

You can't even do that now.

Scott:

You've got to wait 12 months between rent increases to

Scott:

actually increase the rent again.

Scott:

It's just, hmm.

Trev:

All right.

Trev:

Um, some good news.

Trev:

Uh, Scott Morrison has been busy signing copies of his book, Plans for Your Good.

Trev:

Um, it's hot off the presses.

Trev:

You can pre order your copy today from Booktopia.

Trev:

Are

Joe:

you going to read it and review it for us, Trev?

Trev:

No, I'll wait till it's, I'll wait till it's in the 2 bin.

Trev:

Hmm.

Trev:

I won't have to wait long.

Scott:

No, I just think I'll just go borrow it from the library because I

Scott:

just don't, I'm not really interested in giving that bastard any more money.

Scott:

You know, I, anyway, once we get off air, I'll tell you a story up here.

Scott:

Oh, okay.

Scott:

All right.

Scott:

That's not really salacious or anything like that.

Scott:

Anyway.

Scott:

Yeah.

Scott:

Okay.

Scott:

You'll make baby Jesus cry.

Scott:

No, it's not gonna make baby Jesus cry.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Um, I won't go into it.

Trev:

There was an article by Alan Patience in the John Menendew blog, um, basically

Trev:

talking about how with elections now, one third Labor, one third, uh, Liberal

Trev:

National and one third Independents, Teal or Green or Jackie Lambie or whatever.

Trev:

And.

Trev:

That we're moving away from what was the case, and Guy Rundle wrote a piece in

Trev:

Crikey looking at the Tasmanian situation.

Trev:

So, the Tasmanian Premier pulled an early election.

Trev:

Uh, they changed the number of parliamentarians and increased it, but the

Trev:

Liberal vote didn't match that increase.

Trev:

And they're kind of a parliament that's a bit of a one third, one third, one third.

Trev:

And, uh, the Liberal government is forming a rough coalition with the

Trev:

Jackie Lambie Network and seems to have enough to guarantee supply.

Trev:

Labor refused to get into an agreement with the Greens.

Trev:

Just point blank refused.

Trev:

Yeah,

Scott:

I know, which is one of the things that I do not understand, but it

Scott:

makes me think that perhaps we're not part, we're not privy to what the Greens

Scott:

actually do when they get into government.

Joe:

Or maybe we're not privy with how right wing Labor are.

Trev:

Yes.

Scott:

That's also a possibility.

Trev:

Guy Rundle's theory was that the Liberals and Labor are much closer in

Trev:

ideology than any of the other groups.

Trev:

And in fact, there should be a grand coalition of Liberal and Labor with

Trev:

the Greens as the genuine opposition.

Trev:

It's just that they couldn't bring themselves to admit

Trev:

how close they actually are.

Trev:

He doesn't say it in so few words, it's a bit more flowery, but, uh,

Trev:

You know, this is what happens when you talk about Europe and renting.

Trev:

Well, over there, there's a lot more of these sorts of, um, mixtures of

Trev:

coalitions of, uh, Yeah, there are.

Trev:

And we're hitting that one.

Trev:

Yeah,

Joe:

but then you also get the case of Israel, which was very much a proportional

Joe:

representation and they were held to ransom by The right wing conservatives,

Scott:

so that's where Likud had to go in with them and they have now reaped

Scott:

what they've sown, you know, I would have thought that if Benny, whatever

Scott:

his name was, Prime Minister and that sort of stuff, this war would have been

Scott:

over months ago because I think he would have flattened Gaza and he was, no,

Scott:

whatever his name is, Benny Gantz, was it?

Scott:

Was that the?

Scott:

Oh, okay.

Scott:

I don't know.

Scott:

I would have thought that if he was the Prime Minister over there, they would

Scott:

have flattened Gaza and then they were pulled out and they would have said,

Scott:

right, you want these borders open again?

Scott:

Give us back our people.

Scott:

You know?

Scott:

Because I just don't see the point in continuously bombing

Trev:

the Isn't that the first part of the plan you just mentioned?

Trev:

Flatten Gaza?

Trev:

Aren't they still doing that?

Trev:

Yeah,

Scott:

I know, but they've flattened Just haven't quite finished it?

Scott:

They could have actually stopped.

Scott:

You know, they could have flattened it and then they could have stopped,

Scott:

but instead they've got this obsession with going in and, you know, rooting

Scott:

everything out and all that sort of stuff.

Scott:

And I think to myself, you know, Hamas was a creation of the Israeli

Scott:

government because they wanted something that was against Fatah.

Scott:

You know, it's, uh.

Trev:

Okay.

Trev:

Well, let's talk about, uh, Gaza and the Middle East.

Trev:

So Iran recently, in the last few days, uh, sent a bunch of, uh, Missiles slash

Trev:

drones plus firecrackers across to Israel who were busy with their Iron

Trev:

Dome intercepting those objects and some got through, but apparently there

Trev:

was only one injury from that entire, um, project, which seems extraordinary.

Trev:

So, the coverage of this has been Affected by the, you know, the stabbings in Bondi.

Trev:

So here in Australia, you know, turning on the news, not

Trev:

a lot has been said about it.

Trev:

But, what, if you do look at the news, and you, or you read a Murdoch paper,

Trev:

because that's the only goddamn paper out there, or Fairfax, which who are

Trev:

just as bad, you Um, and they talk about, um, you know, everybody in the world has

Trev:

been warning Iran, don't do it, don't send missiles, but they did it anyway,

Trev:

and this is just a, goddamn Iranians.

Joe:

Well,

Trev:

uh,

Joe:

I, I read a thought that they gave them plenty of warning, they knew

Joe:

that the Iron Dome was going to stop them, effectively this was Iran, uh,

Joe:

Iran showing, uh, Not the saving face.

Joe:

They'd been attacked.

Joe:

They had to save face.

Joe:

Correct.

Joe:

This was the way of doing it.

Trev:

And how had they been attacked, Joe?

Scott:

Because they had their

Trev:

embassy blown up in Damascus.

Trev:

In Syria?

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

You would not know that that happened in Australia.

Trev:

Well, I knew about it.

Trev:

Well, how did you know?

Trev:

Because I read it on the ABC weeks ago when it happened.

Trev:

It's, so, so when Iran retaliated.

Trev:

It was because the Israelis attacked, uh, their embassy.

Trev:

It was actually the building beside the embassy, technically, I think.

Trev:

But, you know, with the intent of, and killed a number of people.

Trev:

And, and people are expressing shock and horror at the Iranians retaliating.

Trev:

Just imagine if somebody had, you know, Had done that to a US embassy anywhere on

Trev:

the planet, there'd be no question about the retaliation that would be expected.

Joe:

That then, then Hillary Clinton would be blamed.

Joe:

Yes.

Joe:

Hmm.

Scott:

Yes.

Scott:

But it just It's one of those things, you know, I just don't understand why the

Scott:

hell they decided to bomb that embassy.

Scott:

You know, it's, I just think to myself, that bastard is trying to,

Scott:

he's trying to extend this war.

Scott:

He's trying to keep them going and that sort of stuff.

Scott:

He's trying to drag the Yanks into it.

Trev:

Yeah.

Scott:

But I was very pleased that Biden has already said, no, the

Scott:

Israelis are on their own over this.

Trev:

Apparently that's a red line that was never crossed in any previous sort

Trev:

of world wars or major conflicts of,

Joe:

of

Trev:

attacking your enemies.

Trev:

Consulate like that in another country.

Joe:

Not by a nation state, no.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

So.

Trev:

By terrorists.

Trev:

Yes, but not by a nation state.

Trev:

So I think Israel has yet to claim responsibility, but the

Trev:

USA said, yep, Israel did it, so.

Scott:

Yeah, the Yanks have said Israel did it, so they're on their own.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

And there are all these warnings given because, um, different Western

Trev:

powers were citing to their citizens.

Trev:

Do not go anywhere near these areas.

Trev:

Um, it was because the Iranians had said we're going to send some bombs

Trev:

as a retaliation, uh, missiles.

Trev:

And anyway, they've sent them and they've said, uh, that's it.

Trev:

The project's over as far as we're concerned.

Trev:

Um, it was in retaliation for what was done to us and, uh, we're done now.

Trev:

We're not doing any more, but

Joe:

that's They have said to Israel, don't retaliate for the retaliation.

Trev:

Yes.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

So Which I don't blame them for.

Trev:

Interesting move by the Iranians.

Trev:

Yeah, of course,

Scott:

it was a very interesting move by them.

Trev:

Yeah, so, um, um, yeah.

Trev:

Headline in the New York Times, Israel bombed an Iranian embassy complex.

Trev:

Is that allowed?

Trev:

And Alan McLeod makes the point.

Trev:

Imagine if Iran just bombed the Israeli embassy in DC.

Trev:

Would anybody be asking if it was legal?

Trev:

Good point.

Trev:

Um, just a dearth of background material on that.

Trev:

And, um, You know, I saw comments by um, Penny Wong urging Iran not to

Trev:

escalate the conflict and when they did, Albanese decried Iran's actions

Trev:

and said, um, Iran has ignored our call and those of many other countries not

Trev:

to proceed with these reckless attacks.

Trev:

Anyone who cares for the protection of innocent life must

Trev:

stand against these attacks.

Trev:

Albanese continues, this escalation is a grave threat to the security

Trev:

of Israel and the entire region.

Trev:

It risks greater instability and devastation.

Trev:

And he says, Iran's ongoing flouting of international law, its

Trev:

egregious human rights abuses and threat to international security.

Trev:

Is why this government has imposed targeted financial sanctions

Trev:

and travel bans, he said.

Trev:

Now, I googled and tried to find anything where Australia condemned Israel for

Trev:

the bombing of the Iranian embassy in Damascus and I couldn't find anything.

Trev:

So, it's just the hypocrisy and the double standards, um, that just are annoying.

Trev:

Again, that might have been affected by the fact The, uh, bombing of Damascus

Trev:

Embassy, or the Embassy in Damascus, was on the 1st of April and that was

Trev:

around, the very next day was when that aid worker was killed, uh, Zomi?

Trev:

Yeah, it

Scott:

could well have, yeah, Zomi, whatever her name was.

Trev:

So again, the media was just full of, of that tragedy and not much about an

Trev:

Iranian embassy being hit by the Israelis.

Scott:

Yeah, was it done with, um, how'd they do it?

Scott:

They do it by aircraft or they do it by, um, cruise missiles?

Trev:

Not sure how it was done.

Trev:

I can't, I'm not sure.

Joe:

Usually it's, um, aircraft.

Joe:

The attack on the, um, nuclear processing plant was aircraft.

Trev:

Ah, what else have we got on this, um, oh.

Trev:

I showed image on one episode of those guys who were hit by.

Trev:

You know, walking along, there's some terrible stuff you can see online.

Trev:

One is, um, this one is reported extensively in a Guardian article.

Trev:

But, um, Israeli soldiers taking potshots at a starved Garzan clinging

Trev:

to a bag of airdropped food aid.

Trev:

Um, The soldiers wounded him repeatedly.

Trev:

He kept struggling to crawl to safety and they continued shooting for

Trev:

no reason until they murdered him.

Trev:

Cold blooded murder in broad daylight.

Trev:

You can see that on Twitter.

Trev:

And what's another example here?

Trev:

Uh, uh, just, just going back to the Australian aid worker who was

Trev:

killed and You know, like, the uproar here in Australia by our

Trev:

government, saying, This is outrageous.

Trev:

The Israelis have crossed the line here.

Trev:

I demand an explanation.

Trev:

How dare this happen?

Trev:

30, 000 Palestinians die, and nowhere near the Yes, but they're not Australians.

Trev:

I know, it's so pathetic to be so parochial into just Ignore 30, 000 people

Trev:

being killed, but then get all, um, just the reaction when one Australian does.

Trev:

It's really so small minded.

Trev:

I mean, by all means express the outrage for the Aussie aid worker

Trev:

being killed, but a proportionate amount of outrage for the 30, 000

Trev:

Palestinians who've been killed.

Trev:

Might be nice or consistent.

Trev:

You know, by the way, why was she there?

Trev:

Potentially because Australia had pulled back its funding of UNRWA.

Trev:

So groups like the ones she was with had to come in and, and,

Trev:

uh, sort of fill that void,

Scott:

fill

Trev:

that void.

Trev:

So, you know, is Australia partially responsible?

Trev:

There's a drone that killed her.

Trev:

was by a company that Australia is paying big sums of money to, as part

Trev:

of an agreement between, um, so getting sort of, uh, military supplies from.

Trev:

So, something like, oh, where is it here?

Trev:

Um, so, yeah, the lady's name was Zomi Franken.

Trev:

Killed by a drone, and we're, we're handing 900 million dollars to the

Trev:

company that helped murder her.

Trev:

So, the Israeli arms company that provided the tools for the murder, um,

Trev:

will be handed 900 million dollars.

Trev:

Yes, but guns don't

Joe:

kill people.

Trev:

People kill people.

Trev:

Yes, um.

Trev:

This is from an article in Crikey, and In February, in February, the ABC revealed

Trev:

the Defence Department had awarded Elbit Systems a 917 million contract despite

Trev:

equipment previously supplied by the company being torn out of Australian

Trev:

systems due to national security concerns and um, so they're going to be

Trev:

handsomely rewarded by Australians Was there any mention that, hey, Albanese,

Trev:

if you're so outraged by the murder of this Australian, do we reconsider paying

Trev:

900 million dollars to the company that supplied the drone that killed her?

Trev:

People like Richard Miles just simply refuse to respond when people like

Trev:

Crikey ask questions like that.

Trev:

Um, uh,

Joe:

Well, they just made the weapon, they didn't target it.

Trev:

Yeah, just, all the, all the outrage, but when you can do something,

Trev:

they're not prepared to do it.

Trev:

Um, The Onion had an interesting headline, satirical, it's like The

Trev:

Chaser or like, uh, The Batuta Advocate, headline in The Onion, Israel warns Gaza

Trev:

still harbouring hundreds of doctors.

Trev:

I mean, they're killing just hundreds of doctors, they're, ah,

Trev:

what else have we got here, we've got um Mind you, so's the NHS.

Trev:

Yes, but there's articles where doctors, both Palestinian and

Trev:

foreigners, are saying, look, lots of kids are killed by, you know, uh,

Trev:

bombs and by rubble falling on them.

Trev:

But we're also seeing groups of kids just brought in with gunshot wounds to the head

Trev:

and no other adult victims and the snipers are just picking off kids in the streets.

Trev:

Um, and then various reports by Palestinians and Twitter videos

Trev:

of, of, of people lying injured in the middle of the street.

Trev:

Bystanders unable to move to the middle of the street to try

Trev:

and pull them out of harm's way.

Trev:

And the snipers just continuing to take potshots at them.

Trev:

Like, it is dystopian what is going on there.

Trev:

Um, what else have we got?

Trev:

Places like Germany.

Trev:

There was a professor, um, who's Jewish.

Trev:

She's been disinvited from a guest professorship in Germany for signing a

Trev:

public letter in support of Palestine.

Trev:

The letter was just a pretty simple, um, document about supporting Palestine

Trev:

for the most obvious of reasons.

Trev:

Uh, she's been banned from her position.

Trev:

Yiannis Varoufakis.

Trev:

Has been, um, there's just been an order made against him, a ban on any political

Trev:

activity in Germany, Fiatus, because of his support for the Palestinians.

Trev:

And it's not just a ban on visiting Germany, but also

Trev:

from participating via Zoom.

Trev:

So, so some pretty heavy censorship occurring in Germany.

Trev:

Because,

Scott:

you know, anybody who's Germany feels a hell of a lot of

Scott:

guilt over this second world war.

Scott:

And they actually feel personally responsible for the Holocaust.

Scott:

And I just think to myself, it's time for them to get over that too.

Scott:

Yeah.

Scott:

You know, because they are a modern, fully functional democracy

Scott:

now and that sort of thing.

Scott:

They can still have the history, but they've got to actually move on from

Trev:

it.

Trev:

There's reports of the Israelis using AI for targeting of, um, people.

Trev:

And also reports where When they've sort of located the activities of

Trev:

junior Hamas operatives, they've preferred to kill them in their

Trev:

homes rather than out in the field.

Trev:

Um, this is a method of war.

Trev:

And, uh, yeah, there's an extensive article in the Guardian about

Trev:

snipers targeting children.

Trev:

And, uh, gores.

Trev:

You guys, when you put, like, a bandage on Referred to as gauze, um, so it

Trev:

comes from, um, Gaza, because Gazans were skilled weavers for centuries.

Trev:

So that's where the word gauze comes from.

Trev:

Um, what else we got here in this just litany of disasters,

Trev:

so, ah, it's just incredible

Trev:

Brutality, uh, cold blooded killing, and, um, it's just continuing

Trev:

right in front of our faces.

Trev:

And it's not stopping, these people are now starving, um, oh, you know,

Trev:

allegations, even someone like Bob Carr, former New South Wales Premier

Trev:

said, You know, that attack on the Australian aid worker was probably to

Trev:

scare off and stop aid workers operating.

Trev:

So, in his view, it was an intentional act to scare off aid workers and to

Trev:

reduce the level of aid going into Israel.

Trev:

Not just some simple mistake.

Trev:

Um, you just couldn't put anything beyond them at this point.

Trev:

On the whole, they're doing terrible things.

Trev:

The Australian government has been very limited in its response.

Trev:

Um, Australian government is sending over a guy to talk to the Israelis to

Trev:

investigate the murder of that aid worker.

Scott:

Well, he's not going over to investigate.

Scott:

He's going over to advise the government on the investigation.

Scott:

Right.

Scott:

So he's going to actually be the Australian witness for the

Scott:

investigation and that sort of stuff.

Scott:

So he's going to be sitting in on meetings and all that type of thing.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

Good luck with that.

Trev:

Exactly.

Trev:

Um, yeah.

Trev:

And meanwhile I

Joe:

hope he speaks Hebrew.

Joe:

Hmm.

Joe:

Because what's the odds all the meetings won't be in English?

Scott:

Yeah.

Scott:

No, they won't be in English.

Scott:

They'll be in Hebrew.

Joe:

Yeah.

Trev:

And there we go.

Trev:

Yeah.

Trev:

A complete disaster, Australia doing nothing about it and in fact paying

Trev:

big money to the company that's made the drone that killed the Australian.

Trev:

And uh, meanwhile, criticise the Iranians, um, who are retaliating

Trev:

because their embassy was bombed by the Israelis, so they go to town

Trev:

criticising them, but not the Israelis.

Trev:

It's all so two faced, it's all so hypocritical,

Trev:

hypocritical, quite depressing.

Trev:

I don't know.

Trev:

And, uh, and there we go, that is another, um, episode.

Trev:

So, ah, alright Baldy listener, sorry for the audio last week.

Trev:

I'll try and fix that up, so long term it'll be better.

Trev:

But, uh, anyway, we'll be back next week.

Trev:

We'll talk to you then.

Trev:

Bye for now.

Trev:

And it's a good night from me.

Joe:

And it's a good night from him.

Trev:

Good night.

Chapters

Video

More from YouTube