Tuesday, May 19, 2026

In which the bromancer and Dame Groan feature in the pond's placeholder ...

 

A few housekeeping notes.

The pond regrets it can't keep the comments section open in the immediate future, and so the moderation bar will kick in after a few more days. That's because the pond has to take steps to moderate the content, or risk upsetting the google bot.

Unfortunately the pond will be offline in every way bar the phone, and won't be able to moderate the moderation in the near future.

Blogger wasn't really set up with mobile phones in mind (huzzah) and the pond never bothered configuring it as an operating system.

The pond will try to extend the moderation curfew with the odd post, but that will be tricky until the pond has made the shift and set up online shop in its new location.

Hopefully the pond will be back (the pond has been told some intruders are shot on sight at its new southern location), though if so, it'll likely be in modified form.

The pond's hours derived from the need to do the blog, then get on with work, but in the pond's new iteration work isn't an issue, so maybe the pond will set a more genteel and leisurely schedule. 

Given the way that most correspondents seem to access the site, no one's that keen to get up early in the morning to enjoy freshly baked, piping hot reptiles served up for breakfast. 

The pond might also limit exposure to the reptiles ... there are any number of wastrels and time wasters at the lizard Oz, and one reptile can be as amusing as three can, especially if the intermittent archive is available to offer samples of the others.

The pond would like to thank all the cartoonists for being unwittingly dragooned into the pond. The pond never attempted to score revenue out of the blog, and one of the reasons is that it didn't wish to trade off on the hard work of others. Rather the pond wanted to draw attention to the glories of local cartoonists plying their trade for the enjoyment of all.

And lastly the pond would like to thank all the pond's correspondents, a small, but trusty, hardy band who long ago graduated as doctors of herpetology studies, and who kept the pond slogging on simply to read the comments section.

Hopefully we'll all resume play, but for the moment, it's time for the last placeholder for a while.

Unfortunately, as expected, the lizard Oz didn't deliver a dream team of reptiles as the placeholder.

There's no Our Henry ... there's just this motley crue ... and yes, the budget jihad, the mother of lizard Oz jihads, was still in full swing.

In no particular order ...

COMMENTARY by Dennis Shanahan
Labor falls into tax trap in the valley of death
The desperation and vehemence of the denials and claims from the PM and Treasurer about scare campaigns are proof in themselves that the death tax debate is getting away from Labor.

The bouffant one took a trip back in time ...



Ye ancient cats and hounds, the reptiles are running really hard on the death and taxes routine, and there's a 'toon for that ...



The canny Cranston lined up for a crack ...

EXCLUSIVE
Surprise stamp duty bill looms after trust crackdown
Labor’s trust issues extend to a looming fight on stamp duty
As businesses and families across the country face the prospect of a tax bill if they are forced to restructure their trusts, the states prepare for a multi-billion-­dollar fight over the revenue.
By Matthew Cranston

There was much wailing and quailing ..

BUDGET 2026
Why Labor’s capital gains overhaul became an internet meme
‘Albo owns 47 per cent of my business’: Why Labor’s CGT overhaul became an internet meme
Small business owners are venting anger over reforms they say could deter investment and hit start-ups hard.
By Jack Quail

Rosie and Julie-Anne were suffused with fear, and happy to spread the fear mongering wide ...

FEARS FOR VULNERABLE
Strike at wealthy hits low-income families
Jim Chalmers has defended Labor’s trust tax raid as targeting wealthy tax avoiders, but estate planners warn everyday families will suffer most.
By Rosie Lewis and Julie-Anne Sprague

Even Ancient Troy chimed in over on the extreme far right ...

A taxing problem: major parties fail test of our future
The real intergenerational problem ALP, Libs missed: paying off debt bomb
Labor and the Coalition have condemned future generations to pay for record spending and debt.
By Troy Bramston
Senior Writer

What a pity none of them tackled the alternative ... a brave, bold back to the future ...




To be fair the reptiles also found space for an essential contribution to the Australian Daily Zionist News... with Frank top of the world ma over on the extreme far right ...

ROYAL COMMISSION
‘Change can happen’: Lowy’s soccer blueprint to tackle antisemitism
Frank Lowy’s powerful antisemitism submission: we changed soccer, and we can also extinguish smouldering racism
In a powerful submission to the antisemitism royal commission, Frank Lowy says change will require the same cultural shifts that saw ethnic divisions in soccer transformed into loyalty.
By Frank Lowy

Frank was also top of the "news" with a "love it or leave it" angle ...

EXCLUSIVE
‘If you don’t like Australia, leave,’ says Lowy
Frank Lowy tells Bondi inquiry his soccer fix could help cure hate
Sir Frank Lowy says the same approach that ended ethnic conflict in Australian soccer could solve the antisemitism crisis – but those who won’t accept our values should face deportation.
By Stephen Rice

But what if soccer bores you senseless? 

What if you've seen endless, inane stories of fans feuding and rioting in the streets?

What if you think that the only way to respond to the astonishing grift at work in the World Cup is to participate in a boycott?

Forget it Jake, that grift, that form of madness, is going to go on forever.

The reptiles did gratify the pond by featuring one of the pond's favourites.

It's lesser, minor bromancer, but the pond would have settled for any reptile writing about anything other than the budget, so this'll do reptiles, this'll do:



The header: Can anyone govern UK effectively – a question also for similar democracies, especially Australia; The UK faces having six prime ministers in seven years as Keir Starmer’s leadership crumbles amid a crisis that mirrors Australia’s own policy failures.

The caption: Protesters at a rally organised by Tommy Robinson pose in front of a banner featuring Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Picture: Carl Court/Getty Images

The bromancer spent a bigly four minutes diagnosing Britain's ills, beginning with a cornball joke that says a lot about his sensa huma ...

When I first visited Britain way back in the 1970s, before Margaret Thatcher transformed the place, it was a terrible mess, its economy notoriously the sick man of Europe. (It was nonetheless fun to be there – the Brits made great jokes out of their misfortunes and an Australian with even a few dollars in his pocket felt rich). Britain’s economic performance was dismal and it was riven by strikes and bitter ideological division.
I remember in a country pub one fellow wanting a smoke and having trouble getting his match to light. In exasperation, he declared: “This match is the only thing in Britain that doesn’t strike!”
Britain’s problems are a bit different today but essentially they throw up the same questions as the 1970s. Can anyone govern Britain effectively?
This question, acute in Britain, can be asked with increasing pertinence about similar democracies, and especially Australia.
Long term, I remain a solid optimist about the Brits – their institutional and cultural inheritance is so great, although modern culture is trying to cut them off from their own legacy. Keir Starmer, in office less than two years, is a very poor prime minister. It now seems he has little chance of surviving more than a month or two.

The reptiles flung in snaps of Keir's rivals, Andy Burnham. Picture: Getty Images; Wes Streeting. Picture: AFP



The bromancer was in his element, dissing Labour ...

The campaign to push him out is a mixture of light opera and musical farce, with a strong dash of ­Dynasty/Dallas-style soap opera centred on sibling hatreds that have no logical explanation. The two main challengers are Wes Streeting, the former health secretary, and Andy Burnham, mayor of Greater Manchester. They and Starmer all appear to share rich mutual detestation while always speaking publicly of each other with saccharine emollience.
Streeting notionally comes from the Labour right, though that’s a long way left of normal voters. Burnham has no ideological fixed address. The joke is: a Blairite, a Brownite (follower of Gordon Brown) and a Corbynista (admirer of loony left Jeremy Corbyn) walk into a pub together and the barman asks: Mr Burnham, what would you like to drink?
To return to parliament, Burnham had to get a Labour MP to resign so he could stand at a by-election. The seat in question is Makerfield. In recent local elections, Nigel Farage’s Reform swept to victory there. Ten years ago, the electorate voted overwhelmingly for Brexit.
So Streeting declared Labour must seek to rejoin the EU. This is the conventional view among ­Labour lefties but the public hates the idea, even those people who think successive governments have made a mess of Brexit.
It’s also, mutedly, more or less official Labour policy.

There came an AV distraction ...

UK Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has dismissed speculation about a potential leadership challenge against Prime Minister Keir Starmer as "froth and nonsense." Political tensions within the Labour Party have continued following significant losses in local elections nearly two weeks ago. The issue of Brexit may become significant in any future leadership contest, as UK MP Wes Streeting and Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham have both expressed support for Britain rejoining the European Union.



The bromancer finally turned his keen mind to what ails Britain ...

Burnham thus can’t really denounce it, but having it front of mind increases the chance Burnham loses the by-election. One up to Streeting. But the party rank and file don’t like Streeting. So, sans Burnham, the left would have to put someone else up.
It’s even barely conceivable Starmer could hang on for more tortured months of paralysis if Burnham loses in Makerfield.
Burnham is the only national Labour politician with a positive approval rating. That’s partly because as mayor he doesn’t have to take tough decisions and has no responsibility for issues ripping Britain apart, and for which he has offered no solutions.
Assuming Starmer goes, Britain will have had six PMs in seven years – Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak, Starmer and Starmer’s replacement. Add in David Cameron before May and it’s seven in 10 years. That’s a sign of deeply dysfunctional politics, of a political system, and a society that can’t resolve its public policy contradictions.
People talk, justifiably, of the crisis on the centre right in many democracies. There’s an equal crisis on the centre left. Only three EU governments are left of centre, and they’re in trouble.
Britain’s problems are not mysterious.
They include: massive public debt; uncontrolled welfare spending; the desperate need to increase defence spending; massive disguised unemployment through huge welfare rolls; a loss of social morale and self-confidence; persistent Islamist violence; an education system dedicated to the idea that Britain is evil; a complete loss of trust in institutions, including the mainstream political parties; wildly expensive energy prices arising from net-zero commitments; and the separate but related problems of uncontrolled mass immigration and illegal immigration.

Strange, no mention of Brexit? 

Could it be that the bromancer was all in on that ruinous strategy?

Is it true that the bromancer was something of a Boris and Brexit man?

Indeed he was, and the pond felt the need to send this to the intermittent archive, just for the fun of it...

Brexiteers fighting for liberty and the people’s will

Here you go, a little teaser trailer ...



Meanwhile, the reptiles were featuring a riot ... Anti-migration protesters riot outside Holiday Inn Express in Manvers, South Yorkshire, 2024.



And then the bromancer seamlessly shifted from Labour bashing to Labor bashing, so he too could join in the lizard Oz budget jihad, the mother of all reptile jihads ...

Australia has similar problems. Although the Albanese government is politically dominant, its policy responses are essentially the same as Starmer’s and equally ineffective, indeed destructive in the medium and long term. But we start richer, so will take longer to bankrupt.
A columnist in The Times argued recently that the British people were at fault because they wanted a vast welfare state but didn’t want to pay the taxes to fund it. That seems wise but is actually quite mistaken. Britain, like Australia, is already a very high-tax society. The problem is that putting on even more taxes, especially at the level that would be needed to wipe out deficit spending, is just about impossible because it cripples the economy.
None of the new Albanese/Chalmers taxes will help the economy in any way. They just hinder growth. Britain is at an even worse point in this continuum. Governments have gone down the road of electoral bribery so far they have reached a dead end, where a flimsy but important safety sign warns there is no road ahead, only a cliff.
The Makerfield by-election has quickly become a two-horse race, Labour versus Reform. That’s bad news for the Conservative Party, whose leader, Kemi Badenoch, is immensely likeable and plainly doing a good job, but not yet registering big gains in the polls.
Have the voters deserted the Conservatives forever? Farage has welcomed a number of senior Tory defectors into Reform, and this has slightly reduced his outsider appeal and greatly increased the credibility of Reform as potentially a party of government.
Barnaby Joyce joining One Nation is a similar, though weaker, manifestation of the same dynamic.
Britain will muddle through, but what a mess. Mind you, the 1970s did give us Fawlty Towers.
Greg Sheridan is The Australian’s foreign editor

Please, a little 'toon balance...



The pond suspects that in a month or a year's time the reptiles will still be in the throes of their budget jihad, and the pond is pleased to be shod of it...

And so to the mother of all budget bashers, the old biddy herself ...



The header: Effects of budget shemozzle likely to get worse for Labor; It’s one thing to break a promise delivered 50 times; it’s another thing altogether to deliver a set of policies that can best be described as bungled.

The caption? None, and no credit for the crappy collage, because the graphic is as familiar and as aged as a pair of lizard Oz slippers.

Dame Groan spent a bigly four minutes ranting and railing in a way designed to produce a warm glow in her cult following:

It’s one thing to break a promise delivered 50 times; it’s another thing altogether to deliver a set of policies that can best be described as bungled.
Replete with high compliance costs and unintended consequences, the budget announcements demonstrate both the ineffectiveness and naivety of Treasury to provide advice of an adequate standard. It’s already a shemozzle and it’s likely to get worse in the coming weeks as the flaws and inconsistencies of the announced policy changes emerge.
Rather than representing some sort of gift to the younger generation, the way in which the changes will be grandfathered confers an ongoing gift on anyone who has negatively geared property or a testamentary trust, to give two examples, that will not be available to newcomers.
This facet of the policy may create a lock-in effect whereby those with negatively geared properties simply hold on to them and re-leverage over time. But because of the new capital gains tax arrangements, there will be a strong disincentive to improve the property lest the gains be eaten up in tax. While both Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers talk about improving the rate of home ownership for young people – “getting a fair crack” and all that – the CGT changes apply to all asset classes. You can just imagine the Treasury officials warning about uneven treatment of asset classes.
This is notwithstanding the acknowledgment by the Treasurer that the simple 50 per cent discount method being replaced favours property over shares. But by lumping them into the same method going forward, clear biases remain – particularly against high-growth assets held over relatively short periods of time. Let’s be clear here: what is being proposed is not a return to the Keating system of indexation. Under that arrangement, there was no 30 per cent minimum tax. Moreover, capital gains could be averaged over five years. What was announced in the budget is another beast altogether. It will also be costly to administer.

Of course there had to be a snap of the chief villain: Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers. Picture: Lyndon Mechielsen/Courier Mail



It was classic "we'll all be rooned, and well before Xmas" territory for the old groaner, as she contemplated the dire suffering of the rich:

The impact of the CGT changes on start-ups was quickly identified as a major issue because the new system will impose punitive rates of tax on owners and the staff who generally forgo years of income to achieve success. It is common overseas for there to be specific carve-outs for start-ups – in the US and the UK, for example – but Chalmers’ lame response is that he will consult more on the topic. And what’s with the bizarre proposal of roping in pre-1985 assets that have been CGT-exempt? Surely, this is just a desperate tax grab, reneging on a promise made a long time ago and kept – until now. Again, the compliance costs are substantial.
The fact neither the Treasurer nor Treasury understand the role trusts play in the commercial world has been on full display. Many small businesses are set up as trusts, often in association with bucket companies, because this is the most effective and least costly arrangement for them. There are several reasons for this choice, including asset protection as well as managing tax. But evidently Treasury thinks it knows better.
There is a section in the budget papers that comes close to providing commercial advice to business owners, telling them companies are better than trusts. There is no acknowledgment of the hefty costs associated with restructuring, including the payment of stamp duty to state governments. This impost alone will deter many business owners from considering any change.
There is also the complication of franking credits, which arguably was the issue that determined the outcome of the 2019 election. Where a bucket company is attached to a discretionary trust, the franking credits will not be transferable, implying very high rates of effective tax. This may become an issue the government has to deal with. And why would Chalmers opt to include discretionary testamentary trusts within the scope of the new taxation arrangements for trusts? Again, this is completely bizarre.
These trusts are incorporated in wills often to protect young children in the unhappy event of both parents dying at the same time. They are also a form of asset protection to ensure disgruntled creditors or ex-partners cannot access the proceeds of an estate. As for noting that fixed testamentary trusts will not be affected, this advice is again naive in the extreme. Fixed trusts are, by definition, inflexible and unable to accommodate changing circumstances, and are rarely used.

Trust the pond, the pond's trust is suffering almighty. 

Is there a timetable for things to get better?



The pond can't imagine Dame Groan following that prescription, not when there's groaning to be done:

The government is also on thin ground when it comes to the carve-out for new properties from the ban on negative gearing. Again, this is coming close to offering uninformed and slipshod advice to investors.
The reality is that investment in new apartments in Melbourne and Sydney over recent years have been complete duds. The capital gains have been minimal – 10 times less than the capital growth of stand-alone houses – and many new apartments have defects that must be remedied, often at the expense of the owner. There are also significant problems with the body corporate arrangements a new owner has to deal with.
Of course, anyone who understands basic economics could have predicted this outcome.
A great deal of the gains from investment in property is the return on the land on which it is built. In the case of apartments, there is very little land and there are often few restrictions on new apartment buildings being built close by. It’s a case of buyer beware when it comes to buying new housing stock, something not being mentioned by the government. Evidently, negatively geared owners of new residential real estate will feel a warm inner glow because they are doing something for the nation. It just won’t show up in personal bank statements.
The government is also on thin ground when it boasts about the uptick in home ownership predicted to result from the tax changes – 75,000 over a decade. That’s a mere 7500 a year, which hardly shifts the dial for what is a major shake-up of tax arrangements.
There is also only one direction for rents – and that’s up. The fact is universal negative gearing effectively subsidises renters by shifting some of the costs on to the taxpayer. This impact will be largely lost with the changes, save for new properties and grandfathered investments. There is a lot of water to go under the bridge. The fiasco of the 2014 budget played out over time; this is likely to be repeated in this case. The government will have to tweak several of the settings in response to the information it is given and the likely perverse outcomes.
In the meantime, the only sure winners are accountants, lawyers and valuers.

Is there any upside? 

Well for once Dame Groan identified some winners, though surely she should have included herself and the rest of the reptile jihadists and the lizard Oz as a sure winner. 

Endless columns are now guaranteed, much shrieking, moaning and whining and groaning about budget chaos, and well beyond Xmas, with Dame Groan's "we'll all be rooned" taken up by the rest of the reptile jihadists, her gracious legacy to all...

And that, preserved in gelatinous aspic and the dubious functioning of the intermittent archive, is the reptiles this day, and it will have to serve as a placeholder for anyone turning up to marvel at this weird blog... and the even weirder world of the lizard Oz hive mind.

All that remains to do is to wish everyone well, and turn to the immortal Rowe - alas too early in the week for the infallible Pope to join him - for a farewell 'toon ...



Why they can play that game up until Halloween ...

Monday, May 18, 2026

In which the pond has nothing but Lord Downer, the floodwaters in quarries whisperer and Major Mitchell as placeholders ...


A correspondent reminded the pond of one last thing to do while still online - make sure that there's not a single mention of CBS and Paramount in any of the pond's subscription lists (though mentioning the genuinely funny Colbert in the same breath as the pond was way more than too much).

This is the penultimate pond post before the great darkness descends, though some cynics might suggest that the pond has spent its time full of reptile darkness, and at last there'll be a light glowing on the hill.

Off but mainly on, the pond has been online since way back in the late 1980s - the pond can still remember the pond's son, at thirty bucks an hour access, running up a very big bill to see very little.

How the pond descended into the reptile abyss after that must remain a solemn and sad mystery.

This will be the pond's longest outage, and given its druthers, the pond would like to have left a placeholder featuring some all time pond favourites - say the bromancer brooding about mad King Donald selling out Taiwan, Our Henry doing over the Thucydides trap, and Dame Groan announcing for the zillionth time that the end of the world is nigh. What a wrap that would be.

But the reptiles are rarely congenial in their programming, and the pond is likely to end up tomorrow with the sort of dross that littered the lizard Oz hive mind this morning.

First up comes Lord Downer, like a Colonel Blimp straight from the Adelaide Hills.



The header: Political malaise in UK a warning to our major parties; The Conservative and Labour parties have lost the trust of the public. There have been the scandals, but the real problems are deeper.

The caption for the snap of the chief UK villain (Kemi who?): Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Picture: Peter Nicholls/Pool/AFP

Being a dedicated member of empire, Lord Downer spent a bigly four minutes on the comforting illusion that the UK and Australia remain peas in the colonial pod, and as usual, his analysis revealed more about the dear old sod than anything about the two countries:

Given the affinity between the UK and Australia, events in Britain might help us better understand our own political challenges.
Ten days ago, Britons went to the polls in local government elections. Overall, the insurgent Reform party won 30 per cent of the vote, Labour 20 per cent and the Conservatives 15 per cent. So poorly did the Labour Party perform that the Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, is now under serious challenge from within his own party.
We can speculate on whether Sir Keir will survive or, if he doesn’t, who will replace him. What is more interesting is why the two major parties that have dominated British politics since the 1920s have lost the support and confidence of the public.
Above all, the Conservative and Labour parties have lost the trust of the public. There have, of course, been the scandals, such as the Partygate controversy when Boris Johnson was prime minister and the Mandelson scandal under Starmer. Certainly, these events have upset the public, but the real problems are deeper.
First, there is the issue of immigration. This has several facets. Illegal immigration seems to be out of control. In the two years Labour has been in office, 200,000 illegal migrants have crossed the Channel into England. These illegal migrants are accommodated in hotels at great public expense.

Just to make sure the hive mind knew who could help, the reptiles slipped in a snap of Nigel making plans ... Reform UK leader Nigel Farage at the House of Commons chamber during the State Opening of Parliament on May 13. Picture: Toby Melville/Pool/AFP




It turns out that Lord Downer is deeply sympathetic to Nige's cause ...

This grisly trade began under the Conservatives, and it has only accelerated under Labour. Yet both parties swore black and blue they’d bring to an end illegal immigration. Neither of them did.
Legal immigration has also been controversial. Huge numbers of migrants have been coming into the UK over the past few years, in particular, to fill poorly paid job vacancies.
The perception of the public is that these migrants have changed the face of the country. Voters feel they have contributed to the increase in house prices and waiting lists for the National Health Service. They have also caused civil unrest, particularly over foreign policy issues such as wars in the Middle East. Migrants are also associated with the rise of antisemitism. Now, a lot of these perceptions may be partial truths or totally unfair. It is noteworthy that they are widely held views in the UK, and both the Conservatives and Labour are blamed for allowing all this to happen.

Then just to terrify the hive mind, a terrifying snap... Migrants wade into the sea to board a dinghy to cross the English Channel on August 25, 2025, in Gravelines, France. Picture: Getty




Lord Downer is also a Brexit devotee ...

Then there’s the economy. Unemployment is low, but living standards have flatlined for years.
Taxes have increased, and government debt has spiralled to levels not seen since the Second World War. Both the Conservatives and Labour have tried to persuade the public they have brilliant plans to increase economic growth and the prosperity of the country. In both cases, their plans have been found wanting.
Some commentators will point to the Brexit referendum in 2016 as the cause of these woes. I doubt that that is remotely true. Certainly, Brexit contributed to an escalation in the political temperature from 2016 through until around 2022, but the deleterious impact on the British economy has been nothing like as great as Remainers claim.
For example, over the past 10 years the UK economy has grown by around 15 per cent, France by around 13 per cent, and Germany’s a mere 8 per cent. While none of these records is impressive, the UK’s economy has grown post-Brexit slightly faster than France’s, and at almost twice the pace of Germany’s.

Strange, this from December 2025 ... Brexit's impact on the UK economy ...




There's damned statistics, and then there's damned Lord Downer, as the reptiles slipped in an ancient snap, though they could have dug up a much more recent one, as featured in the Graudian report on a couple of recent marches... An anti-illegal immigration demonstration in August 2025 in Bournemouth, England. Picture: Getty




It being Lord Downer, a true member of the climate science denying hive mind, inevitably any hint of renewables produced a reaction equivalent to an attack of the hives ...

Having said that, the British public are upset about two familiar things. First, the persistent and unrelenting increase in the cost of living. Energy prices have increased alarmingly. For the average British household, electricity prices have doubled since 2016.
In Australia, we’ll be familiar with the reasons why. There has been a massive investment in windmills, in particular, and a reduction in the use of gas. All coal-fired power stations have now been closed. That means intermittent wind power has to be backed up with the remaining gas-fired power stations, as well as nuclear power. As in Australia, there has been a substantial decline in the productivity of electricity generation, and that inevitably makes electricity very expensive.
The British public were promised by both the Conservative Party and Labour that wind power was the cheapest form of power, and that by moving away from coal and gas, electricity would get cheaper. Well, exactly the reverse has been the case.
The public were also told it would help control the climate, but given the UK contributes only 1 per cent of global anthropogenic CO2 emissions, not surprisingly the sacrifices have achieved absolutely nothing.
One consequence of the climate policies of the UK government has been to transfer much of industrial production outside the UK. There’s only one steel blast furnace left in the UK, and much of the country’s steel is imported.
This is a familiar theme to any Australian. We stop industrial production because it emits CO2 as we try to reach improbable targets such as net zero by 2050. As a result, we have to import industrial goods, which are, of course, produced emitting CO2 but in another country. So, in terms of net CO2 emissions, it achieves nothing, but within the borders of an individual country the statistics look good. It’s just politics.
There are other pressures on prices, in particular caused by huge levels of government expenditure. In the UK, government debt is close to 100 per cent of GDP.
The government spends twice as much on servicing its debt than it spends on defence. Think about this. In the last financial year, the Labour government borrowed £130bn ($242bn) and spent £110bn just servicing debt!
This massive level of government expenditure, which has now reached record levels, has not surprisingly been accompanied by ever-growing taxation. British government expenditure is now 45 per cent of GDP.
Under the Tories the tax burden continued to rise, but that was nothing compared to the Starmer government. It increased capital gains tax, increased the equivalent of payroll tax and imposed a 78 per cent additional tax on profits from North Sea oil and gas. The results were obvious.
Fewer people sold assets and so revenue from the capital gains tax actually went down. Fewer employers took on staff so revenue from payroll tax declined. And extraction from the North Sea declined because of the huge supertax.
This is an abridged version of many UK policy failures but the moral of the story is brutal reality: if you don’t do a good job, don’t expect people to vote for you. So instead votes are atomising at the expense of the two major parties.

There's one moment of truth, one moment of insight in all that gibberish, and likely derived from Lord Downer's own experiences. 

If you don't do a good job, you'll score the royal order of the high heeled kick to the groin ...




And so to a survey of the rest of the reptile scene, and the pond regrets that the budget jihad is still going strong in the lizard Oz.

The pond has no idea how the the hive mind readership tolerates this monomania. 

The best the pond can do is link to the intermittent archive, where correspondents can romp to their hearts' content (an actually working archive permitting) ...

WeChat: A canary in the coal mine on Labor’s tax changes?
The sentiment across Chinese media and social platforms has been demonstrably more negative to the budget than mainstream English-language coverage.
By Simon Benson
Political analyst

It turned out that the billionaires and tradies and the Chinese community were being short changed by boomers ...

Budget risks alienating voters with three key wealth miscalculations
Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ fifth budget may ultimately be remembered for three political miscalculations.
By Chris Brycki

The indefatigable but generally unreadable Geoff was on hand to chamber his usual rounds ...

COMMENTARY by Geoff Chambers
Jim Chalmers gives Paul Keating a run for his money with unpopular budget
Jim Chalmers’ unpopular budget has helped Angus Taylor get back into the game.

That was just double dipping - they might be renewables cynics, but the reptiles love to recyle:

EXCLUSIVE
Newspoll: historic rejection of Labor’s big-taxing budget
Newspoll: Jim Chalmers and Anthony Albanese’s budget flops with every generation of voters
A special post-budget Newspoll reveals Jim Chalmers has handed down the most unpopular budget since 1993 and eclipsed the visceral reaction to Joe Hockey’s austerity budget of 2014.
By Geoff Chambers

A whole gaggle of reptiles, or at least a triptych re-enacted the Spanish Inquisition and made Comrade Albo confess ...

PM trips, then confesses
It’s a tax on trusts but not a death tax: PM
Anthony Albanese confirms tax on discretionary trusts set up for people’s last wills, but rebuffs it is a death tax
Anthony Albanese has admitted future inheritance trusts will face higher taxes after initially claiming all testamentary trusts were exempt from the policy changes.
By Greg Brown, Noah Yim and Lachlan Leeming

This was all pretty standard nattering negativity by the nabobs of the Murdoch press, but it was when the quarry whisperer arrived with an attempt at a positive spin that the wheels truly fell off ...



The header: Taylor channels Reagan with bold plan for reform; Angus Taylor’s inspiration is Ronald Reagan, who indexed income tax thresholds in 1985 as part of a program of tax cuts.

The caption for the cornball artwork credited Frank, when really to help his career, it might have been a better career option for Frank to credit AI or Alan Smithee ... Opposition Leader Angus Taylor. Artwork: Frank Ling.

Reagan?

Oh yes, he's back in the game of wild-eyed comparisons.

So preposterous was this idea that the quarry whisperer could only manage three minutes, and that felt like an interminable stretch ...

Angus Taylor’s conservative critics have been urging him to release his inner mongrel. Well, now he has, by unleashing the boldest economic reform since the introduction of the GST.
By committing to index thresholds, Taylor has drawn attention to bracket creep: a scam that has reaped countless billions of dollars over the years by creaming off cost-of-living pay rises.
The stage is set for a fight between collectivists and classical liberals. In one corner are socialists such as Anthony Albanese and Jim Chalmers, who believe governments were put on Earth to raise money and then spend it. They believe the state has a moral claim over private income. In the other corner is the party of Robert Menzies, under a leader who passionately believes individuals should receive the fullest possible reward for their labour and investment.
Chalmers’ confusion is evident from his claim that Taylor’s automatic annual tax cuts would “cost” $35bn over four years. Cost who exactly? Not taxpayers, obviously, who’ll have tens of billions of dollars more disposable income. The greatest cost will be borne by politicians forced to expend political capital by cutting spending or adding to debt.
On Thursday, Nationals leader Matt Canavan delighted Coalition supporters at a post-speech dinner by describing the indexing of income thresholds as the Ozempic of fiscal policy. It will reduce the appetite for big government by forcing politicians to take a bill to parliament to increase taxes, rather than relying on inflation-linked revenue-raising on the sly.
Taylor has been working through the challenges of reducing the public sector burden for years. His strategy to reduce government spending to the pre-Covid level of 24 per cent of GDP is to grow the private sector rather than leaning heavily on expenditure cuts, as Malcolm Fraser tried to do half a century ago.
Fraser at least tried, going to the 1975 election promising “an end to Labor’s tax rip-off” by fully indexing personal income tax for three years. Yet persistent inflation broke his resolve and, by the end of his term, indexation had effectively been dropped.

The pond has been disturbed for some time now by the reptile desire to live in ancient times, and this didn't help ... US President Ronald Reagan in 1988.



Just to make sure everyone caught the full absurdity of this burst of hagiography directed at the beefy boofhead, the floodwaters in quarries whisperer doubled down ...

Taylor’s inspiration is not Fraser, but Ronald Reagan, who indexed income tax thresholds in 1985 as part of a program of tax cuts. Far from reducing revenue and increasing deficits, as critics predicted, Reagan’s tax cuts had the opposite effect, stimulating economic growth and instilling optimism that actually increased revenue. Monica Prasad’s account of that period in her 2018 book, Starving the Beast: Ronald Reagan and the Tax Cut Revolution, shows Reagan faced circumstances not unlike those faced by the Liberal Party today. Republican support was in the low 20s after Watergate. An editor at the Los Angeles Times mused: “Who can even imagine a Republican congress being elected in our lifetime or perhaps in our children’s lifetime?” Polls showed inflation was the No.1 concern. Bracket creep was sapping the confidence of workers and businesses.

The reptiles seem haunted by the head prefect, the squatter from Nareen, though he's long been gone ...Malcolm Fraser in 1977. Picture: Getty




And that was pretty much that, with the Caterist working hard to do a puff job on his prime serve of Angus beef ...

In his first televised speech as president, Reagan outlined his plan to constrain government expansion. “We can lecture our children about extravagance until we run out of voice and breath,” he said. “Or we can cure their extravagance by simply reducing their allowance.”
Unlike Reagan, Taylor will limit tax cuts to bracket creep, initially at least. Yet he is strongly persuaded by the supply-side arguments of economists who inspired Reagan, notably Arthur B. Laffer, whose thoughts were distilled on a paper napkin during lunch with Donald Rumsfeld in 1974, now on display at the National Museum of American History.
“If you tax a product, less results,” Laffer wrote, a phrase Taylor is fond of repeating. “If you subsidise a product, more results.”
The truth of Laffer’s observation was reinforced by Chalmers’ decision to remove concessions on capital gains, negative gearing and trusts. It is effectively a tax on entrepreneurial investment and, as Laffer predicted, we’re about to get less of it. On Sunday Chalmers painted himself further into a corner, claiming Taylor’s proposal was irresponsible and inflationary. Allowing workers to keep more of their income would “pump the most money into the economy when inflation is already at its highest”.
Yet tax cuts do not increase the amount of money in circulation. They merely change who gets to spend it. Chalmers’ logic is that if the government spends money, it isn’t inflationary, but if citizens spend their own money, it is. Experience persuades us the opposite is true: individuals tend to spend their money in the productive side of the economy, stimulating investment, increasing output and building confidence. Governments are inclined to spend money on unproductive pet projects, siphoning scarce capital to low-return or loss-making projects.
Which, ironically, helps Taylor enormously. Four years of lavish Labor spending have created a bucketful of projects few taxpayers would miss. Taylor listed some of them: climate change bureaucracies, sweetheart deals between governments and corporations, notably in the energy sector, transmission lines, electric vehicle subsidies. Cutting welfare for non-citizens, including subsidies for first-home buyers, will deliver a not insubstantial fiscal dividend. Plus, the government has pledged to cut $37.8bn from the NDIS over four years, enough to pay for Taylor’s tax cuts on its own. Not that Taylor should hold his breath on that one but, hey, you never know.

Desperate, desperate times.

Of all the angles offered by the reptiles - the suffering of billionaires was a particular pond favourite - this surely must be the most wretched and desperate of them all.

The Major was also to hand to offer more of the lizard Oz budget jihad, done in his usual manner by berating anyone who didn't share the Major's vision ... (that's why they never could find the Order of Lenin medal the Major proved was worn by Manning Clark).



The header: Jim Chalmers pulled the wool over the eyes of a gullible press; More than failing on its self-defined central task, the budget lacks any growth plan for the nation’s future.

The caption for the fully wired villain Jimbo: Treasurer Jim Chalmers. Picture: Getty Images

The Major's piece ran for an exceptionally tedious five minutes, but then when it comes to a murmuration of reptiles, the Major is always a reliable voice.

You see, he's a world-weary trooper, ready to explain things to younglings lacking the Major's infinite, hard-won, boots-on-the-ground, shop-soiled experience ...

Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ budget last week pulled the wool over some young journalists’ eyes with talk of intergenerational equity.
Many lapped up Jim’s crumbs about the wealthy elderly, but the budget will do almost nothing to boost housing supply for the young and will almost certainly push up rents and interest rates. It also leaves the young with a total federal deficit about to pass $1 trillion. Not much intergenerational equity in any of that.
Chalmers inadvertently highlighted why more thoughtful journalists are disappointed when he answered a question at the National Press Club on Wednesday afternoon with a jaundiced reflection about aspiration.
His political opponents always had aspirations for a shrinking number of older Australians while ignoring the legitimate aspirations of the young, he said. In other words: it’s just politics.
So what’s missing from what Chalmers claims is bold reform? Today’s older Australians were young when reforming Labor treasurer Paul Keating and Coalition treasurer Peter Costello made tough decisions that grew the national pie.
Keating, in The Australian on Thursday, reflected on the 40th anniversary of his 1986 “banana republic” statement and the tough budget decisions he had to make then in the face of plunging terms of trade.
Journalist Troy Bramston quoted him saying excessive spending to maintain living standards and running up debt that burdens future generations was “Australia’s great policy lie” in the post-war period. He was not aiming that at Chalmers but the point holds.

Hard, hard yakka.

Desperate, desperate stuff. 

The pond ran that ancient Troy piece, and correspondents will remember that there was nary a word from the Swiss clock man about the current budget or Jimbo, and so the Major is forced into blather of the "but the point holds" kind... Paul Keating. Picture: Max Mason-Hubers




No, the point doesn't hold and any youngling trying that trick of the trade - introducing the notion of a banana republic by nefarious means - should be hounded out of journalism school.

It's down there with the Major's next opening flourish:

Keating didn't say it ...

If Keating didn't say it, why is Keating's name in the sentence?

Keating didn’t say it but today’s young Australians will also get much more benefit from compulsory superannuation than the Baby Boomers who were middle-aged when he introduced the national system in 1996.
The Australian Financial Review on Thursday spoke to two former Treasury secretaries, John Fraser and Ken Henry, who thought the budget was too expansionary and should be in surplus. Yet Chalmers continues to deny government spending is affecting inflation.
To be fair, Tuesday night’s budget was better than Chalmers’ previous four, but it was not the bold reform The Guardian, Nine newspapers’ economics editor Ross Gittins and some journalists at the ABC claimed.
In fact, the budget’s “intergenerational equity” narrative is just a lazy way of taking money from one group, the elderly, to make another group, the growing youth vote, appear better off.
Chalmers and Albanese had hoped this equity spin would provide cover for ditching their pre-election promises not to change the capital gains tax treatment of investments or alter negative gearing. At least former opposition leader Bill Shorten had the courage to take the same policies to the 2019 election, where they were defeated.
Many older Australians live on welfare and don’t own a home. And while home ownership is harder today than in the Keating-Costello reform era, not all of that is driven by concessional investment taxes or negative gearing. Much is down to state governments’ development imposts.
Budget numbers show the latest housing changes won’t fix the problem. House prices will grow but by 2 per cent less than otherwise. Only 75,000 extra first-home buyers will benefit over the next decade but 110,000 will be trying to get into the market each year.
Chalmers’ “tough reform” is a far cry from Keating cutting the top marginal tax rate from 60 to 49 per cent in 1988, or the company tax rate from 49 to 39 per cent the same year, and again to 33 per cent in 1993.
Nor have Chalmers and Albanese shown the courage of Costello and then PM John Howard, who went to an election in 1998 to win support for junking their “never, ever” GST promise before the 1996 election.

And here we go again, with the Major, just like all the other reptiles, living in the past, celebrating past glories ... John Howard and Peter Costello in 2004.




It's almost as if the reptiles didn't have any faith in the beefy boofhead and his current mob, and so must direct the hive mind readership to ancient times, and by association, imagine the beefy boofhead has somehow been exalted and risen to Valhalla ...

This column argued on February 22 that there were reasons to alter the tax treatment of investment homes and to focus negative gearing on new homes. But it said neither would raise much money or solve housing affordability for the young. Tuesday’s documents confirm those judgments.
But more than failing on its self-defined central task, the budget lacks any growth plan for the nation’s future. There are rats and mice on productivity but nothing to give the young the sort of crack at prosperity Keating and Costello gave their parents.
Instead, the young will face decades of national debt plus limits to the sorts of tax and property arrangements their parents, and Albanese and Chalmers, benefited from. They’ll also get falling per capita GDP, papered over by very high immigration.
Chalmers and Albanese are selling this highly political generational equity line because for the first time the Boomer generation is outnumbered by young voters who don’t vote Coalition.
So how did the media’s budget coverage go? As usual, The Australian and The Australian Financial Review had the best political and economic analysis, even though they are criticised as conservative by the left cheer squad at The Guardian Australian and the ABC, who have never seen a tax increase they don’t support.
The most credulous pieces were by Annabel Crabb on the ABC website and Guardian Australia’s Greg Jericho and Tom McIlroy. All thought Chalmers had done the really big stuff, even though the intergenerational changes raise little revenue in the early years and the main road to budget repair is through a very dubious NDIS repair plan.
They conveniently gloss over likely rent and interest rate rises that will follow this budget.

The Major really decided to test the pond, but given a choice, the pond would rather listen to Crabb than the Major ... Annabel Crabb. Picture: ABC




Okay, in an ideal world, the pond would have to endure neither ... as the Major powerfully suggested that the pond really should be tuning back into the ABC so that an alternative reality might be observed ...

The worst media performance was by ABC 7.30 host Sarah Ferguson, who talked over Opposition Leader Angus Taylor all through their Thursday night interview.
Ferguson clearly disapproves of Taylor’s plans to cut immigration, even though the government proposes to do likewise. And she was sceptical of his promise to index PAYE tax thresholds to return bracket creep, something economists have supported for decade
s.

That reminded the pond of this ...




And so to the Major parading his choice of reptiles, from Pearls of wisdom, to of all people, that tired old hack Shanners ...

Like clockwork, Keating’s reform-era ally, former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty, in Friday morning’s Daily Telegraph, called for the top PAYE tax rate to be cut to 39 per cent from its present 45 per cent plus 2 per cent Medicare levy.
This column thought the most incisive analyses of the Chalmers budget’s economic underpinnings were delivered by former Treasury assistant secretary David Pearl in The Australian and AFR economics editor John Kehoe.
Picking up early on the banana republic anniversary, Pearl said Chalmers had failed his first real test at his equivalent of Keating’s big moment.
“Jim Chalmers had one job and one job only in this budget. The fiscal lever had to be pulled hard to take demand out of the economy,” Pearl wrote.
Kehoe said: “This is the budget Chalmers has dreamt about delivering for more than a decade since Labor’s 2016 election manifesto for higher taxes on assets.”
In The Australian on Thursday, journalist Elizabeth Pike reported on the 20 Labor cabinet members who maintained investment properties that can still be negatively geared under the budget’s grandfathering arrangements. Albanese and Chalmers are pulling up the drawbridge to prosperity.
Dennis Shanahan, The Australian’s national political editor, called out the hypocrisy on budget night: Albo himself has risen up the ladder from meagre beginnings and is now a very wealthy man with multiple homes. Millennials will find it much harder but that won’t be the fault of their parents.

Oh go moan to the Emeritus Chairman, who has done as much to protect the status of billionaires as any story in the lizard Oz about their suffering ...

And so to the immortal Rowe revealing what's really fuelling the reptile nightmares and hysteria ...




Sunday, May 17, 2026

In which Polonial prattle has pride of place again, the pond ignores standard Zionist serves, and tries to cope with the never ending lizard Oz budget jihad ...

 

For old times' sake, the pond decided to restore prattling Polonius to the top for the pond's last Sunday meditation, in what might be for some fair time ...

It was also a little bit self-serving, because Polonius decided not to be involved in the current lizard Oz budget jihad, and instead went looking for rats in the Liberal ranks, and the pond loves a good rat hunt:



The header: ‘Miserable ghosts’ should stop their anti-Lib moaning; From Robert Menzies to Malcolm Turnbull, disillusioned ex-leaders have repeatedly lashed the Liberals - often after losing power or influence.

The caption for Ming the merciless (and assorted nobodies the reptiles clearly had trouble identifying): Liberal Party founder Robert Menzies, second from right, became disillusioned with some of his successors in the 1970s.

This sort of navel-gazing and fluff-gathering has its own kind of charm.

First up Polonius has to redeem Ming the Merciless, casting him not as socialist Labor but as tyke socialist Labor, though only tykes will appreciate the difference:

It says something about the Liberal Party of Australia that 40 per cent of former leaders in the past 50 years have quit or become publicly disillusioned with the organisation that made it possible for them to play a prominent role in public life.
Robert Menzies, the Liberal Party founder and Australia’s longest serving prime minister, let it be known to the anti-communist activist BA Santamaria in the early 1970s that he no longer voted Liberal. This is sometimes interpreted as Menzies voting Labor.
Not so. What it meant was that Menzies had voted for the anti-communist Democratic Labor Party and then preferenced Liberal ahead of Labor.
Menzies had become disappointed in his successors as Liberal leader, particularly William McMahon and Billy Snedden. But when Malcolm Fraser replaced Snedden in March 1975, Menzies went back to voting Liberal. The DLP wound up in 1976.

That mention of Fraser introduced a real sore point for Polonius, the bloody head prefect, the treacherous squatter of Nareen, the man who turned more bloody socialist than the bloody socialists...

In the error-ridden Malcolm Fraser: The Political Memoirs (MUP, 2010), which he co-wrote with left-of-centre academic Margaret Simons, Fraser presented himself as a small-L liberal. However, that is not how he was regarded before becoming prime minister in December 1975. Fraser was then depicted as a political conservative along the lines of Menzies, who supported him.
It was not long after Fraser was defeated by Labor’s Bob Hawke in March 1983 that he publicly turned on his old party. Fraser supported Andrew Peacock over John Howard to become his successor and was relatively quiet. But when Howard replaced Peacock in September 1985, Fraser began criticising the Liberal Party leadership. He let it be known in 2010 that he had resigned from the party.
Without the Liberal Party, Fraser would have been a successful grazier and businessman. But he turned on the organisation that made it possible for him to become Australia’s fourth longest serving prime minister, who had a significant impact on both national politics and international affairs.

The selfish cad. 

Time then to contemplate a bunch of dropkicks and losers... with the GST cake man just as bad as Fraser, and Malware just as bad as the lot of them...

Peacock was Liberal leader on two occasions and failed to win the 1987 election. He competed with Howard for the leadership for several years. But when Howard prevailed, Peacock remained loyal to the Liberal Party. Howard appointed him Australia’s ambassador to the US. The same is true of two other Liberal leaders, Alexander Downer and Brendan Nelson. Neither took out their frustrations on being replaced as Liberal leader on their party.
But not John Hewson, who led the Liberals to defeat in what was classified as the unlosable election against Labor’s Paul Keating in 1993. Hewson followed in Fraser’s footsteps in becoming a vehement critic of the Liberal Party in general and Howard in particular.
A lot of the criticism made by Fraser and Hewson of Howard (Australia’s second longest serving prime minister) turned on personal dislike. Fraser and Hewson were also critical of Tony Abbott, who narrowly lost the 2010 election due to rural independents supporting the Julia Gillard-led Labor government.
But Abbott, who replaced Malcolm Turnbull as Liberal leader in 2009, went on to achieve a landslide victory in 2013. He was overthrown by Turnbull in 2015. Abbott’s attitude at the time was that he did not intend to let one event ruin his life. Despite disappointment, Abbott did not campaign against Turnbull in the 2016 election, in which his successor lost 14 seats to Labor.
The Liberal Party has never recovered from Turnbull’s disastrous campaign in 2016. Perhaps overshadowed only by Peter Dutton’s campaign in 2025. But, unlike Dutton, Turnbull had the advantage of incumbency. Moreover, Scott Morrison achieved an unexpected win in 2019 without Turnbull’s support.
Despite his disappointment, Dutton accepted defeat graciously and attended the recent Liberal Party celebration of Howard’s victory in 1996.
Former Liberal Party deputy leader Peter Costello spoke at the occasion, despite his disappointment that Howard did not step down in his favour before the 2007 election.
For his part, Morrison has a life outside the Lodge and has not criticised the party that made it possible for him to be prime minister.
And then there is Turnbull and, perhaps now, Sussan Ley. Turnbull’s criticism of the Liberal Party since he ceased being prime minister has been relentless, despite having declared, soon after leaving office, that he would not become a “miserable ghost” intervening in politics from out of office.
Turnbull has played this role for close to a decade, partly in his Malcolm Turnbull: A Bigger Picture (Hardie Grant, 2020). Unlike Fraser and Hewson, Turnbull has not resigned from the Liberal Party, possibly because he is much likelier to get a run on the ABC if he is criticising the Liberal Party as a Liberal.
Turnbull’s main targets have been Abbott, Morrison and Dutton, all of whom were involved in his replacement as Liberal leader in 2009 or 2018.
Turnbull was reported in The Nightly on May 11 as addressing a recent conference in London at which he stated that the Liberal Party had been in decline “pretty much since (he) was defenestrated in 2018”. Others would put the time back to 2015.

So many rats, so little time, and so eventually and at last to possible rat Susssan. 

The pond never gave Susssan an easy time, but nor did her colleagues.

 Indeed, the treatment of women in the Liberal party by the beefy bunch of boofheads who assume an eternal right to male power is frequently astonishing.

Naturally Polonius was keen to fit into that patriarchal traditions ...

And now Ley seems to have entered the miserable ghosts club to make up a gang of four. After the Liberal Party’s defeat to One Nation in the Farrer by-election on May 9, Ley issued a statement that concluded: “The day the leadership spilled in February, the new leader said the Liberal Party needed to ‘change or die’. Three months later, the result in Farrer demonstrates that statement to be far truer today than it ever was.”
This was an ungracious statement.

Ungracious? That's what they're calling a statement of the bleeding obvious these days?

Polonius sank in his velvet slipper, and then called for silence from the alleged rats in the ranks, because none dare speak without it being called treason of the first water:

I never publicly criticised Ley. But she had been in politics for more than two decades without stating any significant policy positions. Journalist Niki Savva is no fan of the contemporary Liberal Party but she said no politician, male or female, could have survived Ley’s numbers. Once Ley resigned her seat, it was evident that the Liberal Party could not win the resultant by-election.
New Liberal leader Angus Taylor has an extremely difficult job to restore support for the Liberals. But the likes of Hewson and Turnbull and perhaps now Ley along with members of the Fraser fan club could at least lay off the criticism. Most former Labor Party leaders have refrained from publicly criticising the party that made them.

Roll that one around on your tongue again and savour the flavour:

Most former Labor Party leaders have refrained from publicly criticising the party that made them.

The pond would love to be able to live in the alternative bizarro universe that Polonius seems to inhabit.

Was he referring to former Chairman Rudd?



And after that is where the pond came unstuck.

All that was to hand were typical offerings from the Australian Daily Zionist News, with the dog botherer leading the way:

ABC reporting on Gaza war failed nation, feeding into demonisation of Israel, fuelling antisemitism
The public broadcaster’s distorted reporting contributed to a climate of hostility to Jews.
By Chris Kenny

The pond can't stand that sort of simple-minded abuse and simpleton analysis of cause and effect, and so it was off to the intermittent archive with him, with this as a teaser trailer:



The pond didn't even bother with a teaser trailer for the next bit of Zionism ...

Jew hate dressed in a progressive cloak
Israel and Jews of the diaspora are being held to a different standard to anyone else.
By Julie Bindel

Julie wrapped up her offering this way ...

...Use of the term Zionist (Zio for short) as a pejorative byword for fascist has lately become everyday leftist language. I have been called this for railing against the rape denialism of those (including some hard-left “feminists”) who do not accept the truth of what happened on October 7, 2023. Holocaust denial is creeping back in, too, with some leftists screaming that Jews basically drag up the Shoah to garner sympathy and thus divert attention from their “complicity” in what’s happening in Gaza. There has always been antisemitism on the left, but this is a new level.
I doubt these same leftists would hold ordinary Muslims accountable for events such as 9/11 or to answer for Islamist extremism.
What is happening to Jews today may be dressed in a progressive cloak, but that doesn’t hide what it really is.
Julie Bindel is a feminist campaigner against sexual violence based in the UK. She is co-host of The Lesbian Project podcast.

Uh oh, she went there, so the pond thought it might offer a bit of counter-programming to both of them, as featured in the both siderist NY Times ...

The Silence That Meets the Rape of Palestinians (*intermittent archive link)



And so on - there's more - and inevitably that led to a typical response from the government of Israel, always intent on silencing any alternative versions, as noted in the Graudian (with links to the Graudian's own reporting on the abuse of Palestinians).

Israel says it will sue New York Times over article on sexual abuse of Palestinian prisoners
Media law experts cast doubt on viability of a defamation lawsuit promised by Netanyahu over Nicholas Kristof essay



And then the day fell into a complete heap.

The pond had done its best yesterday with the reptiles' endless budget jihad. Surely the Ughmann and "Ned" had said more than enough already?

But what to do with the rest of the parade of clowns?

In best Arthur Miller tradition, attention had to be paid.

The pond decided all it could do was note down the reptiles, offer a teaser, and send them off to the intermittent archive, where correspondents could graze at their leisure (even though the archive is sometimes tough on grazing, a bit like a Nareen squatter)

The reptiles stayed big on the 'death tax' angle ...

EXCLUSIVE
After death we do tax: breach of trust
Labor has defended controversial budget changes targeting 100,000 investors using estate planning trusts, despite critics warning grandparents and parents will be caught in the crackdown.
By James Kirby and Sarah Ison





A 100, 000 investors! Out of a country of some 28.4 million.

The reptiles know their demographics!

This Jimbo maintained the rage elsewhere ...

COMMENTARY by James Kirby
The bittersweet irony of Jim Chalmers’ budget
Investors need to review all strategies following a dramatic budget. There will be more losers than winners.



Tradies joined long suffering billionaires as victims:

FEDERAL BUDGET
Tax shock for owners of small businesses
Tradies forced to ‘hit the handbrake’ on investment after tax changes
Young business owners have abandoned expansion plans after federal budget tax changes forced a 24-year-old electrician to ‘hit the handbrake’ on his multimillion-dollar investment strategy.
By Paige Fryer and Will Seitam



The canny Cranston also had a go, by dragging some weird dropkick into the fray:

EXCLUSIVE
‘Millions’ line up for tax grab fight
Geoff Wilson has declared war on Labor’s tax changes, promising a ‘vicious’ campaign involving ‘millions of Australians’.
By Matthew Cranston


The Battle of Long Tan?

Deeply weird.

Others, whom the pond confesses never to have noticed, and to care even less about, joined in the nit-picking...

TAXATION
Less than 40pc of CGT is from property: data
The government’s claim that CGT changes will help young homebuyers have been contradicted by tax data showing most capital gains come from shares and trusts.
Joseph Carbone and Perry Williams



Snappy Tom was also on hand to woo the cats of Australia and warn young voters ...

Jim launches mission to woo young voters and destroy enemies
Budget mission to woo young voters and destroy enemies cuts deep
Anthony Albanese has stirred up a war between the ages and picked the side that is not dying off.
By Tom Dusevic
Columnist



Exhausting...

... but there you have it. 

The pond doesn't like to be reduced to doing surveys - who knows when the intermittent archive might clap out? - but it's the only way to handle this sort of jihad.

Those who want to can plunge in, those who don't will realise they're missing nothing but a minor crusade ...and at least everybody can understand that it could be worse...



There's no way in the world that the pond would usually pay attention to the ABC, but just because the dog botherer carried on like a pork chop, here's The fascism expert at the heart of Palantir  


 



 Amen to that...