In which the pond tries to cram all the reptiles into a hearty stew, with Dame Groan, ancient Troy and the bromancer as the succulent bits ...

 

The pond would like to begin the day by boasting how it's boycotting Eurovision, but as the pond has never watched the show, that's a tad hard. 

To the consternation of the pond's gay friends, the pond has always said it would be rather be struck deaf and blind than take in that cacophony of trash, and so it will continue.

And now before beginning this day's reptile tour of duty, the pond was startled to see this story, and in the WSJ  of all places ...

Talk about complete cheek and a colonial, or rather expansionist imperialist mindset..

More of the yarn here...

Israel Built and Defended a Secret Iran War Base in Iraq (*intermittent archive).

And now to the tour of duty, and the pond will confess that in its enforced absence, it will miss the old biddy's groaning into the digital ether.

That's why the pond gave Dame Groan pride of place, especially as she's still blathering on about the "vibe":

The header: The Treasurer is talking up tax reform, but the facts don’t add up; Tuesday night’s tax measures look set to fail the tests of efficiency, equity and simplicity but Jim Chalmers will still claim to be a reforming treasurer.

The caption for the outrageously laughing Jimbo, as he (allegedly) deals death, destruction and woe to the country: Treasurer Jim Chalmers. Picture: Martin Ollman/NewsWire

It wouldn't matter a brass razoo what's in the actual budget, or what Jimbo did, or attempted to do.

In Dame Groan land, we'll all be rooned by Jimbo. He began by rooning us, he continued rooning us and this will just be the latest example of roonation ...

So the old biddy squawked, so the old biddy still groans ...

There was a time when Paul Keating declared that all the pet shop galahs were talking about microeconomic reform. If you believe many members of the press gallery and progressive commentators, those pet shop galahs are now squawking about tax reform.
You know the sort of thing. What do you want? Tax reform. When do you want it? Now.
It’s important in this context to question the objectives of some of those who participate in this debate. It’s generally about the vibe rather than the facts. Loose terms such as intergenerational equity, social cohesion and young people getting a fair crack are used to justify radical changes that had been explicitly ruled out by Labor in the election campaign.
Take the case of the tax on gas exports, a proposal that was loudly launched by various left-leaning individuals and groups over the past several months. The idea was that a 25 per cent export levy could potentially raise billions of dollars annually and wouldn’t cause any harm to domestic gas users.

The reptiles interrupted this groaning with a shot of the perfidious document in preparation: Production of the 2026-27 federal budget papers enters its final secure phase in Canberra. Picture: Martin Ollman/NewsWire

As always, Dame Groan was gobsmacked. The thought of questioning Japan's ability to mark up our gas to extraordinary levels as it onsells the gas was nothing short of delusional, if not downright treacherous:

The naivety in this idea was breathtaking. The levy would not be paid by the gas producers, but by the customers. The delicate state of trade-related international diplomacy would be significantly unsettled, including our need for imported fuel.
But here’s the real rub: the proponents of this idea were not unhappy with the notion that this tax impost would deter further investment in the gas industry in this country. Indeed, this is seen as an upside of the policy. When it is pointed out that the investments on the east cost LNG industry would never have occurred had such a levy been in place, they regard this as missed opportunity.

Just to rub it in, Jimbo was shown clutching a copy of his wicked text, like some Satanic worshipper of evil: Jim Chalmers receiving his copy of the budget. Picture: Instagram

That snap of the man rooning the country (allegedly) sent Dame Groan off on a wild, extended groaning ...

When thinking about tax reform, there are three key criteria: efficiency, equity and simplicity. The aim should be to raise a certain amount of revenue at the least economic cost and as simply as possible while meeting equity objectives. Changes to the tax code should also be judged as a whole, rather than as individual measures.
There is also an important dictum – an old tax is a good tax. What this means is that the compliance costs are essentially sunk and the decisions made by individuals and organisations are based on long-established parameters in the tax code.
This is particularly important for investments in assets held over long periods of time. It’s also why grandfathering any changes is essential – to stay true to the basis on which legitimate decisions were made.
Having explicitly ruled out changes to the capital gains tax and negative gearing, it now seems likely Tuesday’s budget will contain some significant changes on both fronts. The trouble for the Treasurer is that the consequences, both intended and unintended, of these changes are difficult to predict. There will be both short-term and medium-term effects.
One potentially serious consequence of altering the capital gains tax is the impact on start-ups, and entrepreneurship more broadly. The owners of start-up businesses often forgo current income for years in anticipation of reaping the benefit of a significant capital gain. They may also partly pay the staff in equity to conserve scarce cash.
It is interesting to note here, in Canada’s recent botched attempt to increase its rate of capital gains tax, there was a specific carve-out for start-ups. Commercially savvy Prime Minister Mark Carney at least understood the importance of this aspect of the change.
There is also likely to be a wrinkle to the change to the capital gains tax arrangement: the special deal that applies to superannuation funds is likely to be preserved. (Had this not been the case, we would have heard a great deal of wailing leading up to the budget.) What this means is that a further arbitrage will be created for investments by superannuation funds, entities highly favoured by Labor.
When it comes to negative gearing changes, the exit of individual investors in real estate – many mums and dads – may be replaced by large corporations managing large numbers of properties in a hands-off way. This is common in the US, for instance.
Companies can deduct all the costs of investment from their taxable income and will thus be favoured if the benefits of negative gearing are denied to individual investors. Ironically, some of the current investors with multiple properties – they attract particular scorn from the progressive crowd – may be able to establish companies that own the properties. Save for the transaction costs of the transfer, these investors may end up being no worse off.
The seeming aim of these changes is to tilt the playing field in favour of first-home buyers by discouraging investors. One problem is that many properties attractive to investors are not attractive to homeowners, particularly those with families.
There is also the potential problem of rising rents caused by the loss of the benefit of negative gearing and any increase in the capital gains tax. Investors will naturally focus more on cash flow rather than the ultimate capital increment.
This will make it harder for renters to save up for a home deposit, even the 5 per cent variety. For forever renters – and there is a substantial cohort of them – this will be unambiguously bad news.
There is also talk about changes to the tax arrangements that apply to trusts, including a minimum 25 per cent tax on trust income. Many years ago, the Coalition government toyed with the idea of altering the tax of trusts but concluded there were so many complications that it would simply end in tears.
Just think about it: there are discretionary trusts and unit trusts. There are testamentary trusts and disability trusts. There are trusts associated with superannuation and funds management. There are trusts attached to companies. There are trusts that hold farms over the generations. Many small businesses are set up as trusts.
It simply cannot be a one-size-fits-all. There is also some serious misunderstanding of how trusts work and how they are taxed.
In the case of a vanilla family trust, all income must be distributed each year, and tax is levied at the marginal rate of each beneficiary. Children under the age of 18 are taxed at a punitive rate. Losses cannot be distributed. In many cases, trusts are established to protect assets, not for the purpose of tax minimisation.
For wealthy families, establishing a minimum rate of tax will make no difference. This is not so for struggling small-business owners or other trust beneficiaries.
Excluding farm assets from the change is also fraught. An incentive will be created to include some farm-related assets within existing trusts to qualify. This is surely not an intended outcome.
I come back to those three criteria: efficiency, equity and simplicity. When judging the changes that will be announced on Tuesday night, bear them in mind. On the face of it, it seems highly unlikely that efficiency will be improved, particularly as any significant cuts to income tax won’t be part of the package. Simplicity will be sacrificed, without a doubt. The equity effects will be very unclear apart from damaging existing asset holders.
But Jim Chalmers will claim to be a reforming treasurer, which is what this is really all about.

Case closed. 

Nothing Jimbo could do could possibly have impressed Dame Groan, because she's got his number (allegedly). 

She's got the vibe.

We'll all be rooned, and likely before the year is out, and it has nothing at all to do with mad King Donald rooning the world's economies...

There was other reptile budget coverage, but the pond wasn't tempted ... not even by a canny Cranston EXCLUSIVE ...

EXCLUSIVE
Tax bracket creep will eat Jim Chalmers’ ‘WATO’ budget cash splash handout in financial year 2027
Jim Chalmers’ budget sweetener will only return half of what bracket creep costs average workers, while a 30 per cent capital gains tax looms.
By Matthew Cranston

... even though it began with an astonishing collage which shockingly was uncredited...

Goes without saying. Just as Dame Groan called the vibe, doomed before it even begins.We'll all be rooned, before the year is out...

Nor could the pond find room for indefatigable Geoff, chambering what seems an inexhaustible supply of rounds ...

COMMENTARY by Geoff Chambers
PM and Chalmers are in ‘sync’ and all smiles – but this is an ambitious Treasurer
Anthony Albanese and his Treasurer, whose ambition is undisputed, were all smiles as they met on Monday to discuss their trickiest budget to date.

Does this Jimbo seem ambitious?

Geoff says he is ambitious;
And, sure, as far as reptiles can go, he is no doubt an honourable man.
The pond speaks not to disprove what Geoff spoke. 

Let this teaser trailer cry to the heavens ...

A Betoota analysis. Now there's the vibe. No wonder we'll all be rooned before the year is out ...

And now speaking of slinky seductresses, the pond should note this story, yet another reptile EXCLUSIVE ...

EXCLUSIVE
Hanson’s challenge to Coalition: Let’s get together to beat Labor (*intermittent archive)
Pauline Hanson demands the Coalition guarantee support for a One Nation-led government if it wins more seats than them at the next election.
By Rosie Lewis

The pond only offers that teaser as a further example of the way the reptiles at the lizard Oz continue to do mischief, a form of mischief-making denounced by the keen Keane in Crikey...

Everywhere the Liberals look, the feral right and their News Corp friends are killing them
The collapse of the Liberal vote in Farrer is only the end stage of a process that’s been underway for a long time — the destruction of the Liberal Party as a centrist organisation (Sorry,  possible paywall)

The Murdochians as sleeper agents? So the pond has been doing a Smiley ...

From there it was a natural segue to ancient Troy in the slough of despond ...

The header: Liberal Party faces terminal decline after catastrophic Farrer by-election loss; Losing one of its longest-held seats is a result that threatens Liberals’ survival, yet Angus Taylor is clueless about how to respond.

The caption for the oopsy daisy snap: Opposition Leader Angus Taylor at Lavington Public school polling booth on Saturday. Picture: Simon Dallinger/ NewsWire

To say that the pond enjoyed ancient Troy's four minute tale of woe and misery and despair is possibly an understatement:

Angus Taylor failed his first major test as Liberal leader, losing one of the Coalition’s longest-held seats at the Farrer by-election. He now leads a party with fewer MPs than when he took over just three months ago. Moreover, he has no viable strategy to deal with the existential threat facing the Liberals from the rise of not only One Nation but also the teal independents.
We are witnessing the continued destruction of the Liberal Party, uncertain of its identity and purpose, unclear about who it represents, losing members, voters and donors, and plagued by organisational and leadership weakness. The extremist far-right One Nation, which claimed Farrer with almost 40 per cent of the primary vote, will pose a major threat to the Liberal Party’s viability.

The chief villains in ancient Troy's yarn: Taylor and Senator Matthew Canavan chat wih a voter. Picture: NewsWire / Simon Dallinger

Ancient Troy couldn't resist another recounting of an origin story beloved by reptiles:

Farrer includes the border town of Albury, where the second conference to form the Liberal Party was held in December 1944. It took place at Mate’s Lounge over three days, and delegates agreed on a platform and constitution, structure and operating principles, with the goal of encouraging “individual initiative and enterprise”.
Eight decades on, Liberal tradition is being erased across Australia. I’ve noted before that every seat held by Liberal leaders, apart from two – Malcolm Fraser’s Wannon and Scott Morrison’s Cook – have been lost to Labor or independents. We can add Sussan Ley’s Farrer. It charts how the party has lost its heartland and is disappearing from the electoral map.
The loss of Farrer is directly related to Taylor’s Liberal leadership challenge to Ley in February, the party’s first female leader. Ley’s resignation was always likely if toppled by Taylor. But an opposition losing a seat at a by-election is extremely rare. Farrer was comfortably held by the Liberal and National parties since Robert Menzies led the Coalition to victory in December 1949.

Oh dear: Taylor and Liberal candidate Raissa Butkowski pose for photos. Picture: AFP

And still the unravelling continued, as Susssan was as graceful as she was when she conceded to the lettuce. 

Not like that humbug beefy boofhead from down Goulburn way, the wind turbine wonder:

Ley, travelling overseas, departed the leadership and the parliament with dignity and grace. She said nothing that could harm the party’s chances and gave no interviews. Taylor was given a clear run to defend and hold the seat. “I urge the Liberal leadership to accept this result with humility because the voters never get it wrong,” Ley said in a statement.
Taylor’s speech in the wake of defeat was extraordinary. “This by-election was always going to be a mountain to climb for the Liberal Party,” he said.
Yet it has been a Liberal seat since November 2001. “We have been a party of convenience, not of conviction,” he added.
Like conviction on lower taxes, deficits and debt? As shadow treasurer, he supported higher taxes and larger deficits than Labor.
“The Coalition hasn’t done what it should do: be united, stable and strong,” Taylor also noted. The Coalition did split; Nationals leader David Littleproud did face a leadership spill and later quit. But Taylor, too, has been part of that disunity and instability with his takedown of Ley.
The cost of toppling a leader is rarely factored in; this time it was the loss of a relatively safe seat. The result is that the Liberal Party has lost more of its heartland. The May 2022 election brought a warning that it was in crisis, but MPs, officials, members and past leaders routinely ignored it. Yet that was abundantly clear when voters bundled Morrison’s government out of office with brutal efficiency.
In Farrer, the Liberal Party was relegated to third place with just 12.3 per cent of the vote, a swing of 31 per cent since the May 2025 election. The incumbent party was almost wiped out. In the March 2026 South Australian election, the Liberal Party also came third with a miserable 18.9 per cent of the primary vote. The Liberal Party is going out of business.
While the focus is rightly on One Nation’s triumph, winning its first House of Representatives seat at an election, independent Michelle Milthorpe came second in Farrer with 28 per cent of the vote. The independent and teal movement – Milthorpe denies being a teal – represents another major threat to the Liberals having snatched several seats and (mostly) holding them. Labor could also be vulnerable to One Nation in the outer suburbs.

Then came a snap of the betrayed: Michelle Millthorpe lashed the Coalition for preferencing One Nation ahead of her.

Ancient Troy was inconsolable as he shouted his despair to the high heavens:

The Liberal Party’s task, as ever, is to return to the mainstream centre-right. It should not mimic One Nation’s xenophobic and nativist policies and rhetoric, as Taylor has done on immigration. One Nation has not changed; it is the same grievance rather than solutions- based, far-right extremist party. Most of its voters have given up on the major parties and are lodging protest votes.
It was catastrophic for the Liberal Party to direct preferences to One Nation. Coalition preferences helped delivered a One Nation victory in Farrer. This will keep happening, across Australia, unless the Liberal Party takes One Nation on, critiquing its policies and leadership, and preferences it last. One Nation is toxic to mainstream Liberal voters who have turned to Labor, teals and independents.
Yet shadow treasurer Tim Wilson is open to forming a coalition with One Nation. On Sunday, he did not rule it out. Those words will be an albatross around his neck. Labor’s 2028 election campaign strategy is written: vote Liberal or National and you may get One Nation in a three-party Coalition government. This will only hasten the Liberal Party’s demise.
At the conclusion of the Albury conference that formed the Liberal Party, Menzies spoke in response to a motion thanking him for his efforts.
“We have brought into existence for the first time in the history of Australia the Liberal Party of Australia,” he said. “This is the first occasion on which those of, broadly speaking, our political way of thought have established themselves on an Australian footing.”
That party, organisation, leadership and “political way of thought” have lost their footing. The Liberal Party looks to be in terminal decline without a radical rethink of its purpose, policies, constituency, organisation and leadership.
We may look back on Albury as the place where the Liberal Party was born and where it died.

"We may"?!

Oh come now ancient Troy, that's a fudge worthy of the beefy boofhead himself.

And now the pond will admit in this farewell tour to throwing everything at the wall, including the kitchen sink, knowing nothing will stick, but how could the pond leave out its most prized exhibit, another chapter in the deep thoughts of the bromancer?

Unlike wimpy, creepy ancient Troy, the bro was up for the fight. He was onion muncher mad, fighting fit and ready for a trip back to the future ...

The header: Hanson, Farage and Trump show centre-right must fight or die; To prove they are serious, Liberals must engage on net zero and elect Tony Abbott as party president, otherwise the party could be totally eclipsed.

The caption for the snap of the epic fails: Farrer candidate Raissa Butkowski with Angus Taylor, who did manage to mention net zero in his later speech to the handful of Liberals who stayed for their election wake. Picture: NewsWire / Simon Dallinger

The bro was keen for the beefy boofhead to maintain the rage, and pace the keen Keane, what better way that to go full King Donald, full mad far right climate science denialist?

Here’s a critically important take-out from the Farrer by-election. Almost 65 per cent of all voters chose parties that explicitly reject net-zero emissions targets. Yet for how long have we been told that it would be electoral death for any party to oppose net zero in principle?
The Liberals and Nationals were right to give preferences to One Nation, just as Labor preferences the Greens. On any measure, the Greens, whose policy outlook and rhetoric enable antisemitism and whose actual economic policies are nuts, are vastly more toxic than anything One Nation has ever been.
One Nation, in the way of many right-of-centre populist parties that sustain a parliamentary existence over decades, has moderated over the years. It is certainly no longer racist, if it ever was.
In Farrer, too much of the Liberals’ campaign was directed at badmouthing One Nation, rather than holding the Albanese government to account and offering a compelling economic and social vision for regional Australia. The failure to fight on net zero is key.

But there’s obviously a much deeper story to tell.

Uh huh, the deeper story is to join Pauline in her climate science denialism, thereby ensuring absolutely no product differentiation whatsoever. Bring on the seducer of reptiles: One Nation leader Pauline Hanson.

The bromancer was keen for the beefy boofhead to emulate such feats as the Brexit triumph...

Pauline Hanson, Britain’s Nigel Farage and US President Donald Trump are manifestations – and there are more on continental Europe – of the same underlying impulse. That is a conviction by sizeable numbers of voters that the political system no longer works. Not just that it no longer works for them, but that it’s gone wrong fundamentally.
Of course Trump, Farage and Hanson are wildly unalike. Yet all three evidence similar impulses and syndromes in similar societies. Trump is the most consequential disrupter. But Farage has already fundamentally changed British history. Without him, Brexit would never have taken place. A few days ago he won a staggering victory in local council elections held over most of Britain, and came second to the nationalist party in the Welsh assembly, pushing Labour into a humiliating third. Reform came equal second in Scotland, again humiliating Labour in a former heartland.

Speaking of manifestations, the pond regrets not having found a space for the immortal Rowe celebrating Nige and Sir David ...

Oh dear, speaking of more manifestations, not that scarf again: David Farley, the day after his election in Farrer.

Consider again the many virtues of climate science denialism, and not just an eternally stuffed planet to bequeath to the younglings. Everybody wants to stuff the planet, so why not join the cause?

If an election were held today, Farage’s Reform would go close to a majority. That doesn’t mean Farage will perform that well when an election finally arrives. Like Trump, Farage defies political niceties and orthodoxies, though he certainly is nowhere near as foul-mouthed or verbally undisciplined as Trump.
But consider, again, net zero. Farage is utterly contemptuous of net zero commitments and just won very big. Farage and the Conservatives combined score just under half the popular vote in Britain. They, and a couple of smaller parties, now thoroughly oppose net zero. Even Tony Blair says the Labour government should ease back on net zero, as so many other developed countries are doing, either pulling back their official targets or quietly going for more fossil fuel development and power generation.
Across Asia this is undisguised. In much of Europe, it’s happening a bit more shamefacedly. Almost the last true-believing net-zero governments are Keir Starmer’s Labour government in Britain and Anthony Albanese’s in Australia. Britain, in all its mess, is probably Australia’s future.
I mention all this because it goes to the heart of the Liberals’ contemporary dilemma. The Coalition has renounced net zero. But having done so, Angus Taylor and the Liberals almost never mention the fact. It seems they quietly try to reassure country electorates that they’re done with net zero, but do so in such a sotto voce way that they hope city electorates such as Wentworth and Kooyong won’t notice they’ve changed.

Could the reptiles resist slipping in a terrifying snap of an infernal windmill, the carcasses of dead whales just out of frame so as not to upset the hive mind? 

Of course they couldn't: The Coalition renounced net zero, but the failure to fight on it is key. Picture: Christophe Archambault / AFP

The bromancer pressed his point by conscripting his favourite Catholic scribbler, truly an indication of where his mind resides, an eternal Edwardian (born Victorian):

But here’s a simple law of political physics. Changing a policy then not campaigning on it doesn’t win you the support of those who hated the policy, nor does it win you the acquiescence of those who support the policy you’ve abandoned. As my hero, GK Chesterton, observed, it’s the willingness to die fighting that gives the brave soldier a chance of surviving a terrible battle, where the coward has no chance at all.
One Nation’s winning candidate in Farrer, David Farley, gave a stirring speech to his supporters after victory was declared. It was full of specific things he, and One Nation, wanted to do, among them tearing up net zero in order to once more produce cheaper power for Farrer communities. The Liberals should oppose net zero as economic policy.

Of course. What a vision. Stuff the planet and all will be well.

The reptiles decided to offer the prime Angus a little AV distraction: Opposition Leader Angus Taylor says the Coalition is now “strong” under his leadership. Mr Taylor said “we are back” and ready to work together with the National Party. “This will pay dividends over time, I will guarantee it.”

The bromancer pressed his point. The planet might be facing an existential crisis, but what a chance to get ahead by denying it was happening, or better still, making it even worse...

Angus Taylor did manage to mention net zero in his later speech to that tiny handful of Liberals who stayed for their election wake. Managerial politicians typically try to avoid conflict and hard choices. But especially in the era of populist disruption, politicians who don’t make and stick to hard choices die the coward’s death of a thousand cuts. The Coalition has had one big victory in recent years, defeating the voice. The Liberals were a quiver of indecision on the matter. Jacinta Nampijinpa Price’s courage and conviction forced the Nationals to take a stand, and that forced the Liberals to follow. Then Nampijinpa Price and Warren Mundine’s brilliant, passionate campaigning won the day.
Initially, the polls were against Nampijinpa Price and Mundine. They did what’s meant to happen in a democracy – they won the public argument. Initially, the polls were against Farage on Brexit. He won the policy debate with the British people.
The Liberals face existential crisis. They must fight like hell to show they have convincing economic arguments and that must mean fighting on net zero. To have any chance of a centre-right government, they must exchange preferences with One Nation. One task is to beat One Nation on primary votes.
It’s similar in Britain. If the Conservatives enter an election campaign well behind Reform in opinion polls, voters who badly don’t want Labour in office will tend to vote Reform.
One way the Australian Liberals can show they’re serious is electing Tony Abbott as party president. He will galvanise the base, energise the party, project purpose, and he’s a gifted fundraiser who will work hand in glove with his friend, Taylor.
All mainstream centre-right parties face a choice: fight or die. As the old saying goes: if you must be a dog, make sure you’re an Alsatian.
Greg Sheridan is The Australian’s foreign editor.

Why didn't the pond think of that?

 Why does the bromancer always have the most perfect solutions? Bring back the onion muncher so that ludditism, far right fundamentalist, and climate science denialism might flourish one more time.

Yes, if you want to stuff the planet, make sure to stuff it in best far right Brexit fashion, and then we'll all enjoy the return to the days of the onion muncher of yore ...

And if you can't beat 'em, remember to join 'em ...

Further to the pond's opening, is the god of Israel inclined to genocide?

You betcha ... the things that you're liable to read in the bible start with a hearty genocide:

Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark. And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

A mass extinction event, and more at the Skeptic's bible showing god willing to get down with it, and urging his people to do the same.

And then there's this ... perhaps a tad ponderous and pedantic, but convincing up against the genocide deniers:

 

So the current government of Israel, which has form, has some pretty impressive biblical verses to quote in aid of its ongoing ethic cleansing ...