They must have accidentally included the X's.

Will make the refugee camps look like paradise.

Yeah that's definitely true too. Though those surveys were done way back when the national support was much higher.

Didn't most of the remote Indigenous vote yes? It seems like it was more likely the adjacent non Indigenous communities that voted the other way.

Was actually going to give her a bit of credit if she was talking about social economic status but she's actually talking about regional vs cities.

They probably only had margarine croissants left.

It depends the infrastructure costs required for the new development is more than what they recover. If it's less and reducing them encourages more development then it gives them more revenue overall.

Degrowth is too pesimistic for me. The EU has shown you can reduce carbon emissions while increasing GDP we just need the right incentives.

Historically too without the Haber process we would be able to support the current population on the Earth today but we can as a result of it.

It sounds like they are approving all the permits anyway so whether it's illegal or not it doesn't seem to matter.

Where do they do it otherwise? In Australia it's also yearly.

People might also get bonus so in some sense you get paid once a year.

By easing they mean the inflation rate has dropped it's still way above the target range.

Great comment on SMH was "Good opportunity for the council to make money. Now the land's cleared sell it to developers with approval to go up 25 stories"

I swear I saw one but no idea how to properly search lemmy. Here's todays thread though https://aussie.zone/post/1515282?scrollToComments=true

Didn't we have this thread yesterday?

Pretty sure people just leave them at the start for this too.

I mean like do you have an alternative to taxes? The whole point of this is you'd pay less after the switch.

Just tax land...