Australia has a relatively small population. We share no land borders and are protected by vast oceans. We have abundant agricultural land, enormous natural resources, and some of the world’s most valuable exports. We’ve enjoyed more than 80 years without war on our own soil and never experienced a civil war. There is no reason poverty should be increasing in this country. There is no reason the middle class should be shrinking. There is no reason each generation shouldn’t have the opportunity to live better than the last. Australia’s challenges aren’t the result of a lack of land, resources, wealth, or stability. They are the result of political decisions. And for too long, we’ve kept electing politicians who fail us.

This is a time for governments at all levels in Australia to get real to save our future. The cost of capital has been rising and global uncertainty growing. So the agenda should be fiscal restraint and lifting productivity. This can coexist with targeted relief and tax cuts that grow the economy. But spending is out of control, debt levels are unsustainable and productivity growth is going backwards. The federal government recently pissed away $400bn in windfall revenue and the states have long been drunk on property taxes that still didn’t prevent them from racking up record debt. Don’t let politicians tell you it’s okay because other countries look worse off. That is not leadership.

I had many odd jobs before graduating (building labourer, industrial cleaner, picker & packer, nightshift factory worker, retail), but my first degree-related one was in a summer in a water authority. Most of the people in my team were just waiting for retirement. They’d talk about how much they despised the organisation they worked decades for while embodying the toxic culture that bred that resentment. I recall them taking calls from developers waiting months for approvals, who’d explain to them the impacts on the builders, subcontractors and homeowners waiting downstream of their inaction. And I recall them hanging up the phone angry that somebody had the gall to follow them up. One time I even heard the team leader say “bottom of the pile for you” because the person on the other end of the line dare question his work ethic. But I was eager to put my engineering to good use. I didn’t specialise in software, but understood systems and thought that the software, hardware and processes that governed the way the team interfaced internally and externally was archaic, inefficient and plainly ineffective. I took the initiative to get in touch with the ‘innovation’ team and worked for weeks with them on an entirely new system that didn’t rely on the legacy technology in place, reduced interface steps and slashed administration. One day my group manager told me not to pursue it because too many peoples’ jobs would be affected and I didn’t have the authority to implement change. So I spent most of my time reading online articles – and ironically, trying to make the most of my very unproductive introduction to industry, came across Ayn Rand and absorbed myself in free market economics. When I wasn’t asking for more tasks or filling the voids reading, I used the company cars to drive to sites to watch capital works construction. Sometimes I’d be told by my own colleagues not to visit their site (and I knew it was because they didn’t want anybody monitoring them). Needless to say, it was a thoroughly disappointing and eye-opening experience. I could see from those few months how organisations with poor leadership can expel the very people they need while incentivising the worst people to stay.

Rather than asking why One Nation is increasingly resonating with Australians - or holding the governments currently in charge to account for their failures - the response here is clown costumes and incoherent shouting. To be fair, these young people have likely been fed ideological extremism by teachers and parents happy to sacrifice their wellbeing for political gain instead of teaching them to think critically and act rationally.

Useful idiots. It’s one thing to be incompetent, another to be ignorant and yet another to be complicit. Unfortunately, for too long we’ve had politicians that tick all three boxes at the expense of national safety and unity.

I expect this to get some hysterical reactions, but here it goes. This is the first time Sam Wood has been criminally charged for anything in his entire life. He could reasonably be expected not to pose a threat to the public, comply with intervention orders and front court for trial. Bail is denied. Compare this to the endless others who repeatedly invade homes, assault innocent people with deadly weapons, steal cars and endanger civilians in high-speed pursuits. Many are already out on bail. Many are released on bail again. Sam Wood’s charge is in QLD. The others are in VIC. Set aside the legal details and look at it from a regular person’s perspective. How can there be such inconsistency in the way we treat violent crime? Particularly as it relates to public safety.

Fear of the alternative only works when the incumbent is seen as the safe and responsible option. This isn't the sentiment of the Victorian community whose trust has been repeatedly betrayed.

The rage in the community is palpable. The more of these stories they hear, the less they care about the details. This is on top of the greatest decline in living standards in decades. Australia is facing a political revolt like never before.

This is what many people don’t get about inflation and why stable pricing is so critical. In inflationary environments - whatever its drivers may be - there are both legitimate costs being passed on and opportunistic price increases. Businesses understand they can’t increase their costs too frequently or they’ll lose customers, so they often go overboard - both intentionally and unintentionally. This leads to other businesses responding in kind - both because their costs are interconnected and to get ahead of the inflation curve. It just leads to everybody chasing their tail in an inflationary spiral. Only when costs are stable and revenues are growing can businesses properly invest in growth for the future.

Grocery prices are up because input costs are up - their net margins remain at the long term typical 2-3%. The profit presented as dollars is across ~2,000 stores, which gives them the scale to run at 2-3% net margins. If a government-owned supermarket is offering prices at 30% discount, this means the other ~27% is being subsidised. And given their input costs would likely be higher and efficiency lower, it’d be much higher than this - so the subsidy would extend to pure waste. Then add finance costs because governments are running deficits, leading to more debt for future generations. This is what the Greens call good policy.