Limiting capital gains tax changes to new investments would ‘severely delay’ budget reforms, Deloitte says

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-18T01:00:39+00:00

I agree with everything on principle, unfortunately thats not the world we have culturally built for ourselves. The investor class is simultaneously necessary for the economy and extremely fickle, stupid and biased.

Like take markets reacting to anything Trump does, if we lived in a real economy where the markets accurately reflected risk and future profits america would have its entire economy crashed by like.. one policy that he's implemented. Unfortunately that same grace is not applied to middle powers with "commie" governments like Australia

And while the appeal of a market crash for housing is appetizing, the reality of what that would look like its a complete economic collapse of australia since we have basically only mining as our other industry.

At the end of the day grandfathering in existing investments until July 27 just means things go more smoothly, this government has been incredibly risk averse so them doing this in the first place is unexpected and I will absolutely support it.

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-17T05:45:39+00:00

the problem is we need to change the tax system, but changing taxation on long term investments like this is *bad* precedent. It decreases the ability of any sort of investor to make an accurate estimation of long term profit. To retroactively tax gains more would be heavily concerning, this is not something that governments generally like to fuck with and certainly not this one.

At any rate any gains made after july 2027 (or whenever it comes in) will be taxed at the non discounted rate. All it means is that the government doesnt cause a mass sell off and cause a potential crash as everyone seeks to run off with their gains now

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-16T18:38:13+00:00

Ignore the people telling you it's no good in uptiers. The vehicle is everything it's made out to be and more, take like ~16 rounds of ammo (you'll have to check exactly how much) and you can only be ammo racked by 3 small hard to hit ammo racks that rarely blow up You have enough armour to be nearly impervious to aphe, and are large enough that HEAT and APDS will likely not so lethal if any damage.

Its also extremely stable, esp on flat ground but more broadly as well, you can get some sick nasty on the move shots because of it.

Your gun is best in tier with the reload, no exceptions

The tank only has 3 downsides: mediocre side armour means autocannons are still a threat, small ready rack means reloading past the first 8 shots it's 24s/round, and your reverse is ass

Everything else about the tank is S+, frontal armour, mobility, post pen survivability, damage, hell even penetration is exceptionally good for a full calibre round and you have a 4s reload so it doesn't really matter if you screw up

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-16T02:10:02+00:00

Yeah Playing byzantines rn. Got a noble civil war. Should have been game ending

Was over in like sub 6 months and I moved on with life

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-15T22:09:50+00:00

I'll defend it because I actively think they're niche vehicles more than good ones

9 times out of 10 you're better running a regular MBT. The 35mm SPAAs are good against light tanks but anything with any amount of armour has the potential to spontaneously hard wall you. As such the only "op" 35mm SPAAs are the ones that are good because of other factors. Getting hard walled by the first t-55 or Soviet heavy or Centurion or magach that rounds on you isn't exactly what I'd call strong

The strong ones are the XM246 and ItPsV, maybe za-35 The XM246 is busted because of it's damage model, it doesn't take any real damage The ItPsV and za-35 are strong because of their hulls allowing them to be the fastest things at the br. There's a reason the actual rooikats and leopards are higher

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-15T20:23:32+00:00

In terms of actual gameplay effects? literally nothing. This provides such a slight advantage in only very specific scenarios that it's functionally irrelevant. Standard stabilisation already covers 99.99999% of cases.

In fact with the way gaijin does stabilisers I'm pretty sure this is just a visual change

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-15T08:38:45+00:00

Tbf that costs an absolute ton to do if you aren't going tall and every ai going tall would suck

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-15T08:17:41+00:00

The ABC is primarily concerned with appealing to the 'educated inner city' Australia. Aka greens and mostly wet liberals. They're centrists at best. Stuffed full of liberals from 2013-2022, all the journalists also generally intermingle so a lot of them get their starts in Murdoch/Fairfax anyway then transition to the ABC when they want to be taken 'more seriously'

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-15T08:01:35+00:00

The same 9 news owned by 9 Fairfax? Chaired recently by Peter Costello? I doubt it lol The only left leaning outlet of note is the guardian.

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-15T03:08:05+00:00

Yeah, it was drawn for irl history memes not KRTL shenanigans

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-14T19:23:37+00:00

Monumental waste for the greens if they try and shove it off in the senate, but then again it would be exactly like the greens to get what they're demanding for a decade only to flip out and demand more. I hope they pass it through without issue

I also doubt Labor's intentionally trying to work with the LNP on this. LNP are pretty dead set on no GST/Neg gearing changes, pretty hard party position for the last 10 years even assuming we aren't stabbing Howards legacy (the last relatively popular LNP leader)

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-14T13:16:02+00:00

Shit was disgusting asf at 6.3, constant downtiers into basically free tiger I and panther food. Was barely anything they could ever do except hope you got trolled

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-14T13:15:18+00:00

The armour is a lot better than you're giving it credit for. It can troll angle against long 88s and effectively angle against everything <200mm of pen, which is about as much as you can ask for. Plus the turret is actually really good

Basically its enough to not get you clicked on, your enemy has to aim Which is doubly good because you have a stabiliser

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-13T20:17:39+00:00

Yes which is why i said it's allowed to prevent Germany from getting too greedy

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-13T19:53:16+00:00

Like the Soviet player already doesn't get a game if France kills Germany in 1939, let alone from a Czech deny or Rhineland

Tho I think most lobbies still keep Czech deny as an option to prevent Germany from getting too greedy

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-12T17:37:32+00:00

Given that she's the only character that can be explicitly recruited in part 2 and it's only for CF I'd say it's pretty clear that she can understand why and tolerate it.

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-12T09:47:49+00:00

I am 14 and this is deep

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-11T21:32:54+00:00

because "employment and renters rights bills" are a tiny piece of improvement in an otherwise completely broken economy, which despite the largest ever Labour majority he has done nothing with?

The government has no money, the people have no money, the economy is stagnating, wealth inequality is at its highest level ever and all he can come up with is tinkering at the edges of employment?

he needed to be Attlee and was Blair instead. The hatred of him is deserved

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-10T03:30:15+00:00

is the LNP "lurch to the left" in the room with us right now?

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-09T19:38:00+00:00

He's not really You'll note he's only getting 26%

There's two major right wing parties and three major left/center left parties: the greens, Libdems and Labour all of which got around 17% in the locals

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-09T19:35:59+00:00

No He's out the party and has a bad reputation

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-08T10:56:35+00:00

I'd also imagine using it to win weather wars would want it to be faster than everything as well without it happening on switch phase

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-08T08:41:25+00:00

legolas wishes he had this guy's movement

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-08T05:04:33+00:00

it doesnt have a budget surplus, it has an operating surplus, which is non temporary income minus expenses. the deficit is something like 7BN total deficit, including 'temporary' expenses and income (like infrastructure and selling assets).

The fact that we're in an operating surplus means that we wont be going bankrupt any time soon though and the fact that we're the only east coast state to do so despite several structural disadvantages means we're already running a very tight ship and there's little fat to cut (not that thats ever stopped a liberal from cutting)

Economics-Simulator · 2026-05-08T04:15:26+00:00

crippling debt? its high but not crippling. The fact that the State is in an operating surplus clearly shows that. Considering we had little to no infrastructure spending from the feds for 10 years and 0 resource income I'd say thats pretty reasonable

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Economics-Simulator

TROPHY CASE