2016 Australian Federal Election thread

[SixBuckets]

Looks like we're going to the polls for a double dissolution on July 2nd!

What are your key issues for this elections, AusDDers? Negative gearing - pro or against? Public and private healthcare? Unemployment, welfare administration and industrial relations? Refugees and whether or not we should continue locking them in island prison camps? Either or both of the major parties being secretly made up of lizard people in skin suits?

Here's the place to share your opinion/bias/hopes/rage about the issues that influence your vote and how you think they're being addressed in the upcoming election campaign.

Keep it civil!

 

[spacejunk]

Well, i don't really hold back with my political views on here, but there is a risk this will backfire badly on the Coalition.
And i sincerely hope it does.
Their performance since the last election had been so appallingly bad that i hope the electorate has the common sense to send the LNP packing.

I'm not a fan of Bill Shorten or the current Labor Party, but IMO they are the lesser of two evils.
In other words, i preference the ALP but have never voted for them.
The ALP do have universal healthcare and education reform ideas that are promising at times, but i don't have a lot of faith in the direction Shorten's leadership seems to be taking them in.

As for negative gearing, my interest is in affordable housing, not windfalls for property investors.

Also i prefer the term "double disillusion"

 

[SixBuckets]

Well, i don't really hold back with my political views on here, but there is a risk this will backfire badly on the Coalition.
And i sincerely hope it does.
Their performance since the last election had been so appallingly bad that i hope the electorate has the common sense to send the LNP packing.

I'm not a fan of Bill Shorten or the current Labor Party, but IMO they are the lesser of two evils.
In other words, i preference the ALP but have never voted for them.
The ALP do have universal healthcare and education reform ideas that are promising at times, but i don't have a lot of faith in the direction Shorten's leadership seems to be taking them in.

As for negative gearing, my interest is in affordable housing, not windfalls for property investors.

Also i prefer the term "double disillusion"

The negative gearing debate is so deeply polarised. Almost everyone seems to have one of the following opinions:

"I own one or more properties and want to protect my investment income/tax arrangements/retirement plan/status as an asset-millionaire"

or

"I own zero properties and am legitimately concerned about where I'm going to live if property prices keep rising".

It's a really sharp divide.

Of course, there's also the third group of people who think high property prices and a high percentage of the property market being own by investors are "good" but can't really articulate why.

 

[spacejunk]

"I own zero properties and am legitimately concerned about where I'm going to live if property prices keep rising".

Sums it up for me and most of the people i know, i'm afraid.
Almost a whole generation of australians (and other people around the world) have been priced out of ever owning property. And in our rental market, this is a truly frightening thing - with lifelong repercussions; especially in retirement or in case of illness or disability.
I don't give a flying fuck about property investors' dividends, frankly. Not an important issue to me.

 

[andyturbo]

Once you hit state government that's as far as an individual's vote actually matters. It doesn't matter labor or liberal in the end there the same individuals. Having a two sided government with different policies gives the illusion that we have choice in terms of the aspects in which we live.

No matter who wins fast forward three year's and every decision made would have been the same regardless. In a federal election the only thing your voting for is who will be the next puppet. It's very sad that less than 1% I would say even less actually know this (or belive it if they aren't involved directly but choose to start looking much deeper into things--very rare this type)
Too answer question my vote will have 'invalid' as always. Just so I don't get the fine.

 

[spacejunk]

I just put Greens or some other party first (especially in the senate) because it helps to reign-in some of the lib/lab's neo-liberal domination of both houses of parliament, and helps keep a voice of reason (from my political bias, incidentally) in our political discourse.
I mean - look at Scott Ludlam compared to, say, George Brandis.

I agree that state politics is important, but a lot of what the states do (or don't do) depends on the co-operation (financially or in legislative terms) from the Federal government.

They are all in cahoots, there are no two ways about it. It's how it works in the Westminster system (unlike that in the USA).

The easiest way to not vote for a puppet is to not vote for a puppet!
I've never votes for either of "the old parties" or "the major parties" as they call themselves; and if you are disenfranchised (which is a highly rational response in this climate) just do a little reaearch and try to vote for whoever has the platform that you best agree with.

There are lots of fringe and micro-parties these days, as well as some pretty interesting independants.

Considering how tight the polls are between the Libs/Nats and the ALP at the moment (essentially neck and neck) - as well as the fact that a Double Dissolution (election of both houses of parliament - the House of Reps and the whole senate) - those small parties and independants can gain genuine power in bargaining and making deals with prospective governments.

This is especially true in the case of a "hung parliament" - which we've seen many times in recent years.

My tip for people considering throwing their vote away is to do it constructively. The CPA (Communist Party of Australia) still run candidates in the Senate of quite a few states, i believe
Or whatever floats your boat - there are people running on drug law reform platforms, all kinds of things. And they appreciate every vote they get!
If you're sick of the same old shit from the same old establishment Boys' Club parties, just put them last on your ballot.

IMO a protest vote is far better than an informal or donkey vote.

And i'm sure there are some freaks like us standing for parliament worth voting for. I got a local candidate stoned on election day once, to "calm his nerves"

 

[andyturbo]

I love watching Scott Ludlamwith a passion.

Everything you said is correct, other than one thing "don't vote for a puppet"

That is all there is. Hence why I said once it reaches federal level. No matter who wins greens sex party anyone. Even the politicians don't know it until they win and become Prime Minister. That is the puppet I was referring too. Once one becomes the PM/president is when they would get the first insight into the way the system runs. It would be extremely disappointing after years of legit hard work to celebrate your win only to shortly discover that they have become a voice or Representative at the base level of where real power begins. When it comes to major global issues the politicians and PM are told less than I would guess around 20% of info regarding international *issues* . The Government has next to no info or power in relation to the running of the country. A few government agency's do they are the middlemen and mostly pass on as little info as possible regarding there advice (orders) of what the PM must do regarding situations. Note: These agency's are themselfs puppets to the *puppet matters*- the real power.

I can't go into it anymore than this and don't expect one person here to take this seriously, i wouldn't either. I'm not a conspiracy theorists btw. Facts made up my mind never theory s.

I'll leave u with one small explanation just regarding the government being puppets so it may help whoever reads this take it a bit more seriously. I'll just pick one of many examples.
A prime minister gets elected, does his time then another one does and so forth. These people may be in **charge** of the country (in the publics knowledge) but time goes and say 3 years later they are no longer pm and often get out of politics.

There's No way in hell Theyare trusted with information within (using one example again there's much more) ASIS- Issues involving a countrys plans operations for the next 10 years. As they can't risk a pm (4 years later now a citizen out of politics) having any knowledge of

-Vet2 clearance (Secret)
Or further more
-VetPOS clearance (Top Secret)

They are only ever informed of material/issues that have been deemed
-Base clearance (Classified)
And sometimes
-Vet1 (Highly Classified).

In 90% of cases these agency's act as they do but in extreamly situations they are themselfs puppets..Who carry out and ensure the success of certain tasks from xx xx xx.

Don't ask me how I know this. I would rather you not believe me, as I can't comment on any aspect or give any evidence in support of such.

A.T

 

[SixBuckets]

Once you hit state government that's as far as an individual's vote actually matters. It doesn't matter labor or liberal in the end there the same individuals. Having a two sided government with different policies gives the illusion that we have choice in terms of the aspects in which we live.

No matter who wins fast forward three year's and every decision made would have been the same regardless. In a federal election the only thing your voting for is who will be the next puppet. It's very sad that less than 1% I would say even less actually know this (or belive it if they aren't involved directly but choose to start looking much deeper into things--very rare this type)
Too answer question my vote will have 'invalid' as always. Just so I don't get the fine.

I agree that the LNP and ALP are a lot more similar than they like to pretend, but I think there are some key differences. Industrial relations and workers rights, for example.

A vote for a minor party can be a lot more effective than you think.

 

[One Thousand Words]

Effective at hamstring democracy perhaps. You only have to look at the current hung parliament in Qld where the balance of power is held by a couple of Katter rednecks. As a result they have effectively banned uber, despite living in a backwards electorate which doesn't even have taxis, let alone uber. Where is it written that in a democracy should be decided by marginal minority? Is it fair that a Family First senator elected by a handful of percentage should decide that the majority of us cannot play an R rated video game?

It doesn't really matter who is in power, my life is not really affected. I still go to work, still pay more tax than I would like, yet still don't have to worry about being bombed or even robbed when I walk the streets at night. The only thing I wish is for the senate and lower house to be a majority because for the last decade every government that has been in power has been ineffective when it comes to actually governing. The point of a democracy is the majority, no matter how small a margin, is allowed to govern unimpeded. Having a bet each way and creating a senate which blocks an elected parliament is not a healthy way to run a country. The catch cry of "keeping the bastards honest" is silly when society is effectively left in limbo, with no way of making hard decisions in the best interest of all.

Negative gearing is a red herring when it comes to property prices. The super wealthy are more inclined to invest in positively geared investments, leaving moderate ma and pa investors to fight over negatively geared property. House prices are high for young people in cities, but show me a large capital city in the world where this isn't the case. It is near impossible to find an actual 3 bed house in any inner city capital but with most people choosing not to have children until well into their 30's there is no need for young people to jump straight into this part of the market.

Only today I saw a one bedroom apartment for under $300k in inner city brisbane, close to a private hospital which provides cancer treatment to patients from across the state. It returns $31k a year in short term rentals which is a staggering 12% return, with low body corp and rates. Average repayments on this place is less than $250/week, not too big a stretch for most couples on a modest double income. If you were to expect a slim increase in property prices (lets say 3% to be ultra conservative), and you lived in this place for 4 years, you would be able to eventually rent this property for a further 4 years and still sell it without paying capital gains tax, as the place originally was a place of sole residence.

This is just a simple investment example which doesn't involve a disposable income of hundreds of thousands. I have heard plenty of friends tell me they are waiting for the market to implode before they buy a property. The problem is they have been saying that for 10 years . Perhaps if schools taught kids the basics of money, economics and investment there would be less complaining about property prices. My brother bought his first shit box when he was a 19 yr old apprenticeship and now owns almost 2 million dollars worth of property. If you are willing to sacrifice some luxuries when you can most afford to go without it makes it easier as you grow older.

 

[spacejunk]

OTW, you contribute simillar sentiments whenever electoral discussion comes up: it doesn't affect me either way.
I hate to break it to you, but this is a really misguided perspective.
Coral bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef is already out of control, and the federal Government gets to decide whether or not fucking oil tankers can sail through the sensitive and treacherous region.

The federal Government has great power in these matters, and many political decisions can have dire consequences on you, no matter how well you may be thankful you have it.
Environmental catastrophes are just but one part of it, but a simple illustration.

I'd like to think people thought about issues and their wider meaning - beyond one's own life - to see how much damage a bad government can do, in so many parts of life.
Bad governance is the difference between life and death.
Be it in health care, hospital funding, roads - i could go on and on.

As for obstructive Senates - i couldn't disagree more!
This last sitting of parliament showed us exactly why. That first Abbott/Hockey budget was a fucking insult and an embarassment.
That's why those cunts are on the backbenches or in cushy Ambassador jobs in DC.
They were fucking useless, and tried to fuck over so many people that i hope they get bootee out for that alone.

The Greens and the cross-benchers helped hell of a lot of people when they told Abbott to shove his radical budget reforms up his onion-munching arse.

With any luck the electorate will say the same the turnbull's bullshit and give the LNP the flick from both houses of parliament and scrub out the laat couple of decades of predominantly tory stench.

 

[One Thousand Words]

Yet it is a Qld Labor government that has just agreed to open up the Carmichael mine, no matter who is elected Federally there is no way they will block the thousands of jobs being promised. If a handful of greens block it they will be decemated come the next election. Any idea where the Democratic Party is these days?


You may be happy with the current senate balance but unfortunately there is little chance of labor reversing the situation. People want governments to govern, they want the country to move forward. The current Labor party is a rudderless mess, infected by union hoods and led by perhaps the most uncarismatic politition for 100 yrs.

Politics fortunately do not affect me as much as you would like because I make myself immune to change. The economy can wane but I usually bend. Even then international economies affect me more than what is thrashed around in Canberra. I am more interested in local council government as this reflects the community I live in. Roads, public transport, parks and ammenities. The State government is a bloated extension of the federal system and we could easily absorb into the other two and cut a lot of useless red tape and middle management.

 

[SixBuckets]

Effective at hamstring democracy perhaps. You only have to look at the current hung parliament in Qld where the balance of power is held by a couple of Katter rednecks. As a result they have effectively banned uber, despite living in a backwards electorate which doesn't even have taxis, let alone uber. Where is it written that in a democracy should be decided by marginal minority? Is it fair that a Family First senator elected by a handful of percentage should decide that the majority of us cannot play an R rated video game?​

Queensland actually has a different parliamentary structure than where I live, so I'm afraid I'm not too much of an expert on state politics in that area.

It doesn't really matter who is in power, my life is not really affected.

Isn't it nice that you have that privilege? Some of us are more directly affected, and even more of us think that our vote should take the people who are directly affected by government policy into account.

The point of a democracy is the majority, no matter how small a margin, is allowed to govern unimpeded. Having a bet each way and creating a senate which blocks an elected parliament is not a healthy way to run a country. The catch cry of "keeping the bastards honest" is silly when society is effectively left in limbo, with no way of making hard decisions in the best interest of all.

Protection of human rights and an equitable rule of law are fundamental principles of democracy just as much as the election of representatives by a majority vote in elections. I fail to see how "the majority governing unimpeded" holds a country to those standards.

Only today I saw a one bedroom apartment for under $300k in inner city brisbane, close to a private hospital which provides cancer treatment to patients from across the state. It returns $31k a year in short term rentals which is a staggering 12% return, with low body corp and rates. Average repayments on this place is less than $250/week, not too big a stretch for most couples on a modest double income. If you were to expect a slim increase in property prices (lets say 3% to be ultra conservative), and you lived in this place for 4 years, you would be able to eventually rent this property for a further 4 years and still sell it without paying capital gains tax, as the place originally was a place of sole residence.

Love to hear more information about this. Was this the starting price at an auction? How many people were expected to bid? If it wasn't an auction, how long had it been on the market - long enough to suggest that there was something wrong with it?

Again, I'm not hugely familiar with Queensland, but properties in Sydney usually go for quite a large amount over the asking price. And you're also presuming that your couple on a modest double income have been able to save a deposit while paying today's high rents.

This is just a simple investment example which doesn't involve a disposable income of hundreds of thousands. I have heard plenty of friends tell me they are waiting for the market to implode before they buy a property. The problem is they have been saying that for 10 years . Perhaps if schools taught kids the basics of money, economics and investment there would be less complaining about property prices. My brother bought his first shit box when he was a 19 yr old apprenticeship and now owns almost 2 million dollars worth of property. If you are willing to sacrifice some luxuries when you can most afford to go without it makes it easier as you grow older.

Property prices in Sydney have risen by $2000 a week most weeks in the last several years. Please tell me what "luxuries" your average wage earner could cut out to save a deposit on a house that's increasing in value by $2000 a week while paying Sydney rents (and probably accommodating a rent increase every six months). One bedroom apartments in my suburb are selling for almost a million dollars.

When people make this argument, I question what they think the average millennial spends their money on, because the much-maligned coffees, takeaways and nights out are barely a drop in the ocean.


​

 

[chugs]

I've been talking to my local greens and such, both state and federal campaigns and I have to say i'm a little disappointed that drugs seem to be off the agenda. I get that their a political football that the telegraph absolutely smash them over the head with but you need to turn a weakness into a strength and campaign hard on it.

The Drug Reform party caught my eye with the fact that they can put emblems on the senate ballot paper. They're going to place a cannabis leaf on theirs so voters know instantly what they're about. I think this is a great move and it'll see them get some pretty big votes across the country.

So.....who to vote for eh.

However with the destruction of the great barrier reef (92% of the reef has been bleached) and the fact that we hit almost 2c global warming (and the north pole saw temps above 0c this winter!) is really fucking worrying me. We need more action and the Greens are the only party that are pushing hard on that front.

so yeah a hard choice this year.

 

[spacejunk]

Politics fortunately do not affect me as much as you would like because I make myself immune to change

This is delusional, complacent fiction.
I am sure plenty of people said similar things in 1929.

As for your comment about Bill Shorten - i'm no fan, but the shallow personality politics you refer to here make me think that you understand the issues a lot less than you think you do.

As for the Greens, they tread a fine line with drug policy. Their federal leader Richard Di Natale is an MD who has worked in drug and alcohol treatment roles, and is a staunch advocate of drug law reform, including the easy availability of cannabis for those who need it.

The Greens aren't a "protest party" any more, and - Busty, the Democrats faded into oblivion when they made a deal with the LNP over introducing a GST. So much for "keeping the bastards honest" which was a slogan popularised by Don Chipp (the dem's founder; a defected lib). All old news.

We Australians have an opportunity to wipe the corrupt, entitled, bigoted lib/nat coalition out of control of this country federally, and i damn well hope that happens.
I'm not holding my breath, but Turnbull is taking a big risk here, considering this last government has been one of the most dysfunctional and erratic in recent memory.

 

[One Thousand Words]

Love to hear more information about this. Was this the starting price at an auction? How many people were expected to bid? If it wasn't an auction, how long had it been on the market - long enough to suggest that there was something wrong with it?

Again, I'm not hugely familiar with Queensland, but properties in Sydney usually go for quite a large amount over the asking price. And you're also presuming that your couple on a modest double income have been able to save a deposit while paying today's high rents.



Property prices in Sydney have risen by $2000 a week most weeks in the last several years. Please tell me what "luxuries" your average wage earner could cut out to save a deposit on a house that's increasing in value by $2000 a week while paying Sydney rents (and probably accommodating a rent increase every six months). One bedroom apartments in my suburb are selling for almost a million dollars.

When people make this argument, I question what they think the average millennial spends their money on, because the much-maligned coffees, takeaways and nights out are barely a drop in the ocean.


[/INDENT]

This took me 5min of research so forgive me if it isn't appropriate.

http://www.realestate.com.au/property-apartment-nsw-newtown-122377842

1 Bedroom (not studio) in Newtown with an asking price of $449k. Lets say you get it for the asking price, your repayments would be around $400/week.

Pros: Inner city, close to University of Sydney and Prince Alfred and walk to transport, looks like a warehouse conversion in a trendy suburb.

Cons: No car park, then again if you are a Uni Student or work in the city you probably could live here and not really miss having a car. Swimming pool on complex might mean the body corp is a little high. Ditto if there happens to be a lift

A quick scout show that rents for for a 1 bed in Newtown start at $400/week, which means if you had a 12month lease your mortgage repayments would be covered. Your expenses would be Body Corp (lets guess $4000, which is high), rates and water (Probably around the same $4000, again I'm suggesting a high total). Add in another $2000 a year in maintenance (that air conditioner is going to need to be replaced sooner or later, the windows might leak in a storm) and you might need to out lay $10k a year. Split this between two incomes and you are looking at $5k each a year, before you even claim any tax breaks. Not really that big an outlay to be honest. If prices increase at a modest 3-4% you would soon have enough equity to use as a deposit on another property.

Now I'm not saying this is a sure fire investment, personally I wouldn't be happy with 1 bedroom in a market where apartments are being built every year by the hundreds, but it is an example of an investment that gets someone in the market. And this is me looking for 5 minutes at a suburb I have a couple of mates live and which is close enough without being in the sticks.

 

[SixBuckets]

This took me 5min of research so forgive me if it isn't appropriate.

The information online is a bit misleading on this front, unfortunately. I don't know what it's like anywhere else in Aus, but in Sydney (and especially pricier suburbs like the inner west) we have a strong culture of real estates heavily underquoting on property prices. We've actually just had a whole inquiry and legislative reform package come in about this in the last few months and real estate agents are still feeling out the new legal environment. Even when prices aren't underquoted, the competition for them is so fierce that it's not unusual for a property to go for multiple hundred thousand dollars over the asking price at auction.

http://www.realestate.com.au/propert...town-122377842

1 Bedroom (not studio) in Newtown with an asking price of $449k. Lets say you get it for the asking price, your repayments would be around $400/week.

The median house price in Newtown hit one million dollars in 2015, which was around a 15% increase since 2014, and the median unit price is around $700,000. I just tried to find the actual ABS data set and my google fu is failing me, but you can find a lot of media reporting on this over the last six months. Unless that unit is literally on fire at the time of the auction, it's highly unlikely to go for less than $600K - it's on King St, which is the main street of Newtown, so it's possibly above a shop (which comes with a bunch of usage and modification restrictions that can bring down the sale price) but it will still attract a heap of interest because of the location. Anyone bidding on it will probably be competing with over a dozen other buyers - we see the crowds that turn out for auctions in this area all the time and they're an absolute shitfight.

Pros: Inner city, close to University of Sydney and Prince Alfred and walk to transport, looks like a warehouse conversion in a trendy suburb.

Cons: No car park, then again if you are a Uni Student or work in the city you probably could live here and not really miss having a car. Swimming pool on complex might mean the body corp is a little high. Ditto if there happens to be a lift

Really doubt a uni student would be able to afford a $400/week repayment even if they managed to score the property for the asking price. Most of them are struggling to afford rooms in sharehouses. I agree with you about not needing a car if you live in Newtown and work in the city, though (we're in a nearby suburb and don't have one for this exact reason).

A quick scout show that rents for for a 1 bed in Newtown start at $400/week, which means if you had a 12month lease your mortgage repayments would be covered.

Nah. NSW Family and Community Services lists $400/week as the median rent at the start of last year in Marrickville, which is down the road and bit of a poorer suburb (for the inner west). My rent is under $400 but only because we're still paying almost the same as when we moved in eight years ago. If our flat (which is a pretty run down one bedroom that needs a lot of repairs) was rented today, it would get about $500 - more if they replaced the carpet and gave it a coat of paint. We're constantly keeping an eye on the local rental market in case we lose our flat - the way things are at the moment, it would probably mean moving out of the area. I am sure there are one bedroom properties in Newtown going for $400/week, but any potential tenant for those properties is going to be competing with at least 20 other applicants and it will probably go to a dual income couple working white collar jobs who offer to pay extra rent or put down three months in advance. The vast, vast majority of renters in the inner west are paying much more than $400 for their flats - it's not unheard of for people to be paying $250 - $300 for a single room in a sharehouse in this area.

It's a pretty horrible environment to be trying to plan your future in.

 

[spacejunk]

It's a pretty horrible environment to be trying to plan your future in.

Not to mention the inevitable social knock-on effects associated with working adults being priced out of the property market.
Unlike their parents and grandparents, they can't plan for a future to "settle down", because in the volatile Australian rental market is not something you can "settle down" into (and do associated things such as make large purchases, investments and uh, for many people - have families).
The social impact of the shortage of affordable housing is huge enough to affect the entire economy, nobody is immune; even if (like otw) your personal narrative reassures you that you'll always be employable.
If your rich clients are no longer rich, then will you be forced to cater to clients who aren't wealthy?
And what if you are right and you are apparently unaffected by tokenistic shifts in fickle matters of politics - what if one of your dependants, close family members or friends does find themselves adversely affected by housing shortages, and have nowhere to go?
Are you happy to rent them a place, take them in - or would you tell them to bugger off?
This is a tough choice i'm sure many people here have already been faced with.
Housing is scarce and expensive.
Also happens to be a basic human need.

 

[SixBuckets]

The major parties are announcing their election commitments around mental health.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-...-preventing-mental-illness-a-priority/7440486

And more on the Greens specifically: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/05/22/greens-announce-new-1-4-billion-for-mental-health/

My thoughts are that the Greens' commitment sounds great, but $1.4 billion over four years is nowhere near enough to bring the public psychiatric hospital system up to the level of the private psychiatric hospital system, which most people with mental illness will no longer be able to access if the Greens follow through on their promise of cutting the private health insurance rebate. Most private health insurers already exclude psychiatric cover from all but their top hospital policies, so losing the rebate will mean fewer people will have access to long stay private inpatient services or dedicated mood disorder or eating disorder inpatient units.

I feel like the actual best interests of people living with mental illness are being ignored in pursuit of an ideology about private health care being bad and public health care being good. Yes, it's preferable to move to an adequately funded public hospital system that meets everyone's health needs, but that doesn't mean we should cut the services that are keeping people alive in the interim.

 

[spacejunk]

So....who's voting this weekend?


Personally i intend to do all i can to not let my vote go to any party that supports offshore detention of asylum seekers.

I'd hate to see the fucking LNP get re-elected, but that seems likely - and Shorten is about as inspiring as soggy weetbix.

 

[Verybuffed]

A lot of people around me will vote for the Sex Party. They have signage all over my area saying "tax the church", "bring back fireworks" and "legalise cannabis".

No one realises though that they sold 11 million packets of their regulated synthetic cannabis products in the 2013/14 financial year alone from their <snippety popular sex shop retail> stores.