That's what we r stuck with
http://youtu.be/O15bmoRePIU
That's what we r stuck with
http://youtu.be/O15bmoRePIU
Dare to Zlatan
Originally Posted by Grimario
He won't make that mistake at Newcastle since our team is full of number 2's.
lol. very funny.Originally Posted by lquiquer
The more I see Morrison the more I'm impressed.
If he somehow pulls off successful welfare reform without burning the place down he'll be lauded as a miracle worker.
I like Ed Husic too. Shorten needs to get him a better role and **** off stupid turnips like Bowen and Burke.
Bowen, Plibisek and Burke are the ****ing worst.
Tanya Plibersek could well be the most useless politician in history. Oh Wait.. I forgot about Penny Wong.
I think that Penny Wong does a far greater job as leader of the opposition in the senate than bill shorten does as leader of the opposition in the house of reps.
I met Tanya once, prior to the last election which may have affected it, however she only seemed able to regurgitate the lines without explaining the details. Probably why she is on the front bench.
Trick of welfare reform is to close the holes that people sneak through, as well as those people fall through. The NDIS, from those I have worked with that need to go through the process, is quite a difficult system to get an end result from. While the end result is eventually worth the effort, people who have fallen through the system prior to the NDIS still fall through because they don't have the capacity to attend the required documentation etc.
I don't think that either party in this sense is the right one to bring through beneficial reform to Australia's welfare. I think that a bi-partisan committee in which the entire system is looked at and agreed outcomes are accepted would work, except for the fact that such a thing would never occur with the pure aim of achieving the best for the people.
Liberals are likely to destroy the system as they don't get that not everyone is on $200k/pa
Labor are likely to allow the continued systematic failure which allows dicks to get away with rorting the system.
Last edited by Blackmac79; 09-03-2015 at 09:01 AM.
Go jetties
The only way we can pay for the combined pensions, including NDIS(maybe for not much longer) is to buy back the public corporations that have been sold, that's how stupid it really was.
Oh I'm gonna enjoy hearing how you'd pull this one off.
Please explain.
The Australian government has absolutely no budget constraint in terms of spending in Australian dollars.
In simple terms the government is able to purchase all goods and services available that are denominated in Australian Dollars.
Learn how to construct a stock flow consistent macroeconomic model and then get back to us.
Go back through the pages and you will see my opinion on welfare/minimum wage correlation and then you will see where our problem lies.
oi dunst dawg
what's your position on the libs position on superannuation?
yer man paul keating had a spray in the SMH today - i know he's right on one bit, that capital is available like never before to developers in this country, so surely the current system works (however is open to people exploiting the juicy mango....)
seems a bit redundant to let people get to their super early in order to put deposits down to properties they will never be able to afford - but in turn this keeps the debt in the system forever, right?
I've told you mine, now tell me yours, should be interesting Mr smartarse.
cool cool.
So we are talking about the 'poles and wires' yeah?
Go look at the Post Office and see where holding on to a govt funded 'asset' too long gets you.
Govt obviously thinks that assets like poles and wires/ports/generators etc have a shelf life and if they can get good money for them now to fund further economic development and create more govt 'assets' (that then can then generate more income from) then they should do it.
Going off Labors numbers the 'poles and wires' generate $1.7b per year for the govt. leasing 49% of that means they 'lose' $850m per annum but get $20b up front (remembering the Govt will still get that other $850m per year from the remaining 51%).
Say the advancement in technology of renewable energies (not to mention the Nuclear debate)determines that traditional means of delivering power to your home makes the reliance on these 'poles and wires' less important and therefore less valuable? Do we still make the $1.7 per annum from them in the future? who knows?
What? could that really happen? oh wait thats exactly whats happening to the Post Office. you think anyone 30 years ago would dare have thought that we could send correspondence without going through the govt controlled monopoly? no way.
State govt is striking while the iron is hot. i can see where they are coming from.
Also, considering probably 99% of your daily interactions are with products/services provided by the private sector I think its safe to assume you have survived the rigours of dealing with them yeah?
Im sure dealing with one more "big bad business" in your day wont hurt.
Of course once Skynet gets hold of me feel free to mock and bellow to the world 'I told you so'.
Cheers,
Plague
aka Mr Smartarse.
(Anyway as Dunster said we are all living in a vacuum where right is left and left is right so whats it matter yeah?).
I'm not a fan of Superannuation.
For those on modest incomes they will get **** all when they retire and receive nothing in the way of tax concessions either.
Those on decent incomes though get massive tax concessions and as such the benefits for them make Super a good thing to have.
People should have the choice of having Super but it should not be compulsory.
When you look at how house prices basically doubled overnight when Team Howard changed the rules on property and Super Annuation the solution to the current crisis [for many] would be to remove the changes made around 2001/2.
The problem with that is that it will be catastrophic for those with mortgages and the entire financial planning industry - not mention anyone looking to sell a property for far less than they paid.
The other solution would be to tax the living **** out of khunts that own multiple properties - land tax doesn't work in its current form because there are simply to many ways for these khunts to weasel out of it.
Because until property speculation becomes or is made undesirable the future is not looking too bright for anyone - including the oligarchs.
Hey Dunster, whilst we are doing Q&A why do you think that negative gearing is still available?
It seems like a slam dunk policy to overturn to get people out of the property speculation game (which I hate as well) but no pollies go near it.
Is there any economic benefit to the country by having it or are pollies scared of upsettlng the middle/upper class (and losing votes) by getting rid of it?
Don't worry Australia is heading towards a property meltdown big time.
They tried to remove it and the result was that in the short term rents went up. Politicians panicked and Negative gearing returned.
The changes to Super though have been far more detrimental than negative gearing ever was. House prices pretty much doubled overnight. Great news for those that owned them, not so great for those that didn't.
With respect to votes a government only needs to satisfy the top 5% or so of income earners to be elected. This is because they control the media and as such can pretty much determine how the other 95% vote by brainwashing them with misinformation.
Worth noting that Australia Post is currently profitable.
Go jetties
Not really.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-2...s-56pc/6215334
Yeah nah.
Nor is it 'worth' anywhere near what it was.
That was my point.
Looking at a single service that is provided, one that will almost always run at a loss unless people decided it is worthwhile paying several $ per letter.
Point is that the whole thing is subsidy free, and many "franchisees" are turning profits.
Agree it's not what it was though. Just don't buy the government hype around this sudden urgent need to sell the thing off
Go jetties
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote