Election 2010 August 21

[stuartfaz]

You reminded me of last nights Gruen Transfer with John Hewson quoting a South Park episode where the election was between a turd and a ...... (? Sorry memory fails me)

Giant Douche versus a Turd Sandwich

 

[samh004]

You reminded me of last nights Gruen Transfer with John Hewson quoting a South Park episode where the election was between a turd and a ...... (? Sorry memory fails me)

Giant Douche versus a Turd Sandwich

I loved the Greens ads at the end of the episode, both resonated with me, they have some strange policies!

But loved the reference to the South Park episode, was brilliant.

 

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

simongr

my feeling is if the money that is being directed to the private schools was directed to public schools, then the public system would probably be much better than it is, and the demand to pay for private schools would be much lower. I read with interest on a study that showed private school children are more likely to get into uni, but public school kids are more likely to get their degree.

As for medical costs re child birth, i see that's a valid claim on the health care system.

medhead

why should other tax payers foot the bill for the material goods you feel you deserve? I like to travel, and 1 way I help myself to afford that is to not own a car. Is it a hassle, yeah. Does public transport wear me down - sometimes. What I don't do is expect to get money from the government to allow me to do it.

Surely it's better to have taxes as low as possible while providing a decent health care system, a saftey net for the unemployed and sick, a decent pension for those without assets, and the infrastructure we need to run a modern economy.

Being a single white male I feel there's this idea that we're all equal, but some are more deserving of Government largess than others.

As for the debt is bad argument, it's a stoopid argument. Debt to fund recurring costs is wrong, debt to build infrastructure is prob not such a bad idea, especially considering the Government can barrow at much lower interest rates than the private sector. I'd much rather see toll roads build where the private sector builds and runs them, the Government sets a toll that will pay the road off over say a 30 year period. That way future users will share the burden of paying for the road rather than the current generation bearing the total cost. It would also mean the road costs far less than the current PPP setups that require a commercial 15%+ ROI.

If the Government was offering 10/20/30 year bonds with revenue from toll roads can you imagine the avalanche of money from the super industry beating a door to invest??

 

[medhead]

I need to break my reply down a bit. Overall, I have to say that I mostly agree with you on specific points and I agree in general. But I think perhaps some bits miss the big picture.

simongr

my feeling is if the money that is being directed to the private schools was directed to public schools, then the public system would probably be much better than it is, and the demand to pay for private schools would be much lower. I read with interest on a study that showed private school children are more likely to get into uni, but public school kids are more likely to get their degree.

Agree

As for medical costs re child birth, i see that's a valid claim on the health care system.

DO you know how much it costs to have a baby? My first child cost me $3000 for the OBG, that is net cost on top of all my claims on private health and medicare. Then there was the hospital, the GP, the pediatrician and some other bils. We got no government payment for this child. Second child, the cost $5000 for the OBG, plus the other bills. We got the first Howard baby bonus there which was $500 per year for 5 years. It was hard work doing the paperwork to claim that. I hear that the OBG has basically cut right back on business because it isn't worth her time with the cost of indemnity insurance.

medhead

why should other tax payers foot the bill for the material goods you feel you deserve? I like to travel, and 1 way I help myself to afford that is to not own a car. Is it a hassle, yeah. Does public transport wear me down - sometimes. What I don't do is expect to get money from the government to allow me to do it.

Surely it's better to have taxes as low as possible while providing a decent health care system, a saftey net for the unemployed and sick, a decent pension for those without assets, and the infrastructure we need to run a modern economy.

Being a single white male I feel there's this idea that we're all equal, but some are more deserving of Government largess than others.

I don't think I suggested that you should foot the bill for my material goods. The situation is that the government has given me money to help with the cost of raising my children. They do this because Australia faces a risk population demographic with the baby boomers generation. It was decided that more children were needed to address this issue. My point is that while I, or SWMBO, might buy some damn nice boots with the $500 that the government has just paid me and that money isn't being directly spend on the children. I will be spending thousands of dollars on money that I get from other sources on my children. Want is the benefit to children who have happy parents, vs parents who are having to compromise their wants, needs and desires for the children? How many parents with meagre resources would put themselves first and neglect their children?

aside= The story about my PS2, short version. When PS2 was first release I got a pram instead for about the same cost :shock: I'm still waiting for my PS2. (no government subsidy) /aside

So while I have always questioned the middle class children welfare system. I don't think it is fair to question how parents spend the money that the government has given them.

I think the other point I was making is that this excessive welfare system was set up by the Liberals and the current ALP government has actually worked to place limits on the welfare. that limitation was one of the factors on how I voted at the last election, even though it could hurt me

In terms of big picture. The whole tax system is about subsidising the choices of others; about taxing people and then using that money to provide services to others. You mention not wishing to for your taxes to pay for my child. But then you mention public transport, health, a safety net, pension and infrastructure. All of which are paid for by my taxes and which I may or may not not use.

I totally agree we need these things and I'm happy to pay for them. But when you and I get old and we are looking for a pension and health care who is going to pay for that with their taxes besides the children that our taxes have paid to support now?

As for the debt is bad argument, it's a stoopid argument. Debt to fund recurring costs is wrong, debt to build infrastructure is prob not such a bad idea, especially considering the Government can barrow at much lower interest rates than the private sector. I'd much rather see toll roads build where the private sector builds and runs them, the Government sets a toll that will pay the road off over say a 30 year period. That way future users will share the burden of paying for the road rather than the current generation bearing the total cost. It would also mean the road costs far less than the current PPP setups that require a commercial 15%+ ROI.

If the Government was offering 10/20/30 year bonds with revenue from toll roads can you imagine the avalanche of money from the super industry beating a door to invest??

Totally agree about debt and that. But don't say that too loudly around here.

 

[markis10]

Good to see the lies are continuing, impromptu speech ???

Julia Gillard's Speech At Labor Launch | Federal Election





As Ms Gillard took the stage, a thick sheaf of typed papers was discreetly placed upon the podium by a stagehand crouching almost out of sight. A video camera and The Sydney Morning Herald's chief photographer, Andrew Meares, captured the moment when the staffer slipped the papers into place.
When Ms Gillard had finished speaking, the audience - agog at her ability to deliver an unscripted address (indeed, Ms Gillard herself described it as "from the heart") - Meares turned his camera on the papers lying strewn upon the lectern.
Even a cursory glance showed it was a written speech. A closer inspection showed it was the very speech she had delivered, word for word.......

 

[yohy?!]

Good to see the lies are continuing, impromptu speech ???

Julia Gillard's Speech At Labor Launch | Federal Election

Typical of the rubbish media coverage of this election....who gives a twaddle that she didn't give her launch speech off the cuff - the 2 main parties have nothing approaching credible leadership or policies and the alternatives aren't particularly enticing either.

 

[simongr]

simongr

my feeling is if the money that is being directed to the private schools was directed to public schools, then the public system would probably be much better than it is, and the demand to pay for private schools would be much lower. I read with interest on a study that showed private school children are more likely to get into uni, but public school kids are more likely to get their degree.

We will have to agree to disagree. I see the massive waste in the public school system and I do not believe if you threw more money at it you would get better education outcomes.

I like to travel, and 1 way I help myself to afford that is to not own a car. Is it a hassle, yeah. Does public transport wear me down - sometimes. What I don't do is expect to get money from the government to allow me to do it.

But you are - taxes are used to subsidise public transport - so you deciding to save your money and use public transport is indirectly funded by other tax payers.

Surely it's better to have taxes as low as possible while providing a decent health care system, a saftey net for the unemployed and sick, a decent pension for those without assets, and the infrastructure we need to run a modern economy.

As for the debt is bad argument, it's a stoopid argument. Debt to fund recurring costs is wrong, debt to build infrastructure is prob not such a bad idea, especially considering the Government can barrow at much lower interest rates than the private sector.

I am not sure on the safety net question. Personally I don't work to support other people - I work to support my family. Pretty self involved I know but on one hand I am being taxed to fund someone else's lack of savings, being taxed on my savings for the future and I wont be getting any support from the government when I retire.

I am torn on the debt issue. I dont think we should be funding wasteful spending with debt but there are economic arguments that as long as the growth in debt is below the rate of growth in the economy then you arent putting an excessive burden on the future. I also don't think that PPF has worked well.

 

[Oneworldplus2]

...the 2 main parties have nothing approaching credible leadership or policies and the alternatives aren't particularly enticing either.

1+
That about sums it up! I have already done an early vote in PER as l moved to SYD a few weeks ago. It was like trying to decide which was the lesser of two evils.

Politicians will say anything to get your vote, they will lie through their teeth and then shaft you once they are in power.

 

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

I read an interesting article on the 2 party's broadband policies and it's quite interesting to see that the Liberals are relying on takign the old analogue TV spectrum and using that to try and roll out a wireless network the size and complexitiy that's never been tried anywhere else in the world. They can't even say how many towers they need to build to run it, nor how long it will take for them to get adequate fiber back-haul either.

They also can't start building this "bush" network till 2014-15 at the earliest.

They've also not counted in their costings the 1 billion plus in $ that the spectrum would sell for, as well as not let the public know that Australia will not be moving forward to 4G networks as the spectrum being looked at as the standard in the rest of the world will be tied up for the wireless network being proposed.

Not to mention they seem to like the idea of Telstra returning to it's bouncer roll at all the exchanges. Competition...I think not!

 

[serfty]

Broadband ... schmordband; all bets are off if it reduces govmint spendin' by $35,000,000,000.00 or more.

Let the user pay I say! (Directly, rather than via Federal taxes)

 

[serfty]

I did a pre-poll vote today (as I will be overseas this week end) and did my Tri Annual good deed by saving the federal government ~$4.62 in payments to political parties.

Neither of my First preferences went to any party/candidate who is likely to gain enough proportion of the primary vote to garner sufficient portion of the slush funds the parties voted for themselves.

(In reality, my second preferences have more chance of having a meaning).

 

[Mal]

I'm off to vote tomorrow. Already know who I'm voting, and will enjoy doing the pre-poll.

 

[coyote25]

Broardband ... smordband; all bets are off if it reduces govmint spendin' by $35,000,000,000.00 or more.

Let the user pay I say!

This is an infrastructure question not a user pays issue at least not the way people quote it.

We are a community and we want (I expect) to be a good / great one. The fall of societies throughout history starts when infrastructure investment stops.

The mining industry exists because of the massive, in real terms greater than the nbn, investment from governments. Private investment on a big scale came once the base was set.

The question really is this a good infrastructure investment? In a country this vast I think it is and it's probably better than other pork barrel spending on some "important" electorates benefiting only a few ie local rail link.

This is a real Australian wide project opening up huge possibilities especially health services.

Maybe I'm wrong. But the market will not build it, just like it couldn't rail, roads, telephone etc.

Market or user pays will at best deliver to a few in the inner city (so I'll personally be fine). But there will be little to no community benefit.

We have previously built great infrastructure and we should continue. Private industry can then take advantage and make money and hopefully employment.

Balance between private and public, individual and community. Anyway it's great we debate and discuss these issues.

Enjoy the great right / responsibility to vote on Saturday whoever you think has the best plans or ideas. I've worked with all sides of politics and 99% want the best for this country they just have different ideas and might think they know the only way!



Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

 

[odysseus]

Typical of the rubbish media coverage of this election....who gives a twaddle that she didn't give her launch speech off the cuff

Yeah, stop the presses. I read that today and though what earth shattering stuff. Sure, it may have been disingenuous (I don't know, I didn't hear any upfront claims boasting about it being unscripted as was alleged), but how many more significant claims have been recanted this campaign? And they weren't made as big a deal of.

 

[odysseus]

But you are - taxes are used to subsidise public transport - so you deciding to save your money and use public transport is indirectly funded by other tax payers.

But that's the same with all transport. Taxpayers subsidise road transport as well.

And if you don't drive a car on the road, taxes aren't reduced or impacted. And if you don't take public transport, the tax burden isn't reduced (the opposite actually).

 

[markis10]

The mining industry exists because of the massive, in real terms greater than the nbn, investment from governments. Private investment on a big scale came once the base was set.

Huh, what investment, did they dig a hole and put the stuff there??? Our government has certainly not put any real money in, since the Gold rush of the 1800s they have certainly been happy to profit from it though, Ophir is sure doing well from that Government money as our first mine LOL.

If you want to look at the differences in private versus public funding of infrastructure, have a look at the mine rail systems of WA versus QLD, one works well with no bottlenecks, the other is full of them. Does it not strike you as strange that the Government cannot name the number of homes that will be served by the NBN and how much it will cost per user, nor can they elaborate on how they are going to remove the backhaul issues that see us have data limits on our internet services unlike most countries in the world? Fast internet is not much good if oyu are throttled because you hit your data limit

 

[medhead]

Had to laugh at Hockey trying to convince me that iron ore pricing will increase the cost of apples at the supermarket. Talk about voodoo economics to suggest that Australian mines will be able to increase the price of globally traded commodities. If they try that trick I'm sure chindia is just going to call brazil.

Huh, what investment, did they dig a hole and put the stuff there??? Our government has certainly not put any real money in, since the Gold rush of the 1800s they have certainly been happy to profit from it though, Ophir is sure doing well from that Government money as our first mine LOL.

If you want to look at the differences in private versus public funding of infrastructure, have a look at the mine rail systems of WA versus QLD, one works well with no bottlenecks, the other is full of them.

(not going to mention the war so cut the broadband comments)

When you asked what infrastrutuce I was going to cite the QR in central qld. Who built those railways? Who built the power stations? When did mining start there late 60s and the 70s. That government infrastructure worked well for a few years. I certainly haven't read about the mining companies jump over themselves to improve the infrastructure. The WA railways are a fine example of how a company will only build something if they can keep it for themselves. Those railways only work well because they are underutilised and the companies will fight tooth and nail to prevent anyone else using their railway. This gets to the point about balancing the individual against the community. I'm sure bhpb can make some fair money charging Ziggy for running his trains on their track. There is capacity as bhpb are happy to move the product of others but in bhpb trains. (not exactly a viable commercial arrangement)

As for QR isn't the port just as big a bottleneck? No point getting product to the port if it can't get on a ship. Like in the Hunter the miners only seem happy to fight over who gets access not over building more capacity.

 

[markis10]

When you asked what infrastrutuce I was going to cite the QR in central qld. Who built those railways? Who built the power stations? When did mining start there late 60s and the 70s. That government infrastructure worked well for a few years. I certainly haven't read about the mining companies jump over themselves to improve the infrastructure. The WA railways are a fine example of how a company will only build something if they can keep it for themselves. Those railways only work well because they are underutilised and the companies will fight tooth and nail to prevent anyone else using their railway. This gets to the point about balancing the individual against the community. I'm sure bhpb can make some fair money charging Ziggy for running his trains on their track. There is capacity as bhpb are happy to move the product of others but in bhpb trains. (not exactly a viable commercial arrangement)

As for QR isn't the port just as big a bottleneck? No point getting product to the port if it can't get on a ship. Like in the Hunter the miners only seem happy to fight over who gets access not over building more capacity.

I was trying to work out what massive infrastructure was referred to, the power stations are there because that is where the coal is (Moranbah CSG actually provides excess electricity onto the grid), at least we have not sold them off like Victoria has done for the Latrobe Valley. Its interesting to note new mines are privately powered across the country (using CSG) and that WA continues to struggle with a lack of power infrastrucutre.

As for the government investment in infrastructure, its sorely lacking, in the Bowen basin alone, 5 years ago the following needs were identified by the QRC to support the doubling of output by 2020:

• 216 million tonnes per annum of additional port capacity and
• 264 million tonnes per annum of extra rail throughput.

Note the rail throughput requirements are way above the ports expansion requirements and the bottlenecks were confirmed by various sources many years ago:

"Unfortunately, the restricted rail capacity, coupled with strong demand for
coal overseas and production delays at the mines, have combined to stretch out
queues at Dalrymple Bay to 47 vessels, compared with a more normal 15-20
vessels per week. A spokesperson for Queensland Rail, the state-owned rail
operator that runs the mine-to-port trains for DBCT, said improvements were
needed across the supply chain to solve the problem of port bottlenecks
(Trounson, 2007)."

Source: Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2008 177
SOLVING REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE
BOTTLENECKS: RAIL ALLOCATION POLICIES FOR A COAL TERMINAL by
Andreas Ernst, CSIRO Mathematical and Information Sciences.

In WA , the rail system was identified as a good working system by not only its owners, but Government and non mining infrastructure owners as recently as March this year when the OPR feasibility study was completed and handed to the Liberal WA government. By comparison, what has been achieved in similar investments by the labor government over the past three years, what have they done to help grow the business as opposed to putting in place a new tax?

 

[medhead]

I was trying to work out what massive infrastructure was referred to, the power stations are there because that is where the coal is (Moranbah CSG actually provides excess electricity onto the grid), at least we have not sold them off like Victoria has done for the Latrobe Valley. Its interesting to note new mines are privately powered across the country (using CSG) and that WA continues to struggle with a lack of power infrastrucutre.

As for the government investment in infrastructure, its sorely lacking, in the Bowen basin alone, 5 years ago the following needs were identified by the QRC to support the doubling of output by 2020:

• 216 million tonnes per annum of additional port capacity and
• 264 million tonnes per annum of extra rail throughput.

In WA , the rail system was identified as a good working system by not only its owners, but Government and non mining infrastructure owners as recently as March this year when the OPR feasibility study was completed and handed to the Liberal WA government. By comparison, what has been achieved in similar investments by the labor government over the past three years, what have they done to help grow the business as opposed to putting in place a new tax?

I cut out bits because I don't disagree that problems exist on both rail and port. And for the sake of space.

In terms of power stations and the comment about building infrastructure I was thinking a bit more long term. I was referring to the power stations and rail that the government built originally to help develop the coal fields in the first place. Also the aluminum industry in Gladstone.

CSG and the last 5 years prove my point that private money doesn't get invested in these things. The comment was that government has take the first step and then private can take over. The situation in central qld is a good example of that except that private hasn't bothered to build on what the government created. Sure it isn't their responsibility but that doesn't stop them making an offer if the problems are really that bad.

It is pretty clear that private money doesn't build visionary things. If it was up to private industry would Australia have even got a telegraph?

In terms of track record on infrastructure I would simply say that the liberals did nothing for 11 years. At least labor is doing something and 3 years is hardly a long time frame. If we take the 5 year timeframe that you mention 40% of that was liberal government and the problems were around for a lot longer especially in the Hunter. It seems to me that you expected Rudd to get in and wave a magic wand to correct all that neglect overnight, in the middle of the GFC.

I'm not sure which WA railways are you talking about? The 2 private railways in the north that no one is allowed to use. They are no benefit to the community only the individual. Big deal if they are well run.

If you are talking about the rail in Perth that might be operated privately now. But who built it?

Oh and how long have the liberals been unposed in WA? I hope your not claiming they had much to do with the well run railway when labor would have been in charge for the majority of the time.

I've already said it, that things like this are the work of multiple governments. In is not right to castigate the current government for the failures of the legacy from previous governments. NBN is about leaving something to the future. Look at Telstra, a prime example of the benefits of forward thinking by past governments and also the failure of private business/more recent governments to think in terms of national assets.

 

[Alanslegal]

I'm voting Labor but it doesn't really matter as I'm not the 1-2% of true swinging voters who will ultimately decide the outcome of this election. For me it was simple question, who would worse be worse Abbott or Gillard - and Abbott is a much scarier proposition to me.

Besides I don't want my (future) children to be forced to read the Bible under Abbott esp. if their wish is to not to.

Anyway, I've placed some $$$ with Centrebet for the Coalition to win this weekend ... and either way I will be coming out with a grin with $$$$ or happiness.