Election 2010 August 21

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

Medhead

very true. It seems most of the mining companies at the ports in Newcastle and QLD would rather devout their efforts to trying to screw each other over access than actually increase capacity so everyone wins.

The free market does not always provide what the economy requires, at least not at rates the community are willing to pay.

Why Telstra was ever sold off as a fully integrate company I do not understand. I know Bezley created the problem by combining Telecom with OTC, but Howard saw paying off debt as more important that a truly competitive Telecommunications market. The end result is much higher costs on the general public so the Libs could brag about selling assets to pay off debt.

 

[markis10]

Medhead

very true. It seems most of the mining companies at the ports in Newcastle and QLD would rather devout their efforts to trying to screw each other over access than actually increase capacity so everyone wins..

Odd comment, its government organisations (QR National & RAC) that controls the capacity, not the companies. The private model in WA (and there is only one railway - Rio Tinto's Hamersley - that is not open to competition, Rio's Robe River and BHPs Goldsworthy lines are open) is obviously working better given the new builds for Gina and Twiggy that the Liberals have supported and approved in the recent years.

 

[medhead]

Odd comment, its government organisations (QR National & RAC) that controls the capacity, not the companies. The private model in WA (and there is only one railway - Rio Tinto's - that is not open to competition) is obviously working better given the new builds for Gina and Twiggy that the Liberals have supported and approved in the recent years.

I think the point is that private industry could have went to the government owned enterprises and made a deal to contribute to the upgrades required. Instead they fought each other for access.

And bhpb willingly opened its railway to competitors or were they forced to open it? Years of legal stoushes are not what I consider working well.

But having said that I must agree that there are failures on both sides of politics on these matters. The matters you've raised are equally valid as what I've mentioned. Really for me there is no point of difference. Maybe slightly to the ALP for setting up the infrastructure fund. But then it has still got to deliver. So no great difference IMO to decide my vote.

 

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

Markis

I'm talking about port capacity. Just look at Newcastle where the mining companies are about to get a rejection by the ACCC to continue with their quota system for port capacity.

They've finally come to agreement on paying up for an increase in port capacity, but really they should have done it years ago.

As fro the rail networks, well they've been under invested by both Federal and State Government for many years. Just some simple track straightening on the line between BNE to MEL could cut hours off the trip, but that's still to be completed

I suppose until we as voters say no to tax cut bribes and yes to infrastructure investment the sorry state of affairs will continue.

while I find the Chinese political system to be an anathema to civil society, they do tend to get things done. the rate of high speed rail construction in the country is truly breath taking.

 

[medhead]

I suppose until we as voters say no to tax cut bribes and yes to infrastructure investment the sorry state of affairs will continue.

+1

While NBN costs a heap at least it is buying something decent. Notwithstanding the waste of the existing communications system. You might say put it into health but I'm sure a number of health department problems are a function of mis direction of funding. I know of one state health department that was ordered to cut the budget and did so by $80 mil. But in the same period the premiers department was up $100 mil. Hence they converted the money from frontline service to faceless bureaucrats who are only there to make the premier look good. That's only one state government imagine the waste across the whole country.

 

[medhead]

So Abbott is going to give a tax advantage for $20 Billion in bonds with a 10% tax advantage. Sounds a lot like something Keating did. How many recent private infrastructure projects have proven to be sound investments?

Lib super plan may distort markets | The Australian

Of course the Telegraph puts a different spin on the bonds. Makes them sound like Government issued bonds.

Tony Abbott's bond-aid solution | The Daily Telegraph

 

[serfty]

... 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!

Rather Glib methunked!

Given that part of the cost for the NBN is to pay Telstra $11,000,000,000 to hand over the physical stuff under the ALP.

 

[straitman]

Whist I will be glad when this election is over I will miss this entertaining debate :!:

 

[medhead]

Rather Glib methunked!

Given that part of the cost for the NBN is to pay Telstra $11,000,000,000 to hand over the physical stuff under the ALP.

Indeed and I never realised that nbn involved, finally, separating Telstra wholesale.

After seeing the liberal performance on Lateline just now I really have no confidence in their plan at all. Apparently the liberals offer a 12 Mbps *baseline* speed.

 

[coyote25]

Whist I will be glad when this election is over I will miss this entertaining debate :!:

Totally agree with this. While I disagree with some arguments I enjoy debating with those who have well thought out positions, keeps us/me honest.

Whoever you vote for take pride in doing it. Democracy is the centre of our community, a community which I really enjoy being part of


Sent from my iPod touch using AustFreqFly

 

[cove]

I cannot find anyone who wants to pay $100 plus for NBN internet as individuals so how can $43 Billion get invested.
If they want 25% market share the cost of joining would be way higher than $200 a month for individuals.
Where do we find these folks as absolutely no one I talk to want to pay a cent more than they pay currently.
In Tassie they got a few to join for free but that really doesnt count.

 

[medhead]

I cannot find anyone who wants to pay $100 plus for NBN internet as individuals so how can $43 Billion get invested.
If they want 25% market share the cost of joining would be way higher than $200 a month for individuals.
Where do we find these folks as absolutely no one I talk to want to pay a cent more than they pay currently.
In Tassie they got a few to join for free but that really doesnt count.

Lack of pricing is the big problem with NBN. But I think $200 a month is pushing it a bit. The Liberal guy on lateline last night stated that it would cost $2000 per Australian. So @ $200 a month for 25% of take up that is about a 25% pa payback. Seems a bit high to me.

I just got the Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS) election questionnaire. Some strange answers from all parties. But I like the liberal response to a question about improving maths and science education. Their answer is that the Howard government added 2000 university places for science and maths. Ignoring that there is little point in a university place if no one gets the required foundation at school, surely we want to know what an Abbott government would do.

Greens again say we believe in the science. Well what about nuclear and radiation safety science?

ALP had no obvious howlers. But there are still holes in some of the answers.

If anyone is interested I'll find a link to this. Actually it is right up front at www.fasts.org

Sorry if I'm posting a lot here but I have to vote in 2 days!

 

[Moody]

Interesting survey from FASTS - I wonder how many other industry bodies canvas the political parties for their commitment to specific socio-economic areas? I know that my wife received something from DET that scored the parties on education, and that clearly gave the Greens the biggest tick without actually saying vote for them.

And this one should be a tick for Labour in that at least they answered all the questions. I would put the Greens second because of their commitment to boost R&D to OECD standards, but they didn't supply much detail. The Coalition continued the NBN theme by saying they couldn't possibly invest in science because the cupboard is bare due to Labour wasting money on schools, medical facilities, home insulation, and other infrastructure projects.

Waste away I say because we didn't go into recession, I still have a job, my mortgage payments are lower (= effective payrise), and my kids' school never looked better. My only complaint is that both parties are going to stupid lengths to say their budget will be in surplus sooner and be bigger. WTF is that about?!?

How about we use this cash-cow while it lasts to fix up the parts of our economy that are not sustainable and build a better society, because I really don't need another flat-screen TV but I do need some vision from my leaders.

How un-Australian is that!

 

[cove]

In Australia we dont account for the retirement payments to Federal employees. There has been an explosion in employment in the public sector and we should not be selfish and leave these future payments to our children and grand children to cover when it is us now who are effectively supposed to be getting the benefit of having them.
We do need to pay as we go rather than book it off to the next generation.
That is why we need budgets to be prepared and tightly controlled.
Where is Peter Walsh when we need Him?

 

[markis10]

In Australia we dont account for the retirement payments to Federal employees.

We dont even teach financial literacy, love the announcement by Swan that this was coming to schools!

PM defends financial literacy plan

Any bets its going to get cancelled again because we cannot afford it, just like Swan did last year.

 

[Moody]

In Australia we dont account for the retirement payments to Federal employees. There has been an explosion in employment in the public sector and we should not be selfish and leave these future payments to our children and grand children to cover when it is us now who are effectively supposed to be getting the benefit of having them.
We do need to pay as we go rather than book it off to the next generation.
That is why we need budgets to be prepared and tightly controlled.
Where is Peter Walsh when we need Him?

Yep - super payments need to increase if we want to cover our own retirement. It's either that or compulsory euthanasia when the money runs out (that should get the punters saving!).

But PAYG is a stupid way to achieve success and is followed by no-one. Successful companies borrow to invest and reap the rewards. Governments should run deficits when appropriate (e.g. the GFC), and tighten the hatches when the economy reaches full speed.

Of course there are limits - as a country when your level of debt approaches your GDP you are living in a fools paradise (or is that a banana republic?), but Australia is a long, long, long way off that. Personally I am heavily in debt and loving it. If I hadn't borrowed then my family and I would be living in a 1-bedroom unit if we are lucky. More likely we would have left Sydney so that we could afford a decent place to live. Instead we are living in a house that has quadrupled in value and covers my debt many times over, so now we also have an investment unit that is almost positively geared already and is our future plan for our kids (boot them out when they turn 18!).

I would really despair if the only achievement we left our kids was a budget always in the black.

 

[medhead]

In Australia we dont account for the retirement payments to Federal employees. There has been an explosion in employment in the public sector and we should not be selfish and leave these future payments to our children and grand children to cover when it is us now who are effectively supposed to be getting the benefit of having them.
We do need to pay as we go rather than book it off to the next generation.
That is why we need budgets to be prepared and tightly controlled.
Where is Peter Walsh when we need Him?

Um actually, the deferred benefit scheme was closed years ago for federal public servants. Any new employees will all be on accumulation super being paid now at 9% per year. That is funded and booked away, at least in theory depending on how they run their super scheme, as it is technically illegal not to pay over the 9% super money. Sure there is going to be some unfunded liability for older public servants but that will be getting much smaller rapidly.

Yep - super payments need to increase if we want to cover our own retirement. It's either that or compulsory euthanasia when the money runs out (that should get the punters saving!).

But PAYG is a stupid way to achieve success and is followed by no-one. Successful companies borrow to invest and reap the rewards. Governments should run deficits when appropriate (e.g. the GFC), and tighten the hatches when the economy reaches full speed.

Of course there are limits - as a country when your level of debt approaches your GDP you are living in a fools paradise (or is that a banana republic?), but Australia is a long, long, long way off that. Personally I am heavily in debt and loving it. If I hadn't borrowed then my family and I would be living in a 1-bedroom unit if we are lucky. More likely we would have left Sydney so that we could afford a decent place to live. Instead we are living in a house that has quadrupled in value and covers my debt many times over, so now we also have an investment unit that is almost positively geared already and is our future plan for our kids (boot them out when they turn 18!).

I would really despair if the only achievement we left our kids was a budget always in the black.

The chaser made this point to Tony Abbott last night in relation to his claim that his government would run the economy like a household does. So they raised the fact that Abbott's mortgage was something like 4 times larger than his personal income.

 

[serfty]

... So they raised the fact that Abbott's mortgage was something like 4 times larger than his personal income.

Come across this simplistic comparison many times and it's not relevant to Government Debts.

Firstly a mortgage debt is generally the result 100% infrastructure purchase. Not so government debt (remember Joan Kirner :-|).

Secondly, for a mortgage, the lending entity would generally find it quite a straight forward thing to recover their costs should the mortgagee default. This is not the case with government debts.

 

[medhead]

Come across this simplistic comparison many times and it's not relevant to Government Debts.

I think the simplicity of the comparison was the point. Abbott got up there and said that he would run government debt like we run our household debt or a business runs its debt. A simplistic claim that smacks of popularism wile ignoring the fundamental differences you mentioned. I'm not criticising the popularism as both sides are doing that, but it raises some serious questions about the Liberals economic credentials, which is highly surprising to me.

 

[cove]

Todays Australian newspaper details costs of connecting to the NBN.
Now I know Rupert missed the Conroy bag full of money for the free to air TV giveaway so he is negative towards Labor but the writing today helps us understand why the NBN is a probem based on connecting a home to it.That excludes monthly costs of a consumer connecting to it.
Currently consumers have been hit up with Electricity,Water and Shire Rates when we get told the CPI is sub 3 per cent.
I think we need a better Cost Of Living index than the CPI because it is a BS figure that only the Reserve Bank/Treasury use and does not help us understand the real pain caused by interest rate and State and Local Government charges that have risen sharply.