V8Central Forums
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Search | FAQ | Links | Private Messages
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 General Topics
 General chit-chat
 General Libs vs ALP Thread
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Share
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 589

27GV
Team Manager



5249 Posts
joined 20 Jul 08

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  00:49:16  Show Profile Send 27GV a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-28/new-icac-hearing-begins-liberal-party-nsw-eightbyfive/5414892

ICAC gets ready to uncover more corruption in the NSW branch of the LNP.

Hmm, theres one Royal Commission that won't happen, one into dodgy donations to the LNP. But Tone isn't biased guys...


_Mford
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  06:22:31  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Zac

Like I said Trev, I certainly don't class myself as a monarchist, and when it comes to Royal protocol, I neither know nor care, and I'm surprised that you do. It's probably because it's Abbott who made the faux pas more than any interest in Royal protocol. Actually, I do know a bit about Royal protocol and royalty in general, because I grew up in the 1950s, and we were taught a lot of that stuff and it stays with you. I once knew the order 'in line to the throne' up to about 20th. How meaningless was that stuff to Australian children then - let alone Australians now? Even to the British, come to think of it. I just had a quick google and I see that Lady Davina Lewis, elder daughter of Prince Richard Duke of Gloucester is 27th in line to the throne. I guess that means that if the 26 in front of her snuff it or abdicate during her lifetime, she would be Queen of all England, and the remnants of the British Commonwealth as well. It all means as much to me as whether our PM mentioned the Royal couple in the right order at the Dawn Service in Canberra.

Abbott makes plenty of faux pas. That's just a very teensy weensy one. Name another one and let's debate that instead. BTW, I'm not an Abbott supporter, but it's boring when we agree all the time.



it is even sadder when you know the words to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tN9EC3Gy6Nk

I reserve the right to arm bears
Go to Top of Page

Zac
Lumberjack



Australia
9779 Posts
joined 24 Dec 04

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  08:02:10  Show Profile Send Zac a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Thanks, Trev. I feel better now. I only know the first verse. The others are gibberish to me. There again, I only know the first verse to 'Advance Australia Fair'. I recall "When gallant Cook from Albion sailed..." but nothing after that. I thought Albion was a truck. I was remembering Albions recently reading another thread, because the Albion emblem was a rising sun.

Time for my shock treatment...
Go to Top of Page

REM
Team Manager



Australia
14226 Posts
joined 27 Sep 03

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  08:18:21  Show Profile Send REM a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
This a great and well sourced read!

http://www.glennmurray.com.au/abbotts-war-on-the-rest-of-us-and-why-theres-no-need/


That's great, it starts with an earthquake
Birds and snakes, and aeroplanes
And Lenny Bruce is not afraid!
"Remember that in the end nobody wins, unless everybody wins!" Springsteen BTR.


Go to Top of Page

CP
Safety Car Pilot



Australia
11160 Posts
joined 22 Jan 09

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  12:19:00  Show Profile  Visit CP's Homepage Send CP a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
You should know better than to post something like that REM, as that logic is irrelevant in this thread.

There is an interesting little dilemma up here though. We have had a crime rate spike in Gunnedah and Tamworth over the past few months, yet the State Government won't allocate any police for here, however, in the past week we have been given more officers, including a dog squad and PolAir, but not for crime, but for a far greater and more terrifying reason...............Coal Mine Protestors.

Go to Top of Page

Zac
Lumberjack



Australia
9779 Posts
joined 24 Dec 04

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  16:23:47  Show Profile Send Zac a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Of course, to every great and well-sourced read there are alternative great and well-sourced reads. Relevant logic included. This is not one of them but it's my take on it.

Firstly, I do not support all the expected cuts to government spending, nor do I support all the proposed increases in government spending. In fact, I'm not a supporter of most things this government has done - or is proposing to do, but to continue with all these government funded schemes with no plan to reduce debt is fanciful. Yes, our debt is relatively low, but to just say that and keep overspending is not viable. Over the past decade, our governments have enjoyed record tax revenues (not only record amounts, but records relative to our GDP as well). In spite of all the money flowing to the government, government spending has exceeded revenues year by year since 2007, and continues to rise. It's all very well to say that relative to other OECD nations our debt is relatively small. Most debt starts that way until it's not so small. For example, in the 1980s Ireland was known as 'the Celtic Tiger' because of its rapidly rising economy, an example to the rest of the world. It's now a basket case, despite the graph provided in glennmurray.com showing Ireland's economy to be relatively healthy. It's not. Debt wasn't a problem for Ireland until Ireland was unable to meet its interest repayments, let alone reduce the principle. There's a list of countries that were travelling nicely, secure in knowing that their debt was relatively small that have gone the same way.

I see that glennmurray.com has a graph showing poverty rates in various countries. In that graph, Australia is level-pegging with Greece. Greece was relatively generous with its welfare payments. It's now also a basket case and utterly broke. That 'poverty graph' will look way different next time they do one. Australia is a long way from Greece's position, but relaxing in the knowledge that our debt is relatively small is a good way to get there. Speaking of graphs: I only looked at a couple of the graphs on that great and well-sourced read, but I could shoot great holes in the couple I looked at. There's one showing that we spend less on welfare than only four other countries. That's great, but it's a list of only 32 countries. Depending on who you ask, there are between 193 and 204 countries in the world, and without spending a lot of time resourcing, my considered opinion is that most of the 160+ countries not included on that graph would spend less on welfare than Australia. A more accurate graph would probably show that instead of Australia being 4th last in a list of 32, it would be more like in the top 25 of 200. I could add that amongst the little list of 32 countries that are shown, one is Luxembourg - a tiny but very wealthy country, and some would say a principality.

The trouble is we get used to government largesse, so as soon as any government even thinks of cuts to anything, there are squeals. One very small example is the ABC. It's a political hot potato, because of the antagonism between conservative governments and the ABC, but the ABC can afford cuts and still be the well-funded national broadcaster we want and need. In Sydney we have 6 ABC radio stations, 5 ABC television stations, plus a couple of television radio stations (God knows what they're for. At least they don't cost much to run.). IMHO, you could close 3 of the radio stations, 2 or 3 of the television stations and both of the TV/radio stations, and +95% of the population wouldn't even notice. Do that to a few government programs, including some of the generous perks to ex-MPs, and we could - if not actually reduce debt, reduce the rate at which it's increasing. (There are retired MPs who left parliament in the 1970s still on $180,000 p.a. taxpayer-funded pensions for life with gold passes for unlimited air travel as well. I digress. That's probably another subject in itself.)

What annoys me about sites like glennmurray.com is that although they don't want cuts to spending, they don't have any plan to reduce debt. They just say that our economy is great, debt is low, let it blossom, let it grow, etc. Our government debt to them (Our actual national debt is something waaay waaay bigger) just seems to be some benign little number that floats around getting bigger, while quietly smiling to itself. Question: If our debt is so small and our ability to repay is so good, why don't we just repay it? Or even just begin to repay it? Answer: Because we can't. Still no alarm bells ringing anywhere in Glenn Murray's head.

If we don't reduce debt - or more to the point, if we let it keep increasing, we're leaving it to those following to face far bigger cuts. Those of you younger than me should have a think about that. If we don't start repaying, you'll be the ones wearing the consequences. We've been discussing the possibility of the government increasing the pension age. That's because the government doesn't have the money to keep paying pensions at the current rate. If we don't alter the way we're going, by the time the 30-40 year olds reach retirement, there won't be a pension.

The worst thing about our government debt is how little we have to show for it, and also that government debt has risen at probably the best time we have ever had to repay it. In the past 7 years, government debt has risen by $297,000,000,000 (and counting) and some people want it to continue to increase without any plans to reduce it.

It's lovely to have all these government funded programs, but it's not so lovely to leave the bill with the following generations. It does have to be repaid. There will be a day of reckoning unless we start reducing debt, and keep reducing. We can do that by either a great increase in growth or a great reduction in spending. Ideally, we would have just a healthy amount of both. Labor tried the first one, it looks like the Coalition is going to go with the second one.

As an afterthought, here's a link. It's provided by the ABC, so it certainly doesn't follow the News Ltd line about spending and debt, but it's more realistic than glennmurray.com

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-13/joe-hockey-correct-on-australia-debt-and-spending/5310736

Edited by - Zac on 29 Apr 2014 18:19:08
Go to Top of Page

AlbertM
Crackpot



12532 Posts
joined 15 Jan 03

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  19:27:27  Show Profile  Visit AlbertM's Homepage Send AlbertM a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Nice post Zac and pretty much spot on. Pity the Abbott government is getting it so wrong to solve the problem. And the problem can be traced back further than 2007 when it comes to spending more than we should.

Ford fans be proud. History of Australian motor racing shows Ford has been and will always be superior. They have to slow them down when they get serious about racing. The Phase 4 scared the **** out of people, they banned it. Sierra gets called on a technicality, Falcon EF "...had its wings clipped to make Holden part of the show", AU not allowed to show it's potential, Falcon BF gets clipped. Mustang Is so good Supercars made up a rule and gets a bag of cement in the roof, and it still wins.
_Mford
Go to Top of Page

REM
Team Manager



Australia
14226 Posts
joined 27 Sep 03

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  20:20:26  Show Profile Send REM a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Zac always argues his case well.....and his points are cogent and concise....and just quietly, he loves to play the devils advocate....

The heart of the matter is, who defines what is waste and who can afford to wear the collateral damage the easiest....cutting services and programs affects the most vulnerable....always has....always will...both major political parties are ruled by right wing ideologies with ALP captive to self-serving Unions and LNP clearly lapdogs to Big Business....and both guided by an unswerving metaphysical non-critical faith in the capacity of economic rationalism and markets as a social panacea......read some Chomsky if you doubt this.....

Is it absurd and perverse to be spending billions on defence and payments to wealthy mums to have babies....while cutting back on DSP, health access and pensions for the elderly.....well....you be the judge.....one can only wonder how much the original MMRST may have contributed to Govt coffers....from offshore interests who endlessly exploit our soils....and it must be said.....influence our political process far more than their social contribution will ever even remotely approach!

The fact is....the gap between the haves and the have not's continues to increase ever widening....and now with the Abbott Govt, is growing exponentially quicker and is racing towards US type inequity....is this the Australia you want to live in....? well.....that's for you to decide....for me, well "The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members”.....

That's great, it starts with an earthquake
Birds and snakes, and aeroplanes
And Lenny Bruce is not afraid!
"Remember that in the end nobody wins, unless everybody wins!" Springsteen BTR.


Go to Top of Page

27GV
Team Manager



5249 Posts
joined 20 Jul 08

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  23:25:00  Show Profile Send 27GV a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Zac

quote:
Originally posted by 27GV
Look at that big dip around 2007 when Rudd got in.

What I said about more new taxes and increased taxes is correct. Somewhere further back in this thread when it was relevant, I listed most of the new Labor taxes, the taxes that had been increased and the ceilings put on previous allowances and benefits, all done to increase tax receipts. Some worked, some didn't, but tax revenue increased. You can go back and look for it if you want. I'm not doing it all again.

The graph you linked shows tax revenue as a percentage of GDP. The tax revenue increased during Labor's time in government (despite the GFC that Labor supporters kept using as some kind of defence) from $262 billion in 2006-07 to $376 billion in 2012-13. By the way, showing tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is fine, except in Australia's case it is skewed by the massive revenue from mining exports, not because of anything particularly clever done by the government - and yes, before anyone jumps in, that applies to the previous Coalition government as well as the Labor government from 2007 to 2013.

2007-08 $285 billion
2008-09 $278 billion
2009-10 $267 billion
2010-11 $289 billion
2011-12 $317 billion
2012-13 $376 billion (Labor's projected figure, no more recent figure being available)

There was a dip in there as a result of the after effects of the GFC. This was due to a lag in the recovery of company income tax receipts because losses accumulated during the GFC were then claimed against later profits (Labor's own words:
http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/glossy/tax_reform/html/tax_overview_02.htm)
http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/overview/html/overview_42.htm
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/5506.0Main%20Features22011-12?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=5506.0&issue=2011-12&num=&view=

During Labor's time in government, the number of taxes increased and the rates of taxation increased (overall - I'm sure there are examples of some minor tax cuts), and despite the GFC, total tax revenue increased.





So what were you saying about the ALP and new taxes...

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-29/tony-abbott-says-debt-levy-would-not-break-pre-election-promise/5417510

HAHAHA egg meets face


_Mford
Go to Top of Page

Zac
Lumberjack



Australia
9779 Posts
joined 24 Dec 04

 offline

Posted - 29 Apr 2014 :  23:35:20  Show Profile Send Zac a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
If you look past the trees, you might catch a glimpse of the forest. You'll have to open your eyes first, though.

Edited by - Zac on 29 Apr 2014 23:35:57
Go to Top of Page

bigcol
Team Manager



Australia
13314 Posts
joined 06 Feb 04

 offline

Posted - 30 Apr 2014 :  00:10:18  Show Profile Send bigcol a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Cutting employment programs is a joke. They only end up being a bigger burden on society.
In QLD we had one called Skilling Queenslanders for Work and was used for getting young mothers, kids that fell through the cracks, people that just didn't have the skills needed to get a job and long term unemployed back in the work force.
That scheme set up by Labor cost the taxpayer around 50 million and the benefit far outweighed the cost.
Abbott an Hockey need to stop the war on the poor.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/cutting-the-skilling-queenslanders-for-work-jobs-program-doesnt-add-up/story-e6frerc6-1226452893593


FALSE economies are those actions that can save you a bit of time or money initially, but that over the longer term end up costing a lot more.

It is a bit like deciding you can economise today by not getting your car serviced, and then copping a nasty bill down the track when the engine seizes up or the brakes fail.

In this respect, it is hard not to categorise the decision made by the Queensland Government to junk the Skilling Queenslanders for Work jobs program as a false economy writ large, particularly in light of an evaluation of the program conducted by Deloitte Access Economics.

As Deloitte points out, "a broad rationale for SQW can be established, namely there is a role for government intervention in the labour market outcomes of disadvantaged jobseekers".

"However, intervention should only occur where the costs of intervention are outweighed by the benefits. Significantly, the evaluation findings demonstrate that the annual outlay by Queensland on SQW is returned within 12 months, with compounding returns for each additional year a SQW participant remains in employment thereafter."

In short, Deloitte concluded that SQW was an investment that delivered considerable and quantifiable economic benefit to the state.

Over the two years to 2009-10, Deloitte says 57,000 people gained work through SQW, of whom 8500 would not have found employment without the program.

In the period to 2012, this has added $1.6 billion to the Queensland economy and created $440 million in consumption that would not otherwise have existed. By 2020, those numbers grow to $6.5 billion and $1.8 billion respectively.The program, Deloitte calculates, will also create (or would have created) an additional $1.2 billion in state tax receipts in the years to 2020.

And this from a scheme that was costing about $50 million a year.

On average, over 10 years, the various programs within SQW are estimated to yield a cost-to-benefit ratio of 7.6 times.

Employment rates post these schemes vary between 40 per cent and 80 per cent (although these numbers exclude clients who go on to further training, such as TAFE, on completion of the course).

That is just the returns that are easy to measure.

Remember these are carefully targeted programs for society's most vulnerable, delivered at a community level by dozens of providers across the state.

These might be the likes of BoysTown or Acces in the Logan area, south of Brisbane, where programs can be tailored for kids who have fallen through the cracks of the high school system, for migrants and refugees with little English, for older Australians with numeracy and literacy difficulties or for indigenous unemployed.

In the case of young people and the Get Set For Work programs, they are, as BoysTown general manager John Perry notes, often people who have significant issues outside the need for pure vocational training.

The Deloitte report finds that the schemes provides significant social value. This includes improved physical and mental health, self-esteem and intergenerational benefits (to the client's children).

Social capital is also enhanced at a community level through better relationships and reduced crime, violence, suicide, mental illness, poverty and racism.

Social benefits, Deloitte says, "can also translate into wider economic benefits, which cannot be readily quantified but can, nevertheless, represent significant savings for government over the longer term".

These include reduced health and social security costs and savings in the criminal justice system some of the SQW programs specifically catered for recently released offenders, for example.

Deloitte cites a landmark 2007 study by Professor John Mangan and Kerry Stephen examining the cost of social exclusion in Queensland.

"As a broad and purely indicative illustration of the extent of these type of savings, Mangan and Stephen estimated about $562 million per annum in social security savings would be generated should current levels of social exclusion within Queensland be reduced (with about 6 per cent of the Queensland population estimated to be socially excluded)," Deloitte says.

"It was also estimated that approximately $798 million per annum in Queensland Public Health costs could be avoided."

There is no silver bullet for issues of social marginalisation, but killing schemes that not only make a real difference but also earn the state a net return on money invested makes little sense either socially or economically.

syvretp@qnp.newsltd.com.au


ONLY LITTLE BOYZ WEAR BOWTIES
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 30 Apr 2014 :  07:03:30  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
some of these posts are far too long for me to read this early in the morning - sorry

I reserve the right to arm bears
Go to Top of Page

Zac
Lumberjack



Australia
9779 Posts
joined 24 Dec 04

 offline

Posted - 30 Apr 2014 :  09:17:59  Show Profile Send Zac a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
OK

Read later
Go to Top of Page

Legendary Gerry
Moderator



Australia
22229 Posts
joined 19 Feb 07

 offline

Posted - 30 Apr 2014 :  10:02:56  Show Profile Send Legendary Gerry a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
At work like most seem to do!
Go to Top of Page

Trev
Team Manager



Australia
5741 Posts
joined 13 Feb 03

 offline

Posted - 30 Apr 2014 :  12:34:06  Show Profile  Visit Trev's Homepage Send Trev a Private Message  Reply with Quote Copy this URL to Link to this Reply
Yep

I reserve the right to arm bears
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 589 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  











Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Share
Jump To:
V8Central Forums © 2001 - 2018 V8Central Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 20.14 seconds.