Budget 2012, travel losers

[rechoboam]

Oh good, my federally collected taxes can stop funding education of any type then. Hopefully, that helps you realise the stupidity of this statement.



Want you're going to show me state government schools? If so refer back to my post. It is not the Commonwealth government's fault if the state government are firkin useless. That being exactly my point, try point the finger at the people who caused the problem; vote out your useless state government. :shock: or does politics prevent people doing the correct thing. :shock:

As you know state governments run the school education system.

The insulation program was pushed from a hysterical Dept of PM and Cabinet onto an unwilling environment ministry totally unsuited to and incapable of administering the scheme nationwide.

If that's not an example of federal overreach I can't imagine what is. Then again the federal government is responsible for everything from light bulbs to dental fillings now so overreach is just the way things are. My point is that the government has no mandate to micromanage the way our houses are warmed or anything like that. The powers vested in the government are outlined in the constitution and are not unlimited

Its not "stupid" to have respect for the limits of government power and a Constitution that has helped our nation develop over a century.

 

[Moody]

The insulation program was pushed from a hysterical Dept of PM and Cabinet onto an unwilling environment ministry totally unsuited to and incapable of administering the scheme nationwide.

If that's not an example of federal overreach I can't imagine what is. Then again the federal government is responsible for everything from light bulbs to dental fillings now so overreach is just the way things are. My point is that the government has no mandate to micromanage the way our houses are warmed or anything like that. The powers vested in the government are outlined in the constitution and are not unlimited

Its not "stupid" to have respect for the limits of government power and a Constitution that has helped our nation develop over a century.

As I have said before - the Home Insulation scheme was a good concept, but was too generous. No doubt some bean-counter had said that merely subsidising the cost to consumers would have mininal effect (those that could afford it would already likely have insulation anyway), so they set the rebate at what they thought was a reasonable amount per dwelling. Then private enterprise got involved and realised they could cut corners or simply embezzle their way into super profits with little effort. I recall at the time receiving a number of calls from "government representatives" offering free insulation. I declined as I was already insulated, but they continued to push the deal by claiming that their insulation was better and would cost me nothing anyway so I was stupid to knock it back. Sort of reminded me of those scumbags from "Microsoft" who claim a problem has been found with your computer but they will fix it for you.

I can only hope that the worst of the shonky operators have been brought to account, and the government is a bit wiser about trusting people not to steal from each other. A fairly forlorn hope, but I not sure that smaller government and unfettered private enterprise is the solution.

And any time you want to organise a coup to replace the minority Labour government with some right-wing junta, please be my guest. We could all do with some light relief. Somehow I think we will stick with democracy for now and the constitutional right of governments to pass laws. Seems to work most of the time.

 

[rechoboam]

As I have said before - the Home Insulation scheme was a good concept, but was too generous. No doubt some bean-counter had said that merely subsidising the cost to consumers would have mininal effect (those that could afford it would already likely have insulation anyway), so they set the rebate at what they thought was a reasonable amount per dwelling. Then private enterprise got involved and realised they could cut corners or simply embezzle their way into super profits with little effort. I recall at the time receiving a number of calls from "government representatives" offering free insulation. I declined as I was already insulated, but they continued to push the deal by claiming that their insulation was better and would cost me nothing anyway so I was stupid to knock it back. Sort of reminded me of those scumbags from "Microsoft" who claim a problem has been found with your computer but they will fix it for you.

I can only hope that the worst of the shonky operators have been brought to account, and the government is a bit wiser about trusting people not to steal from each other. A fairly forlorn hope, but I not sure that smaller government and unfettered private enterprise is the solution.

And any time you want to organise a coup to replace the minority Labour government with some right-wing junta, please be my guest. We could all do with some light relief. Somehow I think we will stick with democracy for now and the constitutional right of governments to pass laws. Seems to work most of the time.

As per Milton Friedman
When you buy yourself a present you worry about price and quality
When you buy someone else a present you worry about price, less so quality
When someone else buys you a present you worry about quality, not so much about price
When you buy someone else a present with somebody else's money why would you care about quality and why would you worry about price

I just don't see how people believe it makes any sense ever for a government in Canberra to give to 3rd parties money in that fashion to build things for people who aren't paying for them. The fact that self-interested people then exploit the situation isn't an unexpected consequence. It is exactly what will always happens to some extent when perverse incentives are created.

Think of the huge numbers of elderly people who were approached by salespeople and given the hard sell and who would never have known what if anything was being put in.

Exactly the same thing happens in medicine where Medicare pays up and who knows what is being billed to the government.

The principal-agent problem isn't something that suddenly and without warning reared its head in 2008 for the first time. Trusting people all of a sudden to put aside personal incentives and not exploit money being shoved out the door by a panicking government is unforgivably naive.

 

[rechoboam]

Ps we don't need a coup, loke it or not there will be an election next year and the ALP will be thrown out via the democratic process.

 

[Moody]

Ps we don't need a coup, loke it or not there will be an election next year and the ALP will be thrown out via the democratic process.

Too true and I have no problems with whatever the outcome. I just despair at the idiots and self-interested anus's who demand that this "undemocratic" government be thrown out now so that the other side can be promoted beyond their capabilities. Seems that democracy only suits them when their side gets in ...

 

[medhead]

So a complete examination of 2 schools out of 1200.Hmmm.Could those have been selected?Hmmm.

Sorry but what you quoted absolutely does not say they examined 2 schools, only. Read the bit about "The examination also reviewed"

Given that the biggest concerns are raised about schools that closed and public complaints, I suggest that ALSO is the most important bit. Seriously it would be good to read more than just the first sentence.

 

[Isochronous]

"Strawman". Is that supposed to be an insult?? I know - it's so hard to say what you think without being censored on this board, but have no fear - you are on the right side of the argument.

I have no problems with paying my share of tax and hope that others do too. But your statement "Your money is your money. It doesn't belong to the government" seems to be at odds with civilised society, so why don't you go find a place that backs up this stance. Any time you're ready.

No, but your response was a strawman response. My prior comments were in relation to taxation, not democracy. Although democracy does become problematic when it becomes a mechanism for people to vote themselves a higher wage at the expense of others.

When you go to work and labour away, you are working for yourself, not the government. Taxes should be limited to the minimum to find government services that cannot be produced by the market - i.e. defence, law/order, street lighting, subsidies of health and education that effect children and the elderly in particular. But I reject the mentality that the government owns your labour and that we should be grateful that it lets us keep some of our income. My statement, far from being at odds with civilised society, is a basic expression of property rights and personal responsibility. What is at odds with civilised society is the communist notion that we must all be subservient to the collective and that the government owns everything by divine right.

 

[drron]

---

Sorry but what you quoted absolutely does not say they examined 2 schools, only. Read the bit about "The examination also reviewed"

Given that the biggest concerns are raised about schools that closed and public complaints, I suggest that ALSO is the most important bit. Seriously it would be good to read more than just the first sentence.

Now I just knew you would argue thats why I quoted more than the first sentence and read it.The Also was followed not by more school projects being reviewed but the QLD Education Depts handling of the BER in schools scheduled for temporary closure and 2 public complaints-not more individual project.That is they did not look at the actual projects but the department's handling.Complaints were also re schools scheduled for closure not just temporary closure.
So it still says that they examined 2 projects in detail.My point still stands-and as I said in a previous post local builders on the Sunshine Coast are of the opinion many of the jobs could have been done for a lot less.It was not just about schools for temporary closure.

 

[Moody]

No, but your response was a strawman response. My prior comments were in relation to taxation, not democracy. Although democracy does become problematic when it becomes a mechanism for people to vote themselves a higher wage at the expense of others.

When you go to work and labour away, you are working for yourself, not the government. Taxes should be limited to the minimum to find government services that cannot be produced by the market - i.e. defence, law/order, street lighting, subsidies of health and education that effect children and the elderly in particular. But I reject the mentality that the government owns your labour and that we should be grateful that it lets us keep some of our income. My statement, far from being at odds with civilised society, is a basic expression of property rights and personal responsibility. What is at odds with civilised society is the communist notion that we must all be subservient to the collective and that the government owns everything by divine right.

Let me take this slowly .... we live in a democracy. Actually it's many democracies but let's concentrate on the national level for now. Every adult is required to vote for the person they want to represent them, and do it every 3 years or so. The 150 members duly elected are tasked with forming a government and drawing up, negotiating and passing legislation. To ensure adequate State and proportional representation we also have a Senate which reviews this legislation and can reject it or force amendments. All in all we pay them to do this so it is important that the best people get the job. That's the theory ... reality is another thing.

Now if the government decided that all your wages go to the ATO and you will be paid a base allowance (no more, no less) then a couple of things would happen. Firstly the majority of people would count the days off to the next election (or maybe get a gun if they couldn't wait), and secondly a significant number of them would also stop working because there's nothing in it for them. Any government has to balance the capitalist/socialist agendas because extremism on either side is not healthy. Luckily (?) Australia has not had an extreme left or right wing government for some time, which part way explains the great shape that we are in. Long may that continue (though there are dark clouds on the horizon).

But what is also not healthy is your hysterical delusion that we currently have a communist government in power. Please find someone of good standing who agrees with that notion.

 

[Isochronous]

Let me take this slowly .... we live in a democracy. Actually it's many democracies but let's concentrate on the national level for now. Every adult is required to vote for the person they want to represent them, and do it every 3 years or so. The 150 members duly elected are tasked with forming a government and drawing up, negotiating and passing legislation. To ensure adequate State and proportional representation we also have a Senate which reviews this legislation and can reject it or force amendments. All in all we pay them to do this so it is important that the best people get the job. That's the theory ... reality is another thing.

Now if the government decided that all your wages go to the ATO and you will be paid a base allowance (no more, no less) then a couple of things would happen. Firstly the majority of people would count the days off to the next election (or maybe get a gun if they couldn't wait), and secondly a significant number of them would also stop working because there's nothing in it for them. Any government has to balance the capitalist/socialist agendas because extremism on either side is not healthy. Luckily (?) Australia has not had an extreme left or right wing government for some time, which part way explains the great shape that we are in. Long may that continue (though there are dark clouds on the horizon).

But what is also not healthy is your hysterical delusion that we currently have a communist government in power. Please find someone of good standing who agrees with that notion.

Are you literate?

I was rejecting the communist notions you were advancing before that the individual is not the rightful owner of the fruits of their own labour. Another strawman fail for you.

 

[medhead]

As you know state governments run the school education system.

The insulation program was pushed from a hysterical Dept of PM and Cabinet onto an unwilling environment ministry totally unsuited to and incapable of administering the scheme nationwide.

If that's not an example of federal overreach I can't imagine what is. Then again the federal government is responsible for everything from light bulbs to dental fillings now so overreach is just the way things are. My point is that the government has no mandate to micromanage the way our houses are warmed or anything like that. The powers vested in the government are outlined in the constitution and are not unlimited

Its not "stupid" to have respect for the limits of government power and a Constitution that has helped our nation develop over a century.

They may run the education system but a significant amount of the funding comes from the commonwealth government. Frankly the insulation program is irrelevant but as you say the commonwealth government have no power to micro manage the way the states run their business.

And So you have just proved my point. The commonwealth duded the school building program and the states ran it because that is what the constitution requires. By trying to blame the commonwealth government for the value achieved you are ignoring the powers that are clearly outlined in the constitution. Hopefully you can now understand the stupidity of the inherent hypocrisy of your position.


Sent from the Throne

 

[medhead]

---

Now I just knew you would argue thats why I quoted more than the first sentence and read it.The Also was followed not by more school projects being reviewed but the QLD Education Depts handling of the BER in schools scheduled for temporary closure and 2 public complaints-not more individual project.That is they did not look at the actual projects but the department's handling.Complaints were also re schools scheduled for closure not just temporary closure.
So it still says that they examined 2 projects in detail.My point still stands-and as I said in a previous post local builders on the Sunshine Coast are of the opinion many of the jobs could have been done for a lot less.It was not just about schools for temporary closure.

It says they reviewed the "implementation" of BER at those other schools. So I can't agree they only reviewed 2 schools in forming their conclusion

In any case, you're only confirming my point that it is the state governments that were responsible for getting value for money.


Sent from the Throne

 

[rechoboam]

They may run the education system but a significant amount of the funding comes from the commonwealth government. Frankly the insulation program is irrelevant but as you say the commonwealth government have no power to micro manage the way the states run their business.

And So you have just proved my point. The commonwealth duded the school building program and the states ran it because that is what the constitution requires. By trying to blame the commonwealth government for the value achieved you are ignoring the powers that are clearly outlined in the constitution. Hopefully you can now understand the stupidity of the inherent hypocrisy of your position.


Sent from the Throne

The dept of PM and Cabinet drove the whole hare-brained scheme. How the states managed the torrent of cash being thrown at them is another matter.

 

[Moody]

Are you literate?

I was rejecting the communist notions you were advancing before that the individual is not the rightful owner of the fruits of their own labour. Another strawman fail for you.

Yes - are you?

And here is the communist notion that you brought up ..... epic stawman fail but hypocrisy is endemic in your types :-

"What is at odds with civilised society is the communist notion that we must all be subservient to the collective and that the government owns everything by divine right."

They don't own everything by divine right - it is called a constitutional democracy. If you don't like it then I once again invite you to go forth and multiply in a country and system that suits you better. I hear Burma is nice.

And last time I did my taxes the ATO was interested in ALL my earnings. Wages, bonuses, rebates, dividends, interest, share options, rent, etc. etc. etc. This is not to take everything - just make sure I am paying my share. That is NOT communism but don't let me stop you babbling - no laws against that.

 

[drron]

It says they reviewed the "implementation" of BER at those other schools. So I can't agree they only reviewed 2 schools in forming their conclusion

In any case, you're only confirming my point that it is the state governments that were responsible for getting value for money.


Sent from the Throne

Please read my previous posts-every single project under BER had to be signed off by a Commonwealth Government Committee.Your point is denied.The State Governments ran the day to day work but the financial responsibility for every single project was approved by the Commonwealth Government.
The best you can say is the States were responsible for the actual work quality but again value for money was entirely the Commonwealth's responsibility.
Though of course at the time the State Governments were ALP apart from WA.So even if you were right it still demonstrates the financial incompetence of ALP governments.

 

[rechoboam]

Yes - are you?

And here is the communist notion that you brought up ..... epic stawman fail but hypocrisy is endemic in your types :-

"What is at odds with civilised society is the communist notion that we must all be subservient to the collective and that the government owns everything by divine right."

They don't own everything by divine right - it is called a constitutional democracy. If you don't like it then I once again invite you to go forth and multiply in a country and system that suits you better. I hear Burma is nice.

And last time I did my taxes the ATO was interested in ALL my earnings. Wages, bonuses, rebates, dividends, interest, share options, rent, etc. etc. etc. This is not to take everything - just make sure I am paying my share. That is NOT communism but don't let me stop you babbling - no laws against that.

You are right, none of this has anything to do with communism.

Rather it is socialism, encouraging wealth creators to "share the wealth" with a government-dependent underclass client population that can vote the politicians back in
perpetuity. Unfortunately for the government they have played it so hard that there is a perception they may kill the goose laying the golden eggs.

If you are concerned to maintain our constitutional democracy please have another read of that document. It clearly states that civil conscription is unconstitutional. When you are a wage earner and close to 50% of your overtime payments are going to the government, you are a civilian conscript for the welfare state.

You say "they don't own everything by divine right", rather it is a constitutional democracy. You seem to be implying that they own everything because of the Constitution instead. Perhaps you could clarify that? Who is the federal government anyway? It's basically us. We seem to have forgotten that the taxes we pay are supposed to support our own civil society and our own standard of living rather than megalomaniacal projects by a central government.

Come to my school and have a look at the signs they were forced to put up thanking Julia Gillard for their new school hall, which replaced the one we already had anyway. What's the IRR on that structure??

 

[medhead]

This whole thread is full of blindly onesided rubbish that is all about political bias and not at all about the facts. It has no place on AFF and should be deleted. Sad little men who can't deal with the hand they are dealt; who want the GG to dismiss the government again.

Please read my previous posts-every single project under BER had to be signed off by a Commonwealth Government Committee.Your point is denied.The State Governments ran the day to day work but the financial responsibility for every single project was approved by the Commonwealth Government.
The best you can say is the States were responsible for the actual work quality but again value for money was entirely the Commonwealth's responsibility.
Though of course at the time the State Governments were ALP apart from WA.So even if you were right it still demonstrates the financial incompetence of ALP governments.

You claim that, but that is not what you wrote. Simply it's disproved by the fact that independent schools got much better value for money than state government schools. Because the independent schools managed the projects. So allegedly commonwealth government controlled the value for money from the projects but independent schools achieving much better value for money than state schools. Now spot the difference - state government involvement. Proves my point entirely - thank you.


Sent from the Throne

 

[medhead]

You are right, none of this has anything to do with communism.

Rather it is socialism, encouraging wealth creators to "share the wealth" with a government-dependent underclass client population that can vote the politicians back in
perpetuity. Unfortunately for the government they have played it so hard that there is a perception they may kill the goose laying the golden eggs.

If you are concerned to maintain our constitutional democracy please have another read of that document. It clearly states that civil conscription is unconstitutional. When you are a wage earner and close to 50% of your overtime payments are going to the government, you are a civilian conscript for the welfare state.

You say "they don't own everything by divine right", rather it is a constitutional democracy. You seem to be implying that they own everything because of the Constitution instead. Perhaps you could clarify that? Who is the federal government anyway? It's basically us. We seem to have forgotten that the taxes we pay are supposed to support our own civil society and our own standard of living rather than megalomaniacal projects by a central government.

Come to my school and have a look at the signs they were forced to put up thanking Julia Gillard for their new school hall, which replaced the one we already had anyway. What's the IRR on that structure??

**** me! Were you alive when John Howard was prime minister!? You are truly delusional if who think the Liberals don't buy votes with my tax money.


Sent from the Throne

 

[serfty]

[MOD HAT]

Maybe it's time to return this thread to being On-Topic:

Budget winners and losers - Federal Budget 2012 (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Losers:

• 80 per cent cut to inbound duty free allowance reduced to 50 cigarettes or 50 grams of tobacco; $600 million saving over forward estimates
• Passenger movement charge up $8 to $55 from July 1, 2012

[/MOD HAT]

 

[drron]

Dear Medhead-I agree to disagree.
Dear serfty-when do we ever stick to a topic.Though probably this thread should be put in the Playground.