Talking Politics

[Giardiasis]

Gia, context!

Like you I would like to live in a society with a very different structure. But that ain't happening any time soon.

In the context of the society we currently live in I would favour government provision of education as opposed to market provision.

The market does not do a good job of allocating on any basis other than the ability to pay. If education is allocated on the basis of ability to pay then you just perpetuate unequal access.

DS

Sell out!

Well obviously I (and history) disagree, but what is your alternative to either system?

 

[TT33]

So no pension increase in September because there has been a decrease in the cost of living.
Hmmm tell that to the Mrs after she comes home from the supermarket & shows me how much some of the items prices have increased.
Also how my energy bills have gone up thanks to Scomos meddling in that area. I will be paying approx. $400 More next year than this year.

But the economy can afford for him to get a $10,000 pay increase. But the cost of living hasn't gone up, so why should he get a pay rise.

 

[tigertim]

So no pension increase in September because there has been a decrease in the cost of living.
Hmmm tell that to the Mrs after she comes home from the supermarket & shows me how much some of the items prices have increased.
Also how my energy bills have gone up thanks to Scomos meddling in that area. I will be paying approx. $400 More next year than this year.

But the economy can afford for him to get a $10,000 pay increase. But the cost of living hasn't gone up, so why should he get a pay rise.

Only $10,000? Old Danny boy got a $46,000 increase on July 1.

 

[TT33]

Only $10,000? Old Danny boy got a $46,000 increase on July 1.

"Danny boys" government doesn't set the pension rate, Scomos does.

 

[tigertim]

"Danny boys" government doesn't set the pension rate, Scomos does.

Yes, the pension is set by the fed gov. Should it go up in these current times? Maybe, maybe not. Not sure that Victorian pensioners need more money, they can’t go out to spend it thanks to the mess the Andrews government got us in (see what I did there, just irrelevantly drag Danny boy into it just give him a whack....)

And Exactly what “meddling” did Morrison do to increase your energy bills?

And you do understand how the CPI works right, it’s not just the items “Mrs TT33 buys from the supermarket”? There’s about 100000 price observations of thousands of goods in the basket. Fuel is down, education, childcare are down, rents are down.

Should Morrison get a $10000 pay rise in these times? No. Should Andrews get a $46000 pay rise in these times? DEFINITELY no!

 

[TT33]

Yes, the pension is set by the fed gov. Should it go up in these current times? Maybe, maybe not. Not sure that Victorian pensioners need more money, they can’t go out to spend it thanks to the mess the Andrews government got us in (see what I did there, just irrelevantly drag Danny boy into it just give him a whack....)

And Exactly what “meddling” did Morrison do to increase your energy bills?

And you do understand how the CPI works right, it’s not just the items “Mrs TT33 buys from the supermarket”? There’s about 100000 price observations of thousands of goods in the basket. Fuel is down, education, childcare are down, rents are down.

Should Morrison get a $10000 pay rise in these times? No. Should Andrews get a $46000 pay rise in these times? DEFINITELY no!

The "meddling" was the removal of pay on time discounts, which resulted in a significant saving. The new system has reducedratesbutin no wagers anywhere near the previous savings.
Modelling last year's rates including discounts & this year's rates inclding the absolute best rates possible shows that I will be paying approx $400 moreformy energy bills.
The energy providers even advise how much more they expect consumers to pay in their offers. I did the market comparisons as well to make sure I got The best deal possible.I didnt use a comparison website because they are selective in their comparisons.

I also agree that BOTH leaders shouldnt be getting pay rises at this time.

 

[Ridley]

The "meddling" was the removal of pay on time discounts, which resulted in a significant saving. The new system has reducedratesbutin no wagers anywhere near the previous savings.

I still get a substantial "pay on time" discount from my energy provider.

 

[Brodders17]

I still get a substantial "pay on time" discount from my energy provider.

me 2. (it is Morrisons fault we dont get more tho.)

 

[tigertim]

The "meddling" was the removal of pay on time discounts, which resulted in a significant saving. The new system has reducedratesbutin no wagers anywhere near the previous savings.
Modelling last year's rates including discounts & this year's rates inclding the absolute best rates possible shows that I will be paying approx $400 moreformy energy bills.
The energy providers even advise how much more they expect consumers to pay in their offers. I did the market comparisons as well to make sure I got The best deal possible.I didnt use a comparison website because they are selective in their comparisons.

I also agree that BOTH leaders shouldnt be getting pay rises at this time.

I’m not going to get into the silliness of POT discounts but ring someone like iSelect and see if they can help you find a better provider.

 

[DavidSSS]

Sell out!

Well obviously I (and history) disagree, but what is your alternative to either system?

Sell out? Hahahaha, no just realistic. Should I call you a sell out whenever you use a government provided service (such as the footpath outside your dwelling, the roads, the health system etc). No, you are just accepting that societal change has not occurred and we live in the society which currently exists. You lobby for more free market policies within this system as it is closer to your ideal. I argue for government allocation of some areas in our current system as it is closer to community control than a free market, and also the lesser of two evils.

Your interpretation of history is clearly different to mine. But, isn't looking at history a bit empirical?? Wash your mouth out!

History shows us that, in the current system, if education is allocated simply on the basis of ability to pay it perpetuates educational advantage for those who earn more. You can see this moreso in the USA where the system is more expensive and there are ways of buying your way into a lot of the private unis.

Education should be free and properly funded.

DS

 

[Giardiasis]

Sell out? Hahahaha, no just realistic. Should I call you a sell out whenever you use a government provided service (such as the footpath outside your dwelling, the roads, the health system etc). No, you are just accepting that societal change has not occurred and we live in the society which currently exists. You lobby for more free market policies within this system as it is closer to your ideal. I argue for government allocation of some areas in our current system as it is closer to community control than a free market, and also the lesser of two evils.

Your interpretation of history is clearly different to mine. But, isn't looking at history a bit empirical?? Wash your mouth out!

History shows us that, in the current system, if education is allocated simply on the basis of ability to pay it perpetuates educational advantage for those who earn more. You can see this moreso in the USA where the system is more expensive and there are ways of buying your way into a lot of the private unis.

Education should be free and properly funded.

DS

I was being facetious, but that's a false equivalence, I pay for all those things through my taxes and inflation I might as well get back as much as I can. If a thief offers to give me back a bit of what they took I'll take it back.

Ha, yes it is empirical, I was appealing to what you believe settles matters. Economic laws can't be deduced from empirical knowledge, but it does provide a decent guide over the long term on the general effect of how societies are structured.

Can you please provide a bit more information than that on your ideal way? Education should be free? Interesting claim. Why would it need funding if it is free?

 

[TT33]

I still get a substantial "pay on time" discount from my energy provider.

When does your contract finish, mine finished last month, end of discount.

 

[TT33]

I’m not going to get into the silliness of POT discounts but ring someone like iSelect and see if they can help you find a better provider.

I tried them, but I was able to do better than what they proposed

 

[Ridley]

When does your contract finish, mine finished last month, end of discount.

Dunno but will have bills due next month so I'll check it out.

 

[Sintiger]

I hope the age/ channel 9 story on liberal party branch stacking and using electoral office staff for liberal party work is not lost.
It is very similar to the recent Somyurek ALP story but is not just about power but also about the extreme fringes of the Liberal Party
Sukkar and Andrews should be in big trouble but I am betting they won’t be

 

[IanG]

Food for thought from Kerry O'Brien:

'Fundamental failure' leading Australia down the Trump path, warns Kerry O'Brien on Q+A

Former 7.30 host Kerry O'Brien returns to the ABC on Q+A and says Australia is going down a path dangerously similar to the US, and the nation's future is also at stake due to the escalating economic battle with China.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Althom]

I still get a substantial "pay on time" discount from my energy provider.

As do we on gas and electricity. Still available.

 

[spook]

If the plan is to encourage the economy to grow, then why not do everything you can to keep it growing? The economy was always going to shrink in the midst of a global pandemic, at least for a while. But the government can do more. It could increase its spending. It could pay people to do government jobs, which would put more money in people’s pockets, which would enter the economy as they bought things and paid for services. It could funnel money to the areas of the economy where it is most likely to do good.

In fact, a return to full employment within two years is possible, according to a report from the Grattan Institute think tank. But the institute predicted additional spending of between $70 billion and $90 billion from the federal government would be needed.

At this point, it is likely that most of us have only the barest sense of how bad this recession is going to get. A remarkable fact is that, as a result of the government payments to date, Australians at times during this crisis have had higher incomes, on average, than we did before this crisis. But as more businesses shut down, more jobs are lost, more debts are called in and JobKeeper and JobSeeker are reduced – all sucking money out of the economy – more of us will personally experience the pain of this recession. The government is being widely urged to spend more, including by the Reserve Bank. Instead, partly as a result of the cuts and exclusions, and the deterioration in Victoria, the economy next year is expected to be smaller than it was in 2019. Up to 400,000 more people may lose their jobs by Christmas.

The government’s debt answer is nonsense. The line did not have to be drawn where it was drawn and, with the economy still deteriorating, the government has made the decision to claw back spending at the cost of jobs and growth – the very goals it had set for itself. The obvious question, to which no reasonable answer has yet been provided, is why?

So if the record economic growth of recent decades has left a significant group of workers without security – paid leave, sick leave, enough money to live decently – then what do we mean when we put the strength of “the economy” at the centre of our society?

Snapback

In the face of the pandemic, Scott Morrison has failed to adjust his thinking, and wants to return to the way things used to be

www.themonthly.com.au

 

[spook]

When they invoke debt, Morrison and his ministers argue that we should not place a burden on our children and grandchildren. It is interesting, then, to note the predicament of young people in the face of this recession. Young people were a large proportion of those who lost their jobs. In July, the Productivity Commission released a new report on what happened to young people after the last global recession. Just as now, they lost their jobs in overwhelming numbers. For years afterwards, too, they were less likely to have jobs. The jobs they eventually got were worse, and so were their wages. When the economy recovered, their careers did not. In other words, it is the young – including those who will enter the workforce in coming years, still children now – who desperately need jobs to be created. Instead, the government is framing its choice to keep spending down as a favour to the very people it is likely to hurt.

ibid.

Read the article. Comprehensive, logical, smackdown of the Liberal Government's uncaring ineptitude.

 

[spook]

If the government were really concerned about the burden it was imposing on the young, it would worry, too, about the massive costs that are going to hit this country over the next century because of climate change and our national failure to prepare for it.

There is no shortage of advice to the government on how it might use the pandemic crisis as a spur to invest in fighting climate change. The Climate Council submitted a detailed plan to create 76,000 jobs over three years across areas such as renewable energy and public transport. A new project backed by one of the billionaire founders of Atlassian, Mike Cannon-Brookes, outlines a million jobs that might be created in the next five years. Instead, the government has on several occasions flagged heavy investment in natural gas, which will never be a major employer, and, while not as bad as coal, plays a major role in warming the planet.

ibid.