Scout “however I don’t believe that the market place will solve ALL our problems in the naïve way that you do.”

The problems invariably start when governments and their bureaucrats pretend they know how to regulate markets. What might have been a “ripple” of a market correction, after government have “bolstered up the levies” and “managed the flow” ends up like New Orleans when the banks finally break.

Billie, your “choices” are only limited by your capacity to research and ask questions for yourself.

The only problem with choices of political parties is, the labor party knows it does not have a hope if it peddles its old manifesto and the liberal/national party policies are what is needed both for the country and to get elected.

Oh labor will play out the old platitudes and humbug of uniformity but the success of the Hawke / Keating years was based on the de-regulation and removal of protective barriers and monopolies of government owned homes for union members and sheltered workshops for the productively feeble.

The most important “choice” we all make is in which sequence to place the numbers on an electoral ballot paper. When governments tell us what that choice will be, then we are all in a mess.

I would observe, those who feel they need government to make their choices for them also lack the competence to fill in a voting card correctly.

Very entertaining. Two brief comments. Scout, my washing machine is 22 years old, my 1973 tv still looks good, my computers all get upgraded. The one I'm using, which is reasonably quick, cost about $430 new last year partly because I cannabalised drives from older PCs. (And I won't be buying Windows Vista because I see no value in the additional functions.) I can't of course say whether currently-available washing machines and tvs will be so long-lived, but they are far cheaper.

Julie had a relatively modest income in her last job, and I believe well below six figures in her current one. And no product-placement fees. (I've avoided brand names to avoid such an accusation!)

I should have demanded REAL choices as opposed to MORE choices.

Pericles, I am aware that you and Col believe that the market-place will solve ALL our problems by supply and demand. It just hasn’t worked thus far.

Pericles, you stated that I am "the victim of a vicious monopolist, who thinks nothing of providing you with dangerously unsafe and hopelessly fragile software, and insisting that you buy a new machine every time he decides that you need even more features that you will never use.”

Yeah, tell me something I don’t know. Besides I was using the computer as an example only.

Supply and demand would work if it wasn’t all controlled by top heavy monopolies in league with government. As proof of this statement, I present the current ‘nuclear debate’ being promoted by the Howard government. It is being run BY big business FOR big business. Renewable energy/sustainable living is not even getting a look in.

My point is we are being fooled into believing we have freedom of choice and that this choice is diverse. A range of toothpaste flavours is a furphy.

Faustino, my car is 20 years old, fridge 30 and washing machine is 15 years old. Problem is when I do have to replace these items it will be with products with a short life span, which required unrenewable resources and pollution to produce and cannot be wholly recycled. So even if they are 'cheap' as you say they are also 'nasty' for the effects on our ecology. (BTW I don't know who Julie is and what she earns has to do with the debate).

While people continue to buy short lived, massed produced products, we will not have the choice many of us want and this planet (if it is to sustain us) desperately needs.

My thanks to Billie and Ludwig who have understood what I am inelegantly trying to say and that is we don’t have REAL choices and that what is presented as such is simply a lie to keep us complacent.

Apologies to Faustino

I realize, now, you meant Julie Novak the author. Your post makes far more sense to me now.

Regards

Dianne