What is it about the left that they seem unable to see the obvious?

The first unpalatable fact is that we are living way beyond our means. This is evidenced by our level of foreign debt.

The second is that we have a rapidly ageing population, and need to build foreign assets to maintain our retired population when there are not enough local workers to support them.

Instead of wasting money on handouts, a farseeing government could seize the opportunity by:

1. Announcing that it would lower the standard of living by doubling the cost of transport. This would be achieved by raising the tax on petrol to european levels, and doubling fares on public transport.

2. The reserve bank interest rate would be set at 5% above the inflation rate.

3. The revenue form these measures would be used to fund infrastructure throughout the country financed from current revenue without the need for any more borrowing.

4. The keynesian bias against saving would be removed by only taxing real interest earned, and only allowing a deduction for real interest costs.

It is no wonder that people do not save. You do far better encouraging them to save rather than forcing them, as the latter will just be looked on as another form of taxation.

Those who complain that these measures would increase the gap between rich and poor need to remember that having our foreign debt called in would be far more devastating than any of these measures, and would put Labor out of power for a generation.

I agree that a company should not directly run its own super scheme,
for obvious reasons.

What we do have now however, are what I think are called industry
based schemes, which are at arms length from employers and are
doing very well, at far less cost then those schemes run by banks
etc. For instance Westscheme is one that comes to mind.

Manufacturing only makes up a small % of the workforce. Even then
we seemingly can't find enough people to work in the meat industry.

So in Queensland in the beef industry, or in WA in the sheep meat
industry, they have little choice but to rely on 457 workers.

Meantimes WA still has a shortage of policemen, nurses, doctors,
dentists, vets, teachers, etc. Migrants are about the only way
these positions can be filled, for Australians clearly don't
want the jobs.

The very idea of reducing the employer compulsory superannuation levy from 9% downwards to 6% is to my way of thinking a load of rot.
If the percentage of the levy is reduced I think that come the magical year that we get out of this economic mess, that there will be a different clamour from economists to leave it at 6% and not increase it.
After all many economists produced new economic theories whilst being funded by corporations during the 70s and 80s which have proven to only benefit corporations.
To my way of thinking, economists should declare any conflict of interest or face ICAC or better still a Federal Government Commission just like anyone else who engages in conflcit of interest because of corporate funding to them.
Reduction in superannuation is only to benefit business sales.
Government should do back to Keynes, tarrifs, home industries and govt bonds to fund our future. It works.

plerdsus, why am I left wing for not wanting you or your unqualified mates to control the retirement savings of workers. My 20 something financial advisor tried to get me to buy more equities in March because no body needs 3 years income in cash reserves, and he gets a bigger bonus if I buy equities through him. What is Alan Kohler saying in December?

I would be very happy to purchase debentures to rebuild Melbourne's public transport and reopen train and tram factories rather than importing rolling stock from France and Italy.

I can't see why you believe that we are better served by having a French owned insurance company like Axa controlling industry super funds than it would be to have a government run scheme. Private employers are not so strict about employing qualified personnel, government departments will not employ people without the qualification.

Why should governments privatise the risk of old age and socialise Macquarie St losses.