Clearly we have different concepts of what constitutes "creative accounting."

I note with interest the co-incidental news broadcasts of further pushes for executive salaries to be capped to $AU600,000 by the Greens & the Unions and a report on the heads of the big retailers .

Yes people can purchase on line but that remains an undeveloped segment of the market. And of course, shipping needs to be done in bulk to become comparatively competetive and affordable.

And there remains the issues of asian sellers in particular, but not only them, having one price for say australian people and another price for say indonesian people.

I predict that as some form of "knowledge nation" comes more and more into public awareness, that these sorts of issues will become more and more openly discussed to the benefit of the public.

$AU2 shops? If you understand economies of scale, and the chinese merchants in my observation are masters of it, the lower the price, the greater the relative % of profit. $2 here supports an orphan for a day, including education. And what do you say, a piece of chinese plastic in the $2 shop which has probably been bought for $2 for a kilo is good value? I think *DivDoc* has got it right. "Yappynomics"

So, in my view, corporate australia ad those that represent them have become a stultifying, pillar of salt effector upon the consciousness of the nation and they require identifying in the public eye and regulation for the benefit of the majority, not the minority.

I personally find it objectionable these claims that the high costs of product are a direct result of the wages of hard working class australians. Greedy landowners and greedy executives are much more the problem.

As for the beguiled shopper of the glitter tech - I find australian's quickly become pragmatic and frugal when they know they can buy the same thing for a 1/5 of the price.

*I personally find it objectionable these claims that the high costs of product are a direct result of the wages of hard working class australians. Greedy landowners and greedy executives are much more the problem.*

In that case DreamOn, you are busy dreaming on and don't know how
to use a calculator. Take a look at a group like Wesfarmers, which
employs something like 300'000 people these days. A million
$ represents 4$ per employee, so hardly matters. But having a top
management team, which makes the correct decisions, is vital,
as they presently try to turn around the failed Coles business.

To do that they searched the world for the best talent and experience.
Executives with a track record of achievement in the field, are
not going to shift country, shift their families, sell their houses
and move to Australia, for peanuts. Wether you pay them 1 million
or two million, hardly matters in the budget but it certainly matters
in the results and who you can hire.

Hey its a free market in Australia, anyone can set up shop. If you
and the Greens have all the answers, so go and set up those
businesses and show us how its done. Put up or shut up.

LOL - Who's dreaming YabbY? The so called talent that you allude to due to alleged reckless greed has just "collectively" crashed and brought down the international financial system.

And yet, people like you and ShadowM continue to advocate for over the top executive salaries and bonuses, confusing talent and expertise for "reckless greed."

I don't think that the subject is even worthy of debate any longer.

One of the fundamentals that I'd hope you'd appreciate is that when you have artificially inflated prices, say for a piece of junk plastic at $AU2 per piece, what you are in effect doing is devaluing the currency. The same applies in the instance of parking machines no longer accepting 5c pieces.

As for all the answers, no, I am but a novice relative to some, but neither am I entirely clueless.

I do not advocate on this matter for personal benefit, which is why I suggest that talented pensioners, with kids helping to do the paperwork and grandkids to do the unloading, would be better served ordering online by container as a collective direct.

The chinese for example would get more orders, a greater share of our shopping money and would be more happy about paying for more resources.

Beautiful - everyone is happy except for the big retailers.

;-)

Clearly you are still dreaming on, Dream On. If you followed the
present crisis in America, you would know that it was the people
who elected a dummy like George Bush and Dick Cheney. It was Cheney/
Bush, who appointed a regulator at the SEC, who thought regulation
was not required. Now if you have no enforcement of rules, criminals
will thrive. That is what happened on Wall St and has little to do
with grocery chain executives.

*which is why I suggest that talented pensioners, with kids helping to do the paperwork and grandkids to do the unloading,*

So you are going to use kids and grandkids for cheap labour! Careful
of those child labour laws, its illegal in Australia, we are not
in Indonesia here. But of course you could hire staff and pay them
their full entitlements, according to the award.

*and would be more happy about paying for more resources.*

Crap. The Chinese always want things even cheaper. To them
bargaining is a game, a war if you like. Whatever the price, they
will always complain. Its how they do business

It is somewhat dissappointing to see my original post degenerate into a battle between Users on subjects unrelated to the original topic.
Perhaps I Posted to the wrong Forum in seeking support for Pensioners of all types.
The way costs have increased in the past two years and stil increasing means Pensioners are going backwards and the incredible increase that we will inherit in September has already been taken care of by way of increases to Utilities, in Victoria any way.
Whilst some of us can manage better than others, I am mostly concerned about Pensioners who do not have the privilege of owning their own home and having to pay exhorbitant private rentals.
I am rather concerned that there are people out there who do not seem to understand the plight of these Pensioners. Not all people have been able to lead the fortunate life and put money away into Super and other Schemes for use in later life. Some people suffer misfortune, not of their own choosing, during their lifetime, which places them in the situation they now find themselves in, not being able to manage on the current level of welfare.
To say the Welfare Bill is too large for our Government to handle, well it is nigh on time that the Government sorted out some priorities. What is more important, looking after our Aged, Disabled and Sick or wasting money hand over fist on unneccessary trips overseas, financial assistance to other Countries, environmental issues, immigration and many other things whose priorities fall within the lower levels. Charity begins at home looking after our own people and community interests, first. If there is someting left over after our Countries interests have been taken care of, then by all means provide assistance to outsiders. It is quite apparrent that Governments have great difficuly in differentiating between, WE Need and It Would Be Nice to Have, when sorting out Priorities.
Please show some compassion towards members of our own community who are not so well off as you may be.

Some people suffer misfortune, not of their own choosing, during their lifetime, which places them in the situation they now find themselves in, not being able to manage on the current level of welfare.
--
agreed. In my case I suffered a 1 in 9 misfortune in the Vietnam Lottery, but came back and by age 42 received The President's Award in Carrier/UTC over 18,000 other employees, but all my diligence simply made me a prime target for the 1 in 2 chance of losing the lot in the lousy family court. So I am really looking forward to my pension in 6 months

--
To say the Welfare Bill is too large for our Government to handle, well it is nigh on time that the Government sorted out some priorities.
--

agreed also and that plea by govt is crap by its own figures where is says it must save 1 billion pa by increase in age to 67 but in that same year actually had 65 billion "left over" to put into a Future Fund [contrary to Constitution by the way] to pay people who only partially funded their super as "fat cats".