The Forum > General Discussion > Ok, So where to from here?
Ok, So where to from here?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
- 7
-
- All
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 10 October 2010 12:11:44 PM
| |
A few broad ideas:
Rethink what it is we want from governments. What aspects of life can be better supplied by the private sector or from individuals/communities. More participation from citizens. Put the environment first. Without that premise in decision making we work only towards our own downfall. There are too many snouts in the trough - across all sectors- middle class welfare, funding for outdated social engineering programs, sport and corporate welfare, and too much government which exists to prop up itself in a cylce of self-fulfilling programs. The benefits of public ownership in a number of critical areas - such as energy, water and other utilities better served without the pressure of legal obligations to shareholders or where the citizens are subservient to the greed of others. Make the people the common shareholder in some enterprises. Get rid of the empire builders and look critically at what are the priorities of citizens including the obvious infrastructure, health, education, law enforcement, emergency services, judicial and other services. Get rid of double dipping taxation and red tape costs across Commonwealth, State and Local Governments. Employers should offer fair wages and conditions including safe work environments but we should also stop expecting the private sector to act on behalf of governments (collecting taxes) and provide funding for what are essentially private matters. Ideally any one family should be able to live on one income should they choose. The biggest problems come from wage disparity which impacts on demand for welfare and for government subsidies. Reduce the gaps and the cost of living issues will follow. Work for the Dole programs are a good start after an agreed period both to gain experience, training and to improve self worth. Understand some people, due to disability or caring duties, may not be able to work in the same way as others, but that we all benefit from well targeted safety nets that allow others to live with dignity. We all gain from the benefits of this insurance should we experience a similar change in circumstances. Posted by pelican, Sunday, 10 October 2010 12:45:53 PM
| |
579, don't ever try investment for a living, you would soon go
broke. For a a start, you confuse politics and business. If I were to start some new venture for instance, I would first of all use contract manufacturers, wherever they are located. There are already huge manufacturing operations, with all the machinery, its pointless to reinvent the wheel and the associated costs. Much of manufacturing today is highly automated and specialised, so it really depends on who has suitable equipment. They can be located in the US, Europe, wherever. As to Australia, its true that Australian workers have some of the world's cushiest conditions and employing people here comes with extra costs, on top of wages, such as super, payroll tax, holiday leave loading, long service leave, overtime times 2, termination pay, and all the rest. Every bell and whistle needs to be paid for by the consumer in the end. Given that consumers want cheaper and cheaper products, why would anyone risk their hard earned savings to pay for all these bells and whistles and maybe lose the lot, unless its in something like a lucrative mine? That is exactly what is happening Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 10 October 2010 12:52:25 PM
| |
579, have a look at British Leyland, & the rest of the UK car industry, & you will see an industry, & ultimately a country, destroyed by a stupid labour movement. This is a perfect example of what unions, & Labor governments are doing to Oz.
In the early 80s, I was responsible for the localisation of production for a company previously sourcing high quality brass products from the USA, & Europe. After a couple of years development, we had our own improved products, many patented, & were exporting 35% of our production. In the late 90s, I was asked to come back, to try to save the company, which was probably technically bankrupt. It's market share had been lost to importers, sourcing product from Asia, underselling them by large margins. Some of this product probably infringed their patents, but defending those patents was beyond the companies resources. In this case it had nothing to do with high Oz labour costs. I found I could source product to our design, & specification, finished, & in packaging to our design, for less than I could buy the raw brass to make the product here in Oz. That Asia can buy brass, produced from our copper & zinc, much cheaper than we can, is I believe, down to government laws & regulations, that make any refining or heavy industry simply not viable here. Just how long we can continue, taking in each other's washing is hard to know. It is not too hard to see however, that it can't extend beyond our mining boom Posted by Hasbeen, Sunday, 10 October 2010 1:05:45 PM
| |
Interestingly, it seems that things are hotting up between the U.S. and China. The U.S. may be shooting itself in the foot by reacting to China's undervalued currency. It seems cheap Chinese goods are helping the American economy in one way and holding it back in another.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1522591720100515 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2010/Oct/07/weak_economy_has_nations_waging_currency_wars.html Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 10 October 2010 1:24:56 PM
| |
Every thing you say can be fixed with one act of parliament. But the world has an agreement about free trade. Trade may be free, but that doesen't make it fair. So even up the score...
America may come to a solution that somewhat leans that way, which will no doubt cause an avalanch around the world. America loses manufactures the same way we do, so don't blame the labour govt; Poverty wages and conditions is the draw card, even china won't be able to sustain that for ever. N Z tried to downgrade wages and all they achieved was an immigration shift. Posted by 579, Sunday, 10 October 2010 2:21:52 PM
|
Now we have a government that favours a "larger" Australia.
Now we have a government that wants to reduce water to farmers.
Now we are have farmers saying less water means less food.
Do you see a contradiction there ?
Why is it that no news media reporter or politician has questioned
the contradiction of those two policies ?
Should we now have a policy of a smaller Australia ?
Should we start removing immigrants from Australia; a last in first
out policy ?
Or do we starve them out ?
The UN is warning of world food shortages, if we import food then we
use our relative wealth to take food out of the mouths of poorer people.
If we do not have the food then we cannot have the people.