Dear Rehctub,

<<Exports, or should I say, mining exports are the reason we enjoy the lifestyle we do, because without them we simply can't survive.

As far as us becoming a nation of makers again, how do you propose we do this without slashing wages, which of cause will lead to a huge decline in our lifestyles.>>

Enjoying the current lifestyle and survival are two different things. No doubt, once the global economy collapses we could not maintain the same material lifestyle as we have today, but we could still survive if we act wisely now. We have the materials, we have the energy, we have land and water, we just should not forget how to use them.

<<manufacturing won't reignite without serious government input WITH NO MONEY, IT will continue to go off shore (the NBN will make this easier)>>

The important thing is that we retain the skills and basic machinery required for manufacturing. Once there will no longer be an "off shore", at least we will be able to provide our basic needs.

And no, the NBN will not be part of it, because this level of high-tech is not something Australia could ever produce and maintain on its own. Keep the analogue copper lines - these we should have sufficient skills and capacity to maintain, so at least we will have an operating phone network.

Yuyutsu, our biggest challenge for manufacturing, is that our wages are unaffordable, yet, at the same time, too low to live on.

Now this has come about because governments have sifted the burden of welfare, from their responsibility, onto the employers.

The only way to fix this is for governments to subsidize wages, which in principle would stimulate the industries, but once again, we have no money.

But that still leaves the affordabillity issue, as the costs of living are only going to head south, which in turn means increased wages, which then further effects of ability to compete.

Now we have to compete because our population is too small to be self sufficient.

As for water, you seem to forget we are a very dry nation, and water is one of our most prescious , so we simp,y have none to spare.

<< So what about when the going is bad >>

Rehctub, the tax is minimal if not entirely non-existent when profits are down... and tax breaks are up when expenses are up!

<< …this is yet another case of big business, outsmarting government who, at the end of the day, have become desperate to fill the void CREATED through their missmanagement of our affairs. >>

Well, it is just another case of big business wielding their power over government and making it clear who really rules this country!

Whatever complications there might be, you must surely agree that a better return from OUR collective mineral wealth should be reaching US the ordinary people of Australia, and that the super-rich mining companies and their super-rich moguls need to be made just a little less super-rich.

<< Now we have to compete because our population is too small to be self sufficient. >>

Holy bolony, did you really say that??!!??

Rehctub, could you please explain your thinking.

Then you say:

<< As for water, you seem to forget we are a very dry nation, and water is one of our most prescious , so we simp,y have none to spare. >>

How does this sit with our population being “too small”?

Water is one of the essential resources that is under great stress in most of our large cities, which are exactly the places that are suffering rapid population growth and hence a rapidly increasing demand for water.

<<Now this has come about because governments have sifted the burden of welfare, from their responsibility, onto the employers.>>

That should be obvious that employers are not welfare-agencies.
Welfare should be universal, implemented as a negative income tax, whether one works or otherwise, then wages are a private matter between so-called 'employers' and so-called 'employees'.

<<The only way to fix this is for governments to subsidize wages, which in principle would stimulate the industries, but once again, we have no money.>>

It may not be feasible to have a full scale industry yet, in mass-production mode, but it is important to keep up the basic skills, machinery and infrastructure, so we know how to and can start producing in earnest the moment we are disconnected from the rest of the world.

<<As for water, you seem to forget we are a very dry nation, and water is one of our most prescious , so we simp,y have none to spare.>>

This is statistical, including the dry center which is not settled and wouldn't be any time soon either. There is shortage of water in the south (although partly fixed by desalination plants) and excess of water in the north. Even in the South there is sufficient average rain if we had sufficient storage to save it in the rainy years for the dry ones. A system of pipes and tunnels diverting water from the north to the south will solve all water problems permanently, but instead of real, physical water, the current government only wants to move more useless bytes.

<<Now we have to compete because our population is too small to be self sufficient.>>

Even tribes of 50-100 people were historically self-sufficient. All it takes is reduction in the material standard of living (compensated by an improved spiritual standard of living). We don't really need to go that far even: with current Australian population we should be able to sustain the level of technology of the 1970-1980's.

Ludwig, I am not in support of an unsustainable Australia (huge population) I was merely explaining that our population is too small for us to become self sufficient, hence,why we rely so heavily on exports, so we can't possibly exhaub what we produce, because if we produce less, our lifestyles will decline.

I don't want that, do you?

Now as for me agreeing that we should enjoy a greater share of our wealth, too right, that's why these huge miners have shares in their companies, so the likes of yourself, and in fact anyone else who wishes for a larger share, can do just that.

It's called investing, but also has it's risks attached, the risks that the likes of yourself seem reluctant to share, as all you want is a share of the profits, not the losses.

Sorry, that's not fair.

Now as for large companies taking so much of our wealth, they create thousands of jobs along the way.

So I suggest that you be careful what you wish for as you may not like the alternative.

BTW, these large players do run the country, however, unlike your beloved labor party, THEY ARE ACCOUNTABLE.

Can you imagine just what a mess we would be in had labor been in charge of mining?

They have already spent the 20 billion we had, and spent another 200 odd B we don't have, AND COUNTING.