Quote:

It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt.

That's not why they do it.

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 4:39pm:

Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it.

Then say why you think not.

For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

The private owners run them worse, only interested in ripping out as much money in as short a time as possible

How do you know this?

SA, Statewide power blackout?

What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 8:36pm:

What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?

Nothing except the shareholders and over-priced bosses wouldn't have been there to pay....

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 7:53pm:

For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

Why not?  Business certainly isn't doing much of a job of it....... time to resume them.

Explain to us why government should not be in those businesses in the first place..... that's the liberal business party line, but explain it to those of us who pay for it..... ..

Why should matters of national security not be in government hands, rather than in the hands of people who can sell it to some antithetical group?

Who controls the power while the power powers you? Who runs the roads while the roads ruin you?  Who trains the trains while the trains train you to pay much more?  Who ferries the ferries while the fairies fairy you?

What if ANY of these major infrastructure items fell into the hands of a controlling group that was allied with a nation that suddenly declared war on us?

Prevention is better than cure.........

Because their management is too heavily influenced by politics. If you look at the workplace culture of state owned enterprises compared to privately owned ones it is always the same thing - unproductive, unmotivated.

A competitive marketplace will deliver the goods cheaper. Ultimately, it is for the same reason why capitalist economies are so much wealthier than the communist ones. Communism gives you an idea of what happens when the government controls all the businesses. So unless there is a sound economic reason - that is, a condition that makes a market failure both inevitable and worse than the alternative of government ownership - democratic governments around the world have been steadily unloading state owned assets.

Which industries do you consider to be a matter of national security?

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 11:00pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. Why not?  Business certainly isn't doing much of a job of it....... time to resume them. Explain to us why government should not be in those businesses in the first place..... that's the liberal business party line, but explain it to those of us who pay for it..... .. Why should matters of national security not be in government hands, rather than in the hands of people who can sell it to some antithetical group? Who controls the power while the power powers you? Who runs the roads while the roads ruin you?  Who trains the trains while the trains train you to pay much more?  Who ferries the ferries while the fairies fairy you? What if ANY of these major infrastructure items fell into the hands of a controlling group that was allied with a nation that suddenly declared war on us? Prevention is better than cure.........

National Security
Foreign investment is important for Australia’s long term economic success, stability and prosperity.

However, risks to Australia’s national interest, particularly national security, have increased as a result of developments including rapid technological change and changes in the international security environment.

The national security test provides the Treasurer with the ability to address new and emerging national security risks from foreign investment. The national security test:

requires mandatory notification of proposed investments in national security land, interests in exploration tenements over national security land, a proposed direct investment in a national security business or starting a new national security business;

allows investments that are not notified to be ‘called‑in’ for review on national security grounds;

allows investors who choose to voluntarily notify to receive certainty from being subject to ‘call‑in’; and

provides a last resort power, which, in exceptional circumstances, permits the Treasurer to impose conditions, vary existing conditions, or, as a last resort, require the divestment of any approved investment where national security risks emerge. This power is subject to a number of safeguards.


https://firb.gov.au/national-security

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 8:28pm:

How do you know this?

Privatisation transfers the model of the entity away from service to profit.

When you do this on an infrastructure level, especially when there are protections for the company when things go wrong and governments willing to bail them out because they simply can't fail, it's even worse.

But we're getting way ahead of ourselves.

The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument.

I know there are far more important examples of infrastructure, but take Broadband as an example.

The private ISPs put money into the most profitable areas and that was it.  Regional let alone Rural Australia was left out.  Even Telstra's billions they wanted to spend pre-NBN, it was only in profitable areas and they wanted exemptions to their minimum service obligations under legislation in return.

The private sector was never going to operate services at a loss, even if they can recoup those costs from the inner city customers, it's just not good business.  If a Government has to legislate the servicing of those unprofitable areas, what's the point of privatising?

Power, Water, Health etc, it's all the same.

There is no doubt there can be bloat when the government-run these entities, but we can learn from overseas how to manage these sorts of issues, like say Singapore.

But instead, we get told from one side of politics that the private sector can do it better but time and time again, in terms of service, that's proven to be wrong.

We know what they mean by "do it better" is actually making money.  Those services, and the people that use them (again, Power, Water, Health etc) become the commodity under these models.

Not only does the business model change from Service to Profit, but that profit comes by commoditising us and when things go wrong, because they're vital services and infrastructure, we have to pay a second time when our taxes are used to fix the problem/bail them out.

Gold Coast water was an example.  The local council had to buy back the company because costs were skyrocketing and service levels, repairs, started falling.  Water!

It should have never been privatised in the first place, but now we're left with a massive tax bill due to broken contacts that will be paid off for many many years to come.

I'm not flat out anti-privatisation, there are some use cases for it, but the notion that the private sector do it better and more efficiently and Government shouldn't run/own these entities, as a blanket statement I do not support.

Frank wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 10:56am:

National Security Foreign investment is important for Australia’s long term economic success, stability and prosperity. So our homegrowns are incompetent at it? However, risks to Australia’s national interest, particularly national security, have increased as a result of developments including rapid technological change and changes in the international security environment. Thus warranting that protections must be set in place.  There is a basic rule - remove the vague possibilities, then the remote probabilities, then the possibilities  - and you are left protecting against only the probable and the likely.  Interruption of energy is a high priority for any hostile group; transport may well be a remote possibility, but remove that and you lower the demand on your forces of protection. The national security test provides the Treasurer with the ability to address new and emerging national security risks from foreign investment. The national security test: requires mandatory notification of proposed investments in national security land, interests in exploration tenements over national security land, a proposed direct investment in a national security business or starting a new national security business; allows investments that are not notified to be ‘called‑in’ for review on national security grounds; allows investors who choose to voluntarily notify to receive certainty from being subject to ‘call‑in’; and provides a last resort power, which, in exceptional circumstances, permits the Treasurer to impose conditions, vary existing conditions, or, as a last resort, require the divestment of any approved investment where national security risks emerge. This power is subject to a number of safeguards. And you have absolute faith in a government structure that has proven it can be bought - Hong Darwin etc?  You actually TRUST government - which is historically and remains the greatest clear and present danger to security and stability and democracy?  Citing high-flown theory is fine - it is the bread on the bagel that counts. https://firb.gov.au/national-security

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 4:39pm:

Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it.

I am accusing you of nothing less than outright fraudulence, removing the topic of privatization from the MMT thread.

The current dysfunctional neoliberal economic system - including its current privatization ideology - is based on the current evil system of debt money issued by private financiers, all exposed on the MMT thread. 

And your removal of the reply function in your absurdly ideological post suggesting privatization is off topic on the MMT board, reveals much about the self-interested  nature of your  neoliberal economic orthodoxy, which you seem to think must be protected from an open and honest examination at all costs...

Get back to the MMT thread, and debate the issues, or be exposed as a fraud.   

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 7:53pm:

For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

Ideological BS.

Have the guts to debate the issues raised on the MMT thread. 

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/new

Your debt money system is a fraud, like you, who refused to  debate the issues re  IMF debt  crippling third world countries. 

Get back to the debate, or be exposed as a blind ideological fraud, at least until you restore the reply function on post #125,  on the MMT thread.

There has been no known successful privatisation in Australia.

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 4:39pm:

Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it.

Typically not but it was the reason behind NSW's Labor's attempted power sell off.

Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect.

So it isn't always the reason but it can be.

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 7:53pm:

For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

Government running essential services makes a huge amount of sense. It is simply the best way to do it, the best method to provide necessary services to the community.

Without the commonwealth bank in government hands the banking sector went rogue, they just do what they like.

In telecommunications Telecom Australia had the responsibility of providing the communication network required in their charter. This means that they would have just built the NBN without a decade of haggling, bad decisions and sub standard performance driving the process with the final outcome being a slow uncompetitive network by world standards.

Quote:

The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument.

How does the clearest possible example of government ruining the economy by controlling all the businesses strengthen the argument for government ownership?


Quote:

Power, Water, Health etc, it's all the same.

No, they are all different. These are good examples of the different economic arguments for or against privatisation.


Quote:

I am accusing you of nothing less than outright fraudulence, removing the topic of privatization from the MMT thread.

That's nice dear.


Quote:

There has been no known successful privatisation in Australia.

How would you know if it was successful or not?


Quote:

Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect.

So the infrastructure was being mismanaged by the government and this was only going to continue, and you think this is an argument for government ownership?


Quote:

Government running essential services makes a huge amount of sense.

Meaningless waffle. Is food an essential service?

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 4:39pm:

Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it.

Now YOUR  thread, entitled 'privatization', has people's replies entitled under  BOTH "Modern Monetary Theory' AND 'privatization' ...

I say again: restore the reply function to post #125  in the MMT thread, or be exposed as a fraud. 

Where this was the post being debated (on the Modern Monetary Theory thread):

"It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda."

..until you -  as blindly self-interested  as the banksters mentioned above -  diverted the topic to avoid an  examination of  the current evil neoliberal economic debt-money system.    

https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:24pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it. Now YOUR  thread, entitled 'privatization', has people's replies entitled under  BOTH "Modern Monetary Theory' AND 'privatization' ... I say again: restore the reply function to post #125  in the MMT thread, or be exposed as a fraud.  Where this was the post being debated (on the Modern Monetary Theory thread): "It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda." ..until you -  as blindly self-interested  as the banksters mentioned above -  diverted the topic to avoid an  examination of  the current evil neoliberal economic debt-money system.     https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA

Wrong thread. This belong in conspiracy theories.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:45pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:24pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it. Now YOUR  thread, entitled 'privatization', has people's replies entitled under  BOTH "Modern Monetary Theory' AND 'privatization' ... I say again: restore the reply function to post #125  in the MMT thread, or be exposed as a fraud.  Where this was the post being debated (on the Modern Monetary Theory thread): "It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda." ..until you -  as blindly self-interested  as the banksters mentioned above -  diverted the topic to avoid an  examination of  the current evil neoliberal economic debt-money system.     https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA Wrong thread. This belong in conspiracy theories.

No, it belongs in an examination of economic reality, including why and  how money is created,  which you are unable to confront because it undermines your delusional "freedom"/"sovereign individual rights"/"survival of the fittest" ideology. 

And in any case, you are exposed as a fraud until you reinstate the reply ("quote") function in post #125,  in the MMT thread.   

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/103/909/238/original/71199adad2a9a3f6.jpg

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:55pm:

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/103/909/238/original/71199adad2a9a3f6.jpg

very good meme

i dont blame the uber rich for doing it.

you have to blame the politicians for being their little bitches and doing their bidding.

the rich have a duty to make money for their shareholders.

the pollies should stop taking the bribes and put the brakes on

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:53pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:45pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:24pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it. Now YOUR  thread, entitled 'privatization', has people's replies entitled under  BOTH "Modern Monetary Theory' AND 'privatization' ... I say again: restore the reply function to post #125  in the MMT thread, or be exposed as a fraud.  Where this was the post being debated (on the Modern Monetary Theory thread): "It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda." ..until you -  as blindly self-interested  as the banksters mentioned above -  diverted the topic to avoid an  examination of  the current evil neoliberal economic debt-money system.     https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA Wrong thread. This belong in conspiracy theories. No, it belongs in an examination of economic reality, including why and  how money is created,  which you are unable to confront because it undermines your delusional "freedom"/"sovereign individual rights"/"survival of the fittest" ideology.  And in any case, you are exposed as a fraud until you reinstate the reply ("quote") function in post #125,  in the MMT thread.

FTW.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 2:02pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:55pm: https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/103/909/238/original/71199adad2a9a3f6.jpg very good meme i dont blame the uber rich for doing it. you have to blame the politicians for being their little bitches and doing their bidding. the rich have a duty to make money for their shareholders. the pollies should stop taking the bribes and put the brakes on

The average person is being shafted by Govts. and banksters.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 2:07pm:

FTW.

Ladies and gentlemen, freediver happily exposes himself as a fraud, by his own admission: "FTW".   

Of course by definition, truth is irrelevant to fraudsters, which is why freediver refuses to restore the 'quote' button to post #125,  in the MMT thread. 

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 8:36pm:

What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?

A transmission tower would have had all of its “feet” in a thick pad of cement. We saw one such tower toppled that day, one of its “feet” up in the air—with like a 20L collar of cement around the base of it. That is not how such a massive tower carrying high voltage lines is anchored to the ground! There were also not enough apprentices to get power back up more quickly.

I drove from Gawler to Marion through a blacked out city, cops on duty at major intersections directing traffic with torches. Bit like the blackout in WWIi Britain (apart from car headlights. Eery.)

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 2:56pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? A transmission tower would have had all of its “feet” in a thick pad of cement. We saw one such tower toppled that day, one of its “feet” up in the air—with like a 20L collar of cement around the base of it. That is not how such a massive tower carrying high voltage lines is anchored to the ground! There were also not enough apprentices to get power back up more quickly. I drove from Gawler to Marion through a blacked out city, cops on duty at major intersections directing traffic with torches. Bit like the blackout in WWIi Britain (apart from car headlights. Eery.)

Who built the tower?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 2:11pm:

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 2:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:55pm: https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/103/909/238/original/71199adad2a9a3f6.jpg very good meme i dont blame the uber rich for doing it. you have to blame the politicians for being their little bitches and doing their bidding. the rich have a duty to make money for their shareholders. the pollies should stop taking the bribes and put the brakes on The average person is being shafted by Govts. and banksters.

its odd they cant see it bobby.

look at the pandemic

who benefited?

amazon
facebook
netflix
pfizer
bunnings
gerry harvey
the media


big governments right or left, it doesnt matter.
they do what big tech and big corp tell them or they are out.

look at america and joe biden.
military spending is up.
we had trump saying that the USA should mind its own business.
the cia and the military industrial complex went nuts.
in comes biden


did you know biden , obama and hilary dropped more bombs then george bush?
they dropped so many , they ran out of bombs.


nancy pelosi, a so called friend of the down trodden, as woke as f**k is worth 320 million dollars.

how did she get that when her salary is 200k a year.
she brought millions worth of tesla stock just before biden announces an EV mandate.

but because she is woke, the lefties idolise her.

she is laughing so hard at those fools

Looking back at President Obama’s legacy, the Council on Foreign Relation’s Micah Zenko added up the defense department’s data on airstrikes and made a startling revelation: in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 4:39pm:

Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it.

No, they do it to enrich the bank balances of their mates and thereby increase the party donations they get in exchange. Not to mention the job guarantees after they leave office..

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 8:36pm:

What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?

they most likely would have had some sort of contingency in place.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 4:33pm:

its odd they cant see it bobby. look at the pandemic who benefited? amazon facebook netflix pfizer bunnings gerry harvey the media big governments right or left, it doesnt matter. they do what big tech and big corp tell them or they are out. look at america and joe biden. military spending is up. we had trump saying that the USA should mind its own business. the cia and the military industrial complex went nuts. in comes biden did you know biden , obama and hilary dropped more bombs then george bush? they dropped so many , they ran out of bombs. nancy pelosi, a so called friend of the down trodden, as woke as f**k is worth 320 million dollars. how did she get that when her salary is 200k a year. she brought millions worth of tesla stock just before biden announces an EV mandate. but because she is woke, the lefties idolise her. she is laughing so hard at those fools Looking back at President Obama’s legacy, the Council on Foreign Relation’s Micah Zenko added up the defense department’s data on airstrikes and made a startling revelation: in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.

Excellent post; and this current miserable state of global affairs is maintained by the current evil bankster -enforced debt-money system,  which the originator of this thread - freediver - deliberately diverted from the MMT thread, to avoid exposure of the evil of the current debt money system.

Freediver stands exposed as a fraud (even by his own admission: "FTW"): he has disabled the 'quote' button in the Modern Monetary Theory thread, in post #125.   

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 4:51pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it. No, they do it to enrich the bank balances of their mates and thereby increase the party donations they get in exchange. Not to mention the job guarantees after they leave office..

Bravissimo!!

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 4:53pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? they most likely would have had some sort of contingency in place.

Ah. So if the government run the electricity grid, there would be a few backup power stations, just in case? Or a second set of power lines?

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 5:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 4:51pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it. No, they do it to enrich the bank balances of their mates and thereby increase the party donations they get in exchange. Not to mention the job guarantees after they leave office.. Bravissimo!!

You are all missing the real culprits:

...borrowed from wombatwoody, post #124 in the MMT thread:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/new


It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda.


Politicians, like all of us,  are slaves to banksters in charge of the current evil debt-money system, which freediver is apparently determined to preserve.

That's why the upcoming Oz election amounts to a choice  of 'tweedle dee-tweedle dum'.

Useless, like all democratic elections, because the debt-money monetary system itself is evil.   

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 4:53pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? they most likely would have had some sort of contingency in place. Ah. So if the government run the electricity grid, there would be a few backup power stations, just in case? Or a second set of power lines?

Stupid questions from an ideological fraud ("FTW").

It's pleasing to see you are being refuted by those bothering to debate your fraudulent ideology; meanwhile the invitation to avoid you forever being exposed as a fraud remains ...by reinstating the 'quote' button in post #125 in the MMT thread. 

You have no idea what John meant do you?

That's OK, neither does John.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 3:00pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 2:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? A transmission tower would have had all of its “feet” in a thick pad of cement. We saw one such tower toppled that day, one of its “feet” up in the air—with like a 20L collar of cement around the base of it. That is not how such a massive tower carrying high voltage lines is anchored to the ground! There were also not enough apprentices to get power back up more quickly. I drove from Gawler to Marion through a blacked out city, cops on duty at major intersections directing traffic with torches. Bit like the blackout in WWIi Britain (apart from car headlights. Eery.) Who built the tower?

Uh, duh pwivate owna.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:22pm:

Quote: The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument. [quote]There has been no known successful privatisation in Australia.

How would you know if it was successful or not?[/quote]


We would all know of some examples of better product, improved service a cost benefit, more effective or improvements in other metrics.

There simply are none and in fact many of there products and services have diminished in quality while increasing in cost.

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 4:53pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? they most likely would have had some sort of contingency in place.

Preventative maintenance may have been done to reduce the amount of failure and staffing levels would have been appropriate to allow a more reasonable restoration time. Profits would not have all gone to shareholders, wages may have been sufficient to attract and keep the right people and then Profit may have gone into consolidated revenue to help in keeping taxes lower and the budget more healthy.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 6:38pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 3:00pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 2:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? A transmission tower would have had all of its “feet” in a thick pad of cement. We saw one such tower toppled that day, one of its “feet” up in the air—with like a 20L collar of cement around the base of it. That is not how such a massive tower carrying high voltage lines is anchored to the ground! There were also not enough apprentices to get power back up more quickly. I drove from Gawler to Marion through a blacked out city, cops on duty at major intersections directing traffic with torches. Bit like the blackout in WWIi Britain (apart from car headlights. Eery.) Who built the tower? Uh, duh pwivate owna.

How do you know?


Dnarever wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 6:39pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:22pm: Quote: The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument. [quote]There has been no known successful privatisation in Australia. How would you know if it was successful or not?

We would all know of some examples of better product, improved service a cost benefit, more effective or improvements in other metrics.

There simply are none and in fact many of there products and services have diminished in quality while increasing in cost.

[/quote]

In other words, you have no idea at all, and do not even know how to find out. You are just parroting union propaganda.

Because no reputable public utility would do such shoddy work. Because statements were made to that effect—all four feet should have been encased in a thick pad of concrete, not something you or I would do to secure a gatepost.

Maybe you should take the time and read up about that state-wide blackout?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:07pm:

Because no reputable public utility would do such shoddy work. Because statements were made to that effect—all four feet should have been encased in a thick pad of concrete, not something you or I would do to secure a gatepost. Maybe you should take the time and read up about that state-wide blackout?

I read that it was a once in 50 year storm. I grew with publicly owned electricity grids and blackouts happened after regular storms.

A storm like that. . .only blew over the el cheapo crap put up by the privatised owner.

Private owners ONLY want profit and LOTS of it and STUFF improving the privatised (sold of cheap!) asset.

Geez, you are naive FD!

You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:11pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:07pm: Because no reputable public utility would do such shoddy work. Because statements were made to that effect—all four feet should have been encased in a thick pad of concrete, not something you or I would do to secure a gatepost. Maybe you should take the time and read up about that state-wide blackout? I read that it was a once in 50 year storm. I grew with publicly owned electricity grids and blackouts happened after regular storms.

We have a once in a 100 year storm twice a year at present.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:15pm:

Private owners ONLY want profit and LOTS of it and STUFF improving the privatised (sold of cheap!) asset. Geez, you are naive FD!

incorrect.


the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies

just look at smart phones and tv's.

every year they get better and better.

anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure.

what do people complain about most

public hospitals, teaching standards, public housing, delays at centrelink.

the private company delivers or the public dont support it.

the public company has a monopoly and the workers bounce out of bed, with the aim of spending as much time as possible gossipping at the water fountain

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:54pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:15pm: Private owners ONLY want profit and LOTS of it and STUFF improving the privatised (sold of cheap!) asset. Geez, you are naive FD! incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. what do people complain about most public hospitals, teaching standards, public housing, delays at centrelink. the private company delivers or the public dont support it. the public company has a monopoly and the workers bounce out of bed, with the aim of spending as much time as possible gossipping at the water fountain

I have worked both public and private and universally found the opposite to be true.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:54pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:15pm: Private owners ONLY want profit and LOTS of it and STUFF improving the privatised (sold of cheap!) asset. Geez, you are naive FD! incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. what do people complain about most public hospitals, teaching standards, public housing, delays at centrelink. the private company delivers or the public dont support it. the public company has a monopoly and the workers bounce out of bed, with the aim of spending as much time as possible gossipping at the water fountain

Quote:

the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better.

Nobody is saying that manufactured products should be privatised or would be done better. This is driven by profit. While there are huge problems in this type of manufacturing it is outside of this topic. None of these industries were ever public companies and there has never been any intention to privatise them.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:54pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:15pm: Private owners ONLY want profit and LOTS of it and STUFF improving the privatised (sold of cheap!) asset. Geez, you are naive FD! incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. what do people complain about most public hospitals, teaching standards, public housing, delays at centrelink. the private company delivers or the public dont support it. the public company has a monopoly and the workers bounce out of bed, with the aim of spending as much time as possible gossipping at the water fountain

Quote:

anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. what do people complain about most public hospitals, teaching standards, public housing, delays at centrelink.

Untrue - Many government industries performed very well.

Public hospitals are mostly great and they along with Medicare keep the private system functioning. The Private medical system is highly subsidised by the government and Medicare as well as the government system taking on their excess load and functions that the private sector hospitals cannot.

Public schools are about the top standard with a select wealthy few able to attend the very top privates.

Privatisation in Telecommunications, banking, insurance, power etc have all been a disaster. The were all sold at a bargain basement price where the people (The owners never got value for money). Service standards dropped and cost escalated across the board. Privatisation has been an embarrassing corrupt failure in almost every case.

Quote:

Nobody is saying that manufactured products should be privatised or would be done better. This is driven by profit. While there are huge problems in this type of manufacturing it is outside of this topic. None of these industries were ever public companies and there has never been any intention to privatise them.

Are you suggesting it is the history of an industry that should determine whether it is privatised?


Quote:

Public hospitals are mostly great and they along with Medicare keep the private system functioning. The Private medical system is highly subsidised by the government and Medicare as well as the government system taking on their excess load and functions that the private sector hospitals cannot. Public schools are about the top standard with a select wealthy few able to attend the very top privates. Privatisation in Telecommunications, banking, insurance, power etc have all been a disaster. The were all sold at a bargain basement price where the people (The owners never got value for money). Service standards dropped and cost escalated across the board. Privatisation has been an embarrassing corrupt failure in almost every case.

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free?

Same with health care.

All of your examples are meaningless gibberish. It is better because you say it is better, but you have obviously put no thought at all into the truth of what you are saying, or even how to identify the truth.

Take electricity for example. It is a commodity. It leaves no wiggle room for you to blurt out that public electricity is of better quality than private. All we have is price and reliability. Both easily measured. For all the endless whinging about transferring electricity production to the private sector, why has no one presented a shred of objective evidence that it is actually worse?

In NSW EOY results a public school beat all the rest...

I get public health and it is excellent without all the payouts.

Electricity may be a commodity - but that commodity in public hands does not need to satisfy shareholders and rapacious robber barons who 'bought' it.  Price has almost trebled under 'privatisation' with a lower standard of service.

Etc, etc, etc.

A public utility does not have to feed shareholders, duplication of 'ceos' and 'board members' and staff, duplication of administration services, and anything else you can imagine.  It's called efficiency - when a staff of 50 people can handle phone calls in one public organisation - it takes 500 to answer the phones in an endless array of 'private' providers.  Add a recorded answering system that takes you nowhere and clearly service suffers.  Ever tried to get some simple information from 'Services NSW' these days?

It takes one 'ceo' to handle a public utility, and some senior staff - it takes as many 'ceos' etc as there are 'private providers.

It's an absolute no-brainer - it is not more efficient or cost effective - and the facts are there to see... so you are left ONLY with the ideological statement that government should not be in what is a national security business on behalf of the people and not of the leeches in private.

Basically it's all lies ......

P.S.  Don't bother waking Telstra The Private... I've sand-bagged around their terminal in my footpath that runs water into my yard and floods it and dug a ditch and put in a pipe at my expense to the gutter - now don't wake the council in its modern quasi-business style - the drains over the road are still clogged and if I'm flooded again as a result, hell will follow.  I also loaded up my ride on mower today and went down and cut the long grass on that T intersection that makes it dangerous because you can't bloody well see.  Thanks, council - I tried the whipper snipper but angina set in - 72 yos shouldn't be doing your pharken work.

You can stick your private enterprise model up your grass.....

Quote:

In NSW EOY results a public school beat all the rest...

Is this the exception that proves the rule? This is yet another measure on which is would be dead simple to make an objective comparison. and you throw us an anecdote.


Quote:

Electricity may be a commodity - but that commodity in public hands does not need to satisfy shareholders and rapacious robber barons who 'bought' it.

Is that your objective for whether it "works" - whether people are allowed to profit from it? Are you suggesting you would not care if it cost more and was less reliable in public hands, so long as the potential owners were worse off financially?

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 4:53pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? they most likely would have had some sort of contingency in place. Ah. So if the government run the electricity grid, there would be a few backup power stations, just in case? Or a second set of power lines?

I doubt they needed either of those in SA. They just needed some back up switches.

But nevertheless, they would do whatever they needed. Unlike the private sector, it's all about the service instead of about maximising the profit

Quote:

I doubt they needed either of those in SA.

Did you not see Monk's anecdote about a pole that got blown over?

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:26pm:

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free?

because they drink the same cool aid you do.

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:50pm:

In NSW EOY results a public school beat all the rest... I get public health and it is excellent without all the payouts. Electricity may be a commodity - but that commodity in public hands does not need to satisfy shareholders and rapacious robber barons who 'bought' it.  Price has almost trebled under 'privatisation' with a lower standard of service. Etc, etc, etc.

About 10 years ago I needed a hernia operation.
The public hospital waiting list was 18 months but
my medical insurance with HBA got me done in only 10 days.
So in that case the Govt. service was no good.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 6:28pm:

You have no idea what John meant do you? That's OK, neither does John.

You obviously have no idea what anyone means

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:18pm:

You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans.

says the mindess parrot chanting 'ecomomic theory's' that has been proven to be false countless times

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:59pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:18pm: You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans. says the mindess parrot chanting 'ecomomic theory's' that has been proven to be false countless times

:D

FD is doing you slowly, Four Planks Gino.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:54pm:

incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better.

Rubbish. They're not improving phones because they want to make them better for you, They're improving phones because they are trying to increase or maintain market share. If they could get away with selling you the same old nokia 5110 they were selling you decades ago, they would do it in a heartbeat.






aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:54pm:

anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure.

more rubbish.

Frank wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:59pm: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:18pm: You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans. says the mindess parrot chanting 'ecomomic theory's' that has been proven to be false countless times :D FD is doing you slowly, Four Planks Gino.

FD isn't even doing himself. Just because you are as clueless as FD  that doesn't make him right.

Everything that has been privatised has seen a reduction in outcome or quality. Everything. There isn't a single industry that has been privatised that has seen better outcomes for the end product.

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:59pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:18pm: You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans. says the mindess parrot chanting 'ecomomic theory's' that has been proven to be false countless times

Wow. You really have no idea what you are on about. What economic theories do you think have been disproven?


Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:56pm:

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:50pm: In NSW EOY results a public school beat all the rest... I get public health and it is excellent without all the payouts. Electricity may be a commodity - but that commodity in public hands does not need to satisfy shareholders and rapacious robber barons who 'bought' it.  Price has almost trebled under 'privatisation' with a lower standard of service. Etc, etc, etc. About 10 years ago I needed a hernia operation. The public hospital waiting list was 18 months but my medical insurance with HBA got me done in only 10 days. So in that case the Govt. service was no good.

10 days vs 18 months.

Money talks, BS walks.


Dnarever wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:06pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 4:39pm: Quote: It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. That's not why they do it. Typically not but it was the reason behind NSW's Labor's attempted power sell off. Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect. So it isn't always the reason but it can be.

Just in case anyone has forgotten this little gem.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:54pm:

Quote: I doubt they needed either of those in SA. Did you not see Monk's anecdote about a pole that got blown over?

Yes, and that requires neither a backup power stations or a second set of wires to prevent it happening. It just needed to be built properly instead f cheaply.  So why did you suggest them?

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:06pm:

What economic theories do you think have been disproven?

which one hasn't?

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:08pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:54pm: Quote: I doubt they needed either of those in SA. Did you not see Monk's anecdote about a pole that got blown over? Yes, and that requires neither a backup power stations or a second set of wires to prevent it happening. It just needed to be built properly instead f cheaply.  So why did you suggest them?

You are the one who suggested they would have had contingencies. I am not sure why it was not bleeding obvious at the time, but I was trying to guess what you meant, seeing as neither of us know.

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:09pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:06pm: What economic theories do you think have been disproven? which one hasn't?

Are you asking me to guess what you meant again, because you have absolutely no idea what you are on about?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:56pm:

So in that case the Govt. service was no good.

except for the 'govt service' that keeps the private hospital running :D

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:10pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:09pm: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:06pm: What economic theories do you think have been disproven? which one hasn't? Are you asking me to guess what you meant again, because you have absolutely no idea what you are on about?

No, I'm asking you to tell me what economic theory you think has proven to be true?

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:09pm:

You are the one who suggested they would have had contingencies..

So you automatically went for the most ridiculous contingencies you could think off? :D :D

Were you afraid that if you had suggested a reasonable contingency you would have shot down your own argument? so you had no choice but to go to ridiculous.

180 degrees wrong - there is no need for people to make profit and thus raise prices when the whole thing was performing like a Swiss watch anyway.

You can do better than that freediver - there are endless places people can buy shares in private industry to earn a profit without ruining a perfectly good public utility for the public ... nobody is stopping them.

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:11pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:56pm: So in that case the Govt. service was no good. except for the 'govt service' that keeps the private hospital running :D

Touche` - if they/their fund want to pay for a private hospital, let them - just not out of the public purse at the same time.  Now lessee - which way do you think they'll all jump then?

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:11pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:56pm: So in that case the Govt. service was no good. except for the 'govt service' that keeps the private hospital running :D

Actually it was at a major large hospital and guess what?

The operating theater was the same one as used by the public patients.
Only the ward I was staying at was different -
my own private room and better food.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:26pm:

Are you suggesting it is the history of an industry that should determine whether it is privatised?

Another stupid question from a self confessed fraud.


Quote:

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free? Same with health care.

More stupid questions in a long line of stupid questions from a self-confessed  ideological fraud, only capable of asking stupid questions rather than  presenting and defending your own mindless ideology which is based on the current evil, interest bearing, debt money fraud (addressed  in the MMT thread, post #149.   


Quote:

All of your examples are meaningless gibberish.

Cor blimey...don't look in the mirror, it will break into a million pieces. 


Quote:

It is better because you say it is better, but you have obviously put no thought at all into the truth of what you are saying, or even how to identify the truth.

ROTFL, coming from you, a (self-confessed) fraudulent ideologue who has no interest in identifying the truth.

Your non-replies  to Dnarever certainly explain why the current blind-leading-the-blind democratic malaise is evident all around the globe.  (eg, France, is it the extreme Left or the extreme Right or somewhere in between, that has command of 'the truth", while the poor keep getting poorer, no matter who is in power?) 


Quote:

Take electricity for example. It is a commodity.

No, it is an essential service which should always be in public hands.

That's why SA liberal premier Sir Thomas Playford nationalized  SA's electricity grid in 1950, because the private monopoly Adelaide Electricity Co. refused to develop newly discovered cheap brown coal (in 1950), in order to preserve higher profits via higher electricity prices based on previously existing more expensive black coal reserves.  Playford dealt with that self-interest/greed  quick smart.   


Quote:

It leaves no wiggle room for you to blurt out that public electricity is of better quality than private.

Oh God, a dummy AND a self-confessed fraud. Of course electricity is electricity, whatever its source (public or private).



Quote:

All we have is price and reliability. Both easily measured.

Yes, but the source of the electricity  - renewables, or fossils, has a massive impact on prices.....which eg  the Adelaide Electricity Co refused to admit, to protect its profits when cheaper brown coal became available in SA, compared with the existing more expensive black coal preferred by the company, to protect its profits, f**k the public....   


Quote:

For all the endless whinging about transferring electricity production to the private sector, why has no one presented a shred of objective evidence that it is actually worse?

Plenty of evidence eg the massive spike in privatized gas production and subsequent electricity prices in Oz several years ago, the mother of all market failures; and the fact the world is committed to exiting fossil fuels, demanding nationalization, as it becomes clear private sector markets will not achieve the transition to renewables quickly enough.

Still not interested in extricating yourself from your current status as a self confessed fraud (by reinstating   the reply button in your post #125, in the Modern Monetary Theory thread?)

Apparently personal integrity doesn't rate in your ideology.  Pathetic.   

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:12pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:10pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:09pm: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:06pm: What economic theories do you think have been disproven? which one hasn't? Are you asking me to guess what you meant again, because you have absolutely no idea what you are on about? No, I'm asking you to tell me what economic theory you think has proven to be true?

You are the one who brought it up John, not me.


John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:59pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:18pm: You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans. says the mindess parrot chanting 'ecomomic theory's' that has been proven to be false countless times

Have I caught you telling lies yet again again John?

Which economic theories am I chanting? And how have they been proven false countless times?

Given that pretty much every developed country is steadily privatising assets, don't you think it is a good idea to tell them about these disproven economic theories, in case they too as basing their decisions on them?

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:44pm:

Have I caught you telling lies yet again again John?

..this question from a self-confessed fraud!


Quote:

Given that pretty much every developed country is steadily privatising assets, don't you think it is a good idea to tell them about these disproven economic theories, in case they too as basing their decisions on them?

You aren't interested in exploring truth, you self -confessed fraud. (I just heard the words, "a hypocrite and a liar", in relation to the current election campaign; your self -admitted fraudulence shows us why those words (in quotes above) represents the standard in most democracies. 

As a matter of fact, every serious economic commentator recognizes we have a serious problem with increasing inequality and public and private indebtedness, all around the world. 

Explain how balanced budgets and increasing privatization will reverse soaring inequality, both within and between nations. 

Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service.

Now - I don't know how you define efficiency - but if I left my car with the mechanic and came back to find that, without my express permission, he had installed an engine that costs three times as much to run, I would successfully sue him.

John Smith wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:03pm:

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:54pm: incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. Rubbish. They're not improving phones because they want to make them better for you, They're improving phones because they are trying to increase or maintain market share. If they could get away with selling you the same old nokia 5110 they were selling you decades ago, they would do it in a heartbeat. aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:54pm: anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. more rubbish.

they increase market share by making them better for you, idiot  ::) ::) ::)

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 7:53pm:

For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

And for far more fundamental & moral reasons certain utility businesses like water & electricity generation/supply should not be in the hands of private enterprise.

It's a furphy/fallacy that only the private sector can run a business anyway.

The fact that many of our politicians come from a private sector background & often go back there after politics should be evident.

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 8:36pm:

What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands?

Maintenance of infrastructure assets for one.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:20am:

Because their management is too heavily influenced by politics. If you look at the workplace culture of state owned enterprises compared to privately owned ones it is always the same thing - unproductive, unmotivated. A competitive marketplace will deliver the goods cheaper. Ultimately, it is for the same reason why capitalist economies are so much wealthier than the communist ones. Communism gives you an idea of what happens when the government controls all the businesses. So unless there is a sound economic reason - that is, a condition that makes a market failure both inevitable and worse than the alternative of government ownership - democratic governments around the world have been steadily unloading state owned assets. Which industries do you consider to be a matter of national security?

 
You complete tosser ;D

You're saying that politics wouldn't be involved when the system is being run by LNP supporting business?

Frank wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 10:56am:

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 11:00pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. Why not?  Business certainly isn't doing much of a job of it....... time to resume them. Explain to us why government should not be in those businesses in the first place..... that's the liberal business party line, but explain it to those of us who pay for it..... .. Why should matters of national security not be in government hands, rather than in the hands of people who can sell it to some antithetical group? Who controls the power while the power powers you? Who runs the roads while the roads ruin you?  Who trains the trains while the trains train you to pay much more?  Who ferries the ferries while the fairies fairy you? What if ANY of these major infrastructure items fell into the hands of a controlling group that was allied with a nation that suddenly declared war on us? Prevention is better than cure......... National Security Foreign investment is important for Australia’s long term economic success, stability and prosperity. However, risks to Australia’s national interest, particularly national security, have increased as a result of developments including rapid technological change and changes in the international security environment. The national security test provides the Treasurer with the ability to address new and emerging national security risks from foreign investment. The national security test: requires mandatory notification of proposed investments in national security land, interests in exploration tenements over national security land, a proposed direct investment in a national security business or starting a new national security business; allows investments that are not notified to be ‘called‑in’ for review on national security grounds; allows investors who choose to voluntarily notify to receive certainty from being subject to ‘call‑in’; and provides a last resort power, which, in exceptional circumstances, permits the Treasurer to impose conditions, vary existing conditions, or, as a last resort, require the divestment of any approved investment where national security risks emerge. This power is subject to a number of safeguards. https://firb.gov.au/national-security

And for national security reasons we do not require foreign investment in essential public utilities like electricity & water supply.

Everything in it's place.... & we don't want in the current global climate countries like China controlling public essential services.

It's madness.

Furthermore we don't need to be following other nations into the massive debt traps that China/CCP have created so they can control the economy.

Much like what happened in the meat industry where our stupid policies allowed Japanese interests to acquire verticle integration in business by buying farms, buying the meat works & controlling/heavily influencing the prices at the saleyards & shipping their own beef.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 1:22pm:

Quote: The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument. How does the clearest possible example of government ruining the economy by controlling all the businesses strengthen the argument for government ownership? [quote]Power, Water, Health etc, it's all the same.

No, they are all different. These are good examples of the different economic arguments for or against privatisation.


Quote:

I am accusing you of nothing less than outright fraudulence, removing the topic of privatization from the MMT thread.

That's nice dear.


Quote:

There has been no known successful privatisation in Australia.

How would you know if it was successful or not?


Quote:

Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect.

So the infrastructure was being mismanaged by the government and this was only going to continue, and you think this is an argument for government ownership?


Quote:

Government running essential services makes a huge amount of sense.

Meaningless waffle. Is food an essential service?[/quote]

There's another lie right there ..... no one is stating anything about "ALL" buisnesses.

I believe the point of this thread is in the main about the supply & control of electricity generation ..... & water can be added to that.

As I & others have stated many a time you are twistier than 2 eels phuqing in a bucket of snot.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 3:00pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 2:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? A transmission tower would have had all of its “feet” in a thick pad of cement. We saw one such tower toppled that day, one of its “feet” up in the air—with like a 20L collar of cement around the base of it. That is not how such a massive tower carrying high voltage lines is anchored to the ground! There were also not enough apprentices to get power back up more quickly. I drove from Gawler to Marion through a blacked out city, cops on duty at major intersections directing traffic with torches. Bit like the blackout in WWIi Britain (apart from car headlights. Eery.) Who built the tower?

Private enterprise - taking shortcuts?

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 5:51pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 4:53pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? they most likely would have had some sort of contingency in place. Ah. So if the government run the electricity grid, there would be a few backup power stations, just in case? Or a second set of power lines?

There were.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:01pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 6:38pm: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 3:00pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 2:56pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? A transmission tower would have had all of its “feet” in a thick pad of cement. We saw one such tower toppled that day, one of its “feet” up in the air—with like a 20L collar of cement around the base of it. That is not how such a massive tower carrying high voltage lines is anchored to the ground! There were also not enough apprentices to get power back up more quickly. I drove from Gawler to Marion through a blacked out city, cops on duty at major intersections directing traffic with torches. Bit like the blackout in WWIi Britain (apart from car headlights. Eery.) Who built the tower? Uh, duh pwivate owna. How do you know? Dnarever wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 6:39pm: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 1:22pm: Quote: The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument. [quote]There has been no known successful privatisation in Australia. How would you know if it was successful or not? We would all know of some examples of better product, improved service a cost benefit, more effective or improvements in other metrics. There simply are none and in fact many of there products and services have diminished in quality while increasing in cost.

In other words, you have no idea at all, and do not even know how to find out. You are just parroting union propaganda.[/quote]

;D And as if others here don't know whose propaganda/agenda/line you are parroting.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:11pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:07pm: Because no reputable public utility would do such shoddy work. Because statements were made to that effect—all four feet should have been encased in a thick pad of concrete, not something you or I would do to secure a gatepost. Maybe you should take the time and read up about that state-wide blackout? I read that it was a once in 50 year storm. I grew with publicly owned electricity grids and blackouts happened after regular storms.

Those sort of descriptions are just excuse making BS.

And what you grew with was better maintained & repaired quicker than it is today under PE.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:18pm:

You are a mindless parrot, chanting empty slogans.

And you have made as many empty statements in favour of PE .... NONE OF WHICH ARE TRUE.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 7:54pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:15pm: Private owners ONLY want profit and LOTS of it and STUFF improving the privatised (sold of cheap!) asset. Geez, you are naive FD! incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. what do people complain about most public hospitals, teaching standards, public housing, delays at centrelink. the private company delivers or the public dont support it. the public company has a monopoly and the workers bounce out of bed, with the aim of spending as much time as possible gossipping at the water fountain

Hardly comparable to the secure provision of essential services like electricity & power.

I worked for a Govt owned Railway for 38 years, they always had the best in locomotives & rollingstock ..... and knew how to run a rail business.

In 2010 the freight side of the Rail company(QR) was sold off/floated on the stock market....

it's just about rooted now -- the container freight side has again been sold off allowing 1 company Pacific National a virtual monopoly on container freight on the whole east coast/states of Australia.

A well run monopoly that QR once had in QLD was deemed not allowable for a Govt body(stupid plagiarized Hilmer Report) ..... has now been allowed to be held by private enterprise.

The ACCC is as useless as tits on a boar pig.

Look at how the NZ, Tasmanian & Victorian Govts had to take back control of their Rail companies & assets because of the failure of private enterprise ... who ran it into the ground & just packed up & left.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:26pm:

Quote: Nobody is saying that manufactured products should be privatised or would be done better. This is driven by profit. While there are huge problems in this type of manufacturing it is outside of this topic. None of these industries were ever public companies and there has never been any intention to privatise them. Are you suggesting it is the history of an industry that should determine whether it is privatised? [quote]Public hospitals are mostly great and they along with Medicare keep the private system functioning. The Private medical system is highly subsidised by the government and Medicare as well as the government system taking on their excess load and functions that the private sector hospitals cannot. Public schools are about the top standard with a select wealthy few able to attend the very top privates. Privatisation in Telecommunications, banking, insurance, power etc have all been a disaster. The were all sold at a bargain basement price where the people (The owners never got value for money). Service standards dropped and cost escalated across the board. Privatisation has been an embarrassing corrupt failure in almost every case.

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free?

Same with health care.

All of your examples are meaningless gibberish. It is better because you say it is better, but you have obviously put no thought at all into the truth of what you are saying, or even how to identify the truth.

Take electricity for example. It is a commodity. It leaves no wiggle room for you to blurt out that public electricity is of better quality than private. All we have is price and reliability. Both easily measured. For all the endless whinging about transferring electricity production to the private sector, why has no one presented a shred of objective evidence that it is actually worse?[/quote]

Because they can afford to ...... & they're elitist snot nosed twerps like you.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:10pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:09pm: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:06pm: What economic theories do you think have been disproven? which one hasn't? Are you asking me to guess what you meant again, because you have absolutely no idea what you are on about?

Go into politics .... you never answer a question.

Always reply with a question.

Complete dishonesty.

ProudKangaroo wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:28pm: How do you know this? Privatisation transfers the model of the entity away from service to profit. When you do this on an infrastructure level, especially when there are protections for the company when things go wrong and governments willing to bail them out because they simply can't fail, it's even worse. But we're getting way ahead of ourselves. The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument. I know there are far more important examples of infrastructure, but take Broadband as an example. The private ISPs put money into the most profitable areas and that was it.  Regional let alone Rural Australia was left out.  Even Telstra's billions they wanted to spend pre-NBN, it was only in profitable areas and they wanted exemptions to their minimum service obligations under legislation in return. The private sector was never going to operate services at a loss, even if they can recoup those costs from the inner city customers, it's just not good business.  If a Government has to legislate the servicing of those unprofitable areas, what's the point of privatising? Power, Water, Health etc, it's all the same. There is no doubt there can be bloat when the government-run these entities, but we can learn from overseas how to manage these sorts of issues, like say Singapore. But instead, we get told from one side of politics that the private sector can do it better but time and time again, in terms of service, that's proven to be wrong. We know what they mean by "do it better" is actually making money.  Those services, and the people that use them (again, Power, Water, Health etc) become the commodity under these models. Not only does the business model change from Service to Profit, but that profit comes by commoditising us and when things go wrong, because they're vital services and infrastructure, we have to pay a second time when our taxes are used to fix the problem/bail them out. Gold Coast water was an example.  The local council had to buy back the company because costs were skyrocketing and service levels, repairs, started falling.  Water! It should have never been privatised in the first place, but now we're left with a massive tax bill due to broken contacts that will be paid off for many many years to come. I'm not flat out anti-privatisation, there are some use cases for it, but the notion that the private sector do it better and more efficiently and Government shouldn't run/own these entities, as a blanket statement I do not support.

This excellent critique of privatization has been transferred to the Modern Monetary Theory thread, post #130.
[The MMT thread explores the reasons why governments adopted privatization as a policy choice,   and examines solutions to counter the problems associated  with privatization].

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1645944963/120#130

Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 7:45am:

Go into politics .... you never answer a question. Always reply with a question. Complete dishonesty.

Indeed, freediver is an ideological fraud by his own admission, see post #24. ....("FTW", anything to win the debate....)

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:06pm:

Quote: Typically not but it was the reason behind NSW's Labor's attempted power sell off. Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect. So it isn't always the reason but it can be. Just in case anyone has forgotten this little gem.

One case of a justified sell off. This is the full list.

Note: this sell off was blocked - it didn't happen.

In fact this when done later by the Liberal state government they sold off Vales point power station for $1 Million. The buyer redefined the expected date to retire the plant and re valued it to $750 Million.

Yes The Liberals did in fact give their business mate a $749 million dollar discount. 2 years later the prime business man involved received an AO from the Liberal government.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:26pm:

Quote: Nobody is saying that manufactured products should be privatised or would be done better. This is driven by profit. While there are huge problems in this type of manufacturing it is outside of this topic. None of these industries were ever public companies and there has never been any intention to privatise them. Are you suggesting it is the history of an industry that should determine whether it is privatised? [quote]Public hospitals are mostly great and they along with Medicare keep the private system functioning. The Private medical system is highly subsidised by the government and Medicare as well as the government system taking on their excess load and functions that the private sector hospitals cannot. Public schools are about the top standard with a select wealthy few able to attend the very top privates. Privatisation in Telecommunications, banking, insurance, power etc have all been a disaster. The were all sold at a bargain basement price where the people (The owners never got value for money). Service standards dropped and cost escalated across the board. Privatisation has been an embarrassing corrupt failure in almost every case.

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free?

Same with health care.

All of your examples are meaningless gibberish. It is better because you say it is better, but you have obviously put no thought at all into the truth of what you are saying, or even how to identify the truth.

Take electricity for example. It is a commodity. It leaves no wiggle room for you to blurt out that public electricity is of better quality than private. All we have is price and reliability. Both easily measured. For all the endless whinging about transferring electricity production to the private sector, why has no one presented a shred of objective evidence that it is actually worse?[/quote]


Quote:

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free?

Well under the private only model those who cannot pay get no education. here we have a system where those who can pay to send a child to an expensive private they can but everyone is entitled to a great education. And then you find that as often as not the public schools end up leading the education standards results and receive the top grades.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:25pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:11pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:56pm: So in that case the Govt. service was no good. except for the 'govt service' that keeps the private hospital running :D Actually it was at a major large hospital and guess what? The operating theater was the same one as used by the public patients. Only the ward I was staying at was different - my own private room and better food.

In my area if you go to the private hospital for an elective surgery they will be fine but if there are problems especially after hours they will organise an ambulance to get you to the public hospital where you can be treated for serious medical problems.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 12:01pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:26pm: Quote: Nobody is saying that manufactured products should be privatised or would be done better. This is driven by profit. While there are huge problems in this type of manufacturing it is outside of this topic. None of these industries were ever public companies and there has never been any intention to privatise them. Are you suggesting it is the history of an industry that should determine whether it is privatised? [quote]Public hospitals are mostly great and they along with Medicare keep the private system functioning. The Private medical system is highly subsidised by the government and Medicare as well as the government system taking on their excess load and functions that the private sector hospitals cannot. Public schools are about the top standard with a select wealthy few able to attend the very top privates. Privatisation in Telecommunications, banking, insurance, power etc have all been a disaster. The were all sold at a bargain basement price where the people (The owners never got value for money). Service standards dropped and cost escalated across the board. Privatisation has been an embarrassing corrupt failure in almost every case. If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free? Same with health care. All of your examples are meaningless gibberish. It is better because you say it is better, but you have obviously put no thought at all into the truth of what you are saying, or even how to identify the truth. Take electricity for example. It is a commodity. It leaves no wiggle room for you to blurt out that public electricity is of better quality than private. All we have is price and reliability. Both easily measured. For all the endless whinging about transferring electricity production to the private sector, why has no one presented a shred of objective evidence that it is actually worse?

Quote:

If public schools are so great, why are so many people willing to pay a small fortune to buy a private education for their children and forgo what the government offers them for free?

Well under the private only model those who cannot pay get no education. here we have a system where those who can pay to send a child to an expensive private they can but everyone is entitled to a great education. And then you find that as often as not the public schools end up leading the education standards results and receive the top grades.[/quote]

... not to mention socialisation with all 'levels' of society as opposed to the Spoilt Brat sector that goes into the family business of politics etc, and have zero idea of anything of substance that affects society.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 11:51am:

..... it was the reason behind NSW's Labor's attempted power sell off. Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect.

Quote:

One case of a justified sell off.

The self-off of an essential public service is never justified, these should always remain in public hands, because the need for private profits means workers wages will be subject to downward pressure, and maintenance costs will be cut/avoided more than they should be. 


Quote:

Note: this sell off was blocked - it didn't happen. In fact this when done later by the Liberal state government

Yes; and the fact the ALP ALSO thought it had to sell off this essential public service - to "raise money" - shows how useless the ALP has become, a stooge for mainstream neoliberal economic policies.

The problem being  the creation of money as debt (originally regarded as sinful - "usury"-  by the world's religions): see the discussion in Modern Monetary Theory (post #131) re the history of money creation, and how we have inherited the current debt-money system.....and why currency-issuing governments are forced to tax private citizens (which governments are increasingly unable to do) or borrow from private financiers/banksters.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:44pm:

Have I caught you telling lies yet again again John? Which economic theories am I chanting? And how have they been proven false countless times?

you have no idea what you say do you? No wonder you struggle so to work out what others are saying. How can you when you don't even know what you are saying



freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 7:53pm:

- the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:44pm:

Given that pretty much every developed country is steadily privatising assets, don't you think it is a good idea to tell them about these disproven economic theories, in case they too as basing their decisions on them?

It won't matter what I tell them. They're only interested in lining their own pockets and as long as they have fools like you to spread their lies for them, they'll continue to do so.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 9:25pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:11pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 8:56pm: So in that case the Govt. service was no good. except for the 'govt service' that keeps the private hospital running :D Actually it was at a major large hospital and guess what? The operating theater was the same one as used by the public patients. Only the ward I was staying at was different - my own private room and better food.

In just about any private hospital if a patient needs emergency surgery, they'll rush you to a public hospital. Private hospitals aren't there to provide care, they are there to make a profit. There is no way they are going to pay a team of surgeons to remain on standby  24/7.

Personally I don't think public hospitals should accept patients from private hospitals ... then you'll see their whole business model collapse and the whole 'private does it better' argument would fall apart in a heartbeat.

aquascoot wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 5:12am:

John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:03pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:54pm: incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. Rubbish. They're not improving phones because they want to make them better for you, They're improving phones because they are trying to increase or maintain market share. If they could get away with selling you the same old nokia 5110 they were selling you decades ago, they would do it in a heartbeat. aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:54pm: anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. more rubbish. they increase market share by making them better for you, idiot  ::) ::) ::)

no, they increase market share by making it better than their competition. They don't give a bugger about ME.

freediver wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 8:26pm:

Quote: Nobody is saying that manufactured products should be privatised or would be done better. This is driven by profit. While there are huge problems in this type of manufacturing it is outside of this topic. None of these industries were ever public companies and there has never been any intention to privatise them. Are you suggesting it is the history of an industry that should determine whether it is privatised?

It seems frustrating to be asked to explain the obvious, things that you obviously do know yourself.

It isn't determined by the history but the history displayed the position. There are industries that historically have been part of the competitive market most this is because it is where they belong. Things that may even benefit from competition that are not essential services or not of national importance.

Things like education, healthcare power, water that need to be supplied with little or less dedication to profits Telecommunications with monopoly issues with scale service and national security belong in public hands.

These things that belong and fit better in public hands produce risk and suffer when privatised.

Industries related to production of goods have always been private industries as they belong in the competitive market. They are not there because of the history but the are there in the history because that is where they belong. There is no case to say there would be any benefit in the nationalisation of these functions.

It would be just as ludicrous to nationalize yo-yo manufacture as it is to privatise education or power.

John Smith wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 5:15pm:

aquascoot wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 5:12am: John Smith wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:03pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:54pm: incorrect. the best things that keep getting improved are made by private companies just look at smart phones and tv's. every year they get better and better. Rubbish. They're not improving phones because they want to make them better for you, They're improving phones because they are trying to increase or maintain market share. If they could get away with selling you the same old nokia 5110 they were selling you decades ago, they would do it in a heartbeat. aquascoot wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 7:54pm: anything done by government is catastrophic and usually a failure. more rubbish. they increase market share by making them better for you, idiot  ::) ::) ::) no, they increase market share by making it better than their competition. They don't give a bugger about ME.

Often they don't make it better they just market it better. They don't give a bugger if it is any better they just want to sell it.

I currently have a mobile phone that has a worst function of making phone calls - It is better at almost everything except what it is meant to do.

I don't see how this should be off topic in such a discussion.

Anyway, back in the 90s when John Howard was delivering his sales pitch for Telstra's privatisation he said it would be of great benefit to the average mum and dad - because they could buy shares and become investors.

But who asked him this: Why buy what you already own?

wombatwoody wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 5:42pm:

I don't see how this should be off topic in such a discussion. Anyway, back in the 90s when John Howard was delivering his sales pitch for Telstra's privatisation he said it would be of great benefit to the average mum and dad - because they could buy shares and become investors. But who asked him this: Why buy what you already own?

Exactly..... more LNP lies to help their Boys Club mates get rich milking the masses.

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 11:28pm:

Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service.

Crap.

Do you have any evidence at all for this?


Quote:

And for far more fundamental & moral reasons certain utility businesses like water & electricity generation/supply should not be in the hands of private enterprise.

Do you know what the reasons are?


Quote:

It's a furphy/fallacy that only the private sector can run a business anyway.

Strawman. Even a communist government can run a business. Just not very well.


Quote:

The fact that many of our politicians come from a private sector background & often go back there after politics should be evident.

It's got nothing at all to do with the skills of the individual.


Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:46am:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? Maintenance of infrastructure assets for one.

But we just had someone pointing out that the NSW government sold off electricity assets because it "couldn't afford" to maintain them.


Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:50am:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:20am: Because their management is too heavily influenced by politics. If you look at the workplace culture of state owned enterprises compared to privately owned ones it is always the same thing - unproductive, unmotivated. A competitive marketplace will deliver the goods cheaper. Ultimately, it is for the same reason why capitalist economies are so much wealthier than the communist ones. Communism gives you an idea of what happens when the government controls all the businesses. So unless there is a sound economic reason - that is, a condition that makes a market failure both inevitable and worse than the alternative of government ownership - democratic governments around the world have been steadily unloading state owned assets. Which industries do you consider to be a matter of national security?   You complete tosser ;D You're saying that politics wouldn't be involved when the system is being run by LNP supporting business?

Yes. People tend to run their businesses to make money.


Quote:

And for national security reasons we do not require foreign investment in essential public utilities like electricity & water supply.

;D

You think the water supply is a national security issue?


Quote:

Because they can afford to ...... & they're elitist snot nosed twerps like you.

Another lie. Most of them struggle to come up with the money.


Quote:

Well under the private only model those who cannot pay get no education.

Youa re missing the point DNA.


Quote:

And then you find that as often as not the public schools end up leading the education standards results and receive the top grades.

So the parrots keep mindlessly chanting. But where is the evidence?


Quote:

It seems frustrating to be asked to explain the obvious, things that you obviously do know yourself. It isn't determined by the history but the history displayed the position. There are industries that historically have been part of the competitive market most this is because it is where they belong. Things that may even benefit from competition that are not essential services or not of national importance.

So how do you know where they belong?


Quote:

It would be just as ludicrous to nationalize yo-yo manufacture as it is to privatise education or power.

And yet you cannot explain why.

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:19pm:

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 11:28pm: Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service. Crap. Do you have any evidence at all for this?

It happens to be true. Don't know what world you're living in.

Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:30pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 6:19pm: Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 11:28pm: Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service. Crap. Do you have any evidence at all for this? It happens to be true. Don't know what world you're living in.

This isn't a religion Gnads. You need evidence. No matter how strongly you believe it yourself.

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:31pm:

Gnads wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 6:30pm: freediver wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 6:19pm: Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 11:28pm: Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service. Crap. Do you have any evidence at all for this? It happens to be true. Don't know what world you're living in. This isn't a religion Gnads. You need evidence. No matter how strongly you believe it yourself.

The same could be said off you. SO far you haven't provided any evidence that private education provides better results. Nothing. You could prove private education provides better results just as easily as they can the other way. It's the same web sites. Instead you just make the same dumb comments repeatedly and demand others prove you wrong.

Quote:

SO far you haven't provided any evidence that private education provides better results.

Sure I have. The fact that so many people are willing to pay so much for it.

Money talks, BS walks.


Quote:

every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service

This is both an absurd statement, and one that is easy to back up with evidence. So far the only evidence we have is Monk driving past a power pole that had blown over, and hearing somewhere it was built privately, and the NSW government not being able to afford to maintain electricity infrastructure.

Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 5:59pm:

wombatwoody wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 5:42pm: I don't see how this should be off topic in such a discussion. Anyway, back in the 90s when John Howard was delivering his sales pitch for Telstra's privatisation he said it would be of great benefit to the average mum and dad - because they could buy shares and become investors. But who asked him this:Why buy what you already own? Exactly..... more LNP lies to help their Boys Club mates get rich milking the masses.

Ahem.

While privatisation is supported by neoliberal ideology that stipulates less government intervention in the economy, Australia's history of privatisation was initiated under a Labor government, which appears to defy Labor Party policy objectives.

However, during the Hawke-Keating years, there were attempts to remove the ideological underpinnings of the debate on privatisation, as the approach taken by the government was "more about a pragmatic choice" to modernise and open the economy to international markets. Prime Minister Hawke said, "The difference between us will be one of ideology. That will distinguish us from the opposition (Liberals)."

Hawke was rebuking the charge that Labor had abandoned its commitments to public ownership and enterprise, while highlighting the need for economic rationalism in order to address pressing economic problems.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_in_Australia

Dnarever wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 11:51am:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:06pm: Quote: Typically not but it was the reason behind NSW's Labor's attempted power sell off. Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect. So it isn't always the reason but it can be. Just in case anyone has forgotten this little gem. One case of a justified sell off.

Amusing how those against privatisation are all for getting solar panels and a battery.

I guess privatisation is only bad sometimes.  :)

Is Labor still committed to public ownership? It is hard to find a clear answer.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-20/fact-check3a-are-labor27s-policies-socialist3f/8948552


Quote:

The Australian Labor Party's national platform has long included an objective of "democratic socialism" along these lines "to the extent necessary", but it is not reflected in the party's current policies. Labor is not proposing nationalisation of Australian industries.

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 7:25pm:

Quote: SO far you haven't provided any evidence that private education provides better results. Sure I have. The fact that so many people are willing to pay so much for it. Money talks, BS walks.

In NSW we only have 2 government non selective high schools in the top 100 schools.

Willoughby Girls High school is highest ranked at 65th that area has large Asian population.

A government selective high school only takes bright kids these schools do well because they don't admit dim wits.The kids sit a test in 6th grade to qualify for a selective high school. The high school i went to is ranked 2nd best in NSW.

10 private schools are ranked in the top 21 high schools.

https://www.matrix.edu.au/high-school-rankings/2021-high-school-rankings/

If your offspring aren't smart enough to get into selective high school then private schools have better results compared to non selective government schools.

Quote:

In NSW we only have 2 government non selective high schools in the top 100 schools.

That seems rather different to the chants coming from the mindless parrots.

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 7:25pm:

Sure I have. The fact that so many people are willing to pay so much for it. Money talks, BS walks.

best you keep walking then.

freediver wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 7:53pm:

For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place.

The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses.

We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it?

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 8:45pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 7:25pm: Quote: SO far you haven't provided any evidence that private education provides better results. Sure I have. The fact that so many people are willing to pay so much for it. Money talks, BS walks. In NSW we only have 2 government non selective high schools in the top 100 schools. Willoughby Girls High school is highest ranked at 65th that area has large Asian population. A government selective high school only takes bright kids these schools do well because they don't admit dim wits.The kids sit a test in 6th grade to qualify for a selective high school. The high school i went to is ranked 2nd best in NSW. 10 private schools are ranked in the top 21 high schools. https://www.matrix.edu.au/high-school-rankings/2021-high-school-rankings/ If your offspring aren't smart enough to get into selective high school then private schools have better results compared to non selective government schools.

Absolutely 100% with you there! IF your kids can't get into a govt owned selective school then you should get them into a private school.

(Unless of course you have a clever son who gets into Sydney Grammar - which is BOTH a selective AND a private school 😎)

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it?

Imagine that extra billion going into health and/or aged care each year instead. Apologies... I ought to know better. Clearly my priorities need to be sorted. 😔

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:16pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 9:11pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it? Imagine that extra billion going into health and/or aged care each year instead. Apologies... I ought to know better. Clearly my priorities need to be sorted. 😔

It's costing us over a billion dollars a year because the luvvies don't want to see any ads.

Free to air TV is already obsolete. SBS and ABC are turning into just another netflix. Except they still show ads. I refuse to watch it, even though it is free. And no, I cannot be bothered upgrading my ad blockers every 20 minutes to keep up with them.

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:27pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 9:16pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 9:11pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it? Imagine that extra billion going into health and/or aged care each year instead. Apologies... I ought to know better. Clearly my priorities need to be sorted. 😔 It's costing us over a billion dollars a year because the luvvies don't want to see any ads.

Just finished double checking that figure.

It's receiving over a billion a year in funding from Scomo.

I tell you what I'd be doing post haste if I was the PM ... I'd slash the ABC's budget by 50%. That half a billion dollars per year would be re directed into aged care. That's where the need is. I've gone to great lengths to explain that aged care isn't just about our baby boomer parents. It affects all of us. Especially those of us who are Gen X and Gen Y. We're picking up the pieces of a broke aged care system which needs to be seriously addressed. We just have to find money for aged care. It's an emergency. Now more than ever. Each and every year more baby boomers are turning up and being told to wait at the end of a ridiculous queue for an aged care package/remedial assistance etc. Some are dying whilst waiting in that queue.

Nope! Cut back anywhere/everywhere possible I say!

1. ABC - discussed above.

2. Jobseeker payments. Not a cent more must be given! If anyone on Jobseeker isn't able to survive on it then go get SOME job! Unemployment is 4% AND tipped to fall to 3.5% by the end of the year. There's no excuse! These unemployment figures haven't been seen for over 15 years!

3. All state and federal govt departments need to be looked at afresh. Cut staff back by 10%! And why not? It's happening right across private enterprises! Why should govt departments be exempt?

4. Every single Australian politician needs to reflect on a very long overdue question : Why aren't THEY leading by example? The wages of workers they're happy to tax aren't keeping up with CPI yet the wages of politicians automatically increase irrespective of what the rest of us are going through. Nope .. if politicians want to talk the talk that's fine but only if they themselves walk the walk. That means their wages need to stop sprinting and start walking instead.

It's easy to TALK about a fair go. Words are cheap. No one is prepared to be fair dinkum about it. Our politicians should be setting examples not seeking exemptions. i

YEAH!!!!  Let the bastards all turn to crime and underworld activities like trafficking their daughters etc!  Let's create a solid underworld complete with inroads into the cops (bought) and politicians (bought) and so forth so as to advance criminality and organised crime as the only way of life available!

If they can't get by in a parasite society - they can just be the BEST parasites!!

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:29pm:

Free to air TV is already obsolete. SBS and ABC are turning into just another netflix. Except they still show ads. I refuse to watch it, even though it is free. And no, I cannot be bothered upgrading my ad blockers every 20 minutes to keep up with them.

Jesus Christ - not the benefits of privatisation again........ get out a bit, freed......

My ad blocker never fails... what's wrong with yours?

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:27pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 9:16pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 9:11pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it? Imagine that extra billion going into health and/or aged care each year instead. Apologies... I ought to know better. Clearly my priorities need to be sorted. 😔 It's costing us over a billion dollars a year because the luvvies don't want to see any ads.

Government has no place in business!  Business has no place in government.................................... NONE!

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it?

You're assuming the ABCs charter is to make money.

It's not, it's to provide a service.

If it's privatised all the biggest "loss" services will go, including new and radio that saves lives during emergencies and provides regional and rural Australia with news and information.

All the international services will go which helps bring the attention to Australia boosting many local markets, not just tourism.

If, like Telstra, the government legislate service obligations to these services and areas there will be demands of handouts for subsidies.

What's the point in privatising it in that case?

And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity?

If whoever buys it cannot control the narrative to further their own agenda, like Skynews, are unable to advertise and have to follow the Principles and Standards the ABC is currently bound to, nobody will buy it anyway...

Unless the ABC is destroyed it's not a profitable service.

And despite the slow shift to the right, that's the entire point of the notion of privatising the ABC, to destroy it because those who pull the strings of the conservative parties demand it, and the sheep are all to eager to follow orders.

Mr Sad,

Quote:

And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity?

Wow - you really have been brainwashed.
I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt.
propaganda outlet.
It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 8:13am:

Mr Sad, Quote: And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? Wow - you really have been brainwashed. I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt. propaganda outlet. It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia.

You want to accuse me of being brainwashed, yet the "propaganda" you speak of is nothing but reporting of both sides.

You're so used to what you get from the likes of SkyNews that the ABC, sticking to their charter, is considered "propaganda" to you.

Just shows how far right you've gone without even realising it friend.

Each time the Libs hold enquires into the ABC, other than the last one that was not finished, they all come to the same conclusion, the ABC has abided by their charter and are not in fact a propaganda outlet.

Go look it up...

Facts over feelings mate.

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:19pm:

Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 11:28pm: Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service. Crap. Do you have any evidence at all for this? Quote: And for far more fundamental & moral reasons certain utility businesses like water & electricity generation/supply should not be in the hands of private enterprise. Do you know what the reasons are? [quote]It's a furphy/fallacy that only the private sector can run a business anyway.

Strawman. Even a communist government can run a business. Just not very well.


Quote:

The fact that many of our politicians come from a private sector background & often go back there after politics should be evident.

It's got nothing at all to do with the skills of the individual.


Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:46am:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:36pm: What would have been done differently if it was in the government's hands? Maintenance of infrastructure assets for one.

But we just had someone pointing out that the NSW government sold off electricity assets because it "couldn't afford" to maintain them.


Gnads wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:50am:

freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:20am: Because their management is too heavily influenced by politics. If you look at the workplace culture of state owned enterprises compared to privately owned ones it is always the same thing - unproductive, unmotivated. A competitive marketplace will deliver the goods cheaper. Ultimately, it is for the same reason why capitalist economies are so much wealthier than the communist ones. Communism gives you an idea of what happens when the government controls all the businesses. So unless there is a sound economic reason - that is, a condition that makes a market failure both inevitable and worse than the alternative of government ownership - democratic governments around the world have been steadily unloading state owned assets. Which industries do you consider to be a matter of national security?   You complete tosser ;D You're saying that politics wouldn't be involved when the system is being run by LNP supporting business?

Yes. People tend to run their businesses to make money.


Quote:

And for national security reasons we do not require foreign investment in essential public utilities like electricity & water supply.

;D

You think the water supply is a national security issue?


Quote:

Because they can afford to ...... & they're elitist snot nosed twerps like you.

Another lie. Most of them struggle to come up with the money.


Quote:

Well under the private only model those who cannot pay get no education.

Youa re missing the point DNA.


Quote:

And then you find that as often as not the public schools end up leading the education standards results and receive the top grades.

So the parrots keep mindlessly chanting. But where is the evidence?


Quote:

It seems frustrating to be asked to explain the obvious, things that you obviously do know yourself. It isn't determined by the history but the history displayed the position. There are industries that historically have been part of the competitive market most this is because it is where they belong. Things that may even benefit from competition that are not essential services or not of national importance.

So how do you know where they belong?


Quote:

It would be just as ludicrous to nationalize yo-yo manufacture as it is to privatise education or power.

And yet you cannot explain why. [/quote]

That was the excuse given by the govt of the day. It hasn't stopped any govt getting involved in spending taxpayer dollars on other things they couldn't afford.

What is paid in taxes & for electricity there was no excuse for failure to maintain or be able to afford.

I bet the govt. responsible was an LNP govt.

We had 2 Premiers & their govts removed in QLD for selling off or planning to sell state assets.

Bligh Labor govt & Newman LNP govt.

As for the control of our water assets being a national security concern .... why wouldn't it be?

Why did the Brits send bombers into Europe to blow up dams during WW2?

Privatisation of essential public assets has not resulted in 1 cent saved or any other benefit for taxpaying consumers.

It's a fact. 

freediver wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 6:31pm:

Gnads wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 6:30pm: freediver wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 6:19pm: Grappler Truth Teller wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 11:28pm: Saying 'privatisation is good' over and over will not alter the fact that in every 'privatised' 'venture' the cost to the end user has gone up for a lower standard of service. Crap. Do you have any evidence at all for this? It happens to be true. Don't know what world you're living in. This isn't a religion Gnads. You need evidence. No matter how strongly you believe it yourself.

You haven't supplied any. ::)

ProudKangaroo wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 9:08am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 8:13am: Mr Sad, Quote: And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? Wow - you really have been brainwashed. I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt. propaganda outlet. It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia. You want to accuse me of being brainwashed, yet the "propaganda" you speak of is nothing but reporting of both sides. You're so used to what you get from the likes of SkyNews that the ABC, sticking to their charter, is considered "propaganda" to you. Just shows how far right you've gone without even realising it friend. Each time the Libs hold enquires into the ABC, other than the last one that was not finished, they all come to the same conclusion, the ABC has abided by their charter and are not in fact a propaganda outlet. Go look it up... Facts over feelings mate.

No you're wrong -
The ABC pushed propaganda about how being a homosexual was OK -
always pushing gay rights -
that Covid vaccines were OK -
never had one story about vaccine injuries,
whenever a black person did a home invasion, a car jacking or a horrifying assault -
they would never mention their race-
it was always - " a youth" or some other euphemism.
They always follow the status quo of our wonderful democracy
without evidence that it's a one party state with 2 branches:
Labor and Liberal.

It's pure Govt. propaganda.
You have been sucked in.
Our media is highly controlled.

I spoke to a radio presenter once -
they have to go on a 4 day course before
they are allowed to speak on the radio -
to learn the Govt. line on everything -
good examples are as per the above.
They are not free to say whatever they want.

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 8:32pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 11:51am: freediver wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 9:06pm: Quote: Typically not but it was the reason behind NSW's Labor's attempted power sell off. Simply the NSW government could not afford the necessary upgrades and maintenance due to a long period of neglect. So it isn't always the reason but it can be. Just in case anyone has forgotten this little gem. One case of a justified sell off. Amusing how those against privatisation are all for getting solar panels and a battery. I guess privatisation is only bad sometimes.  :)

How does that relate to privatisation or privatisation of public assets?

People pay for the solar to reduce the costs of the electricity generated by private enterprise providers.

Private enterprise hasn't reduced the costs ... it's increased them .... always has.

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12^th, 2022 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it?

I have PayTv .... it's full of commercial advertising. I pay a premium.... why should there be ads .... why hasn't my subscription decreased & saved me anything because of the ads?

The ABC can be very good for a taking a break from that continual bombardment.

ProudKangaroo wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 9:08am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 8:13am: Mr Sad, Quote: And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? Wow - you really have been brainwashed. I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt. propaganda outlet. It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia. You want to accuse me of being brainwashed, yet the "propaganda" you speak of is nothing but reporting of both sides. You're so used to what you get from the likes of SkyNews that the ABC, sticking to their charter, is considered "propaganda" to you. Just shows how far right you've gone without even realising it friend. Each time the Libs hold enquires into the ABC, other than the last one that was not finished, they all come to the same conclusion, the ABC has abided by their charter and are not in fact a propaganda outlet. Go look it up... Facts over feelings mate.

No you're wrong -
The ABC pushed propaganda about how being a homosexual was OK -
always pushing gay rights -
that Covid vaccines were OK -
never had one story about vaccine injuries,
whenever a black person did a home invasion, a car jacking or a horrifying assault -
they would never mention their race-
it was always - " a youth" or some other euphemism.
They always follow the status quo of our wonderful democracy
without evidence that it's a one party state with 2 branches:
Labor and Liberal.

It's pure Govt. propaganda.
You have been sucked in.
Our media is highly controlled.

I spoke to a radio presenter once -
they have to go on a 4 day course before
they are allowed to speak on the radio -
to learn the Govt. line on everything -
good examples are as per the above.
They are not free to say whatever they want.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 8:13am:

Mr Sad, Quote: And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? Wow - you really have been brainwashed. I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt. propaganda outlet. It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia.

How would it be a propaganda outlet for the current LNP govt when they are forever complaining about it being left leaning.

They like a few here want it privatised.

Do you ever have a clue?

Gnads wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:08am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 8:13am: Mr Sad, Quote: And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? Wow - you really have been brainwashed. I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt. propaganda outlet. It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia. How would it be a propaganda outlet for the current LNP govt when they are forever complaining about it being left leaning. They like a few here want it privatised. Do you ever have a clue?

Read my post above.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:06am:

ProudKangaroo wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 9:08am: Bobby. wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 8:13am: Mr Sad, Quote: And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? Wow - you really have been brainwashed. I see the ABC as nothing more than a Govt. propaganda outlet. It reminds me of the Tass news agency in Russia. You want to accuse me of being brainwashed, yet the "propaganda" you speak of is nothing but reporting of both sides. You're so used to what you get from the likes of SkyNews that the ABC, sticking to their charter, is considered "propaganda" to you. Just shows how far right you've gone without even realising it friend. Each time the Libs hold enquires into the ABC, other than the last one that was not finished, they all come to the same conclusion, the ABC has abided by their charter and are not in fact a propaganda outlet. Go look it up... Facts over feelings mate. No you're wrong - The ABC pushed propaganda about how being a homosexual was OK - always pushing gay rights - that Covid vaccines were OK - never had one story about vaccine injuries, whenever a black person did a home invasion, a car jacking or a horrifying assault - they would never mention their race- it was always - " a youth" or some other euphemism. They always follow the status quo of our wonderful democracy without evidence that it's a one party state with 2 branches: Labor and Liberal. It's pure Govt. propaganda. You have been sucked in. Our media is highly controlled. I spoke to a radio presenter once - they have to go on a 4 day course before they are allowed to speak on the radio - to learn the Govt. line on everything - good examples are as per the above. They are not free to say whatever they want.

You're an idiot .... how is that govt. propaganda?

The govt of the day is a rightwing conservative LNP govt. ::)

ProudKangaroo wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 12:21am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Apr 12th, 2022 at 9:11pm: freediver wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 7:53pm: For far more fundamental reasons - the government should not be running these businesses in the first place. The governments job is running the country it should not be involved with businesses. We should privatise the ABC/SBS those who like it can buy shares in it. It will save taxpayers over a billion dollars a year. Why should those who don't watch it pay taxes for a small minority who don't want commercials to pay for it? You're assuming the ABCs charter is to make money. It's not, it's to provide a service. If it's privatised all the biggest "loss" services will go, including new and radio that saves lives during emergencies and provides regional and rural Australia with news and information. All the international services will go which helps bring the attention to Australia boosting many local markets, not just tourism. If, like Telstra, the government legislate service obligations to these services and areas there will be demands of handouts for subsidies. What's the point in privatising it in that case? And would a privatised ABC still be bound by their charter, you know the one that required honesty in reporting which time and time again, investigation after investigation has shown to be fair, balanced and of the highest integrity? If whoever buys it cannot control the narrative to further their own agenda, like Skynews, are unable to advertise and have to follow the Principles and Standards the ABC is currently bound to, nobody will buy it anyway... Unless the ABC is destroyed it's not a profitable service. And despite the slow shift to the right, that's the entire point of the notion of privatising the ABC, to destroy it because those who pull the strings of the conservative parties demand it, and the sheep are all to eager to follow orders.

Once again you're just full of utter shyte.

Let's take a closer look at the budget the ABC enjoys compliments of Scomo ie us!

We're all tightening our belt Post Covid yeah? No pay rises and everybody who is working is working a lot of unpaid overtime.

Meantime ABC gets an automatic handout of OVER a billion dollars each year!

Let's look at how responsible the ABC has been. For that we'll need to start with its Managing Director.

Exhibit A

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/abc-boss-david-anderson-pockets-salary-of-1mplus/newsstory/2e6666ed272167f7358efe659e84f0a9

ABC managing director David Anderson is now paid a salary of over $1 million.

2:23PM OCTOBER 23, 2021

Senior executives at the ABC ­enjoyed bumper salary increases in the past financial year, with the remuneration package of the managing director tipping over $1m and the news director pocketing a 36 per cent rise.

Gnads wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:11am:

You're an idiot .... how is that govt. propaganda? The govt of the day is a rightwing conservative LNP govt. ::)

Don't call me an idiot - you idiot.
It was the Libbos who organised a vote on poofter marriage:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Marriage_Law_Postal_Survey

Prior to the survey, the Liberal–National Coalition government had pledged to facilitate a private member's bill to legalise same-sex marriage in the Parliament in the event of a "Yes" outcome. This allowed parliamentary debate and a vote eventually leading to the legalisation of same-sex marriage.[4] Both the Coalition and the opposition Labor Party allowed their MPs a conscience vote on the relevant legislation. Had the survey returned a majority "No" result, the government said it would not allow a parliamentary debate or vote on legalising same-sex marriage.

Oi Sad Sack!

Let's take a closer look at the budget the ABC enjoys compliments of Scomo ie us!

We're all tightening our belt Post Covid yeah? No pay rises and everybody who is working is working a lot of unpaid overtime.

Meantime the ABC gets an automatic handout of OVER a billion dollars each year!

Let's look at how responsible the ABC has been. For that we'll need to start with its Managing Director.

Exhibit A

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/abc-boss-david-anderson-pockets-...

ABC managing director David Anderson is now paid a salary of over $1 million.

2:23PM OCTOBER 23, 2021

Senior executives at the ABC ­enjoyed bumper salary increases in the past financial year, with the remuneration package of the managing director tipping over $1m and the news director pocketing a 36 per cent rise.

Now let's put this in perspective: Australia's Prime Minister gets paid $549 K. The ABC requires an urgent restructure and needs to be trimmed down by 50% ASAP! The resultant savings must go straight into the bankrupt yes bankrupt Aged Care Sector!

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:15am:

Gnads wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 10:11am: You're an idiot .... how is that govt. propaganda? The govt of the day is a rightwing conservative LNP govt. ::) Don't call me an idiot - you idiot. It was the Libbos who organised a vote on poofter marriage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Marriage_Law_Postal_Survey Prior to the survey, the Liberal–National Coalition government had pledged to facilitate a private member's bill to legalise same-sex marriage in the Parliament in the event of a "Yes" outcome. This allowed parliamentary debate and a vote eventually leading to the legalisation of same-sex marriage.[4] Both the Coalition and the opposition Labor Party allowed their MPs a conscience vote on the relevant legislation. Had the survey returned a majority "No" result, the government said it would not allow a parliamentary debate or vote on legalising same-sex marriage.

They were pressurised into making a decision on a parliamentary vote.

That still does not make the ABC a proganda outlet for a conservative rightwing LNP govt.

Still an idiot.

Gnads wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 10:15am: Gnads wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 10:11am: You're an idiot .... how is that govt. propaganda? The govt of the day is a rightwing conservative LNP govt. ::) Don't call me an idiot - you idiot. It was the Libbos who organised a vote on poofter marriage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Marriage_Law_Postal_Survey Prior to the survey, the Liberal–National Coalition government had pledged to facilitate a private member's bill to legalise same-sex marriage in the Parliament in the event of a "Yes" outcome. This allowed parliamentary debate and a vote eventually leading to the legalisation of same-sex marriage.[4] Both the Coalition and the opposition Labor Party allowed their MPs a conscience vote on the relevant legislation. Had the survey returned a majority "No" result, the government said it would not allow a parliamentary debate or vote on legalising same-sex marriage. They were pressurised into making a decision on a parliamentary vote. That still does not make the ABC a proganda outlet for a conservative rightwing LNP govt. Still an idiot.

The Liberal party stood up for queers to
sodomise each other's stinking backsides
and the ABC pushed the propaganda that it was all OK.
That propaganda was so powerful that idiots voted for it.

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:21am:

Oi Sad Sack! Let's take a closer look at the budget the ABC enjoys compliments of Scomo ie us! We're all tightening our belt Post Covid yeah? No pay rises and everybody who is working is working a lot of unpaid overtime. Meantime the ABC gets an automatic handout of OVER a billion dollars each year! Let's look at how responsible the ABC has been. For that we'll need to start with its Managing Director. Exhibit A https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/abc-boss-david-anderson-pockets-... ABC managing director David Anderson is now paid a salary of over $1 million. 2:23PM OCTOBER 23, 2021 Senior executives at the ABC ­enjoyed bumper salary increases in the past financial year, with the remuneration package of the managing director tipping over $1m and the news director pocketing a 36 per cent rise. Now let's put this in perspective: Australia's Prime Minister gets paid $549 K. The ABC requires an urgent restructure and needs to be trimmed down by 50% ASAP! The resultant savings must go straight into the bankrupt yes bankrupt Aged Care Sector!

So what? the obscene salaries of of CEO's & executives in private enterprise make the ABC managing directors salary look like a pittance.

You wanna get some perspective on that.

The Commissioner for Taxation Chris Jordan is on over $2million a year until 2024.

Gnads wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:53am:

So what? the obscene salaries of of CEO's & executives in private enterprise make the ABC managing directors salary look like a pittance. You wanna get some perspective on that. The Commissioner for Taxation Chris Jordan is on over $2million a year until 2024.

Our PM gets paid more than the president of the United States.
Senior Public servants get paid much more.
Guess what - it's all done with borrowed money.
That's communism for you -
if you're high up in the party you live like a King.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 11:11am:

Gnads wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 10:53am: So what? the obscene salaries of of CEO's & executives in private enterprise make the ABC managing directors salary look like a pittance. You wanna get some perspective on that. The Commissioner for Taxation Chris Jordan is on over $2million a year until 2024. Our PM gets paid more than the president of the United States. Senior Public servants get paid much more. Guess what - it's all done with borrowed money. That's communism for you - if you're high up in the party you live like a King.

So the LNP are Communists now? A bigger idiot.

Our PM gets paid about the same as the US President.

PM - AU$549,000
Pres - AU $539,000

Gnads wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 10:53am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 10:21am: Oi Sad Sack! Let's take a closer look at the budget the ABC enjoys compliments of Scomo ie us! We're all tightening our belt Post Covid yeah? No pay rises and everybody who is working is working a lot of unpaid overtime. Meantime the ABC gets an automatic handout of OVER a billion dollars each year! Let's look at how responsible the ABC has been. For that we'll need to start with its Managing Director. Exhibit A https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/abc-boss-david-anderson-pockets-... ABC managing director David Anderson is now paid a salary of over $1 million. 2:23PM OCTOBER 23, 2021 Senior executives at the ABC ­enjoyed bumper salary increases in the past financial year, with the remuneration package of the managing director tipping over $1m and the news director pocketing a 36 per cent rise. Now let's put this in perspective: Australia's Prime Minister gets paid $549 K. The ABC requires an urgent restructure and needs to be trimmed down by 50% ASAP! The resultant savings must go straight into the bankrupt yes bankrupt Aged Care Sector! The Commissioner for Taxation Chris Jordan is on over $2million a year until 2024.

Boom even more money for Aged Care!

There's way too much money being HANDED OUT compliments of the TAX PAYER.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1642722399/27

^^^ Here's another $55 million I found a few minutes ago.

I reckon we'll find even more money which should be going into Aged Care before dinner time.

Gnads wrote on Apr 13^th, 2022 at 11:19am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 11:11am: Gnads wrote on Apr 13th, 2022 at 10:53am: So what? the obscene salaries of of CEO's & executives in private enterprise make the ABC managing directors salary look like a pittance. You wanna get some perspective on that. The Commissioner for Taxation Chris Jordan is on over $2million a year until 2024. Our PM gets paid more than the president of the United States. Senior Public servants get paid much more. Guess what - it's all done with borrowed money. That's communism for you - if you're high up in the party you live like a King. So the LNP are Communists now? A bigger idiot. Our PM gets paid about the same as the US President. PM - AU$549,000 Pres - AU $539,000

Hi idiot,
They are all communists pretending to be capitalists.

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/104/014/951/original/ee86e1d53485eeb8.jpg