Should the Goverment of the day do CBA on ALL their Policies from now on?

If so why should they, if not why not?

I went not every government because if the government did a CBA on EVERYTHING, we wouldn't have any Centrelink payments that the Libs complain about and when they receive it, they don't say a thing.

If you look at who is demanding a Cost Benefit Analysis, you will see only two types, the totally disingenuous, and the totally clueless.
I thought Miss could not get sillier, but then another post shows she can, with her current belief that policy costings and Cost Benefit Analyses are the same thing.
The sad thing is that it is only the wackiest extremists that oppose the NBN, and they like to create the impression that their position is representative of a wider community feeling of discontent, when it is not.
They are like Global Warming denialists that say that huge numbers of scientists do not agree there is Anthropogenic Climate Change, but never quote the statistical fact that 82% of all scientists surveyed do accept it, and 97% of climatologists accept it, but they will never offer those figures, instead preferring to name individual dissenters and try to imply they spearhead significant numbers of like minded scientists, when they do not.

The whole point of a CBA is to give an indication of return on investment for company money, which does not take into account any of the human benefits that we demand our governments to provide us with, so a CBA on it's own is almost completely irrelevant when it comes to government infrastructure spending, and any who fail to recognise that simple fact are totally kidding themselves, I just wish they would stop trying to kid me, because I am not buying that line of BS.

EVEN a CBA can articulate non-financial benefits. In fact, if any of you retards had ever seen or read one you will know that a CBA doesnt necessarily have to only list FINANCIAL benefits. If Gillard-the-incompetent had any faith in the NBN shoudl would order a CBA to actually articulate its benefits - financial and otherwise. But the benefits are not there as she claims and never have been.

Did John Howard have a CBA prepared before pouring 15 billion dollars of taxpayers money in to the super accounts of the wealthiest people in Australia?
Didn't think so.
In fact many of the rich who felt they were pressured to invest at a very bad time, because of Howard's policy, are still dirty on that too, because they had to pour their own money in as well to qualify for the government handouts, only to see the GFC make it all go up in smoke, or more literally, disappear into the smoke and mirrors of investment banking.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 12:47pm:


Sorry LW. I have to disagree. The NBN would actually make it cheaper for us on the Central Coast.

I can't see why we don't do a CBA. It's 93% of us. Not 85%.

Did Howard do a CBA on the war?

aussiefree2ride wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 12:42pm:


Why do you think that poll is entirely useless and biased aussie

James Bluntus wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 1:04pm:


cheaper for one section of the country is not the basis of supporting it. the 85% I referred to were the 85% of people in cities currently with ADLS2+ for whom the NBN offers nothing in its standard form.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 1:20pm:


LW, you can be idiotic sometimes. We have ADSL2+ and in the cities it will be cheaper while it is making speed faster. You have to be blind if you can't see the benefits of it.

skippy. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 1:49pm:


Time will tell if the sheep will follow their master....

James Bluntus wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 1:40pm:


speaking of the blind... CAN YOU READ??? even the NBN claims it wil NOT be cheaper than existing ADSL2+ and its standard speed will be no faster (12Mbs). If you want to debate then at least try and understand the flow of the argument!

John S wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 3:50pm:


ur an idiot. of COURSE the pension increase had a CBA. how do u think they know what it would cost and woul dit be affordable? Honestly, do you breathe unaided?

Bloody hell!! I just wasted time reading another Thread about this, and neither was worth the effort.

What is the big objection to having a CBA on the NBN?  What is the problem?

This is just any infrstructure project, it is the largest single ticket item ever undertaken in Australian history.

If we can get a CBA done on that, then we dont stand a chance getting one done ever again.

We do them at work for any new projects over a certain figure, and any refurbishment of existing infrastructure over a certain figure.

And for the record, a CBA isnt just about dollars.

If the CBA comes back with ticks for the NBN, I will support it.  If a government refuses to do one I will never back it because it looks like a government has something to hide, and that scares me more than anything.

This isnt putting up a couple of school halls, its a $43billion investment, how could you consider doing that without a CBA.

If the taxpayer’s money is being spent by the government, then of course a CBA should be done, only the idiot left would think otherwise. They are sh it scared the cost far outweighs the benefit, and it will be made clear to all.

Repeat for those who can't read or comprehend:

If the taxpayer’s money is being spent by the government, then of course a CBA should be done, only the idiot left would think otherwise. They are sh it scared the cost far outweighs the benefit, and it will be made clear to all.

John S wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 3:50pm:



As you openly admit, the poll is totally useless in this instance, just a pre schooler`s WOFTAM.

viewpoint wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 7:18am:




Not only are the ALP scared of the expense being massive and the benefits being minimal the ALP are also scared that all of the costs would be discovered.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 4:01pm:

After the massive rorts that have already been uncovered from the ALP policies (eg BER, pink batts) then EVERY policy from the ALP MUST now undergo a CBA.
Only stupid fools would allow the ALP to spend without a CBA, and that would include just running acrosss to the corner milk bar to get the milk, bread & newspaper.
No one trusts the ALP anymore, this is why the CBA is a mandatory requirement.

FRED. wrote on Dec 27^th, 2010 at 2:06pm:


What.... and you don't??

FRED. wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 12:35pm:



Nah, I'm sure you would feel more at home doing the hard work for a change.

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 8:25am:


do u honestly think the only consideration in any infrastructure project is accurate costing by treasury?? are you seriously that naive/dumb/stupid? EVERY large infrastructure project has to justify itself. there isnt enough mponey for everything to be approved so only the ones with the greatest need/benefit/effectiveness get approved.

and then there's the NBN...

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 2:56pm:

Quote:




Not on national infrastucture
CBA's were unheard in the government realm till the opposition attempted to "demand" one on the NBN


Quote:



(note the resort to personal abuse when ALL else fails)

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 6:28pm:



Worryingly, I think he is serious.

I genuinely think the guy would want to go ahead with a national project with no cost-benefit analysis and no payback return....

Still, pretty easy when somebody else is footing the bill I suppose.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 8:37pm:



longy name one policy or infrastructure that has had a cost benefit analysis that any federal or state goverment has ever done. They might have done a cost benefit but not a cost benefit analysis.

I bet my bottom dollar that O'Farrell won't do any cost benefit analysis on any infrastructure he starts if he come Premier of NSW.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 9:38pm:




And, then you will get the Julia Gillard outburst demanding that her policy pass through both houses, unchallenged, unquestioned and done immediately.
Yes, the Kremlin will be recruiting Julia very very soon.

John S wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 9:53pm:



LOL

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 8:37pm:




I never thought YOU were, either
A P&L is a record on past business, not a projection or prediction for the future

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 10:04pm:


profit and loss PROJECTION was what I meant to say. and still u maintain that govt infrastruture is built without any analysis as to what it wil cost and what its benefits are.  Truly, you are remarkable. Stupid and stubborn yet REMARKABLY so.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 10:10pm:



Look at this exmple

Quote:
 


Now if three guys brought a car and the third guy did what the second guy did but didn't worry about the resale value.

John S wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 10:27pm:


look at the english you uneducated MORON. CBA is actually Cost/Benefit Analysis. Cost and Benefit are two columns of a spreadsheet that are LINKED by the analysis. without the analysis cost and benefit are pointless.

Oh why do I bother, you and Buzz can join Green-goober is the dumber-than-snot bucket. Honestly, if someone asked you if 1+1=2 You'd have to consult the ALPs policy platform to decide. It makes me wonder if any of you have ever had a job anywhere higher than BOTTOM of the pile where no decisions and no thinking are involved.

John S wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 10:27pm:



Amazing!  This helps to explain how one can bring one`s self to vote for the the ALP, or the "party for daydreams & decor".

longy I ask in another thread that was started by sprintcyclist that is about 7 pages and I ask a heaps of times

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1293112081/0

What goverment has ever done a CBA?

Now you are so bloody smart answer that or are you an idiot and you can't answer.

None of you liberals can answer a simple question.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 28^th, 2010 at 10:58pm:


so andrei tell me what wrong with my example of CBA

LW you can’t teach a pig to play the piano…….   

Be careful, they're shouting again and the colouring book is out.

viewpoint wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 7:22am:



dont forget the c& p.. ha.ha..

what are those little wires called that they put across the roads from time to time.. sometimes only on one way traffic lanes..

costing.

benefit.

or analysis.

or maybe just for the hell of it and keeping someone in a job.

I find this topic somewhat irrelevant.. it wouldnt matter how much was spent on CBA.. it wouldnt make any difference to the outcome to the tax payer..they would still get stuck with paying for white-elephants. stop start tunnels to nowhere.CBDs that never get off the plans.

yet all manage to cost fortunes.. that would be better spent on hospitals.or even police stations..instead they close them to pay for white-elephants.. andddddddddddddddddddddd.

(Admittedly, finding a major infrastructure project started by the Howard Government may be quite a chore in itself



paying off a  bloody HUGE DEBT... was a CHORE they were pretty proud of.

and by golly I bet the rudd/gillard mob were glad they did..not that they have ever said so!!...

but just think what crap we would be in if the Libs hadnt bothered and just added to the bloody HUGE DEBT instead.

and built monuments to nowhere.or green loans. plaques on schools.
or waste watch oopp.. grocery watch .fuel watch NBN watch. hospital watch. ETS watch,... so much they could have spent our hard earned money on.. silly billies.

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 8:23am:



Buzz it is no good arguing  with LW he won't admitted that he is wrong.

You beat him on Yahoo with a argument and he still didn't admitt he was wrong.

Look back at the last two and half pages he is the only one saying there should be a CBA done on the NBN.

and the shrill little 'girl' continues to trumpet her complete lack of knowledge on how major decisions are made in govt.

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 9:01am:





You can come on with all the gay jibes you LIKE, as an attempt at diversion
It ALL washes over me




And it DOESN'T answer the question ...i


Quote:

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 9:18am:


Where is the gay jibe?

Just a tad precious aren't we?

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 9:34am:



He can't tell me what's wrong with my example of CBA.

He must be a "GREAT ACCOUNTANT" then

buzz ever notice the pommy bigot has never said what university he went to.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 11:37am:







"Our Business, Marketing, Accounting and Finance programmes are based at Queen's Campus"


http://www.dur.ac.uk/dbs/degrees/undergrad/business/

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 29^th, 2010 at 9:01am:




Don't worry he's also wondering why we weren't using metric in the 1960s!