longweekend58 wrote on Dec 30
th, 2013 at 7:27am:
sir prince duke alevine wrote on Dec 29
th, 2013 at 10:06pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 29
th, 2013 at 10:04pm:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 29
th, 2013 at 10:19am:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Dec 28
th, 2013 at 8:47am:
Time for a very large proportion of our populace to get some tough love & re-prioritize their spending.
We'll remember this one when the LIBs have to cut budget spending sue to Labor wastes
No problem as long as health & education are not touched.
If he really wants to impress me he can start with all the crap Howard brought in for those I sighted in the above post.
Super earning over 200K being tax free
5 billion to private health companies
4 billion to miners
Are all worth losing if a surplus is what you base success on.
You know that won't happen. They'll cry poor and claim they'll need to cut jobs. And then spend millions on ad campaigns and we will be right back where we started. Apparently markets should be left to their own devices as long as government subsidies them.
This is why governments should NEVER subsidise private industry, all that happens is artificial influx and their subsidies get sucked up into extra profit that companies become accustomed to. But hey, Howard was terrific.
nice principle as long as EVERYONE does it. but they don't. and sometimes by not subsidising all you do is end up with no industry at all. not exactly a success.
So then you're basically admitting that free markets are a con, because industry can't survive without government injection? A bit of welfare for the company?
Whatever happened to economics 101 where businesses provide a service or product, offer a value proposition, and then generate revenue from that which leads to a profit for them? If they don't have the right value proposition then perhaps their management shouldn't be paid the millions that it is and instead should go back to the drawing board. Quite simply, enough of this nonsense that somehow they can only survive through government injection. All government injection does is raise their funds in the first year, and then what? Then it's there for life.
If they want bail outs, that's a different story. Put a proper cost-benefit proposal to the government on a bail out strategy, and if it is sound, guarantees money back to the tax payer, and if it provides benefit to the tax payer, then do it. Otherwise, fold.
It seems that this whole idea of cohesive society, role of government and the tax dollar has gone complete hay wire. Just like businesses, people shouldn't be expecting to have their tax dollar give them some sort of subsidy back for some private service. The value proposition with the tax dollar has always been for government to provide necessary social and economic infrastructure, public services, welfare for those falling into the safety net or on the pension, and defence. That is it. Enough of this wanting more and more and more, and wanting to pay less and less and less. What joke. And then some dare to even make the argument of "individualism"...
I hear the Pilbara port is going to close for a few days due to the cyclone. Will Gina et al need some funding because they'll lose a few million as a result? poor fellas.
Forum
Pages: 
