Markdun Posted August 2, 2021 Posted August 2, 2021 Turbs, you are wrong on the US and Australia on separation of powers. The USA has much stricter separation of powers than in Australia. In the USA the ‘Executive’ arm of government is completely seperate to their parliament (Congress). Their Executive is headed by the president who is ‘the boss’ of all public servants, subject to the constraints of laws passed by the seperate Parliament. Their judiciary is seperate as is ours federally...actually we copied the US system on this. However, the big difference is that our governments (the ‘Executive’) are not ‘separated’ from parliament. We have what is called (perhaps incorrectly), ‘responsible government’ in that tge Executive is drawn from parliament and responsible to the people through parliament, whereas the US ‘Executive’ is responsible directly to the people via a popularly elected president. The States in Australia have the British tradition of no formal separation of powers; they only practice separation of powers from choice, not law. The Vic govt may choose to allow their CMOs and other experts to do their own thing without political pressure but this is just an indicator of a wise government....a bit like when Kevin Rudd accepted the advice of Treasury when responding to the GFC. Just because a person holds a statutory position, like a CMO, does not protect them from political pressure. Just look at the sports rorts, where a statutory body with the legal power and duty to allocate public funds was effectively totally bypassed by a Minister acting loose and fast with the rule of law. I have decades of experience in the federal public service and a couple of examples...I was asked to write a robust piece on the empirical evidence of the costs and benefits of privatising a certain type of large government owned business. I did this, and my paper was returned from the Departmental secretary with the instruction, ‘remove all arguments and evidence that don’t support the government’s position and submit to the Senate committee’. Or another time I was directed by a Minister to ‘invite’ the head of a statutory regulatory authority (like CASA) for a face to face meeting with the Minister. That Minister told me to ‘make very sure he knows this is not going to be some cosy chat, but a real dressing down’.....that was one difficult phone call for me. My guess is that that meeting was cosy and short because all the Minister had to do is say, ‘I think Mark explained to you the issue I’m not happy about’...’Yes Minister, I’ll fix it’. This was decades ago in the era of an independent public service....it’s much worse now. Skippy mentioned the comedy, ‘Yes Minister’. But we also have the Australian distopian documentaries of the ‘Hollow men’, ‘Utopia’ and now the reality show on all channels called, ‘the Morrison/Murdoch Government’. 2 2
turboplanner Posted August 2, 2021 Posted August 2, 2021 39 minutes ago, Markdun said: Turbs, you are wrong on the US and Australia on separation of powers. The USA has much stricter separation of powers than in Australia. In the USA the ‘Executive’ arm of government is completely seperate to their parliament (Congress). Their Executive is headed by the president who is ‘the boss’ of all public servants, subject to the constraints of laws passed by the seperate Parliament. Their judiciary is seperate as is ours federally...actually we copied the US system on this. However, the big difference is that our governments (the ‘Executive’) are not ‘separated’ from parliament. We have what is called (perhaps incorrectly), ‘responsible government’ in that tge Executive is drawn from parliament and responsible to the people through parliament, whereas the US ‘Executive’ is responsible directly to the people via a popularly elected president. The States in Australia have the British tradition of no formal separation of powers; they only practice separation of powers from choice, not law. The Vic govt may choose to allow their CMOs and other experts to do their own thing without political pressure but this is just an indicator of a wise government....a bit like when Kevin Rudd accepted the advice of Treasury when responding to the GFC. Just because a person holds a statutory position, like a CMO, does not protect them from political pressure. Just look at the sports rorts, where a statutory body with the legal power and duty to allocate public funds was effectively totally bypassed by a Minister acting loose and fast with the rule of law. I have decades of experience in the federal public service and a couple of examples...I was asked to write a robust piece on the empirical evidence of the costs and benefits of privatising a certain type of large government owned business. I did this, and my paper was returned from the Departmental secretary with the instruction, ‘remove all arguments and evidence that don’t support the government’s position and submit to the Senate committee’. Or another time I was directed by a Minister to ‘invite’ the head of a statutory regulatory authority (like CASA) for a face to face meeting with the Minister. That Minister told me to ‘make very sure he knows this is not going to be some cosy chat, but a real dressing down’.....that was one difficult phone call for me. My guess is that that meeting was cosy and short because all the Minister had to do is say, ‘I think Mark explained to you the issue I’m not happy about’...’Yes Minister, I’ll fix it’. This was decades ago in the era of an independent public service....it’s much worse now. Skippy mentioned the comedy, ‘Yes Minister’. But we also have the Australian distopian documentaries of the ‘Hollow men’, ‘Utopia’ and now the reality show on all channels called, ‘the Morrison/Murdoch Government’. Well don't worry about it then; we'll go down different paths.
skippydiesel Posted August 2, 2021 Posted August 2, 2021 2 hours ago, turboplanner said: Well don't worry about it then; we'll go down different paths. That's fair enough Tubs - to a point. Such faith in our (clearly very flawed) system, smacks of the very complacency that allows our leaders to behave in ways that we would not accept from our own family/friends/work colleagues and the proletariat. I would council a more cynical and analytical view of our leadership and its deterioration over the last 40 years. If we continue down the path they are leading us, your children/grandchildren, may no longer be able to freely "go down different paths" without state sanctioned repercussions.
turboplanner Posted August 2, 2021 Posted August 2, 2021 5 hours ago, skippydiesel said: That's fair enough Tubs - to a point. Such faith in our (clearly very flawed) system, smacks of the very complacency that allows our leaders to behave in ways that we would not accept from our own family/friends/work colleagues and the proletariat. I would council a more cynical and analytical view of our leadership and its deterioration over the last 40 years. If we continue down the path they are leading us, your children/grandchildren, may no longer be able to freely "go down different paths" without state sanctioned repercussions. I moved on to avoid an interminable discussion involving what someone meant by the words they used, how legislation says one thing but convention does another, and how certain Acts, Amendments, Codes and Conditions change operations. I realised with a jolt that in the past 25 years I hadn't dealt with public servants at all, but gone straight to Ministers and their staff to get solutions - in other words working within your "flawed system". All systems are flawed with some having some very good points and some hopelessly bad, so if you're waiting for a perfect system to emerge, it's not going to happen. King Arthur thought he had it but then someone screwed his wife and the fights started all over again. If you take your own advice and analyse the net government impact on Australia over the past 40 years, you'll find it. hasn't deteriorated, we are all better off, and Australia continues to punch around No 10 to 15 financially in a world of over 200 countries, with its State and Commonwealth government structures. What has happened in the past 40 years is the media has just focused on the leaders, so a lot of good hard working talent goes unnoticed, and the print media has all but gone. beaten by the near zero cost of digital distribution, and the stories are clipped at around 100 to 150 words, or a few seconds on TV, so we miss a lot of the action. For example, were you aware that the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services shifted to horizontal integration to handle the current pandemic faster?, so while the CHO is in charge, there are strategic people out there in the suburbs and country who have the authority to act instantly, and have been doing so, which is one of the reasons Victoria has been able to shut down outbreaks so fast. For all I know Skippy some or all of the other seven jusidictions might be copying Victoria as you read this. 1 2
Jerry_Atrick Posted August 2, 2021 Posted August 2, 2021 2 hours ago, turboplanner said: If you take your own advice and analyse the net government impact on Australia over the past 40 years, you'll find it. hasn't deteriorated, we are all better off, and Australia continues to punch around No 10 to 15 financially in a world of over 200 countries, with its State and Commonwealth government structures. Was going to write a long diatribe.. I would wager, given the evidence, that Australia has progressed more in spite of the governments than because of them, and with more progressive and strategic thinking governments we would be miles ahead of where we are now. Mind you, it is not unique to Australia... 1
turboplanner Posted August 2, 2021 Posted August 2, 2021 5 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said: Was going to write a long diatribe.. I would wager, given the evidence, that Australia has progressed more in spite of the governments than because of them, and with more progressive and strategic thinking governments we would be miles ahead of where we are now. Mind you, it is not unique to Australia... Yes, we would have progressed more if our governments had got the right information and used it progressively and with strategic thinking, but with a population of 25 million, are we doing something wrong in being in the top 10 to15 countries in finance, or 44th out of 173 countries in Covid death rate/100,000 people? 2
onetrack Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 (edited) I think you have to be very careful measuring a countries position in terms of finance. There are many more areas in a nations performance that are more important to many people. The nations good health of its people should be the most important thing - but in the current pandemic situation, a serious number of people seem to think that concentrating on keeping up huge profits, is more important than the nations good health. No better example exists of this failure to get priorities right, than America, the richest nation on the planet with the worlds worst health system, and where huge corporations make vast profits from people being sick. Yet in Cuba, a country with their financial position in a precarious state, their people are in excellent health, health treatment is freely available to all, and they manufacture their own drugs and provide them at cost to the people of their nation. Somewhere along the line there's a good middle ground between the disparities between America and Cuba - but I'm concerned Australia is going to follow America at the current rate, with a major emphasis on gathering up vast amounts of personal wealth, that one could never fully utilise in a hundred lifetimes. I can tell you this much - when you are seriously very sick, and facing death, or long-term debilitating pain, and restriction on movement and personal enjoyment, you will almost certainly happily hand over all your lifetimes accumulated stash of wealth, to return to good health. Edited August 3, 2021 by onetrack 1 3 1
turboplanner Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 (edited) 25 minutes ago, onetrack said: I think you have to be very careful measuring a countries position in terms of finance. There are many more areas in a nations performance that are more important to many people. The nations good health of its people should be the most important thing - but in the current pandemic situation, a serious number of people seem to think that concentrating on keeping up huge profits, is more important than the nations good health. No better example exists of this failure to get priorities right, than America, the richest nation on the planet with the worlds worst health system, and where huge corporations make vast profits from people being sick. Yet in Cuba, a country with their financial position in a precarious state, their people are in excellent health, health treatment is freely available to all, and they manufacture their own drugs and provide them at cost to the people of their nation. Somewhere along the line there's a good middle ground between the disparities between America and Cuba - but I'm concerned Australia is going to follow America at the current rate, with a major emphasis on gathering up vast amounts of personal wealth, that one could never fully utilise in a hundred lifetimes. I can tell you this much - when you are seriously very sick, and facing death, or long-term debilitating pain, and restriction on movement and personal enjoyment, you will almost certainly happily hand over all your lifetimes accumulated stash of wealth, to return to good health. Yes, there's a balance, and nothing wrong with doing a SWOT analysis for a Country. Edited August 3, 2021 by turboplanner
spacesailor Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 (edited) Is the "Pfizer " vaccine manufactor,d in Ireland as it was stated in the film,, " Holy Water ". Could be another film , to to cheer us up. spacesailor Edited August 3, 2021 by spacesailor Auto spell wrong word
Mewp Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 (edited) Thats the real difference between Pifzer and AstraZeneca, Pifzer costs around $30 per dose where as Astrazeneca is around $4 per dose. Astrazeneca announced they would not profit from sales during the pandemic. Edited August 3, 2021 by Mewp 2 1
Student Pilot Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 2 hours ago, spacesailor said: Is the "Pfizer " vaccine manufactor,d in Ireland as it was stated in the film,, " Holy Water ". Could be another film , to to cheer us up. spacesailor If our esteemed PM would only have Pfizer then you can't blame others for refusing AZ 1
skippydiesel Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 (edited) 10 hours ago, turboplanner said: I moved on to avoid an interminable discussion involving what someone meant by the words they used, how legislation says one thing but convention does another, and how certain Acts, Amendments, Codes and Conditions change operations. I realised with a jolt that in the past 25 years I hadn't dealt with public servants at all, but gone straight to Ministers and their staff to get solutions - in other words working within your "flawed system". So, it would seem you are well aware of & use the flawed system - Why was there no approach to the appropriate Gov service/public servant? Why did you find it necessary to make a direct approach the Minister & his/her staff? Do you have a personal connection that facilitated this short cut? Are you not part of the problem? All systems are flawed with some having some very good points and some hopelessly bad, so if you're waiting for a perfect system to emerge, it's not going to happen. King Arthur thought he had it but then someone screwed his wife and the fights started all over again. I agree – human (individual interest) seem to corrupt most if not all, systems. The question is should we accept this or continually strive for better/improvement? If you take your own advice and analyse the net government impact on Australia over the past 40 years, you'll find it. hasn't deteriorated, we are all better off, and Australia continues to punch around No 10 to 15 financially in a world of over 200 countries, with its State and Commonwealth government structures. If your only measure is the economy/wealth (similar to our governments) – we probably have no more to discuss. One more point on this – our financial position is largely as a result of mineral/fossil fuel extraction – not production as such. An accident/luck of our geographic location – not Government enlightened policy direction (my apologies for any offence taken by our excellent & highly productive agricultural sector) What has happened in the past 40 years is the media has just focused on the leaders, so a lot of good hard working talent goes unnoticed, and the print media has all but gone. beaten by the near zero cost of digital distribution, and the stories are clipped at around 100 to 150 words, or a few seconds on TV, so we miss a lot of the action. For example, were you aware that the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services shifted to horizontal integration to handle the current pandemic faster?, so while the CHO is in charge, there are strategic people out there in the suburbs and country who have the authority to act instantly, and have been doing so, which is one of the reasons Victoria has been able to shut down outbreaks so fast. For all I know Skippy some or all of the other seven jusidictions might be copying Victoria as you read this. What I see, since I joined the NSW public service in 1985, is the severe running down of most services/agencies (many are mere shells of their formers entities), coupled with the rise & rise of “fee for service”. This is despite a near doubling of our population in that time and presumably the tax base that goes with it. As for the (news) media – sure their world/approach has changed to accommodate technology developments but at base they are as they have always been. I Edited August 3, 2021 by skippydiesel
Jerry_Atrick Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 9 hours ago, turboplanner said: Yes, we would have progressed more if our governments had got the right information and used it progressively and with strategic thinking, but with a population of 25 million, are we doing something wrong in being in the top 10 to15 countries in finance, or 44th out of 173 countries in Covid death rate/100,000 people? As OT said, finance is not the sole measure - but using it, yes Australians get it right despite governments actions and inactions that thwart it. With respect to the COVID success, it would appear the governments that let it be handled by the CHO's got it right and those that didn't - didn't quite get it right (although the numbers are still far better than other countries). In Vic, the government was responsible for the quarantine outbreak - not the CHO.. Going off topic (since the subject of financial position in the world was brought up - which is measured usually as GDP/capita - given Australia's resources, education (well at least of prior days), size, etc., on an adjusted basis, I would say it is a laggard.: https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/worlds-5-richest-nations-by-gdp-per-capita-2021-05-20. With the exception of the USA (and Luxembourg as it is a tax haven), we should be up there given what we have at our disposal. In the top 25 economies, which is outright GDP, we are 13 - so just scrape into the bottom half. Ahead of us are many countries that do not have the resources.. they have an internal market bigger than us - yes most have a bigger population than us, but there is no reason why we should not be further up the scale (on both counts). I agree with OT - Australia is moving to the American model and it is a travesty that such outright and per capita wealth nations are further concentrating wealth (or in Australia's case, either selling economic rights to foreign interests or just letting them in); and the resultant problems that causes. We have a saving grace, which is a relatively high basic wage (costs of living ain't cheap, though).. But things like health, education, food standards, ecological sustainability, etc, are all in the mix in terms of utilising all economic resourcing to better society. In our societal structure, we need a robust economy to work for us; and to get one, we need to work for the economy.. In a competing world, that means governments must foster innovation and investment; accept the future and be prepared to transition the economy as technology progresses and other imperatives (e.g. climate change) occur. In addition, IMHO, it needs to weigh its procurement policy to supporting existing and fostering fledgling indigenous businesses, rather than relying on foreign businesses, even if it costs a little more and involves a little more risk. Re the grubbiness of government, I was doing a job for a Vic statutory authority. We were going to tender to replace legacy systems with an integrated system to service that sector. There were sadly no indigenous firms that could provide the system.. As we were evaluating the tenders, our initial round threw out a world leading software vendor who pitched the most expensive solution that in their bid, they acknowledged didn't exist and they would have to build it - they didn';t have an offering that came near to supporting the sector we were in. It was not until it was made clear to the minister who had ultimate responsibility for the Authority that should any of the other vendors appeal the award, there is no possible way without doctoring all of the bids that the decision could be upheld, especially if the auditor general got involved. That public service head had been moved before I finished the contract. 1
turboplanner Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 (edited) Skippy: “So, it would seem you are well aware of & use the flawed system - Why was there no approach to the appropriate Gov service/public servant? Why did you find it necessary to make a direct approach the Minister & his/her staff? Do you have a personal connection that facilitated this short cut? Are you not part of the problem?” Let’s be clear; you’re the one calling our system flawed. I came off the farm and learnt it. · I hadn’t thought about why I didn’t deal with public servants, and certainly wouldn’t generalise and condemn them as a whole, but in what I do, probably the best summary would be I haven’t found them productive or willing to make decisions; it’s been more productive to go to Ministers or Ministerial staff. · No personal connections, just hard work; I’m dealing with an ever-changing group of people. · No, the system flows around me. Skippy: ”I agree – human (individual interest) seem to corrupt most if not all, systems. The question is should we accept this or continually strive for better/improvement?” · Jesus tried to change the system and look where it got him. You have to decide whether you are going to get the job done, or fix up all the things that are broken. Skippy: “If your only measure is the economy/wealth (similar to our governments) – we probably have no more to discuss.” · No, it’s not the only measure, but if you extend on GDP and extrapolate it per capita you can see how being able to afford something makes all the difference to every facet of life. Skippy: “our financial position is largely as a result of mineral/fossil fuel extraction – not production as such. An accident/luck of our geographic location – not Government enlightened policy direction (my apologies for any offence taken by our excellent & highly productive agricultural sector)” · It was John Gorton in an impassioned speech to Parliament who said we should not just be extracting iron ore from the ground, but refining it into steel, adding thousands of jobs and retaining the money in Australia, then using it to make finished products, adding exponential numbers of jobs and wealth. Where he came unstuck is no one wanted to do that, they just wanted to sell as much as they could as quickly as they could to make their fortunes. We are after all a free Country. · Inevitably the minerals boom ended. I was expecting to see Australia crash financially when that happened, because we’d lost our main source of income – primary production of wool and food when the UK went into the EU, but Australia quickly learnt how to promote itself to tourists and recovered almost without loss. · In the early part of European settlement of Australia, developing our own manufacturing base was necessary because of the difficulty of obtaining goods at affordable prices, but containerisation and freight hubs reduced the freight costs allowing Australians to buy T shirts and jocks at prices manufacturing on the huge overseas scales allowed. We are getting into some of it with robotics, but our GDP per capita is too high to complete with the big olume manufacturers where human labour is significant. Skippy: “What I see, since I joined the NSW public service in 1985, is the severe running down of most services/agencies (many are mere shells of their formers entities), coupled with the rise & rise of “fee for service”. This is despite a near doubling of our population in that time and presumably the tax base that goes with it.” · I have some sympathy for you there; the same happens in the corporate sector where poor managers just employ more managers and more people instead of developing systems to handle the work. The people start playing politics, the company starts going down the tubes and there are mass sackings and a much smaller company handling only its core business, only it can’t survive on that core business, and it goes under, then the cycle repeats with a different lot of management. · One of the primary factors is digital. In my own operations, by using self-calculating systems and data population, I was able to do the work of three people. Some jobs which took a week came down to minutes or in one case 17 seconds. Skippy: “As for the (news) media – sure their world/approach has changed to accommodate technology developments but at base they are as they have always been.” · No, the print media made huge cost savings due to digital, typesetters went first, then people started to drift to social media and the newspapers followed, but lost their newspaper market and with it their advertising income. They played with online editions but made two mistakes, putting up paywalls at much the same subscription rate as their newspapers had been, and trying to convert a newspaper layout to screen layout, which none of us like. They mostly became financial basket cases and started sacking sub editors, and journalists to the point where it seems that even the remaining journalists are on a drip-feed of income. I do work with investigative journalists who might work on a story for 12 months before it is published, and a few years ago they could call in a helicopter, send out a photographer, hire people to do extensive research – all the things required to develop a complex story based on facts. Today they’re mostly working from home, and a lot of Contributors are writing stories using words like peech instead of peach. Edited August 3, 2021 by turboplanner 1
APenNameAndThatA Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 22 hours ago, onetrack said: I think you have to be very careful measuring a countries position in terms of finance. There are many more areas in a nations performance that are more important to many people. The nations good health of its people should be the most important thing - but in the current pandemic situation, a serious number of people seem to think that concentrating on keeping up huge profits, is more important than the nations good health. No better example exists of this failure to get priorities right, than America, the richest nation on the planet with the worlds worst health system, and where huge corporations make vast profits from people being sick. Yet in Cuba, a country with their financial position in a precarious state, their people are in excellent health, health treatment is freely available to all, and they manufacture their own drugs and provide them at cost to the people of their nation. Somewhere along the line there's a good middle ground between the disparities between America and Cuba - but I'm concerned Australia is going to follow America at the current rate, with a major emphasis on gathering up vast amounts of personal wealth, that one could never fully utilise in a hundred lifetimes. I can tell you this much - when you are seriously very sick, and facing death, or long-term debilitating pain, and restriction on movement and personal enjoyment, you will almost certainly happily hand over all your lifetimes accumulated stash of wealth, to return to good health. I’m pretty sure China is richer than the US
danny_galaga Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 10 minutes ago, APenNameAndThatA said: I’m pretty sure China is richer than the US Not by average per capita. US is still way richer by that measure.
kgwilson Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 Defining wealth by GDP is misleading unless you consider the debt of the country. Chinas national debt is around 5.6 Trillion compared to the US debt of 26.7 Trillion. This was as at August 2020 so it will be a lot worse now especially in the US with the pandemic & Trump administration failures to take in to account. 1
skippydiesel Posted August 3, 2021 Posted August 3, 2021 20 minutes ago, turboplanner said: Skippy: “So, it would seem you are well aware of & use the flawed system - Why was there no approach to the appropriate Gov service/public servant? Why did you find it necessary to make a direct approach the Minister & his/her staff? Do you have a personal connection that facilitated this short cut? Are you not part of the problem?” Let’s be clear; you’re the one calling our system flawed. I came off the farm and learnt it. · I hadn’t thought about why I didn’t deal with public servants, and certainly wouldn’t generalise and condemn them as a whole, but in what I do, probably the best summary would be I haven’t found them productive or willing to make decisions; it’s been more productive to go to Ministers or Ministerial staff. · No personal connections, just hard work; I’m dealing with an ever-changing group of people. · No, the system flows around me. (It hard to differentiate my response from the clutter) Sorry if I offend Turbs - but the response can only be "in your dreams mate" . You may have worked out how to short cut the system and plug in directly to the minister /perhaps the Department (PS) behind the minister is but the aforementioned shell so there is little point in trying to work with the people who are being payed (tax $$) to look after your enquiry. 20 minutes ago, turboplanner said: Skippy: ”I agree – human (individual interest) seem to corrupt most if not all, systems. The question is should we accept this or continually strive for better/improvement?” · Jesus tried to change the system and look where it got him. You have to decide whether you are going to get the job done, or fix up all the things that are broken. The Jesus construct certainly had the right idea - the quick immediate fix rarely addresses the entrenched problems. He/she/it was a manager of my own ilk - you manage just as much for the future as for the present. Our Gov. are all about the present, very little for the future wellbeing of Australia or the Planet. 20 minutes ago, turboplanner said: Skippy: “If your only measure is the economy/wealth (similar to our governments) – we probably have no more to discuss.” · No, it’s not the only measure, but if you extend on GDP and extrapolate it per capita you can see how being able to afford something makes all the difference to every facet of life. Sure GDP is very important but I disagree that you can simply "extrapolate it per capita" - the wealth flows down BS! We are increasingly following the USA/ market based approach to our society/environment despite seeing how that inevitably leads to the sort of mess the USA is in today.. The market approach works for and is promoted by the very wealthy minority 20 minutes ago, turboplanner said: Skippy: “our financial position is largely as a result of mineral/fossil fuel extraction – not production as such. An accident/luck of our geographic location – not Government enlightened policy direction (my apologies for any offence taken by our excellent & highly productive agricultural sector)” · It was John Gorton in an impassioned speech to Parliament who said we should not just be extracting iron ore from the ground, but refining it into steel, adding thousands of jobs and retaining the money in Australia, then using it to make finished products, adding exponential numbers of jobs and wealth. Where he came unstuck is no one wanted to do that, they just wanted to sell as much as they could as quickly as they could to make their fortunes. We are after all a free Country. · Inevitably the minerals boom ended. I was expecting to see Australia crash financially when that happened, because we’d lost our main source of income – primary production of wool and food when the UK went into the EU, but Australia quickly learnt how to promote itself to tourists and recovered almost without loss. · In the early part of European settlement of Australia, developing our own manufacturing base was necessary because of the difficulty of obtaining goods at affordable prices, but containerisation and freight hubs reduced the freight costs allowing Australians to buy T shirts and jocks at prices manufacturing on the huge overseas scales allowed. We are getting into some of it with robotics, but our GDP per capita is too high to complete with the big olume manufacturers where human labour is significant. Soo you do not think that Government has a role in guiding/promoting sustainable industry in Australia? Skippy: “What I see, since I joined the NSW public service in 1985, is the severe running down of most services/agencies (many are mere shells of their formers entities), coupled with the rise & rise of “fee for service”. This is despite a near doubling of our population in that time and presumably the tax base that goes with it.” · I have some sympathy for you there; the same happens in the corporate sector where poor managers just employ more managers and more people instead of developing systems to handle the work. The people start playing politics, the company starts going down the tubes and there are mass sackings and a much smaller company handling only its core business, only it can’t survive on that core business, and it goes under, then the cycle repeats with a different lot of management. · One of the primary factors is digital. In my own operations, by using self-calculating systems and data population, I was able to do the work of three people. Some jobs which took a week came down to minutes or in one case 17 seconds. Skippy: “As for the (news) media – sure their world/approach has changed to accommodate technology developments but at base they are as they have always been.” · No, the print media made huge cost savings due to digital, typesetters went first, then people started to drift to social media and the newspapers followed, but lost their newspaper market and with it their advertising income. They played with online editions but made two mistakes, putting up paywalls at much the same subscription rate as their newspapers had been, and trying to convert a newspaper layout to screen layout, which none of us like. They mostly became financial basket cases and started sacking sub editors, and journalists to the point where it seems that even the remaining journalists are on a drip-feed of income. I do work with investigative journalists who might work on a story for 12 months before it is published, and a few years ago they could call in a helicopter, send out a photographer, hire people to do extensive research – all the things required to develop a complex story based on facts. Today they’re mostly working from home, and a lot of Contributors are writing stories using words like peech instead of peach. I think you missed my point: The news media/press whatever you wish to call it, is a creature that will always be afflicted by ADD. Old news/good news/long or detailed stories do not hold its attention (or the public they serve). They crave the the immediacy of the sugar hit. The method by which they disseminate their stories may speed up/shorten the cycle (electronic media) but at base they are still very much the same creature as always (this a comment on an industry not individual journalists). On your spelling comment "peech instead of peach" - I have always been an extremely poor speller (dyslexia?). This "affliction" has made me realise that language/spelling is dynamic, its communication that is important - has the message been received as intended by the sender? - if yes does it matter so much that peech/peach etc etc is used? Note. I do understand that poor spelling may add a level of confusion to the message in some circumstances.
spacesailor Posted August 4, 2021 Posted August 4, 2021 I too will say !. " This government is bad " Take that ' photo-driving licence ' at the time our PM stated " not to be used as an ID card " But now we can.t access this government with the the new ' I D PHOTO CARD ' issued by the same department . Just one of many faults with this AND the rest of the ' trough feeder,s. spacesailor '
onetrack Posted August 4, 2021 Posted August 4, 2021 2 hours ago, APenNameAndThatA said: I’m pretty sure China is richer than the US Not so. Despite China's huge size and abilities, in every measure - apart from the numbers of their people - the U.S. still beats China, hands down. The size of the U.S. economy is staggering in total terms. These are the people who make the worlds largest amount of armaments - and high-tech armaments at that - they have the worlds largest Navy, they produce the majority of the worlds aircraft (despite Boeings stuff-ups), and the financial system and the amount of wealth they control, still rules the world. 1
onetrack Posted August 4, 2021 Posted August 4, 2021 (edited) Quote Defining wealth by GDP is misleading unless you consider the debt of the country. Chinas national debt is around 5.6 Trillion compared to the US debt of 26.7 Trillion. This was as at August 2020 so it will be a lot worse now especially in the US with the pandemic & Trump administration failures to take in to account. kgwilson - I am firmly of the opinion that the Chinese finance figures are fudged, and that they are improperly accounting their overall debt level. They don't count a lot of debt that would be accounted for under Western financial rules and guidelines. Much of the Chinese banking system is very opaque and they still run a lot of financial enterprises that are basically community banks with poor records, poor lending records, and laced with corruption - despite Xi Jinpings "crackdown" on corruption. His crackdown on corruption was more about eliminating threats to his leadership by other Chinese becoming exceptionally wealthy - and we all know that huge wealth gives the wealth-holder vast amounts of power, that can rule over "elected" officials. I would not be in the least surprised to find that China's actual debt levels are closer to the U.S. levels, than they will admit. No country can install the infrastructure that the Chinese have installed in the last 25 years, say, without incurring a huge debt level. But the Chinese have studied how Japan works, the Japanese are more indebted than the U.S., with Japanese debt levels at over 200% of GDP - but they are still an exceptionally powerful and wealthy country, because the debt is largely internal, and they owe very little to other countries. China is the mirror-image of the Japanese financial system, they manufacture on a large scale, and utilise the manufactured products to develop their nation, and therefore increase their productivity again. Where Japan wins over the Chinese, is they have established a reputation for superb quality, and when they have decided they have finished using their manufactured products, they sell them to overseas buyers at inflated prices, and the buyers fight to acquire those used manufactured items. Get a look at the prices asked for used Landcruisers, and industrial and construction machinery on the "Japan export" sites, they are raking it in. The Chinese only rely on the export of cheap newly-manufactured goods, but soon, that will change as the Chinese workers start demanding better wages. The Chinese welders pay levels have already gone up substantially in recent years. And the Chinese wage system is based on seniority, not merit or abilities or training levels, which in itself, is a basically flawed arrangement. The Chinese manufacturing system is based on huge quantities of production, not high quality levels, a system which is also basically flawed for the long term. Edited August 4, 2021 by onetrack 1
kgwilson Posted August 4, 2021 Posted August 4, 2021 Whether Chinese figures are fudged or not they are set to become the worlds largest economy by 2028 according to most economists. There are hardly any economies that are in surplus. Almost half of Japans debt is held by it's own bank. They all (including Australia) participate in quantitative easing (money printing). Nothing backs up the debt other than promises. If interest rates rise the worlds financial system should collapse but they will find ways of writing off debt or restructuring it to prevent this. 3 1
danny_galaga Posted August 5, 2021 Posted August 5, 2021 One-track, I think people really have to stop thinking of China as that place that makes crappy hand tools etc. Last year they surpassed the US for the first time in number of patents applied for. Us has again taken the lead but that is clearly an indication that they aren't just a nation of 'people with nimble hand who can make knock offs'. People are people, you get industrious and incentive people in every corner of the world, even the poorest or most authoritarian country. On the subject of pay, did you know that the average engineer in China earns more than their counterpart in the US? You have to divorce your attitude to the politics and just look at the facts when it comes to economics. To say China will be the biggest economy in the world doesn't mean you like their government. 3
turboplanner Posted August 5, 2021 Posted August 5, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, danny_galaga said: One-track, I think people really have to stop thinking of China as that place that makes crappy hand tools etc. Last year they surpassed the US for the first time in number of patents applied for. Us has again taken the lead but that is clearly an indication that they aren't just a nation of 'people with nimble hand who can make knock offs'. People are people, you get industrious and incentive people in every corner of the world, even the poorest or most authoritarian country. On the subject of pay, did you know that the average engineer in China earns more than their counterpart in the US? You have to divorce your attitude to the politics and just look at the facts when it comes to economics. To say China will be the biggest economy in the world doesn't mean you like their government. About 25 years ago one of our car manufacturers decided the only way we could compete with importers was to manufacture in China, so a director was sent across to set up a carline to build the next model six cylinder car for Australia. The middle management income in China exploded so far so fast that they were buying two story McMansions and wanted big luxury cars, so Australia got the flick and the carline was used to build a luxury brand US model in higher volume. Edited August 5, 2021 by turboplanner 1 1
Recommended Posts