HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche)
Subject: Re: The Role of Government
Organization: MetaPro Systems, Perth, Western Australia
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 08:52:34 GMT

In <714642851.F00001@csource.oz.au>
   Steve.Williams@f547.n635.z3.fidonet.org (Steve Williams) writes:

>I think it it is optional in so far as if you can afford private insurance you
>go for it, but if you can't and if your like me, working 14 hour days to 
>support
>a wife and 2 year old with one on the way and still only making around $35,000
>p.a then you should be entitled to basic medical coverage for your family.

Agreed. There is a social responsibility to provide basic
medical care, especially to taxpayers. But there is more
than one way to skin the cat.

>In the same way as people that don't drive cars still pay for roads in taxes,
>those that earn large sums of money pay more in taxes to provide services for
>all the community. If those people are allowed to opt out of the system then 

Actually, the road users subsidise other expenditure. Only
about 20% of what's collected in fuel taxes and excise is
used for roads.

>the
>revenue base for Medicare will be shot and we will be back to medical services
>by income and that stinks.

Will it? If the majority of taxpayers would get a tax rebate
for private medical insurance (up to a limit), then the load
on the public health system would be reduced markedly.

Ever wonder why there's an ever-increasing load on the
public health system? It's because people can't see the
sense in paying Medicare and private insurance, and then
they still have to pay for a "gap". So people abandon
private insurance (which has a side-effect of driving up
that cost to those who still want private insurance) and
utilise what's left of an under-funded public health system.

I pay around $2000 every year in health insurance, and if I
went to a doctor, I'd still have to fork out money despite
the insurance. I could simply drop the private insurance and
pocket the $1200+ and rely on Medicare.

If everybody did that, then the Medicare levy would have to
increase to 5% or more of income if it were to be
self-funding. So, back to square one. Do not pass GO, do not
collect your $1200 (give it to the tax man).
-- 
+-----+ Bernd Felsche                     _--_|\  #include <std/disclaimer.h>
| | | | MetaPro Systems Pty Ltd          /      \ bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au
| | | | 328 Albany Highway,              X_.--._/         Fax: +61 9 472 3337
|m|p|s| Victoria Park, Western Australia 6100  v        Phone: +61 9 362 9355
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: miw@cc.uq.oz.au (Mark I. Williams)
Subject: Re: Work permits for Kiwis...
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:32:02 GMT

scrooge@Moneybin.equinox.gen.nz (Glenn Murphy) writes:

>What do you Aussies think about the proposal for Kiwis working in Australia 
>to have to have work permits? As a prospective New Zealand worker in Aussie 
>(Sydney in particular) I wonder what the locals think?

I think it's a stupid idea. With the rest of the world moving towards
more open borders, some fools here are proposing that we shut our
borders to keep out the Kiwis, just when nett migration is starting to
move the other way.

What they should do is go the whole hog and cut out the 6-month tax-free
period that New Zealanders get when they come over. They should pay PAYE
tax from the day they set foot on Aussie shores. This will go a long way
towards stopping the Kiwi mercenaries who are prepared to work for short
periods for ridiculous wages because they are rorting the taxation
systems.

cheers,


--
Mark Williams         The University of Queensland       miw@cc.uq.edu.au
+61 7 36 54012   (w)  Prentice Centre
+61 7 36 54477  (fax) Qld 4072  Australia
Nullum magnum ingenium sine mixtura dementiae fuit.  -- Seneca
From: bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: The big currency lie
Date: 2 Sep 92 08:52:39 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: MetaPro Systems, Perth, Western Australia

In <6312@otc.otca.oz> brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones) writes:

>Am I the only person who absolutely *cringes* each time the 5 second news
>grab on TV relates the value of A$1 to US$?

Not the only one.

I'm please to see that SBS indicated the exchange rate for
about 5 different ones, including UK, Germany and Japan.

Just for kicks, it's strange to see that the US dollar has
been failry stable w.r.t the brass razoo over several years.
Meanwhile, both have plummeted 50% against the Deutsche Mark
and UK Pound.

-- 
+-----+ Bernd Felsche                     _--_|\  #include <std/disclaimer.h>
| | | | MetaPro Systems Pty Ltd          /      \ bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au
| | | | 328 Albany Highway,              X_.--._/         Fax: +61 9 472 3337
|m|p|s| Victoria Park, Western Australia 6100  v        Phone: +61 9 362 9355
From: taso@munnari.OZ.AU (Taso Hatzi)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: What's wrong with lowering the dollar?
Date: 19 Aug 1992 19:59:56 +1000
Organization: University of Melbourne
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: munnari.oz.au
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:
: 
: exactly how we managed to turn a respectable trade surplus throughout
: most of this century into a massive deficit in just a few years. The
:
Aus has historically relied on exports of raw materials to earn foreign
currency. When the world was technologically simple and we didn't import
so many computers, software, VCRs, TVs, hi-fis, cars, aeroplanes, etc, what
we earnt was enough to pay for the imports. The volume of imports
grew, the EEC shut the date on our European markets, our other customers 
developed alternative supply channels (and thereby acquired the means
to set prices), and our trade surplus rapidly turned into a trade
deficit.

So why couldn't we supply our own computers, and etc? I believe the
reason is that virtually all of our manufacturing industries have fallen
to foriegn predators who have no natural desire to research, design or
manufacture anything in Aus - they just want a sales office. The Govt has
been bullying companies for several years to generate exports and the papers
tell us our manufactured exports are increasing strongly and I suppose
if one excludes the cost of servicing our debt, the trade balance 
doesn't look too bad. How many of these firms will continue when the
regime changes and the 'incentives' are removed? 


Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark)
Subject: Re: Why pick on the kids? Let's get the fat cats!
Keywords: overpaid salary-cap wages tax complexity
Organization: ITC, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: 27 Aug 92 06:53:49 GMT

suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:

>In article <ednclark.714832071@kraken> ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark) writes:
>>	Finally, there is nothing wrong with free education and increased
>>education for the masses so long as it doesn't come hand in hand
>>with an expectation of a highly payed, high status job and a
>>non-acceptance of physical labour employment when the opportunity
>>presents itself.
>I agree with your last part. However, the bald statement ``there is
>nothing wrong with free education and increased education for the masses''
>is obviously wrong without further provisos/qualifiers. What do you
>mean by free education? Tuition free? What level of support for
>living expenses? For how long? For what courses? etc. The complete
>lack of an ability to come to grips with these issues is what really
>gripes me when we have people bandying about phrases like 
>``education is a right not a privilege''. Without giving sensible
>answers to what I have just asked, such phrases are at best
>meaningless.

Okay, I'll qualify 'free education', jeez. Free education is the freedom of
access to education by anyone anytime.  As for the financial side to
education I beleive that we should all be responsible to repay any
investment into our educational careers by the general public.  I think tax
recovery of AUSTUDY, ABSTUDY etc is a great idea and so is HECS. I don't
beleive that governments should look at anything on an individual scale and
that includes education.  It is in the country's best interest to have a
highly educated population (maybe then they'll use their heads when voting),
and the government should and does make it policy to increase the level
of education in the general populace and make best use of these educated
people for the society. I'm afraid I still stick to my original assertion
until you explain why it is 'obviously wrong'.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: dyfl@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Daniel Y Lam)
Subject: Re: The Role of Government
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 03:46:06 GMT

Steve.Williams@f547.n635.z3.fidonet.org (Steve Williams) writes:

>I think it it is optional in so far as if you can afford private insurance you
>go for it, but if you can't and if your like me, working 14 hour days to support
>a wife and 2 year old with one on the way and still only making around $35,000
>p.a then you should be entitled to basic medical coverage for your family.

You're saying you want to be able to use other people's money to buy
medical coverage for your family.  Don't we all?  For that matter,
I'd like to be able to use other people's money to buy a whole lot of
other things too.

>In the same way as people that don't drive cars still pay for roads in taxes,
>those that earn large sums of money pay more in taxes to provide services for
>all the community. If those people are allowed to opt out of the system then the
>revenue base for Medicare will be shot and we will be back to medical services
>by income and that stinks.

Perhaps we can allow people who don't drive cars to opt out of paying
for the roads.  What is so radical about suggesting that one should
not be able to use other people's money without their consent?
--
	Daniel Lam
	Melbourne, Australia

In my opinion, the opinions expressed here are my personal opinions.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: dyfl@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Daniel Y Lam)
Subject: Re: Why pick on the kids? Let's get the fat cats!
Keywords: overpaid salary-cap wages tax complexity
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 03:57:57 GMT

ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark) writes:

>I left school 8 years ago. That year our principal had all of the seniors in
>one room and asked "How many of you (there was 167 of us) are going to be
>tradesmen?" Two (2) people put up their hands.  Those two also were two of
>the least capable academically in the year. What all of the people wanted to
>do was become accountants, solicitors, scientists, engineers, bank managers
>etc. So two people will produce our houses or manufactured goods (obviously
>quite a few of those who left in Junior would end up in labouring or
>manufacturing jobs) and the rest will produce nothing tangible. The rest
>will rely upon the fees, taxes etc charged upon those 2 and the Junior
>leavers to maintain their jobs. Why is this expectation that everyone can

An excellent point against so-called "free education".

Hmmm.. can't find any other good points, though.  Do you really think
accountants, lawyers, etc... are non-productive or not as productive
as real tradesman?

If these fat cats produce no wealth, how come companies are prepared
to pay them?  Remember, companies are run by greedy capitalists,
whose aim is to maximize profit.  Why would they waste money to
employ someone who produces no wealth for the company?  No, employers
only employ you if, from their point of view, the wealth you produce
for them is higher than the salary they pay you.

The same cannot be said for government entities.
--
	Daniel Lam
	Melbourne, Australia

In my opinion, the opinions expressed here are my personal opinions.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: prl@csis.dit.csiro.au (Peter Lamb)
Subject: Re: The big currency lie
Organization: CSIRO Division of Information Technology
Distribution: aus
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:03:35 GMT

chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:

>In <1992Sep2.085239.15260@metapro.DIALix.oz.au> bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) writes:

>>I'm please to see that SBS indicated the exchange rate for
>>about 5 different ones, including UK, Germany and Japan.
>>
>>Just for kicks, it's strange to see that the US dollar has
>>been failry stable w.r.t the brass razoo over several years.
>>Meanwhile, both have plummeted 50% against the Deutsche Mark
>>and UK Pound.

>Yes - strange behaviour for the world currency of reference...

I don't see why. The US$ is an important currency simply because
a large part of the world's trade is conducted in it. There's nothing
implicit in being "the world currency of reference" that says
that no currency can rise in value against it.

I am intrigued by the way people view currency movements. While I was
living in Switzerland, I noticed that newspapers (and people in
general) *never* spoke of the Swiss currency rising or falling. It was
always all those *other* funny foreign currencies which were doing
things, even when all the major ones were moving in the same
direction against the Swiss Franc.

-- 
Peter Lamb (prl@csis.dit.csiro.au)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter)
Subject: Re: Why pick on the kids? Let's get the fat cats!
Keywords: overpaid salary-cap wages tax complexity
Organization: Monash University
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 04:35:34 GMT

In article <ednclark.714787497@kraken> ednclark@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (Jeffrey Clark) writes:
>I left school 8 years ago. That year our principal had all of the seniors in
>one room and asked "How many of you (there was 167 of us) are going to be
>tradesmen?" Two (2) people put up their hands.  Those two also were two of
>the least capable academically in the year. What all of the people wanted to
>do was become accountants, solicitors, scientists, engineers, bank managers
>etc. So two people will produce our houses or manufactured goods (obviously
>quite a few of those who left in Junior would end up in labouring or
>manufacturing jobs) and the rest will produce nothing tangible. The rest
>will rely upon the fees, taxes etc charged upon those 2 and the Junior
>leavers to maintain their jobs. Why is this expectation that everyone can
>become a manager or white-collar worker and "somebody else" will do the real
>work? The major reason is unfair income bias towards these non-productive
>service employments.  Why should a teenager who sees Mum and Dad slaving
.....many details left out.
>let's hear some scathing response.

Not exactly scathing from this quarter. However, while I do agree you
have highlighted a chronic problem with our society, the major
factor is NOT salary (it may be PERCEPTION of salary levels). I'd
swap my university salary for that of a plumber that runs his
own little (cash fee supplemented) business. I find it rather ironic
that I (who has always prized education) am now horrified by the number
of high school students who are hell bent on a university education becuase
everything else is a ``dead end job''. 
My major objection to your piece, however, is the notion that the
solution to all of this is to engineer salary scales. Firstly,
such a proposal can't work (companies will always find ways to pay
``over award'' if they think it's in their best interests). Secondly,
I am always adverse to such tinkering or social engineering. You
usually find that such schemes become a bit of machinery that it
impossible to control and too blunt to do any good anyway. Eventually,
if the problem continues, we will have that many white collar workers
that salary levels (and employment levels) will decline so much
that it will become OBVIOUS that the blue collar workers are more
in demand and more likely to be well rewarded. 
BTW In my times since leaving school I have often done a ``back of
the envelope'' calculation to compare my net success in accumulating
wealth against that of the ``average labourer'' and the conclusion
is invariably that when all lost earnings and extra cost is taken
into account, I am certainly not better off than if I had left
school at fifteen. However, I am enjoying my lifestyle more -
that's the difference to me and many others.
d.s.
From: allanc@cs.su.oz.au (Restless Wanderer)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: NSW Court of Appeal exonerates Greiner?
Date: 26 Aug 92 00:50:20 GMT
Reply-To: allanc@cluster.cs.su.oz (Restless Wanderer)
Distribution: aus
Organization: Basser Dept of Computer Science, University of Sydney, Australia

In article <chris.714733702@suite.sw.oz.au> chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:

>Finally, (and I don't know what they were saying in Liberal Party
>branch meetings) the overwhelming community view was that the behaviour
>of Greiner was outrageous. Had an election been held, he would have been
>soundly defeated. Indirectly, the Liberals have scored by getting a new

	Well Chris, I'm not privy to any political branch meetings but
	the overwhelming community view,that I associated with,was that
	the independents had let their electorates down.Not one of disgust
	at the Greiner/Metherill debacle.EVERYONE I spoke to accepted that
	political appointements are made at the whim of the Govt.Lance Gair
	flies to mind,as does Jack The Bag Man Herbert.
	Outrage was directed at the 3 wise monkies who made a mockery out
	of the phrase" innocent until proven guilty ".They have a lot
	to answer for.The Chamberlains can attest to a miscarriage of
	justice.
	Would YOU employ Dr Terry after this event.?

	As for your assertation that 'he would have been soundly defeated'
	Well that never happened so you can be as hypothetic as you like.
	I'll wager that independents loose ground due to this action.
	I know people in the electorates that voted for these people..ONCE.



Allanc
From: chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Choosing the Prime Minister and the Ministry
Date: 24 Aug 92 23:41:50 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd

In <1992Aug24.075241.3387@cs.su.oz.au> mrj@moria.cs.su.oz.au (Mark James) writes:

>The Australian Constitution states that the ministry is appointed
>by the Governor-General, and it has been formalised that the
>GG should take advice from the Prime Minister alone.
>But who chooses the Prime Minister?

The GG. He makes an educated guess after the defeated PM resigns
after losing the elections (or losing a no-confidence motion).

>Does/Can the Parliament act to choose the PM and hence the ministry?

The parliament gets to express its disapproval by carrying a
no-confidence motion. If it agrees with the GG's choice, there's
no problem.

To avoid problems, the GG chooses the leader of the party with the
majority of the seats in Parliament. If no party has a majority it
gets interesting...

As an aside, this area of constitutional law is very vague when
abnormal circumstances apply. The Greiner/Moore affair is a case
in point. The NSW Court of Appeal in ruling that the ICAC was
unable to return a finding of corruption, referred back to Evatt's
book "The King and his Dominion Governors" as being one of the few
reference works on the reserve powers of the Crown.

For those interstate bods, Greiner couldn't be found to be corrupt
because the court ruled that there is no objective test for measuring
the limit of partial (political) begaviour for politicians, even
when they are also Ministers of the crown. He wasn't exonerated as
the Liberals and the press keep saying...
-- 
Chris Maltby - Softway Pty Ltd		Internet: chris@softway.sw.oz.au

PHONE:	+61-2-698-2322	"I'm waiting for X-Windows to become just that;
FAX:	+61-2-699-9174	 Ex-Windows" - A McGrath.
From: brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Hinch Notes
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:14:11 GMT
Distribution: aus

in article <1992Aug18.044917.9666@latcs1.lat.oz.au>, tourloup@latcs1.lat.oz.au (Vasilios E. Tourloupis) says:
> I guess this is the type of reaction to be expected when the Reserve
> Bank decides to replace the face of the only female representing
> Australian history with the Queen.

The new series of notes will have three famous Australian women, whereas the
old series only had one - Caroline Chisolm.  It's unfortunate that she
happened to be on the lowest denomination note, because it was the first to be
replaced.

This may have created a bad impression.  The new series is going to improve
the representation of famous Australian women, not reduce it.

As for the appearance of the Queen on the $5 note, well, I'm all for it,
because it's probably going to do more in galvanising public support *for* a
republic than any other single action!

-- 
Brendan Jones  | ACSnet:  brendan@otc.otca.oz.au               | What does
R&D Contractor |   UUCP:  {uunet,mcvax}!otc.otca.oz.au!brendan | your
Services R&D   |  Phone:  (02)287-3128    Fax:  (02)287-3299   | company
|||| OTC ||    |  Snail:  GPO Box 7000 Sydney 2001, AUSTRALIA  | export?
From: chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: What's wrong with lowering the dollar?
Date: 18 Aug 92 23:15:39 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd

In <1992Aug18.050104.12286@trl.oz.au> c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:

>So is there anyone out there who knows why so many people in this country
>believe that we should continue to have an overvalued currency?

There is another large factor which makes the precise value of
the exchange rate important. This is the net foreign debt which is
expressed in currencies other than A$. Given that interest on the
current NFD is a significant percentage of GDP, small changes in
the currency value can make big differences to the proportion of
GDP left over for Australians...

So although a lower currency advantages exporters, it disadvantages
all those borrowers of foreign currencies, especially governments...

An interesting thread for this group might be some discussion of
exactly how we managed to turn a respectable trade surplus throughout
most of this century into a massive deficit in just a few years. The
crucial change in policy (if it was policy) seems to have occurred in
the late 1970s. As such either Fraser or Stone would seem to be the
responsible official.

Some commentators have suggested that a policy of encouraging imports
was to counter the devastation for farmers that was sure to ensue from
the minerals boom exploding the currency value. Of course, the minerals
boom was all on paper - and we ended up with the imports and no exports.
What's more, it wasn't the greenies who stopped that "boom"!

I guess no-one would describe Fraser as an "economic rationalist", but
Stone certainly was. Or was the policy an example of unnecessary
government interference?

Chris
-- 
Chris Maltby - Softway Pty Ltd		Internet: chris@softway.sw.oz.au

PHONE:	+61-2-698-2322	"I'm waiting for X-Windows to become just that;
FAX:	+61-2-699-9174	 Ex-Windows" - A McGrath.
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: dyfl@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Daniel Y Lam)
Subject: Re: The Role of Government
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 04:30:03 GMT

Steve.Williams@f547.n635.z3.fidonet.org (Steve Williams) writes:

>Are you saying the Medicare levy should be optional? Like all taxes it isn't,
>and to my way of thinking I would rather have this one specific levy taken out
>of my earnings to ensure my family and I get a reasonable level of medical care
>than go back to the "get private health insurance if you can afford it"
>mentality of the Fraser years.

Well, I think everything should be optional, wherever possible.  It's
nice to hear of your willingness to use your money to protect your
family.  What Medicare allows people to do, however, is to use other
people's money to protect themselves.

--
	Daniel Lam
	Melbourne, Australia

In my opinion, the opinions expressed here are my personal opinions.