HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yar@cs.su.oz.au (Ray Loyzaga)
Subject: Re: Australia's Debt
Reply-To: yar@cluster.cs.su.oz.au (Ray Loyzaga)
Organization: Basser Dept of Computer Science, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:03:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.232455.18450@trl.oz.au: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:
:In article <rakesh.721126947@sungear: rakesh@mame.mu.OZ.AU (Rakesh DESAI)
:writes:
::Govt will have to stop spending i.e. lot of
::welfares will have to go.  
:There was a hypothesis called the Twin Deficits Theory that said that if the
:Government had a deficit in its budget then this helped to cause a trade
:deficit and a current account deficit.  Some time ago, this was shown to be
:bogus.
:Ask yourself, why is cutting spending on welfare necessary to reduce the trade
:deficit?

Pity that we don't have a trade deficit, we have a current account deficit
which has as one of its factors interest payments and foreign borrowings.

:
::Govt may have to devalue dollar 
:
:The dollar's value is set by the market, not the Government.

They could instruct the Reserve Bank to stop supporting it, the market level
would be below the current setting. (although they make quite a deal of money
out of this ... and I guess the govt needs the revenue).
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
From: mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:25:31 CST

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


Brendan>are usually "too afraid to speak out".  They do this because they often don't
Brendan>have any actual evidence to support their cause.  I mean, if they did have
Brendan>evidence they would use it, wouldn't they?
>THAT'S EXACTLY the tactics used by the PROPONENTS of compulsory voting.
>You are clearly afraid of letting the people decide whether to attend or not.

No, this exactly why it should be compulsory. I have already
argued as to the need for everyone to vote to ensure equal
value. In NZ 88% turned out when it became optional, but
what if that 88% are the educated, finacially fortunate 88%.
They will not see any problems in the economy and so there
will be nothing done for the 12% that don't vote, and so in
time they come to believe voting is useless and the thing
perpetuates and in more time there kids get no education or
job opportunities and so cant/dont vote and eventually the
crime rate goes up and the 88% scream why haven't you done
anything about this criminal element and people get put in
jail and lose their right to vote.

Great system, makes the USA a good third world country to
live in for some.

We are lucky in Australia that the government can not afford
to ignore any group in the community.

Michael
--
Michael Pilling				Phone: +61 8 259 7017
Software Engineering Group		Fax: +61 8 259 5980
Information Technology Division		Telex: AA82799
DSTO Australia				michael_pilling@itd.dsto.gov.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: miw@cc.uq.oz.au (Mark I. Williams)
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 06:03:38 GMT

b_duke@darwin.ntu.edu.au (Brian Duke) writes:

>I believe the same law applies to aboriginals as it does to non-
>aboriginals in the NT, but I suspect that the Electoral Commission does
>not chase up and fine aboriginals in remote communities. As I said in my
>post, I believe Everingham tried to change it, but did not. Does anyone 
>really know what the situation is?

With respect to aborigines voting, after the 1968 (?) referendum on the
matter, aboriginese were allowed the vote, but it was not made
compulsory. I don't remember ever hearing that this situation had
changed, but then there have been periods when I was out of touch.

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
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Period between PM election win and taking office
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 07:08:50 GMT

In article <10918@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> brendan@cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony)
writes:
>In <1992Nov4.054331.28756@ucc.su.OZ.AU> mikef@dph1.health.su.OZ.AU writes:
>
>>ceremony but would not agree that it was longer. I also thought that we do
>>not have a PM elect but rather that the newly elected PM assumes office
>>immediately after the election win, that is after the opposition has
>>conceded defeat.
>
>I think the new PM is not until the old one resigns and the GG appoints
>a successor. This may take days, or hours. Whitlam and Cairns were at
>work the day after they were elected or some such, 

Wasn't it Whitlam and Barnard?

>and worked as a 2 man
>government until a full cabinet was sworn in some days later. Usually
>there is not quite such a rush, but in reality the PM-elect has the
>moral authority of the office effective immediately.

Chris O'Neill
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: pol253b@monu1.cc.monash.edu.au (Ms D Alexander)
Subject: Policies - does only economic policy count? 
Keywords: gst, economic, policies 
Organization: Monash University, Australia.
Distribution: aus
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:36:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.140350.165047@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:
>
>BTW Keatings comments last week convinced me to change my
>vote. Seeing he has said Labor = Lib in the senate, I might
>as well put lib before labor.

Surely your vote is contingent upon the whole range of policies of both
parties?  Besides, if you're anti GST, then a vote for Liberal is a
definite vote in favour of GST, whereas a vote for Labor doesn't endorse
GST, after all, they're not going to introduce it.

Dey.
From: hoconnel@iti.org (Heath O'Connell)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Policies - does only economic policy count?
Date: 11 Nov 1992 22:58:52 GMT
Organization: The University of Adelaide
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: adelphi.itd.adelaide.edu.au
Keywords: gst, economic, policies

pol253b@monu1.cc.monash.edu.au (Ms D Alexander) writes:

>In article <1992Nov9.140350.165047@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:
>>
>>BTW Keatings comments last week convinced me to change my
>>vote. Seeing he has said Labor = Lib in the senate, I might
>>as well put lib before labor.

>Surely your vote is contingent upon the whole range of policies of both
>parties? 

	That would be news to Mr. Keating. He wants to boil down his party's
line to, "We don't have a GST". Admittedly this is only a matter of semantics
anyway, considering the wholesale sales tax.


--
		hoconnel@adelphi.physics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Vic Ministers Get $20,000 pay rise.
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:47:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.074124.598@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>
suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.063335.25043@trl.oz.au> c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris
O'Neill) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov4.232430.6955@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>
>>suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:
>>
>>>All I am saying is that your reaction is over the top.
>>
>>Just like the letters to the newspapers.
>>
>>What reaction?  Just saying that this tax is evidence that the Liberal party
is
>>usually only fair to the rich?
>Well there we have it! Straight from the horses mouth. 
>Frankly I tire
>discussing with someone who can only see black and white 

Frankly I tire of discussing with someone who was ignorant of the definitions
of progressive and regressive taxation, who says that such black and white
knowledge is insignificant but only says this after he realizes that his black
and white understanding was wrong.

>(It "progressive" or its "regressive" its "Non-liberal" or its "Liberal")
>if its unfairer than XXX than its only fair to the rich.

What we have set out to do is test the hypothesis that Liberal governments are
usually only fair to the rich.  The $100 house tax is evidence that confirms
that hypothesis.

Chris O'Neill

Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter)
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
Organization: Monash University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 07:23:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.131832.164998@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:
>suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:
>
>
>>The point is that 1) the responsibility is only in your imagination
>>                  2) democracy doesn't come tumbling down in USA, UK....
>>                     just because they don't have compulsory voting
>
>Both the UK and the US have a history of having highly
>unrepresentative governments. Thatcher stayed in power for
>a long time withonly 38% of the vote of those who actually
>voted. Similarly, how many black/gay/female congersdroids
>are there? The fact is that in the US you have to have an
Are you that sure our record is better? 
>awful amount of money behind you to have a chance of getting
>elected. That is hardly equal access and yes I would say
>that democracy has failed.
>
>As for I have no responsibility. Sounds like the argument
>the economic irrationalists make about market forces.
>Elect me to government so I can do little, have all the
>privilages but no responsability for the economy, I'm going
>to take myself out of the loop, and when it all fails in the
>worst recession since the depression, it's not my fault it
>is the market.
>
>Bullshit, gutless Bullshit.
It's pretty easy to build something into a virtue isn't it.
*I* always know who to vote for. *I* always do my democratic
duty - in fact I val;ue it so much that *I* am going to up
the ante in how much you have to pay to demonstrate *YOU* value it
also.
Rather like a religous reaction. Want me to face Mecca every morning?
Want me to send letters of thanks for the air I breath?
Pious bloody rubbish. I recognise some responsibility, as far as it
goes, to try to vote where I have a reason. But that doesn't seem
to satisfy you as self-appointed high priest of democracy. You want
me to attend a booth and fill a form in with meaningless numbers -
(even when I have no reason to choose from those available)
read Canticle for Lebowitz lately?
If you've got to use religious arguments then you're dead in
the water before you start.
d.s.

-- 
David Suter - Dept. of Electrical and
Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University,
Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia
ph 565 5682 Fax 565 3454
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter)
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
Organization: Monash University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:48:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.095442.165004@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:
>>>As for I have no responsibility. Sounds like the argument
>>>the economic irrationalists make about market forces.
>>>Elect me to government so I can do little, have all the
>>>privilages but no responsability for the economy, I'm going
>>>to take myself out of the loop, and when it all fails in the
>>>worst recession since the depression, it's not my fault it
>>>is the market.
>>>
>>>Bullshit, gutless Bullshit.
>>It's pretty easy to build something into a virtue isn't it.
>>*I* always know who to vote for. *I* always do my democratic
>>duty - in fact I val;ue it so much that *I* am going to up
>>the ante in how much you have to pay to demonstrate *YOU* value it
>>also.
>I really do not follow the the concept of how much you pay
>in this argument, just what do you mean by it?
>And I wouldn't call it a virtue, just the least I could do.
>I would call it a necessity.
I pay becuase I cannot *legally* abstain. I can get away from
it by various devices but I either have to play the charade
and attend or I have to fight a fine. I agree its not a HUGE price
to pay, but its a price you invent to satisfy your equally invented
fears. Much like all religious zealots you then turn around and
accuse me of heresay and consulting with the devil (economic rationalists)
simply to bolster your own thin justification.
d.s.

-- 
David Suter - Dept. of Electrical and
Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University,
Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia
ph 565 5682 Fax 565 3454
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Taxation distorting investment
Organization: Telecom Australia Research Laboratories
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:50:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.102941.165082@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au
writes:
>c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:
>
>>One of the fundamental requirements of
>>the tax system is that it should not distort investment decisions (i.e. it
>>should not make an investment viable if it was unviable in the absence of
>>taxation).  The Treasury made no direct effort to change this situation.  Its
>>only effort was to cause a recession that brought down inflation as an
>>after-effect.
>
>Here I disaggree, the tax system should be used to distort
>investment decisions for the long term benifit of the
>country. 
>
>        E.g. tax breaks on R&D and for flegling industries.
>        Surtaxes on speculative gains (as opposed to capital gains).
>        I would also favour a special monopoly tax for things
>                like media monopolies and the FAC.
>        This would make it easier for new startes to enter
>        the market and break the monopoly. After which the
>        tax can be removed.
>        Currently the Adelaide Advertiser and the Courier
>        Mail's position is unassailable. This tax should
>        especially apply to sham competition like the Adel Adver.
>        and the News (now folded).

Well I could have said that one of the fundqmental requirements of the tax
system is that it should not UNINTENTIONALLY distort investment decisions.  I
would hope the Government did not want the distortion caused by negative
gearing and inflation but it didn't do anything sensible about it.

Chris O'Neill
From: jcollier@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU (John Donald Collier)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Compulsory voting (Re: Will Victorians vote stupid yet again...?)
Date: 6 Nov 1992 22:42:43 +1100
Organization: University of Melbourne
NNTP-Posting-Host: ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au

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

>I think this about your entire attitude mate. 
>d.s.

No doubt. You are making quite a bit about a very minor
imposition, so you are most likely not laying your cards
on the table. Of course you are offended to be called on it.

-- 
John Collier 			Email: jcollier@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au
HPS -- U. of Melbourne		  	Fax:   61+3 344 7959
Parkville, Victoria, AUSTRALIA 3052
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter)
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
Organization: Monash University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:27:07 GMT

In article <chris.721006646@suite.sw.oz.au> chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:
>In <1992Nov4.234114.8324@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:
>>You claim to know what's best for me and deny me a fundamental
>>right - to abstain with dignity (not through some quirk of the
>>enforcement of your legislation). That's a bigger insult methinks.
>
>David (and all the opponents of compulsory voting),
>
>Here's a simple remedy. Don't register to vote. If you get caught,
>take it to court. If you are forced to register, don't vote. If you
>get caught, take that to court. If you are fined, don't pay. If they
>put you in prison, go on a hunger strike. If you have to die to protect
>our rights, it's a small price to pay. A massive campaign of civil
>disobedience will surely bring the result you want! After all, it's
>every citizen's right to protest against unfair legislation.
What, and wast a perfectly good opportunity to be a vicitim
perpetually. I might win!
d.s.


-- 
David Suter - Dept. of Electrical and
Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University,
Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia
ph 565 5682 Fax 565 3454
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd
Date: 10 Nov 92 06:00:08 GMT

In <brian.721369072@coombs> brian@coombs.anu.edu.au (Brian) writes:

>suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Nov9.104806.165040@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:
>
>>A vote is a vote is a vote.. and only counts
>>once (no more no less). 
>
>	Really?  Then what happens to the preferences you cast David?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. A preferential vote only
counts once too. It's just that its probabilty of counting once
is >= 50%, whereas in the first past the post system it's <= 50%.
Got it?
-- 
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
Subject: Re: For david and others
From: mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:03:47 CST
Distribution: aus

pol253b@monu1.cc.monash.edu.au (Ms D Alexander) writes:

>In article <1992Nov6.114655.165018@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au writes:
>>Contrary to what you may believe, I am in fact a swinging
>>voter.
>>
>Well, let's hope for your sake that you use condoms.

>Dey.


Actually I never have unsafe sex so I don't need them.

Michael

BTW Keatings comments last week convinced me to change my
vote. Seeing he has said Labor = Lib in the senate, I might
as well put lib before labor.
--
Michael Pilling				Phone: +61 8 259 7017
Software Engineering Group		Fax: +61 8 259 5980
Information Technology Division		Telex: AA82799
DSTO Australia				michael_pilling@itd.dsto.gov.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Vic Ministers Get $20,000 pay rise.
From: mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au
Date: 9 Nov 92 12:20:23 CST
 <1992Nov5.074124.598@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> <1992Nov5.234724.12932@trl.oz.au> <1992Nov6.011445.14023@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>

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

>                    Poor who rent       Poor who buy           Rich
>Labor tax (petrol)   $33 per year (ave)   (33 year average)  (33 per year ave)
>     (Pyramid only)    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>                         Per Driving PERSON NOT household.

>Liberal             Virtually zero        $100               $100

True, but do you factor in that rich people often have more
cars and the very rich ones that guzzle more gas?
Personally, the advantage of the petrol tax is that it is to
a limited extent discressionary. People can drive less, buy
more feul efficient cars (assuming you can afford to at all)
 and less of them.

I actually don't think there is a lot of difference between
labor and liberal. We have been told that they will both
vote for the GST (surprise surprise). And both have been
rushing down the blind alley of economic irrationalism/
lassie faire economics. This is the collective criminal
negligence that allowed tricon, pyramid etc to happen.
E.g. the reserve bank virtually retired from checking what
banks told them in the 80s. The ANZ has paid out twice as
much in dividends in the past 2 years as it earned. Westpac
speaks for itself. Great record.

Michael
--
Michael Pilling				Phone: +61 8 259 7017
Software Engineering Group		Fax: +61 8 259 5980
Information Technology Division		Telex: AA82799
DSTO Australia				michael_pilling@itd.dsto.gov.au
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: implication of GST
From: mjp@itd.dsto.gov.au
Date: 3 Nov 92 09:47:42 CST
 <1992Oct21.091430.4522@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> 
 <1992Oct26.142750.164888@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> <1992Oct30.000020.14222@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>

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

>Well you may think its not worth considering but this is
>the very case that is the heart of my criticism. But you appear
>to agree with me that, in this case, the Democrats would
>appear to have been follish in being so single minded on their stance.
yes I do agree.

>No - its to be a bit more reasonable about what you threaten to do.
>Surely, the domcrats could just say that if there is no clear
>mandate for a Hewson government THEN they will use whatever powers
>they may have to help defeat GST. Small price to pay for being
>reasonable.

>It's not a problem with the voting system but with abuse of the voting system.
Firstly, I think it is fundementally a problem with the
voting system. Secondly I think the problem is simply that
if you have a 30 second media grab you can not say we will
vote against the GST unless lib + Nat > 50% house of reps
vote not the seats won. It would confuse the electorate,
and confuse the media who would just not print it. "We will
vote against the GST" is a far clearer message, gives the
people a real choice, and the electorate is free to decide.
Also on the balance of probabilities scenario E will not
come up and so is irrelevant. Certainly this appears even
more likely after Kennet's binge.

Michael
--
Michael Pilling				Phone: +61 8 259 7017
Software Engineering Group		Fax: +61 8 259 5980
Information Technology Division		Telex: AA82799
DSTO Australia				michael_pilling@itd.dsto.gov.au
From: b_duke@darwin.ntu.edu.au (Brian Duke)
Newsgroups: aus.politics
Subject: Re: Compulsory Voting
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:27:35 +0900

In article <miw.720925004@cc.uq.oz.au>, miw@cc.uq.oz.au (Mark I. Williams) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov4.085327.4172@darwin.ntu.edu.au> b_duke@darwin.ntu.edu.au (Brian Duke) writes:
>>>I have a different view on compulsory voting from here in the top end.
>>>This week there is a bye-election going on. When I say "this week", I
>>>do not mean on this coming Saturday. The electorate is Arafura, which 
>>>consists of part of Arnhem Land and the Tiwi Islands - a predominantly
>>>aboriginal electorate and more important one with a very thin spread out 
>>>population. Voting in many places is by mobile polling booth and these
>>>started work on Monday, carrying on all week. Only a few larger 
>>>communities vote on Saturday.
> 
> Sorry to sprag the wheels of this argument (the thrust of which I agree
> with), but isn't it still the case that voting is *non-compulsory* for
> aborigines?
> 
> mischievously,
Indeed.

I believe the same law applies to aboriginals as it does to non-
aboriginals in the NT, but I suspect that the Electoral Commission does
not chase up and fine aboriginals in remote communities. As I said in my
post, I believe Everingham tried to change it, but did not. Does anyone 
really know what the situation is?
-- 
                  Brian Salter-Duke (Brian Duke)
School of Chemistry and Earth Sciences, Northern Territory University
        GPO Box 40146, Casuarina, NT 0811, Australia.
Phone 089-466702   FAX 089-410460    E-mail B_DUKE@DARWIN.NTU.EDU.AU
Newsgroups: aus.politics
From: suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter)
Subject: Re: Vic Ministers Get $20,000 pay rise.
Organization: Monash University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 07:41:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.063335.25043@trl.oz.au> c.oneill@trl.oz.au (Chris O'Neill) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.232430.6955@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>
>suter@fawlty8.eng.monash.edu.au (Mr D. Suter) writes:
>
>>All I am saying is that your reaction is over the top.
>
>Just like the letters to the newspapers.
>
>What reaction?  Just saying that this tax is evidence that the Liberal party is
>usually only fair to the rich?
Well there we have it! Straight from the horses mouth. Frankly I tire
discussing with someone who can only see black and white (It
"progressive" or its "regressive" its "Non-liberal" or its "Liberal")
if its unfairer than XXX than its only fair to the rich.
d.s.

-- 
David Suter - Dept. of Electrical and
Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University,
Clayton, Vic. 3168, Australia
ph 565 5682 Fax 565 3454