JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[Reaper]

-Ok, if I had a mortgage, I certainly wouldn't want interest rates to go up! And neither would the 30% of australian households who are paying off mortgages.

If you had any sort of investment with a component in either a conservative fund or in cash (every managed fund will have at least a portion invested in "cash"), such as nearly every Superannuation fund and/or self funded retiree then higher interest rates are what you are praying for. Like everything, interest rates too high is not healthy for the country, nor is it when they are too low.

-'recessions will not occur very often if at all'. Recessions will always happen. Always have, always will. The economy is a living organism, sometime it's healthy sometimes it's sick.
-privatised jails - ok I encourage you to look into US justice system. If you can call it that. Between abuse of plea bargains and mandatory sentencing, they have very high incarceration rates. Does it make the streets over there any safer? No. W.R.T. utilities was referring to sewerage, water, rubbish collection, some airports......

I think there are many many many factors in US society which influence the crime rate. Weather jails are privatised or not should have minimal effect on crime rates either way. Further, it has been long established that even at best, govco just don't seem to have the ability to run or build *anything* as efficiently as private enterprise.

-I'dve thought quality education and medical care were basic human rights, everyone has access to these when needed, don't see the problem? Converting LGAs into electorates could work in the city but out west in the seat of Calare we have about 6 LGAs in our seat.......the local issues that face Parkes would be much different to those of Lithgow.
-If unions are indeed 'businesses' - where do the profits go? CFMEU made losses last 2 financial years, they are businesses they aren't very good ones!

Unions are a business just like any other association, club or professional body. In the case of the CFMEU I'd suggest any profits would be eaten up in fines and legal fees defending their thugs from running rampant over business and other associated corruption.

CFMEU fined $1.25m over Grocon protests in Melbourne - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Clean out the CFMEU, says Simon Crean

 

[c2105026]

Whether or not jails are privatised crime would be the same - true, never disputed that, but incarceration rates could go sky high; US prison system surprisingly corrupt. Think about it - more prisoners mean more $$$ for contractors. There was one very obvious case where a judge - who had business interest in local jail - would then sentence pretty much all who came before him to jail, no matter the crime.

privatisating something could be good if the item in interest is basically stuffed. However, if the thing you are about to sell is profitable - why sell it?

As I said, what service/performance the end customer already benefits may improve due to efficiency, but you could lose some amenity in the search for profit. Eg. I bank with the Greater Building Society, it is not-for profit, as a result I can get really good deals on loans and investments. With the CBA, you couldn't because shareholders needed their dividends. I am also with medibank private; yes it will be privatised but up until now it was comparable with private providers and I believe still turned a profit of some $300 million dollars/yr. Finally once something is sold, it's sold for good. You have now have a reduced asset base that you could sell in the future if your country is actually bankrupt.

 

[Reaper]

Whether or not jails are privatised crime would be the same - true, never disputed that, but incarceration rates could go sky high; US prison system surprisingly corrupt. Think about it - more prisoners mean more $$$ for contractors. There was one very obvious case where a judge - who had business interest in local jail - would then sentence pretty much all who came before him to jail, no matter the crime.

I'm sure all of these issues can be overcome with appropriate regulation. I cannot imagine the judicial system (ie courts etc) being privatized in any shape or form. Like any level of government, people being

privatisating something could be good if the item in interest is basically stuffed. However, if the thing you are about to sell is profitable - why sell it?

Ummm we need the money? If the yield from the venture is less than the (effective) cost of financing it? If the vendor can get a premium price for it?

In this case we are talking about a prison though which will never ever make money. What it becomes a mitigation process. If it costs (say) $200 for govco to house a prisoner per day but the private operator can do it for $180 (at the same standard) then I'd say we should seriously look into it.

As I said, what service/performance the end customer already benefits may improve due to efficiency, but you could lose some amenity in the search for profit. Eg. I bank with the Greater Building Society, it is not-for profit, as a result I can get really good deals on loans and investments. With the CBA, you couldn't because shareholders needed their dividends. I am also with medibank private; yes it will be privatised but up until now it was comparable with private providers and I believe still turned a profit of some $300 million dollars/yr. Finally once something is sold, it's sold for good. You have now have a reduced asset base that you could sell in the future if your country is actually bankrupt.

I don't see a downside of privatizing medibank if it can provide a return as described above. Why? Govco could easily create a new private health insurance business any time in the future they saw fit. Build a business and sell it off. Same goes with power generation, airlines, banking, near anything you like. It's what entrepreneurs have done forever. Personally I suggest govco shouldn't - they have a long and celebrated history of ####ing such things up but that's an entirely different issue.

 

[c2105026]

It's fine to sell something if you actually need the money to remain solvent but if one is to do it out of ideology....if you have a good asset that is working for you, why sell it. As govt of both sides have shown has shown, they don't get a premium price - eg. $15 billion of NSW power infrastructure sold for 5, telstra shares shooting up in value in first few days suggests the initial offering was way too cheap.

Using prison analogy - govt houses a prisoner for $200 a day, which would be a non-profit cost price. Provider could do similar job for $180 a day but the need for profit could reduce the available $$$ to $150 a day, at which they will need to boost efficiency or cut the service. Very often a boost in efficiency does lead to a cut in service - so that is easily done. Eg. regarding prisons, in the US private prisons have much higher rates of assaults etc, due to lower rates of supervision and poorer training.

From a leftie/social justice/social democrat perspective - unless something is privatised by public offering, deals are done behind closed doors, and there is a 'preferred' person to take over something, the rich get richer and society gets a bit more rotten. EG. Bob Carr steps down as premier. Walks into job at Macquarie bank, at which point NSW govt then gives up its assets and leases basically everything - through MacQuarie bank. They made a ####ing killing. Like a rotten fish, it stinks from head to tale.....this goes for major parties on both sides.......

 

[Jesterarts]

Just throwing it out there, I do t have too much of an issue for assault rates in prisons to increase. Good incentive to stay the hell out really.

It seems that prisons are just another for of welfare. So we should give people a reason to stay out.

Also. As a double bonus. Those who commit the assaults in prisons would have their sentence extended due to their actions, thus keeping them out of our society.

It's really win/win as far as I am aware.

 

[Tasmaniak]

While I agree that we spend too much on prisons. Having seen the effect of private jails in some areas of the US, they tend to cause more trouble then they are worth. Corruption is a massive problem in the judicial system and I don't think its the answer here.

The only time it really worked in the US is in the states with heavy regulation which costs almost as much as state run prisons.

Maybe it could work better here in Oz being a different government... But I don't think so.

 

[Reaper]

It's fine to sell something if you actually need the money to remain solvent but if one is to do it out of ideology....if you have a good asset that is working for you, why sell it. As govt of both sides have shown has shown, they don't get a premium price - eg. $15 billion of NSW power infrastructure sold for 5, telstra shares shooting up in value in first few days suggests the initial offering was way too cheap.

I have no knowledge of the NSW power sale beyond the then state government was out and out corrupt. As for telstra, I'd argue that the timing of it's sale was near perfect. T1 was in the first 1/3 of the tech bubble, T2 was near the peak at $7.70 sale before shortly going to $9.something before crashing to around $2.60 within 2 years. The ALP and cross benches frustrated the balance although they finally sold it off in 2006. Since then it has mostly bounced between $3 and $4 although is somewhat higher now at $5. As IPO's go Telstra was considered an excellent result, even with the benefit of hindsight.

Using prison analogy - govt houses a prisoner for $200 a day, which would be a non-profit cost price. Provider could do similar job for $180 a day but the need for profit could reduce the available $$$ to $150 a day, at which they will need to boost efficiency or cut the service. Very often a boost in efficiency does lead to a cut in service - so that is easily done. Eg. regarding prisons, in the US private prisons have much higher rates of assaults etc, due to lower rates of supervision and poorer training.

TBH I personally don't care if there is a cut in service but that's a different philosophical argument. Standards are very easily regulated the same as they probably already are.

From a leftie/social justice/social democrat perspective - unless something is privatised by public offering, deals are done behind closed doors, and there is a 'preferred' person to take over something, the rich get richer and society gets a bit more rotten. EG. Bob Carr steps down as premier. Walks into job at Macquarie bank, at which point NSW govt then gives up its assets and leases basically everything - through MacQuarie bank. They made a ####ing killing. Like a rotten fish, it stinks from head to tale.....this goes for major parties on both sides.......

Just doing 5min of reading - it appears the NSW state government of the day was about as old school corrupt as they come. I wonder how many shredders they wore out getting rid of the brown paper bags come election day :lmao:

 

[Reaper]

While I agree that we spend too much on prisons. Having seen the effect of private jails in some areas of the US, they tend to cause more trouble then they are worth. Corruption is a massive problem in the judicial system and I don't think its the answer here.

The only time it really worked in the US is in the states with heavy regulation which costs almost as much as state run prisons.

Maybe it could work better here in Oz being a different government... But I don't think so.

It is important to remember that the US judicial system is very different to Australia too. Many judges and sheriffs are elected officials (either via the public or their peers) amongst a litany of other differences. Another case in point being how the US Banking system works vs Australia which is arguably the best in the world. As much as many bitch about the profits of Australian banks, the only thing worse, and usually it's catastrophically worse, is an un-profitable bank.

 

[Tasmaniak]

I just can't see it working here... But hey that's why I twist wires together instead of making important parliamentary decisions! Lol

 

[Calaber]

I'm thinking that we could almost start a list of what this government has managed to achieve so far, despite the lefties saying "nothing".

After just seven months, we have seen a substantial reduction in the number of asylum seekers entering this country. (I think the difference between the thousands that came in during the comparable period under Labor and zero for the Coalition, is reasonably substantial.)

FTA with Japan

FTA with South Korea

FTA with China next on the agenda.

Considerable improvement in our relationship with Japan and Korea following damage caused by Rudd's efforts during his first term in office. IIRC, he also pissed China off, too. (Not nice to be called rat f***ers, Kevin)

The under-achievements probably can be covered by

Relations with Indonesia still pretty rocky, with a lot of work still to be done to undo the damage caused by both parties since 2006.

Tangible evidence that the government has the correct policies to address the fiscal emergency they made so much noise about during the election campaign. We have another month or so to wait for that one.

We still have those damned taxes, thanks to the intransigent opposition and the Greens.

Overall, it's not a bad score-card for just seven months but the real proof in the pudding will come with the budget and perhaps, the new Senate from July.