Search results

Ok I'll put it this way: Financial benefit from the 40% tax (some $9bn p.a. by 2012-13) to the Government > Loss of tax rev/investment from "1 in 8" marginal, high risk, projects Our ports + rail lines are already at capacity at current production levels; I don't think that particular concern...

Rudd's definition of "super profits" is ROI in excess of long term bond rate (~5.5%) + ~5% This means that the required returns on these "cancelled" projects, would have been 10.5%+... in fact likely much more if the 40% supertax would have had such a big impact on profits (they would have to...

Unless Turnbull retakes the leadership before the election (extremely unlikely) Rudd will win without a shadow of a doubt

Lol wat BS... projects are determined to be unfeasible all the time - pretty sneaky tactics blaming it on the new tax

Except where others are harmed (torts/criminal cases), Gov responsibility is to effectively educate only, not to force certain individual behaviours. An ideal drugs policy: -All drugs are banned where their use negatively affects others (playgrounds, beaches, inside, train stations + bus...

His presence will only hold sway while he's the leader

What does everyone think? IMO, its fantastic continual microeconomic reform. Congrats to Rudd, Swann and Henry - this is the kind of thing Abbott would never invest time in

Usyd has heaps of variety - the majority of accounting and economics lecturers are shithouse, but occasionally you get a really good one (often if the main lecturer is busy for a few weeks, they get a more senior member of the faculty which can be great) I dont think UNSW would be any better...

I reckon its cause there's a perception (probably true) that Turnbull would not be able to pander to the "working families" vote. He's too noble to institute BS populist vote grabbing policies + his ideas etc are difficult for your average uneducated man in the pub to understand Also he's damn...

George St + the Cross are much worse; yet drinks are 4* as expensive Higher drink prices =/= less alcohol related shit to deal with

Did you even read my post? Smokers have already paid for all the extra health costs; they've paid for their own Medicare funding and are now subsidising everyone else's With this in mind, I think the Gov's supposed right to keep taking money is questionable

Tobacco tax revenues >>>>>>>>>> cost to healthcare system These smokers are being taxed simply because they're easy prey... its OK to the point where they compensate all the externalities from their behaviour but when it goes past that point you gotta question whether its fair Alcohol laws are...

and then when aca showed the dogs he was talking about, they were so cute and quiet

Nope, my family has lived here since the mid 1800s... white people are allowed to support Asian language teaching as well I wouldnt be surprised if he got dumped in a post-election cabinet reshuffle, as a way of getting rid of a shit policy and shit minister at the same time Simply wrong...

What does everyone think about this idea: The Gov would set up refugee application centres in countries which contribute to the boat people problem (e.g. Afghanistan + Sri Lanka) - these could be part of our embassies. Anyone who did not apply for asylum at these places would be turned back...

I really like Rudd: -In 07, he promised infrastructure spending to easy capacity constraints. We've seen massive upgrades to the freight rail network and ports (e.g. port botany expansion) leading to stuff like the multi $bn coal export contract in QLD -Proper view on global warming -Stimulus...

I dont actually believe that this is going to happen Its either a ploy to gain votes when they ditch the policy or a tool used to sidetrack all the conservative old people who would otherwise be whinging about the seemingly extravagant spending on the NBN

I reckon parental means testing is nothing short of discrimination - which parents have enough liquid capital to easily spare $10k+ a yr for each child? Sure, rich parents might be able to sell assets etc but that's not to say they will. End result... kids with poor parents have an easier time...

I don't get your point... They lowered the speed limit, and the death toll rose How is this supporting your POV? And I'd love to see some proper RTA stats (proper = impacts of experimental speed limit changes... not conclusions drawn from the behaviour of the kind of people who are willing to...

So you reckon repeating "I am a roads engineer" constantly makes you sound credible? Your substantive contribution to this thread is 0 The evidence speaks for itself (both the shit that the RTA churns out and the progressive research that has been done overseas)...