http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-28/federal-government-begins-medibank-private-sale-pitch/5774458 Um Don't we already own it? Isn't it a public asset? If it is such a good investment, why are we selling it, don't we need the income.
For the current government the $ has the highest meaning, it comes way before any other values or ethics. Thinking it through, private health will become more and more expensive, and medicare will cover less and less and less. We had an old chap working next door, he was waiting a full 18 months to get his hip replaced. Man he really was in terrible pain. The Abbott governemnt will make sure we become a third world country with an ultrarich minority, and endless suffering for most. All signs are there.... Regards
Yes, it is an asset owned by the Government. No you do not own it as you are not the government. I will buy shares in it with the expectation that the share price will go up a lot. This is what happens when Governments sell such things. But I and people who buy the shares will get this benefit not the government. The government will waste the money it gets from the sale.
It's a combination of ideology and stupidity. Seriously bad mix but apparent in this awful government.
The Government are a group of people hired by the Australian people to represent them. How do you propose that 300 politicians that form Government representing the Australian people "own" Medicare Private? The people of Australia "own" Medicare Private - not 300 politicians.
This is getting beyond ridiculous now. These cretins whinge & whine that the Australian people have NO revenue to generate tax, and they have decided to sell-off another Australian public owned asset that is generating tax revenue. Australia is looking more like a country in the desperate position of a "fire-sale" with every passing day. Its time the Australian people demanded a referendum on any sale of a public asset. What these politicians are doing is equivalent to my employee's selling my business without my approval and consent - this is THEIFT.
They are selling something we already own back to us. Sorry for the little man rolling around laughing, but I cannot think of anything intelligent say on how a population could/would allow something like this to occur, without them being outraged and wanting to stop it. When I see how people in France, Hong Kong, Germany, and other countries protest for their rights and democracy against governments and politicians, I feel totally ashamed to call myself an Australian when I see something like this occurring.
The politicians are not hired. They are elected. The people of Australia do not own Medicare Private. The 300 or so politicians do not own Medicare Private. It is the Government that does own it currently.
The Government are a group of people hired by the Australia people to represent them. Who do you think pay's politicians salaries - the fairies in the bottom of the garden. No, the Australian tax payers. Why do you think anyone working for a government department is known as a "public servant"?
Private ownership is not the same as state ownership. Ideally we should do this with all government assets. Start with Australia Post - they are the most useless people on the face of the Earth. Every single interaction I've had with them from postage to in-store has been slow, unprofessional, and bureaucratic. The problem with that is - without the massive advantage of government privilege, there's not a chance in hell it would survive.
This has always been my point. If Governments cannot competently manage a small public owned business like Australia post; then how in hell can they tell the Australian people they can competently manage the entire countries $trillion dollar + economy, and competently manage public affairs? Are the problems confronting Australia post the problems of Australia Post employees, or are they the problems of the politicians "who" don't know how to manage Australia Post as a business for the Australian people?
I kind of agree with a lot you write on this subject, however I firmly disagree with your premise that politicians should be business people or have experience in business. Daily I see or read about businesses doing the wrong thing. Wrong things by their Customers, wrongs to their staff, wrongs to the country and wrongs to the environment. We see corruption rampant in business, and if you watch these anti-corruption hearings you will see it is business that is corrupting the system. Politicians are an elected representative of the populace. Some are professional politicians and have degrees that are in or include politics. So in both ways they are qualified. If they are a "Joe Blow" then they are truly representative of the populace, if they have qualifications in politics, then they are qualified in their jobs. The problems are as you say, the sheeple. I worked at a major Sydney hospital that was trying to make a better economic resource of it's kitchen and cafeterias. Any changes were carwashed by the staff, so the hospital sold them. (The cafeterias not the staff) The changes were made. We need to revisit just about every aspect of our system. Basically it is a good system, it has served as well as we grew, but now we have come of age as a nation, it is time we packed our bags and left the apron strings of our mother (become a Republic). It is time we revisited what it is we want. We need to redesign our political and financial system to reflect changes in work practices, population growth, resource management, planet ecology and our increased standard of civilisation and communication. We need to be leaders, innovators, inventors and good global citizens, not followers, users or troglodytes. We need to look at how we live and what we contribute, not what is in it for us, otherwise we will all loose.
Here is a starter, lets rethink what we term employed. Business makes a living out of making business less reliant on staff. How many companies are building machines that their sales staff can use the following line. Let's say it is a computerised lathe. "This machine does the job of ten men, it does it more accurately and with finer tolerances." It's happening daily and in thousands of businesses. If we keep making better technology that will do a better job, quicker and use less resources and staff how are we going to lower the unemployment rate. Shorter hours, tax multi-income families harder, earlier retirement, research and development of new technologies and industries, where and in what we invest our money ... rethink them all. It's only going to get worse, not better unless we face it.
Y Funny you should allude to the disintegration of the low end labour force. I have recently been in Japan at a technology show that services the retail industry. There I came across a display of technology that can run an entire department store that would generally require over 100 staff with just two people, and they are front door security. Everything is done with a smart phone. You click on a barcode and software is loaded that sell you the product. You watch a sales video of about 15 seconds, if you want it you touch the BUY tab on your screen then proceed to a small black code reading box at an exit lane with your purchase. You then scan the product barcode and your phone barcode and money is immediately transfered from your account to the stores account and you then pass through a scanner much like an airports security gate and off you go. We are so stupid that we are willing participants in the complete destruction of our society. This technology has the ability to replace over a million workers. Heres the thing....... This technology could be refined enough to actually be sold as an add on to one of the over the counter accounting programs thousands of small business's currently run. At a cost of less than a thousand dollars. Here is another thing I learnt at a meeting two weeks ago. There is a push to trial sub contracting in the retail industry. Basically you would need to get an ABN and tender for a sales job or stores assistant. It is already in the health industry with Doctors tendering for positions under this set up as sub contractor. I see much unemployment in the future.
So do I, it is why I think we need to totally rethink the whole process. More leisure time, why don't we take advantage of trhis, become a world of artists and the such. A beautiful world is possible, but an ugly and brutal one is also in the cards.
Would you not consider public departments to be a "business"? Considering they operate and have employees just like any other private business? Therefore, if politicians are in control of these public departments, then shouldn't they have some business savvy or qualifications? Wouldn't you even consider controlling the Australian economy to be a type of business? You don't get your doctor to do your accounts or your dentist to cut your hair... If the Health minister hires a CEO to run the Health department, then how does the Health Minister know the CEO is competent, if the Health Minister has no knowledge and qualifications in the health industry, and doesn't know a syringe from a bed pan? If I want to hire someone to do a specific job in our business, then I don't hire an IT person to work in our mechanical workshop or vice versa. The problem is: the citizens are paying Government ministers huge salaries to do nothing, except to be "mouth pieces" for the CEO's of Government run departments. Lets start paying the CEO's, and get rid of the useless mouth pieces.
Don't get me wrong, the system is adulterated. But it is better than having it like you said. Take your business, you have mechanics, IT people, office staff, presumably. You have a mechanic foreperson, an IT manager and an office manager. Who would you get to manage the business. You may also have a spare parts dept and salespeople. Someone with a business degree can meld them all together into a team. He doesn't need to know how to fit a propeller shaft, where to source it from, how to put up the website, or how to type 50 words a minute. He needs to know management, people skills, customer relations, OH&S etc. The politics of your business. Who should be minister for mineral resources? Clive Palmer or Gina?
We have public owed Government departments and assets that work like private owned companies. Therefore, how can ex-solicitor turned politicians, who have no formal qualifications in their Ministerial portfolios, and who have not had even basic business experience of operating a child's lemonade aid stand in a front yard, have the intellectual capability to hire CEO's to manager entire Government Departments, and public owned assets? This situation is like me hiring an office manager without any office manager qualifications or experience, so that individual can then hire office staff - it just doesn't make sense. I don't think neither Rinehart or Palmer would make good mineral resource ministers.
