![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Hmmm... Ten days since the last update. Main excitement since was building a new server for Borderlands, and recovering data as I went from a Domain to a Workgroup for the MS-Windows clients. This server, btw, will be running Red Hat Fedora Core 4 Linux, not bloody Windows NT 4.0.
MC-ed the True Cost Economics Forum at Swinburne University last week; some 75 people in attendence and some excellent speakers including Alanna Hartzok, Associate Professor Frank Fisher, and Kenneth Davidson.
The Federal Government's budget is a "miserable failure" and an "irresponsible scam" (quotes from my press release this afternoon). People earning less than $63000 pa will probably find themselves worse off when interest rate increases (oh, the irony) and transport costs are taken into account. The significant business and high income tax cuts have primarily come from China's strong demand for commodities which isn't exactly a long-term proposal. As recognised, the budget does nothing for the environment and fails to address the growing skills shortage.
Caught up with
v3nu5 and company on her brief visit to Melbourne; wandered around Luna Park, had coffee and cake on Acland Street and ate at the wonderful Xanghai. Managed to get half way to Kiss Kiss Bang Bang before my nose, leaking like a faucet, lead me and
caseopaya to turn tail and head home. Still was wonderful to meet someone whom I've known since 1998 and never actually met in real life.
My letter in The Age a couple of weeks ago on Dr. George Pell led to a response by someone who claimed that Jesus wasn't a Jew (they should read Matthew 5:17 and 15:4-7) and a far more sensible reply by a Rev. Dr. Bob Fraser. On that related note; I am giving a presentation at the Melbourne Unitarian Church on June 11 for "Liberal and Rationalist Prospects in Islam"
MC-ed the True Cost Economics Forum at Swinburne University last week; some 75 people in attendence and some excellent speakers including Alanna Hartzok, Associate Professor Frank Fisher, and Kenneth Davidson.
The Federal Government's budget is a "miserable failure" and an "irresponsible scam" (quotes from my press release this afternoon). People earning less than $63000 pa will probably find themselves worse off when interest rate increases (oh, the irony) and transport costs are taken into account. The significant business and high income tax cuts have primarily come from China's strong demand for commodities which isn't exactly a long-term proposal. As recognised, the budget does nothing for the environment and fails to address the growing skills shortage.
Caught up with
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
My letter in The Age a couple of weeks ago on Dr. George Pell led to a response by someone who claimed that Jesus wasn't a Jew (they should read Matthew 5:17 and 15:4-7) and a far more sensible reply by a Rev. Dr. Bob Fraser. On that related note; I am giving a presentation at the Melbourne Unitarian Church on June 11 for "Liberal and Rationalist Prospects in Islam"
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 11:00 am (UTC)No, no, no... The Jika Jika Community Centre is in Northcote.... (Not at all to be confused with the Jika Motor Inn or the Jika Jika High Security Unit in Pentridge).
As for the old hotel and former original location of St Luke's Anglican Church, it still stands in all its, ahh, glory..
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 11:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 12:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 12:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 12:39 pm (UTC)I suppose they think he was C of E or something. Gah. You don't even need to check the Bible for that sort of stuff.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 01:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 06:13 pm (UTC)The main thing that bothers me about management of the economy is how much depends on a housing bubble, that is incredibly regressive.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 09:47 pm (UTC)Of course, not the magazine. Which I must write an article for one day.
To describe it as a 'housing bubble' is quite accurate; the price of housing, or rather land, (where site rental is privately accumulated) will always include a speculative component. The real cost of building houses has actually fallen (by about 0.5%) since 1950.
It's interesting that economic crashes are preceeded by a "housing" boom.
Personally, I'm glad interest rates have gone up. Indeed, I want Paul Keating levels.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 09:49 pm (UTC)With a complimentary cocktail upon entry!
Speaking of which there is yet another Jika Jika (from whom we used to received Xmas cards from)..
From this morning's Age:
http://www.theage.com.au/text/articles/2006/05/15/1147545263405.html
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:03 pm (UTC)Also, while the government has squandered opportunities to do sensible things with the money (activities such as spending something heading towards $1B on helicopters that are all grounded because they are dangerous aren't exactly smart), those who oppose the government will always reject any changes to taxation. We used to have awful bracket creep. A few years back when the highest marginal tax rate cut in around $50k, we were getting close to having half the working tax payers on the top rate. More than half were into the second highest rate. Now the top rate will come in at $150k and the second highest at $75, which is a fantastic improvement for the vast majority of workers. If a tiny interest rate rise is going to mean that someone on $60k a year isn't vastly better off, they are borrowing _way_ beyond a sensible level.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:16 pm (UTC)You may be right there; although I doubt strongly whether the planet could afford such industrialisation.
If a tiny interest rate rise is going to mean that someone on $60k a year isn't vastly better off, they are borrowing _way_ beyond a sensible level.
How do you figure that? A person on $63,000 will receive little changes to their income tax (see below) a mere $500 relief due to the marginal increase of the 30% threshold from $21600 to $25000.
Current income tax rates
00000 - 06000 0%
06001 - 21600 15%
21601 - 63000 30%
63001 - 95000 42%
95000+ 47%
New income tax rates
000000 - 006000 0%
006001 - 025000 15%
025000 - 075000 30%
075001 - 150000 40%
150,000+ 45%
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:17 pm (UTC)Well, yes; this is a problem with all religious texts - that various adherents interpret selectively, and even when they don't they claim that some of it is metaphor or contextual and others aren't.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:24 pm (UTC)Ahh, fixed. The link was supposed to be:
http://www.theage.com.au/text/articles/2006/05/07/1146940404696.html
The thing about the Singaporean elections was that the Worker's Party received a damn good vote in the seats it actually ran for. We may see a change there in a couple of election's time..
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:26 pm (UTC)As long as it's only "somewhat".
Little has been gained in this world from the benevolence of our rulers; every little right we have has been fought for.
It's always an uphill battle against vested interests.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:27 pm (UTC)That would not bode well for the future of the kittens, would it Mr. Cat?
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 10:49 pm (UTC)One thing which nearly all commentators are still surprised about is why can't we get a government that will index the brackets to CPI (or similar) and therefore avoid, once and for all, the problem of "bracket creep".
no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 11:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 11:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-15 11:59 pm (UTC)What is the justification for lowering the tax rate for the highest bracket? Are rich people just paying too much tax?
Indeed, that is exactly what they have been saying. This is despite the fact that it is low and middle income earners who are paying effective high rates of taxation; as for the effective taxation rate for part-time workers/part-time unemployed! Well, that approaches 70% plus.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-16 02:04 am (UTC)Ah well.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-16 03:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-16 03:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-16 04:43 am (UTC)Well, there has been effective changes to the low-income offset threshold which means that low income people don't pay tax on the first 10,000 rather than 7,500 which was the case in the previous financial year.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-16 04:44 am (UTC)If it moves; tax it!
(Personally, I prefer taxing things which don't move)
no subject
Date: 2006-05-19 03:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-19 05:02 am (UTC)Glad to finally meet up with you in RL. Very lovely company at dinner too!
Oh, and thanks for all the job offers... Might even take one of them up!
no subject
Date: 2006-05-19 05:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-19 05:14 am (UTC)Hey, that's a very good idea! Will do that for sure!