• Join ccmfans.net

    ccmfans.net is the Central Coast Mariners fan community, and was formed in 2004, so basically the beginning of time for the Mariners. Things have changed a lot over the years, but one thing has remained constant and that is our love of the Mariners. People come and go, some like to post a lot and others just like to read. It's up to you how you participate in the community!

    If you want to get rid of this message, simply click on Join Now or head over to https://www.ccmfans.net/community/register/ to join the community! It only takes a few minutes, and joining will let you post your thoughts and opinions on all things Mariners, Football, and whatever else pops into your mind. If posting is not your thing, you can interact in other ways, including voting on polls, and unlock options only available to community members.

    ccmfans.net is not only for Mariners fans either. Most of us are bonded by our support for the Mariners, but if you are a fan of another club (except the Scum, come on, we need some standards), feel free to join and get into some banter.

The Salt Mine: Dig Deep, Stay Salty

pjennings

pjennings

Well-Known Member
pjennings said:
Who would you prefer Sussssan Ley or Angus? They really need to look at the best candidates they can get - not fall back on who went to what school or what happy clappy church they go to.

The Liberal party used to have moderates like Viner, McPhee, Steele Hall, Harry Edwards, Bruce Baird even Andrew Peacock. That was when they were a good Govt and Opposition. Amanda Vanstone was even a moderate at first until she was told she would lose her pre-selection unless she changed tune. So much for a broad church.

There are plenty of people in the Liberal Party that could do a much better job than those in Parliament but it is too much a matter of who you know - not your ability.

They have shot themselves in the foot. Without their lurch to the right there would be no Teals.
Click to expand...
Further to this the Coalition should be a shoe-in given the lack of scrutiny they receive and they will undoubtedly pick up seats.

However, they also should be concerned about some of their own.
Deakin - Sukkar is now even unpopular with the Liberals
Menzies - probably safe - but a moderate liberal so may not get much support from head office
Dickson - the ALP and a new teal will be swapping preferences. If they come second and third Dutton will be in trouble.
Cowper - strong teal standing
Wannon - third time comedian candidate well supported after going close last time.
Bradfield - Fletcher retiring and a strong teal standing
 
true believer

true believer

Well-Known Member
another gay hating conservative caught on grindr .
are all these trans gay haters hiding in the closet ?

Ihip news is the best show in town

 
Last edited:
H

Hello Sailor

Well-Known Member
Hi Joyful,
I didnt get a chance to consider your informative post yesterday but I DO have a few questions/comments.
.
“It has provided an equal, national approach for all Australians instead of the incredibly piecemeal and expensive approach each individual state offered prior.”

I’m OK with this if it means that it is more efficient/cost effective. If reverting responsibility to the states is not feasible [even via increased GST grants to cover the cost] then savings need to be made at the Commonwealth level.

“It has allowed disabled Australian to function, work and increase their tax contribution by doing so.”

I’ve heard the tax argument before and this is where I have some difficulty.
The average cost of a package is $65k/year, but you say that this enables them to contribute taxes. What is the net loss on this deal [on average}? Assuming 20% tax rate each person on average will need to earn 325k to break even.

“It has decreased tax payer burden by ensuring that the needs of disabled people are met before they enter catastrophically expensive emergency care”.

I’m unsure what you mean here. Everyone sooner or later ends up in emergency care. Can you expand a bit please?

“Consequently of moving to a national model it made the NDIS "the only life boat in the ocean" for disabled people. As the states have completely retreated from their provision of services it has increased costs to the Commonwealth. But the national model of the NDIS significantly decreases costs by ensuring efficiencies through lack of duplication of state programs and employees. It appears more expensive simply because it isn't split between the 6 states budgets.”

I’m OK with efficiency and removing duplication, who isn't, but I think that it’s also more expensive because more and more people access it. I don’t think it should be the only life boat in the ocean-I think that families should be the initial care providers and where that is not possible [maybe means tested like for access to other government benefits] then yes, get on the lifeboat. It should be a last resort, not the first. [As an aside, doesn't duplication still exist by having multiple private enterprise profit-driven 'providers' as middle men. This could be a place to tighten things further].

There are over 700,000 Australians on the NDIS and it is growing by about 8%/yr. Within a decade it is expected to cost the budget more than the age pension [and that’s saying something given the ageing population too]


“In addition, actually funding the National Disability Insurance Agency properly so it can successfully audit and enforce the NDIS' rules would be enough to prevent it. Since its implementation the NDIA has never been given the resources to properly do its job”.

Shorten certainly tried to tighten things up , but this sounds like something from Humphrey Applebey justifying why a new hospital is fully staffed but has no patients :)]. The administrators should have prioritised and allocated funds for compliance. Its had over ten years to identify and correct the rorting.


“Ensuring that they can function in Australian society to the best of their ability and to Australia's benefit.”

"to the best of their ability"

In a world without financial constraints this is lovely, but that’s not the world we live in. Is the current care the bare minimum or how extravagant? We also have obligations to the aged, to the sick, to the unemployed, to educate our children, but the State don’t provide [because we cant afford to] optimal conditions in nursing homes, the sick don’t get their own doctor to care for only them, students aren’t provided with 1:1 teacher to pupil ratios and the unemployed have case officers that manage a large number of recipients, not just one. I think it must be more efficient in institutions where fewer, but specialised staff can provide care to many.

to Australia's benefit

How is this quantified?
 
Last edited:
true believer

true believer

Well-Known Member
booney said:
Why should anyone care if they are gay or not.Does it affect their ability to be competent politicians?Same with Johnson.OK he is supposedly from the conservative gay hating Christian lobby so that makes him hypocritical but still a human being with human foibles.
Click to expand...
Johnson is actively persecuting people .for being lgbqt.
He's from the people that took the gay out of enola gay .
Nazis are human beings .
That doesn"t excuse jew burning or bombing children.

Looks like sailor read another post .
 
P

Paolo

Well-Known Member
Hello Sailor said:
“It has allowed disabled Australian to function, work and increase their tax contribution by doing so.”

I’ve heard the tax argument before and this is where I have some difficulty.
The average cost of a package is $65k/year, but you say that this enables them to contribute taxes. What is the net loss on this deal [on average}? Assuming 20% tax rate each person on average will need to earn 325k to break even.



There are over 700,000 Australians on the NDIS and it is growing by about 10%/yr. By 2027 at $100 BILLION it is expected to cost the budget more than the age pension [and that’s saying something given the ageing population too]
Click to expand...
1. Bit of a misrepresentation of the argument to take a comment about net contribution to tax and turn it into a breakeven argument.

The NDIS program doesn't exist to break even by getting individuals into the work force.

2. What's your source?

"This week's budget papers show the NDIS will cost $48.5 billion this financial year. Looking forward, it projects it'll be $52.3 billion in 2025-26 and up to $63.4 billion by 2028-29" - ABC
 
H

Hello Sailor

Well-Known Member
Paolo said:
1. Bit of a misrepresentation of the argument to take a comment about net contribution to tax and turn it into a breakeven argument.

The NDIS program doesn't exist to break even by getting individuals into the work force.

2. What's your source?

"This week's budget papers show the NDIS will cost $48.5 billion this financial year. Looking forward, it projects it'll be $52.3 billion in 2025-26 and up to $63.4 billion by 2028-29" - ABC
Click to expand...
No, as I said I have some difficulty with it, I'm not trying to misrepresent anything.
I read JP as implying that by providing the financial support, that the beneficiaries become taxpayers. If there is no break even, let alone a net benefit for that investment, its a net loss. As a net loss, I dont think saying that becoming taxpayers is a selling point. Its just shuffling huge amounts of government money in one direction and then recouping a very small amount in return, and we are supposed to celebrate this?
If you re-read my text, I asked what the net loss was.
The break-even reference was to highlight that it was so unlikely to break even, that it must be a net loss and its this that I was seeking.

Here's one link, but its not as up to date as your figure. I stand corrected. Even with your lower figure, these are eye-watering numbers. This lower number delays the overtaking of the age pension from 2027 to within a decade (2033). Still nothing to celebrate.

I have corrected the original post. Thanks for the up to date info.

www.afr.com

NDIS to cost $100b, exceeding the pension: budget watchdog

The NDIS is on track to overtake the age pension as the most expensive area of spending within three years if it remains stuck on its current trajectory.
www.afr.com www.afr.com
and
www.smh.com.au

Ballooning NDIS ‘coming under control’, but key reforms in flux

The government is not trying to tighten NDIS eligibility, but says its clean-up of the huge disability program is yielding results.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
 
Last edited:
Wombat

Wombat

Well-Known Member
booney said:
Why should anyone care if they are gay or not.Does it affect their ability to be competent politicians?Same with Johnson.OK he is supposedly from the conservative gay hating Christian lobby so that makes him hypocritical but still a human being with human foibles.
Click to expand...
Just responding to TB's post. Just pointing out the hypocrisy as per usual.
 
pjennings

pjennings

Well-Known Member
Hello Sailor said:
No, as I said I have some difficulty with it, I'm not trying to misrepresent anything.
I read PJ as implying that by providing the financial support, that the beneficiaries become taxpayers. If there is no break even, let alone a net benefit for that investment, its a net loss. As a net loss, I dont think saying that becoming taxpayers is a worthwhile point to mention. Its just shuffling government money in one direction and then recouping a very small amount in return, and we are supposed to celebrate this?
If you re-read my text, I asked what the net loss was.
The break-even reference was to highlight that it was so unlikely to break even, that it must be a net loss and its this that I was seeking.

Here's one link, but its not as up to date as your figure. I stand corrected. Even if your figure is accurate, these are eye-watering numbers. The lower number delays the overtaking of the age pension from 2027 to within a decade (2033). Still nothing to celebrate.

www.afr.com

NDIS to cost $100b, exceeding the pension: budget watchdog

The NDIS is on track to overtake the age pension as the most expensive area of spending within three years if it remains stuck on its current trajectory.
www.afr.com www.afr.com
and
www.smh.com.au

Ballooning NDIS ‘coming under control’, but key reforms in flux

The government is not trying to tighten NDIS eligibility, but says its clean-up of the huge disability program is yielding results.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
Click to expand...
PJ wasn't commenting on the NDIA.
 
true believer

true believer

Well-Known Member
vive la france
french nazi and their version of charlatan nigel farage
lets hope more of these shit birds face justice


Eugene McParland @EugeneMcParland@mastodon.ie
Marine Le Pen found guilty of embezzlement
The French far-right icon will be sentenced later Monday
By Victor Goury-Laffont
PARIS - Marine Le Pen and eight other former MEPs from the French far right were found guilty Monday of embezzling European Parliament funds
https://www.politico.eu/article/fra...le-pen-court-verdict-embezzlement-case-guilty

POLITICO · 1hMarine Le Pen banned from running for office after being found guilty of embezzlement By Victor Goury-Laffont
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
21
Guests online
232
Total visitors
253
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
6,866
Messages
406,226
Members
2,859
Latest member
tito88alter

Share this page

Top