News Flash; attention Mr Hockey.

Apparently the sky ain't falling.

"Australians may be bracing for tough news in next week's federal budget, but according to a new report by the OECD, compared with 35 other countries, life in Australia is actually very good."

It continues;

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/oecd-finds-australians-have-good-life-but-poor-worklife-balance-20140506-zr5kj.html#ixzz30zBJ2KbL

>  Doesn't mean there's heaps of room for some idiot to ruin it for us then...

>   Goes to show how badly off the world really is overall, eh?

>  Those with the reins can do better than they are.  To quote Brigadier/Major General MacDonald - there is always woom for impwovement (**snorts froth off top of beer**)

Life is good for those with enough income to be comfortable. But there are lots who, for reasons not within their control, don't enjoy comfortable circumstances.
Life is good for those who don't suffer chronic illness, mental health problems or who are living with fear of violence.

Statistics, particularly international comparisons on living standards etc, are of limited value and never tell the whole story.

Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries.

If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different.

That's true, but you have to offset that against the tribulations suffered by the rural population in times of drought particularly, which can sometimes last 5-8 years.
And then we do get cyclones and floods regularly.

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 1:40pm:

Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries. If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different.

Which is why Indonesia, India, Saudi Arbia, Egypt, Algeria et al are such good places to live and visit.  ::)

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 1:40pm:

Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries. If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different.

LOL

Do you have any practical knowledge?

Do you know how cold it gets in the desert?

We swellter through 40'C+ summers and we will have frosts soon....no ice and snow but.... ::)

King FriYAY II wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 3:07pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 8th, 2014 at 1:40pm: Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries. If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different. LOL Do you have any practical knowledge? Do you know how cold it gets in the desert? We swellter through 40'C+ summers and we will have frosts soon....no ice and snow but.... ::)

I expect that the desert of your mind reaches absolute zero. I feel your pain but offer no solace.

King FriYAY II wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 3:07pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 8th, 2014 at 1:40pm: Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries. If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different. LOL Do you have any practical knowledge? Do you know how cold it gets in the desert? We swellter through 40'C+ summers and we will have frosts soon....no ice and snow but.... ::)

        Frosts? Cold?  It is to laugh, Europe, America, let alone Canada, routinely get temperatures from 0c to below -40c, hardly even in the race anywhere in Oz, are we?  ;D

austranger wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 7:13pm:

King FriYAY II wrote on May 8th, 2014 at 3:07pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 8th, 2014 at 1:40pm: Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries. If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different. LOL Do you have any practical knowledge? Do you know how cold it gets in the desert? We swellter through 40'C+ summers and we will have frosts soon....no ice and snow but.... ::)         Frosts? Cold?  It is to laugh, Europe, America, let alone Canada, routinely get temperatures from 0c to below -40c, hardly even in the race anywhere in Oz, are we?  ;D

Only in Friyay's head.

except for work life balance


and the neo cons want to abolish penalty rates so as to make that balance even more lop sided  :D :D :D

John Smith wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:

except for work life balance and the neo cons want to abolish penalty rates so as to make that balance even more lop sided  :D :D :D

They just want to eliminate the "life" bit.
           Well, for the plebs anyway that is.

---

austranger wrote on May 8^th, 2014 at 7:13pm:

King FriYAY II wrote on May 8th, 2014 at 3:07pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 8th, 2014 at 1:40pm: Australia has a temperate climate without the ice and snow people in less temperate climates get. This cuts down the need of energy for heating which is a high cost in colder countries. If Australia was colder and more susceptible to cyclones and tornadoes, the picture would be very different. LOL Do you have any practical knowledge? Do you know how cold it gets in the desert? We swellter through 40'C+ summers and we will have frosts soon....no ice and snow but.... ::)         Frosts? Cold?  It is to laugh, Europe, America, let alone Canada, routinely get temperatures from 0c to below -40c, hardly even in the race anywhere in Oz, are we?  ;D

You still need the smacking heater though don't you?

We will experience temps below 0 this year though, won't we.

Shopping centers will have the heaters on won't they.

It'll snow in the Vic Alps and NSW and Tassie though won't it.

tools....

Do you want to do air conditioners next?

::)

OldnCrusty wrote on May 7^th, 2014 at 10:41am:

News Flash; attention Mr Hockey. Apparently the sky ain't falling. "Australians may be bracing for tough news in next week's federal budget, but according to a new report by the OECD, compared with 35 other countries, life in Australia is actually very good."

Our economy is far better than most other OECD countries. Our debt is tiny compared to the US, Japan and most of Europe.

The government is talking down the economy for purely political purposes.

The question has to be why didn't John Howard spend the proceeds of the mining boom on infrastructure rather than wasting it all on middleclass welfare.

Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue.

There is no chance that manufacturing will take root in Australia, boomerang industry excepted.

The A$ will rise and jobs will decline. Get used to it.

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10^th, 2014 at 12:03pm:

Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue

Surely, that isn't a bad thing to have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. My uncle retired from the mining industry after being on a near 6 figure salary, and he reckons that mining is what separates Australia from being a third world country. You would think that the billions of dollars that the mines produce for the Australian economy is something that is very cost efficient if we only have the fewest employees per millions of dollars revenue produced.

UnSubRocky wrote on May 10^th, 2014 at 7:44pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 12:03pm: Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue Surely, that isn't a bad thing to have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. My uncle retired from the mining industry after being on a near 6 figure salary, and he reckons that mining is what separates Australia from being a third world country. You would think that the billions of dollars that the mines produce for the Australian economy is something that is very cost efficient if we only have the fewest employees per millions of dollars revenue produced.

When resources becomes the major part of your economy you have become a third world country because there is insufficient jobs to go around and manufacturing is uncompetitive because wages are high and exchange rate is high.

In such a circumstance, the only way to keep a lid on the A$ is by capital investment in other countries so you export capital instead of goods and services. The lucky country is becoming the dumb country.

Australia was 7 th in OECD's life satisfaction index.

7. Australia
> Life satisfaction score: 7.4 (tied for 7th)
> Self-reported good health: 85% (4th highest)
> Employees working long hours: 14.2% (7th highest)
> Disposable income: $31,197 (4th highest)
> Life expectancy: 82.0 years (7th highest)

More than 14% of Australians said they worked very long hours, more than all but a few other nations. Residents were rewarded for their hard work, however. Per capita disposable income was $31,197 — fourth highest after the U.S., Luxembourg, and Norway. Additionally, the average personal earnings in Australia was $46,585, among the highest of all nations reviewed. Residents were also heavily engaged in politics last year. Australia’s 93% voter turnout, likely the result of compulsory voting, was the highest in the OECD. Possibly also contributing to residents’ happiness was the size of their homes. Australians live in especially large homes, averaging 2.3 rooms per person, among the most of any country reviewed.

On the basis of purchasing power parity Australian incomes fall considerably and are comparable with UK and behind USA.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2014/05/05/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world-5/#ixzz31JSVl7Gx

We live in a country that is relatively peaceful, we have a govt that is stable and benign, compared to what some people have had to put up with throughout history.
Most of us have a roof over our head and enough food to eat.
We're better off than about 95% of people who have ever lived on the planet.

Maybe things could be better and maybe things won't stay this way forever, but just be thankful for what we do have here, because I don't think a lot of people realise how lucky we are.

The_Barnacle wrote on May 10^th, 2014 at 11:08am:

The question has to be why didn't John Howard spend the proceeds of the mining boom on infrastructure rather than wasting it all on middleclass welfare.

Because Howard understands what happens when the Middle Class is diminished.

AiA wrote on May 11^th, 2014 at 6:24am:

The_Barnacle wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 11:08am: The question has to be why didn't John Howard spend the proceeds of the mining boom on infrastructure rather than wasting it all on middleclass welfare. Because Howard understands what happens when the Middle Class is diminished.

so he set about subsidising it? How is that going to work long term?  ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on May 11^th, 2014 at 9:28am:

AiA wrote on May 11th, 2014 at 6:24am: The_Barnacle wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 11:08am: The question has to be why didn't John Howard spend the proceeds of the mining boom on infrastructure rather than wasting it all on middleclass welfare. Because Howard understands what happens when the Middle Class is diminished. so he set about subsidising it? How is that going to work long term?  ;D ;D ;D

good point, the answer is its not working. Many middle class households are now entirely dependent on welfare, I think i read the other day that 50 percent of households pay no net tax.

It's not true that any household pays no tax. Anybody who buys retail goods pays tax. People who own property pay rates which is a property tax. There are countless other examples. Everybody who spends money pays tax.

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10^th, 2014 at 9:12pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 12:03pm: Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue Surely, that isn't a bad thing to have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. My uncle retired from the mining industry after being on a near 6 figure salary, and he reckons that mining is what separates Australia from being a third world country. You would think that the billions of dollars that the mines produce for the Australian economy is something that is very cost efficient if we only have the fewest employees per millions of dollars revenue produced. When resources becomes the major part of your economy you have become a third world country because there is insufficient jobs to go around and manufacturing is uncompetitive because wages are high and exchange rate is high. In such a circumstance, the only way to keep a lid on the A$ is by capital investment in other countries so you export capital instead of goods and services. The lucky country is becoming the dumb country.

You said that mining has the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. It stands to reason that mining is the most cost efficient business, if you are raking in more money per employee, in spite of high wages. Miners make near (and in some cases, over) 6 figure yearly salaries. That's working for a company that operates at a decent profit. Compared to essential services (which in some cases sees employee numbers cut to save costs), which operates at a loss. I confuses me that you would see the mining industry as a bad thing. Plus, it doesn't even cross your mind that mining is only one industry in Australia that employs people amongst numerous other industries that work interdependently with the mining industry.

If Australia relied solely on mining, we might be another Iraq with no real prospect of diversifying our economy. But it's pretty much a thriving economy, when you have 5% unemployment, numerous industries to work in, and a moderately to highly educated workforce that even works in industries that they are considered over-educated. Things should be looking good for us for the next 20 years.

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 11^th, 2014 at 10:07pm:

It's not true that any household pays no tax. Anybody who buys retail goods pays tax. People who own property pay rates which is a property tax. There are countless other examples. Everybody who spends money pays tax.

last time I bought property I paid over $30 g in stamp duty (tax)  then when I sell it, I have to pay again ....  :D :D :D

UnSubRocky wrote on May 12^th, 2014 at 9:21pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 9:12pm: UnSubRocky wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 12:03pm: Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue Surely, that isn't a bad thing to have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. My uncle retired from the mining industry after being on a near 6 figure salary, and he reckons that mining is what separates Australia from being a third world country. You would think that the billions of dollars that the mines produce for the Australian economy is something that is very cost efficient if we only have the fewest employees per millions of dollars revenue produced. When resources becomes the major part of your economy you have become a third world country because there is insufficient jobs to go around and manufacturing is uncompetitive because wages are high and exchange rate is high. In such a circumstance, the only way to keep a lid on the A$ is by capital investment in other countries so you export capital instead of goods and services. The lucky country is becoming the dumb country. You said that mining has the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. It stands to reason that mining is the most cost efficient business, if you are raking in more money per employee, in spite of high wages. Miners make near (and in some cases, over) 6 figure yearly salaries. That's working for a company that operates at a decent profit. Compared to essential services (which in some cases sees employee numbers cut to save costs), which operates at a loss. I confuses me that you would see the mining industry as a bad thing. Plus, it doesn't even cross your mind that mining is only one industry in Australia that employs people amongst numerous other industries that work interdependently with the mining industry. If Australia relied solely on mining, we might be another Iraq with no real prospect of diversifying our economy. But it's pretty much a thriving economy, when you have 5% unemployment, numerous industries to work in, and a moderately to highly educated workforce that even works in industries that they are considered over-educated. Things should be looking good for us for the next 20 years.

Economies evolve or devolve just as societies do.

Romans in 800 BC thought life couldn't be better. But then their relative well being compared to other developed societies diminshed to its lowest point post WW2 with some recovery since until GFC.

Also consider Greece, the birthplace of philosophy.

They did not evolve to the stage of flipping mud huts like Australia has as an economic basis.

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 11^th, 2014 at 10:07pm:

It's not true that any household pays no tax. Anybody who buys retail goods pays tax. People who own property pay rates which is a property tax. There are countless other examples. Everybody who spends money pays tax.

NET tax, bozo, net tax.

Soren wrote on May 13^th, 2014 at 12:48pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 11th, 2014 at 10:07pm: It's not true that any household pays no tax. Anybody who buys retail goods pays tax. People who own property pay rates which is a property tax. There are countless other examples. Everybody who spends money pays tax. NET tax, bozo, net tax.

I am sure that excludes council rates which are a tax on property ownership, GST and taxes on petrol and other hidden taxes.

If your assertion is true, the Australian economy is underwater with the tsunami of baby boomer retirements about to deliver the coup de grace.

Nothing to see here: the baby boomers know exactly what's going on so don't worry!

:-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[ :-[

Those baby boomers are all crying for they are retiring in mansions that their kids still can't leave  :o

Soren wrote on May 13^th, 2014 at 12:48pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 11th, 2014 at 10:07pm: It's not true that any household pays no tax. Anybody who buys retail goods pays tax. People who own property pay rates which is a property tax. There are countless other examples. Everybody who spends money pays tax. NET tax, bozo, net tax.

Hows abouts we talk about net subsidies: something soren and his little 'friend' culture tryhard something something will never acknowledge??

The world runs on environmental subsidies that were never there to give. Wealth, and most aussies have some experience of it in the family, rides on the back of a free kick! The subsidiary industry all rides on that free kick...

That is inefficiency written into the system: why not attack the attack I SAY, but who cares because Hollywood just tells us to f that and f this and drink that and smoke it up cuz yehhhhhh cos like we is dat rich and cool and sophisticated and it's all honest to goodness like productivity bro yeh  :o with our long weekends and 38 hour weeks and stuff lol  ::)

UnSubRocky wrote on May 12^th, 2014 at 9:21pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 9:12pm: UnSubRocky wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 12:03pm: Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue Surely, that isn't a bad thing to have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. My uncle retired from the mining industry after being on a near 6 figure salary, and he reckons that mining is what separates Australia from being a third world country. You would think that the billions of dollars that the mines produce for the Australian economy is something that is very cost efficient if we only have the fewest employees per millions of dollars revenue produced. When resources becomes the major part of your economy you have become a third world country because there is insufficient jobs to go around and manufacturing is uncompetitive because wages are high and exchange rate is high. In such a circumstance, the only way to keep a lid on the A$ is by capital investment in other countries so you export capital instead of goods and services. The lucky country is becoming the dumb country. You said that mining has the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. It stands to reason that mining is the most cost efficient business, if you are raking in more money per employee, in spite of high wages. Miners make near (and in some cases, over) 6 figure yearly salaries. That's working for a company that operates at a decent profit. Compared to essential services (which in some cases sees employee numbers cut to save costs), which operates at a loss. I confuses me that you would see the mining industry as a bad thing. Plus, it doesn't even cross your mind that mining is only one industry in Australia that employs people amongst numerous other industries that work interdependently with the mining industry. If Australia relied solely on mining, we might be another Iraq with no real prospect of diversifying our economy. But it's pretty much a thriving economy, when you have 5% unemployment, numerous industries to work in, and a moderately to highly educated workforce that even works in industries that they are considered over-educated. Things should be looking good for us for the next 20 years.

Where did you mention the fact those resources are non-renewable?

--> game set and check mate!! Admit it: you hate me dontcha  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

UnSubRocky wrote on May 12^th, 2014 at 9:21pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 9:12pm: UnSubRocky wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 7:44pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 10th, 2014 at 12:03pm: Darlings, Australia is facing an economy dominated by the resources industries which probably have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue Surely, that isn't a bad thing to have the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. My uncle retired from the mining industry after being on a near 6 figure salary, and he reckons that mining is what separates Australia from being a third world country. You would think that the billions of dollars that the mines produce for the Australian economy is something that is very cost efficient if we only have the fewest employees per millions of dollars revenue produced. When resources becomes the major part of your economy you have become a third world country because there is insufficient jobs to go around and manufacturing is uncompetitive because wages are high and exchange rate is high. In such a circumstance, the only way to keep a lid on the A$ is by capital investment in other countries so you export capital instead of goods and services. The lucky country is becoming the dumb country. You said that mining has the lowest number of employees per million dollars revenue. It stands to reason that mining is the most cost efficient business, if you are raking in more money per employee, in spite of high wages. Miners make near (and in some cases, over) 6 figure yearly salaries. That's working for a company that operates at a decent profit. Compared to essential services (which in some cases sees employee numbers cut to save costs), which operates at a loss. I confuses me that you would see the mining industry as a bad thing. Plus, it doesn't even cross your mind that mining is only one industry in Australia that employs people amongst numerous other industries that work interdependently with the mining industry. If Australia relied solely on mining, we might be another Iraq with no real prospect of diversifying our economy. But it's pretty much a thriving economy, when you have 5% unemployment, numerous industries to work in, and a moderately to highly educated workforce that even works in industries that they are considered over-educated. Things should be looking good for us for the next 20 years.

Life is non-linear but you wouldn't have heard of the concept the whole forum suspects  ;D

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 13^th, 2014 at 2:03pm:

Soren wrote on May 13th, 2014 at 12:48pm: Laugh till you cry wrote on May 11th, 2014 at 10:07pm: It's not true that any household pays no tax. Anybody who buys retail goods pays tax. People who own property pay rates which is a property tax. There are countless other examples. Everybody who spends money pays tax. NET tax, bozo, net tax. Hows abouts we talk about net subsidies: something soren and his little 'friend' culture tryhard something something will never acknowledge?? The world runs on environmental subsidies that were never there to give. Wealth, and most aussies have some experience of it in the family, rides on the back of a free kick! The subsidiary industry all rides on that free kick... That is inefficiency written into the system: why not attack the attack I SAY, but who cares because Hollywood just tells us to f that and f this and drink that and smoke it up cuz yehhhhhh cos like we is dat rich and cool and sophisticated and it's all honest to goodness like productivity bro yeh  :o with our long weekends and 38 hour weeks and stuff lol  ::)

You are rambling and free-associating too much - free kick, Hollywood, cuz yeahhh.

I know what you are saying mate but we do not have to take it on the chin. We have to get off our collective arse and take our country back and if we'd rather just watch footy and commercial media then we deserve every bit of crap we get.

Labor needs to straighten itself out quickly by cleaning house or split so that there is time to build it back up. It has lost the trust and it is a union style party trying to morph into a funky left movement. I'm all for the change but get real man, there are things that needs doing if you want to achieve that in time. The way things are going we definitely do not want another round of the Rabbott-club at the helm.

Sorry, I'm a little excitable.

I was quite well aware that most of our natural resource exports are non-renewable. I don't care. What I do know is that we have a hell of a lot of them, and it's probably going to be our great-great-great-great-great grandchildren that might be concerned about running out of our currently abundant natural resources.

Geez, we do have a big influence on world economies, when we do have a large share of natural resources to sell to the world. The Africans are our only real competition. But they are too busy having ethnic conflicts over such resources, that they aren't likely to hurt our exports.