facthunter Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 We need Steel Aluminium. Magnesium and Nickel. We also have no more than 3 weeks supply of petroleum, in reserve. How clever is that? Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Someone said who could predict the turnarond in the minerals. Answer Blind Freddy. When you swamp the market and then continue to produce in excess it is easily predictable. Our government wants money so they approve as many mines as thay can. They can't see that for example Adani is Indian and will be diggging up Qld to send to India. They can't see that the profits are going to be made in India, so no taxation will come to us. They will allow Indians to work here so more money going overseas. The price for ore will still be depressed. What they need to do is make the royalties a more realistic sum. For the last 40 plus years I have listened to the miners boasting about how much they are selling and then a week later bemoaning the fact that they are not getting enough profit. Twiggie forest had the right idea when he said they should reduce output. What a fuss that produced. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff13 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 As I've previously stated ..Who could predict the turnarounds in the Minerals Industries that have occurred? Nev Just about everyone around the fringes of the industry have seen it coming. But there are always a few who try to push everything past a viable return. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 More the degree than the fact it was inevitable. BHP Billiton increased output like the Saudi's. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwi303 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 A clever country might do its sums and decide it cheaper to keep it open, keep those workers and all the associated subies employed. Happened here, the Smelter down south at Tiwai point was threatening to close if they didn't get electricity at a price they liked, Govt leaned on the (govt owned) power company, sweetheart deal achieved. Govt share dividend lowered due to lowered profits from the govt owned power co, but lots of workers paying income tax instead of recieving the dole more than balances that. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 I would imagine that Dick's a Conservative, so, I think that he would vote with the Conservatives on the majority of matters He is a socialist green and a malthusian, so the opposite. ...but lots of workers paying income tax instead of recieving the dole more than balances that. Good outcome. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 There's a point where government assistance to prop up industries goes beyond a joke. Remember the "too big to fail" banks in the USA who were responsible for the GFC? They got propped up and the boards used the money to hand themselves massive bonuses. Now Clive is boasting that he's used $250 mil of his own assets to prop up the nickel company (really?) and wants the government to match him dollar for dollar. What he's really asking for is money for nothing, from taxpayers who have no interest in his company. I think that's called "begging" but most beggars only ask for a dollar or two. Yes there are situations where a company which employs many people and will be viable again in the future should be able to get assistance in a short term crisis. This should NOT be a gift from the taxpayers, it should be in the form of a low-interest loan which they should repay as soon as they're back in the black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Yes there are situations where a company which employs many people and will be viable again in the future should be able to get assistance in a short term crisis. This should NOT be a gift from the taxpayers, it should be in the form of a low-interest loan which they should repay as soon as they're back in the black. You mean to say that mining companies should be treated the same way as drought-affected farmers? OME Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 You mean to say that mining companies should be treated the same way as drought-affected farmers?OME Yep. Funny thing though, I reckon the owners, board members, executives and senior management would all fail the income and assets tests, even if the company is in the red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarly Gnu Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 How about that I see in #32 Marty must be growing up, seeing the light and becoming an economic conservative... I like it! Not much gov money left for bail-outs (that's a silver lining), not too far off before we'll have to worry about bank bail-ins (which are far worse). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 that feeling when you open up recfly and read GNu 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 GM at one stage was owned by the US government. What's good for GM is good for America??? Does that saying still hold? Shameless. Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreywh Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 I like Dick , He seems straight and a real bloke.......... He is a vocal member of the Stable Population group. Which , I believe is the ONLY way forward for Australia..... 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 And for the world even more so. Nev 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 As I've previously stated ..Who could predict the turnarounds in the Minerals Industries that have occurred? Nev Nev, not sure if your question was meant to be rhetorical, ironic or even sarcastic but, in my time I can recall the booms and busts of the early 1970s (Poseiden), the boom of the early 1980s and the bust of the late 1980s and, of course the recent boom now busted. Whenever I hear people talking about "Minerals Boom" I immediately think "I wonder when the bust will be?". In early 2000s Coal was selling ex Newcastle for around USD20 per tonne. In the peak of the last boom it reached prices over $120 per tonne. Hardly a sustainable price level but everyone who could get a tonne of coal out of the ground did so. And, eventually as happens in every boom, supply expanded enough to exceed demand and prices crashed. No surprises there. Most Australian coal exports do not go to China which has enormous reserves of its own even if it lacks the infrastructure to get it to where it is needed. China's economy is still growing at twice the rate of most other economies around the world and this talk of a China slowdown is simply nonsense. It may not be growing at as big a percentage number as it did but, in absolute terms it is getting bigger every year by an amount bigger than the previous year. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 I am a huge fan of Dick Smith. He is a great entrepreneur and philanthropist. Trying to shove him into a Conservative or Communist box is just mindless. I see him as a progressive, small "L" liberal who is committed to logic and science as the way forward. He is outspoken and attracts a lot of criticism but he says what he thinks and backs it up with action. Imagine a government run by Dick Smith? There be pollies dropping in their tracks not able to keep up with the pace. Disagree with his conclusions by all means but save the questioning of his motives for some other forum. He could be fully retired living on his own island in the Whitsundays not giving a toss about the rest of Australia but instead, despite being in his 70s he clearly does care and at every opportunity he makes his views known with the aim of persuading more people to think. Is he right about not being able to sustain a geometric progression of economic and population growth? Of course he is - that's just simple mathematics. Is anyone prepared to deny the maths? No! Instead they just ignore it and both sides of politics in Australia and all around the world are obsessed with achieving unsustainable perpetual growth. Insanity writ large. 1 11 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Koreelah Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 I'm in favour of sustainable living. I also plan to become a Buddhist and renounce all worldly possessions...after I get just a few more. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 How about that I see in #32 Marty must be growing up, seeing the light and becoming an economic conservative... I like it! Not much gov money left for bail-outs (that's a silver lining), not too far off before we'll have to worry about bank bail-ins (which are far worse). Perhaps you misunderstand me Gnu. I'm all for the government spending money where it's needed - social welfare, sensible forward-looking infrastructure, support for renewable energy industries... I'm just not a fan of it giving our money to companies who have made billions and squandered them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 If, as the article refers to, Dick Smith stands for Parliament. How effective would he be as an independent trying to implement change, if the Government had a clear majority ?Then again, he firstly has to get elected in the seat, and How many voters in that seat see aviation as a primary issue? (Kind of a one trick pony) http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/01/21/00/55/dick-smith-considering-running-against-bronwyn-bishop-report If the government has a clear majority, then the only people able to effect change are the Prime Minister, Cabinet, lobbyists and a few favoured vested interests. When the government majority is slimmer Cabinet will talk to the independants and if they get cranky may resort to talking to the ALP or Greens. In the current climate, Dick Smith in the Senate might achieve some success, in the lower house he would have to work a lot harder unless there was a hung parliament, as there was under Gillard. The backbenchers are shut out of much of the decision making process and their main role becomes helping constituents solve problems with the public service or as shock troops selling leadership decisions (including captain's calls) to a cynical public. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coljones Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 I would imagine that Dick's a Conservative, so, I think that he would vote with the Conservatives on the majority of matters, and only speak out on his hobby-horse interests. He's the sort of person you think you could trust to be free of Party influence. It does not concern me who is the local member for those seats north of the harbour. I don't live up there.OME Free of party influence may also indicate that he will have all the answers at his fingertips but be totally unaware of what the questions are. Parliament covers a vast legislative and administrative territory and it helps if there are political advisors and public servants matching up answers to questions. Independants can be suckered by the government and opposition on a wide range of issues. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 Like Xenophon, He will be able to investigate matters referred to him independently. In aviation matters I would imagine he would be easy to get involved and knows much. Nev 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchroll Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 Trying to shove him into a Conservative or Communist box is just mindless. I agree. Dick certainly can't be considered "conservative" nor "leftist" either. He has a mix of progressive social views while being staunchly pro small business. I disagree with some of his views and proposals on aviation, but by all accounts he's a thoroughly decent person. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 I'm pretty sure that Dick is no a raving right-winger. When I said that I thought he would be of a Conservative bent, I meant that I thought he was a few steps Right of Centre. I don't think any businessman would support the Left to any great degree. There's a difference between Socialism and "progressive social views. I think he is too astute to have the wool pulled over his eyes by either major party. I think it is good for parliament to have some Independents to act as burrs under the saddle cloth. OME 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 People will send confidential information to independents moreso than major parties where it's nearly impossible to have a direct contact for ordinary mortals. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonRamsay Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 I dislike independents having the balance of control as it gives them power totally disproportionate to their democratic mandate. The peanut who was elected to the senate on a fraction of 1 percent of the vote and from what I could see knew nothing about everything and was open to being guided by "independents" like Palmer. Those situations do make the Senate into the "Unrepresentative Swill" that Paul Keating ascribed to them. Crazy part is that the ALP/Greens coalition and the Libs/Nats coalition could by simple agreement between them chose to ignore the votes of the minor parties by a process similar to the "pairing" arrangement that happens when an MP must be away from parliament and the other side has one of their own stand aside. It could be done by a handshake and that would be the end of independents forever. I'm a big fan of Nick Xenophon but even he should only have power equivalent to his mandate rather than an accident of numbers. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now