Me too they were really helpful & the problem was sorted in no time . I think they are hard on bullshit artists who try to scam the system but small oversights & mistakes are dealt with fairly . When i first got the letter from them i was thinking this is going to be a shit fight & it wasnt ..
And I'm not taking the obvious troll bait. I've said my peace on it, if he's that keen to know he can search for it. Not going to get dragged into another pointless shitfight for his amusement. That's all I'll say on it.
Who would pay for the bridges ? the schools in small communities ? the roads where heres not enough users to pay for it ? . Thats progress . Progressing far faster than if you had to collect the money from each individual as they use it . In some cases it would take decades & sometimes not at all because it isnt feasible . . Better to have an inefficient service than no service at all
Maybe the people who chose to live in small communities do so because they don't want to suffer the interference of outsiders telling them how they should do things. If you want the public transport system and the overcrowded schools you move to the big city, if you want peace and quiet you move to the country. If a secluded mining community wants to get the product in an out they need to build their own road. Schooling is overrated anyway.
Tax is one of those things that is seen OK because it is a tradition. I've mentioned this before that argument from tradition is a logical fallacy. It was tradition and seen as OK that men were superior to women. You have to look at the mechanics of tax and ask the question. Clearly it is taken by force and is wrong. The question at the point is, how should we as a society deal with this fact? In the same way that instead of accepting the subjugation of women, we needed to ask, how are we going to deal with this? For any particular thing though, whether it be slavery, subjugation of women or whatever it is only a minority in society who will ask the questions initially. The majority just want to go along with how things are regardless as to the morality of them. Humans come from a dark history and we have to accept that and change things for the better.
That's not progress. That's spending money on a bureaucrats wet dream in the hope of progress but without an objective measure of whether it was worth it and should be continued or whether it was totally pointless and should be abandoned. Apple funded its creations and progress in the hope they create true progress (and hence make money in the process). Scarce funds for creations that didn't or couldn't generate sales were cut off and moved to far better opportunities thereby spurring true progress faster. There are thousands of examples around the world, but the roads, buildings, bridges, water supply, electricity etc in Dampier and Jabiru were principally built by private companies.
One tax at a flat rate - consumption tax. Just having such a simple tax alone will get rid of 95% of the ATO. The more you consume the more you pay. Simple.
So people who live in small towns dont deserve to have a school or doctor or a bridge to connect the further outlying towns to the services they might need .? Yeah that sounds good everyone that doesnt live within 50klms of a major city can fend for themselves. Some things cannot be based on monetary value alone .
No. Why anyone would want to privatise the police force is beyond me. Unless of course, you're a dictator.
Your reasoning isn't sound. You're comparing living under subsidies and claiming that taking away subsidies will increase the cost of living, therefore we need subsidies.
It's a lifestyle choice. We are planing to move to a very small community, the roads are mostly dirt, the doctor is at the bottom of the mountain in the nearest town and it does get cut off in torrential rain. When you want your bin emptied you take it to the local dump. We are going there to get away from all the other crap. The rest of the residents seem to be doing ok. If you chose to move away from these 'essential' services then you can't expect to complain that they aren't there. The idea of centralising services is not because we all want to live in the same place but because we can't afford to do it efficiently otherwise. We don't have enough doctors to go around as it is, forcing doctors to go out to rural communities just because a few people want to live there doesn't seem fair to the doctor. If a doctor happens to like the community and the lifestyle then problem solved.
Fishy, if you are interested in how security could work in a non-monopoly situation David Friedman gives a good talk on it here. I can't do justice by talking about it here but he talks about how they security agencies would interact with each other and what their motivations and incentives would be like and draws on real-world mediation that occurs now and shows how it can be expanded upon. Well worth it if ou are interested in these ideas. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz0AvdqRVnI[/youtube]
People can (and do) pay for services that people need regardless of the amount of users. What you want are taxes to pay for services that people want regardless of the amount of users.
What if its not choice . You were born there ? bad luck . For all the shit things the gub does they actually provide some good things for ALL AUSTRALIANS (actually doing what they are supposed to do ) & you guys want to stop that ........unbelievable
