Bribes paid directly from RBA accounts, reported and communicated to management ... but they set monetary policy and are above reproach! How many times have we heard a Treasurer or Prime Minister defer to the RBA to do the right thing? Know we now they are as corrupt as any central bank of any banana republic. Transparent, clear as day, they print money to bribe people. Yet they won't print money to pay for public infrastructure and leave us paying tolls and taxes. Thanks Mr Stevens, please sir, can I have some more?
Given how little was done over the AWB scandal I am similarly sceptical much will come of this latest disaster. Which is a great shame and a real indictment of the absolute corruption of our government. Oh wait isn't it supposed to be different here?
It's not surprising though. How much media coverage has been done in Australia to cover the Libor scandal? (http://www.smh.com.au/business/libor-scandal-explained-20120704-21hie.html) It's one of the biggest, most blatant global scams exposed and couldn't be hidden quick enough by the MSM and Government. It has to be noted that as things unwind and it becomes increasingly obvious that Australia actually was never really 'different' at all, so too will it become more obvious that Australia's role in the global ponzi scam is also more insidious. Australia's best claim here is that it's the 'best of a bad bunch', but that doesn't automatically qualify us as 'good'. The same principles and values apply here for you as the individual stacker. There's a veritable mountain of shit hitting the fan across the entire globe across financial, economic, social and political spectrums and no one will be spared. But that said, come what may, Australia still stands to weather this storm best overall. If you were in Europe, the US or UK today I'd recommend you pack your life up and head down under.... bug out capital of the entire world.
I don't agree with that. We are almost entirely dependent on high commodity prices. Even now we have a two-speed economy with mining going great and everything else depressed. I notice this when I go for jobs in IT. Mining companies pay significantly more. When the commodity prices come back to Earth, what will Oz have left? The next boom is likely to be in an entirely different sector and not one that Australia is likely to be a big part of. Why will big money come to Oz? I think investment money will be looking to new technologies around the world, not the once in a lifetime industrialization of China where we were one of the few countries setup adequately to deal with it. That's virtually over now. At best, Oz will be returning to mediocrity. The smart money is beginning to realise this.
You misunderstood auspm I think. I'm only new to the term 'bug out', but this is what it is about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bug-out_bag It's not about money. Edit: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bug out and http://www.bugoutsurvival.com/ are some further examples.
I guess that depends on what exactly it is you think is going to happen in the Northern hemisphere that Australia is going to avoid.
These are the people presiding over monetary policy that determines the rate at which your savings depreciate, turning everyone into financial speculators and gamblers to get the returns on their money needed just to keep pace with the inflation they force upon us. What a disgrace! They print money from nothing, bribe people with it, lie about it and have the gaul to justify their existence by stealing our savings. That Aussie Dollar looks real beaut don't you think?
I'm definitely not specifically defending the RBA (which should be abolished), but what sh**s me about this whole thing is that it is considered a crime in the first place. It should NOT be a crime for a business to offer bribes as part of doing business. It should be (and is) a crime to receive a bribe (except if we are talking sole business owners) as that is defrauding someone else. Unless the offerer is committing some sort of fraud against their employer (which should be pretty difficult), it is not the offer that is the bad thing it is the receipt. It may not match the expected code of conduct of an organisation's employees and hence can be a sackable offence, but it should not be deemed to be a criminal act.
It is true that bribes are common place practice for doing business in many third world countries but I don't think we should be participating in it, or encouraging it. It is making receiving public servants and politicians in other countries corrupt. Personally I think it stinks, these were not small sums but millions of dollars.
Exactly. How can we hold our head up and say we are above reproach if we are actively participating in and enabling fraud in another country. This fraud steals from the citizens of whichever nation as the companies making the bribes have to charge higher prices to cover the bribes. These extra costs end up in the pockets of those corrupt officials. How is that a good/fair thing? The poor old taxpayers get slugged again. I think actively trying to stamp it out is a good thing and the fact the powers at be in the RBA knew and it would appear did nothing with this info is, while not surprising, is still something that needs to be punished.
I don't think the sum really matters (on the RBA end at least). What I'm saying is that not encouraging/participating are completely different things to it being a criminal act. The offer doesn't make the public servant/politician corrupt. It is the acceptance that makes them corrupt (and in the process harming the taxpayers of their country). On our end the RBA ended up with export contracts that they may or may not have secured. Sweet for us. It is the taxpayers in the recipient countries who have potentially ended up paying more for the RBA services than they needed to (effectively fraud for personal gain) and it is their criminal justice system that needs to deal with their criminals. It is not our responsibility for us to prosecute their criminals.
And further, if you want to clean up the corruption of the people in those countries. What better way than to expose it (unfortunately it has to be after the fact) and let their people/justice systems handle it?
Assuming they do of course. If bribing (or attepting to bribe) an official in our own country is a criminal offence (and I agree it should be) then I don't see how you can waive such actions by an Australian company just because they occur outside the country. Sure the country stands to benefit but it is benefitting from fraud. Made even worse when such beneficiaries are actually govt institutions. Would make a mockery of our local laws.
Historically, I think the offence to bribe public officials was to prevent rich people from getting off criminal offences (back in the good old days when the public officials were limited to policing and judicial duties). I tried to be careful with my wording - bribery to pervert the course of justice is a completely different thing and is wrong. Even though it won't change our system a dot, what I am arguing is that offering a bribe in the course of doing business is not the criminal act even though it has been demonised as such. If I happen to be standing next to you and you ask for my knife/gun/axe (or whatever - assuming I am carrying such a thing of course) and I pass it to you and you then kill someone standing a few metres away, it is not my fault. I didn't commit the crime even if the series of circumstances may look like I "enabled" it. [EDIT: As pointed out by my betters below, this is a really bad and irrelevant analogy.]
Not sure your analogy stacks up. If you handed over your knife/gun/axe knowing what they planned to do with it then an argument could be made that you are culpable. If made in ignorance of their true intent then yes you cannot or should not be blamed so long as a reasonable person would have come to the same conclusion. I still think both offering & soliciting a bribe is a criminal act. You are attempting to induce behaviour that causes others a loss (in this case taxpayers). I think we are arguing semantics though - you are of the opinion that the bribes being offered are bad just not criminal as such?? Knew or ought to have known is probably the better phrase. Sorry just being pedantic. edit. wanted to respond to Gino but did not need extra post.
Perhaps, but that argument isn't consistent with the issue, because when the RBA (or its subsidiaries or its agents) OFFERED the bribe, they were actively participating in the corruption and criminality of the person taking the money because they knew what the outcome would be. A better analogy would be the RBA offering a gun to a murderer so he/she could kill someone, from which event the RBA would benefit. Of course, I'm not comparing the RBA or their offering bribes with murdering people, just highlighting the logic fault in your analogy.
Yeah. Crappy analogy. Boyracer - Yes, I'm not arguing that they are "right", just that they shouldn't be "criminal".
No, they actually knew, because that was the intent of the bribe in the first place and the purpose of the funds provided for bribing those officials ... But who cares? Glen Stevens can print bits of plastic 'til the cows come home ... US$30 here we come! ... again.
lack of self-defense lack of cheap commodity items lack of political freedoms at local level lack of things like a constitution to uphold after shtf ...you can keep it
