Follow by Email

Friday, 30 September 2011


Whilst the proposed doubling of pay rates for our elected politicians to six figure sums might seem appropriate in comparison to corporate executive salaries, I don't believe that our politicians would be sufficiently qualified to apply for many corporate positions.
Politician dictators do not have the same set of skills which are required to run large corporations which need to provide a valuable service/ product which customers will voluntarily purchase.  Our politicians dictate the service policy and enforce the tax fee under the threat of doing jail time if we don't pay for services we don't many times need from a simplistic point of view.There needs to be a better method to assess the merits of pay scales for monopoly positions of safe seat politicians. Have your say in the general media 


The Centre for Independent Studies recently suggested receiving payment for immigrants who wanted to enter Australia in competition with the people smugglers which I suggest is a reasonable means of dealing with the people smugglers issues.  However, I would like to go one further and suggest that we should not be giving away Australian Citizenship's but rather we should work out what Australia's net worth is divided by number of current citizens and offer to sell new Citizenship's @ value plus extra for goodwill. The usual requirements for selecting suitable law abiding people should still apply, however we should receive payment which government should use to pay into the national debt.

Any comments?

Thursday, 29 September 2011

RBA to have a Representative in China

Representative in China

The Reserve Bank of Australia has issued a Media Release today to advise it is establishing representation in China. An office, located within the Australian Embassy in Beijing, will begin operations in mid October and will assist in the Bank's ongoing monitoring of economic and financial conditions in China. It will also help build relationships with various government agencies and private entities. I certainly hope the Chinese government do not view this move as a spying attempt.

The office will be headed by Mr Ivan Roberts. Mr Roberts speaks Mandarin and
has authored a number of papers on the Chinese economy. He is currently a senior
economist in the Asian Economies Research Unit and has had a number of other
roles in the Bank's Economic Group.

On a much more important note, does anyone know how much of Australian Super funds is invested in the American economy and if we have any RBA representative in Washington to monitor the risk profile of those funds while the American Congress stuff around with their own taxation and debt management problems.  Diplomacy is one thing, but when so much money is being put at risk by economical inept elected polictical members of the American Parliament, surely our own RBA could be our representative to help protect our retirement funds by offering an apolitical view of where they may be going wrong.

Sometimes outsiders can see the problems far better than insiders who believe they have to pander to so many voting groups to deliver what they want instead of what they need. Refer to my other blog on my agreement with Warren Buffett that taxes must rise urgently....and in my view to save the value of capital in the stockmarkets...

What do our economic experts think of my opinions?

Chinese Government.

Wednesday, 28 September 2011

SUPPORTING Warren Buffett's higher tax crusade

The American politicians against increasing the taxes of the rich are actually assisting the rich in becoming poorer as we speak …. just as the Greek government in refusing to increase taxes has debased their own currency into default mode. Are the wealthy and middle classes richer or poorer when their stock market collapses and banks wont lend to them ?
The same applies in the USA …..the answer is to increase taxes of those that can pay so that will help keep the value of all their assets from collapsing to Nil.

The ramifications are horrendous if the American politicians don’t think outside the square and worry too much about their own political survival. The Congress members themselves should be able to explain the real wealth benefits of increasing income taxes to protect their constituents assets would be a compelling argument surely.

I should add that increasing taxes on the wealthy is a small price to pay to help to protect their own capital wealth. In contining to resist the proposed tax increases, your politicians are not doing their voters any favours if as a result of world perceptions the USA financial system is weakened by the increasing deficits then financial markets continue to dive by such a magnitude that ALL CAPITAL GAINS over many generations will be wiped out completely in so few months time.

If only your politicians and your treasury officials could explain this simple reason why all businesses should pay increased taxation. It would be a WIN WIN for everyone including us in Australia who have invested so much of our Superannuation funds in your stockmarkets.

For those of you who fear giving too many benefits to the poor, you should not be concerned as they in true Keynesian spirit will spend that government outlay back into the businesses who worry so much about paying an increased tax. The multiplier effect would benefit your sales and the residual net profit increase will be measured x 10 or more price earnings ratios. At its simplest explanation, if a business pays an extra $1,000,000 in tax and if $500,000 would go to reduce the deficit the other 50% or $500,000 is quickly returned in the way of increased sales amount, then, surely your price earning ratios after expenses should return you back the original $1,000,000 in the form of a capital gain. Everybody wins and the stock markets in the USA do not obliterate your total capital during stock market jitters.

An important observation I’d like to make is that until recently I would have said that in USA you had a system of having an elected dictator who had enormous power. This belief was shattered completely during the recent haggling by congress regarding increasing your borrowing and interest payment limits if i understood the fuss to be about. I instead saw your President as being financially impotent and having no power whatsoever unless your various congressmen agreed to comply with your Presidents wishes.

As far as what USA government role should be, appears to been lost in history as government officialdom took more and more power away from your citizens who let their rightful rights be stripped away from them and now in the hands of a group of dictators in your Congress, but not your President. This has not always been a bad thing in my opinion especially during the G.W BUSH jnr Presidency when thankfully your administration made sure he did not stuff up completely. However, your Congress have destroyed the role of the President when it refused to deal with President Obama’s wish recently making him look like an impotent lost politician. It was not a good look and i believe your Congress made a terrible error in judgement and did then and now put at risk the asset values of all the wealthy they seek to represent. It was a serious matter which needed to be resolved much earlier when the world was looking at your government for leadership…IT FAILED MISERABLY.

Luckily the general public will forget and others did not view it in the way I have described it…but for your god’s sake can we see some responsible Congress leadership on these matters in the future? from Australia.

Monday, 26 September 2011


The numbers discussed below run like telephone numbers and give an insight into where some of USA tax goes....i suggest readers use google to read up on the programs and see if you think there is any merit in them being suggested for Australia..... They appear to be more generous than in the Australian system and certainly better for landlord and rooming house operators who have to wear bad debts . The American system protects both the tenant from misusing the grant and the landlord gets his rent on time and intact using the Voucher ystem. On July 30,2009  the American Senate Appropriations Committee approved the FY 2010 HUD funding bill  providing $45.8 billion for HUD programs, $4.5 billion more than the FY 2009 .

The bill increased FY 2009 Housing Choice Voucher spending by $1.2 billion to provide $18.1 billion for vouchers in FY 2010, including $75 million for 10,000 new vouchers for homeless veterans and $20 million for new family unification vouchers, and increases project-based Section 8 rental assistance by $600 million to provide $8.1 billion in FY 2010.  The President’s Budget requested $17.8 billion for vouchers, a $1 billion increase over FY 2009, and $8.1 billion for project-based Section 8, a $600 million increase over FY 2009.
On September 19, 2011 the President unveiled his plan to reduce the federal deficit by more than $3 trillion over the next ten years.  The plan includes savings of $1.5 trillion from tax reform, almost $580 billion from cuts and reforms to mandatory programs, and $1 trillion from the already planned draw-down of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. 
According to a summary of the bill, the bill would slash the HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) program to $1 billion.  This is a $607 million, or 38 percent, cut compared to the FY 2011.
These budget changes must have great effect on the people they are designed to assist or is most of this money used on administration services? Does anyone know more about the topic...please join discussion.

Sunday, 25 September 2011


Yes, I have room to house more people in my green castle in St Arnaud. So if you want a sea change and opportunity to move to a loverly country town with most facilities and do not have any personality or substance abuse problems, then contact me for more discussions and an application. Look up the town on Google for further examination.

Business people are also invited to have a look at what a progressive St Arnaud has to offer in the way of new business opportunities.


First let me state that I was amazed a few weeks ago when I saw American politicians in deadlock and wait to the very last minute before passing a treasury bill to ensure their debts would be paid on time. That i saw as being totally irresponsible on the part of all the legislators in their Congress...despite that I don't really understand their system. Then if media reports were correct...they went on holidays before passing a Bill to allow payment of wages for their Airport staff...another big confidence blooper.
Now it seems that Obama wants to increase taxes on the rich to help reduce deficits and pay for Medicare for the poorest in their society of which I would say the percentage would be substantial compared to Australia. Apparently there are many are ramifications for private insurers so i cant analyse the issues appropriately. My comments can only be a superficial analysis of cause and effect of taxing the rich.
The American politicians against increasing the taxes of the rich are actually assisting the rich in becoming poorer as we speak .... just as the Greek government in refusing to increase taxes has debased their own currency into default mode. Are the wealthy and middle classes richer or poorer when their stock market collapses and banks wont lend to them ? 
The same applies in the USA .....the answer is to increase taxes of those that can pay so that will help keep the value of all their assets from collapsing to Nil. The ramifications are horrendous if the American politicians don't think outside the square and worry too much about their own political survival. The Congress members themselves should be able to explain the real wealth benefits of increasing income taxes to protect their constituents assets would be a compelling argument surely.


We get so many gloom and doom experts making so many predictions that the Australian property market will experience a massive collapse very soon similar to the USA market did..
My view is that the Australian property market is different than in USA because the USA is not so generous towards its own poor.
From a simplistic point of view there are possibly two main reasons why the property market could decline, the first being if the RBA decides to increase interest rates or keep them too high for too long or if any new incoming coalition of politicians decide to cut welfare and rent assistance for Centrelink clients. The USA does not appear to support its lower income or no income citizens in any way near as our generous politicians support of our people. Property prices are to some extent underpinned by several million government welfare recipients using their Centrelink benefits in true Keynesian style by renting housing and buying food and utilities.
Can you imagine the effects on the banks asset backing if we where to get a crazy government which would suddenly cut the rent assistance benefit in Australia. I dont believe those people including many of our politicians who own units and houses fully understand what would happen to the value of their assets if this were to occur.... each time they complain they are supporting the poor through their taxes..Their own wealth is underpinned by government welfare and they just dont get it.
The reality is the everybody rich and poor relies on government welfare to be maintained and not be fiddled with.


I have learnt so much from my tenants over the years on how they invent ways to get everything for nothing, without the need to work or contribute to society, scaming charities and government departments and molding their personalities to gain assistance to maintain their lifestyle in the manner they have become accustomed to. This may sometimes include attempted blackmail or creating stories to gain an advantage by deception basically.
Unfortunately the charitable do gooders and church groups either know they are being scammed or are oblivious to the scams, such is the nature of mankind and the flaw of Selfishness and Ego...where the streetwise take avantage of the weak church groups. Now I'm not saying that there are not many people deserving assistance, i'm saying that a huge number are scamming our nations generous system of social welfare both private and government.
I'm going to make a bold statement in my blog ...that nobody can be poor in Australia when the biggest charity in this country is the Federal Government using Centrelink and Tax department to redistribute $billions to the needy.  Sure some of the rich and famous and some politicians complain that there is too much welfare...but they are wrong from even an economic point of view. I will again make a bold statement and state that the wealthy rely on the poorer and government welfare for their wealth.  The banks also rely heavily on a generous welfare state underpinning their asset security.I will expand on this later in my blogs.

Before I mention the scams i'm aware of I'd be interested to hear what readers have seen over the years.

Saturday, 24 September 2011



 I totally object to government proposals to require real estate agents to be used like KGB Spies to locate unregistered rooming houses who dare to provide housing for people. These Agents would in effect be UNLICENSED PRIVATE INQUIRY AGENTS

If an agent observes evidence consistent with occupation of the building by a number of people, rather than the individual, couple or family otherwise identified as lessees, this may provide grounds for a reasonable belief. Examples of this kind of evidence are set out below.

What constitutes evidence of rooming house activity?

There are certain physical signs that may indicate that the building is being used as a rooming house. These may include:
  • a large number of residents using the building
  • the interior of the building has been changed in a manner consistent with multiple occupation and not envisaged by the lease (e.g. informal, ad hoc building works such as plywood dividing a room into two)
  • locks or numbers on bedroom doors
  • evidence of a high level of usage of facilities such as kitchens and toilets supported by high water, electricity and gas bills for the building
  • a high level of usage of facilities that seem to be inconsistent with the usage envisaged by the lease
  • high levels of rubbish and recyclables
  • multiple vehicles parked on or off the street
  • lots of mail addressed to different people
  • multiple individual toiletries stored in bedrooms rather than bathroom
  • lessee not living on site
  • no communal area
  • cooking appliances and fridges in bedrooms
  • televisions, kettles, games consoles etc. in bedrooms but not in communal areas
  • advertisements of rooms to let
  • notices on display (e.g. of where to pay rent, to keep areas clean, etc.)
  • caravans or sheds converted into bedrooms
  • many mattresses on the premises.


The is my first attempt to get the CRISIS & ROOMING HOUSE ACCOMMODATION topic in front of the not only the politicians who seem to have all the answers prior to being elected but also the department heads who really run the State Governments when lazy politicians leave it to the normal processes to continue. 

One would assume and expect that with each successive change of State or Federal Government there would be an improvement with fresh new ideas to solve the problems always blamed on the previous government. In my opinion little changes when a few extra politicians in the opposing side get elected thus swinging the political power to another group or syndicate or coalition of politicians. Why?  In my opinion it is because the staff in the departments are still the same people even if the Heads of Departments also change.   

If you have any ideas to help alleviate the housing problem please
contribute your ideas to the blog ...I'm still learning how to use the blog so
forgive me if i appear as a commenter instead of the blog entry.


Friday, 23 September 2011


This is my first attempt at blogging and is meant to a medium of discussions about the problems of providing accommodation for people who claim to be at risk of homelessness or those who claim they are already homeless. Whilst it is written from the viewpoint of a rooming house operator; it will also actively attempt to lobby for the reasonable treatment of tenants by government authorities. It will be a no nonsence expose of what is really happening behind closed doors. It will lobby governments to allow and encourage new operators to provide accommodation for the different levels of need without penalising operators who dare to provide 4 or more unrelated people with a place to sleep at night without them needing to register with government departments for fear of heavy penalties.  We realise the need for safety, however absolute safety from fire or smoke is not possible unless government prefer everyone live in canvas tents with easy to open doors for excape in case of fire. Death by exposure is more likely by those who have already lost a room due to council closures. The State Coroners case a few years ago when two people died in an upstairs Brunswick backpackers establishment being used as a reason why Councils need to close down several houses causing the eviction of many people. albeit. even some deserving it.