As predicted in April, Abbot appears to be getting support from Rupert.
I suspect that the bloated government payroll (overpaid
Government "workers" and pensioners) is what kept the government in
power. And the only way to get money to keep paying is
deal. And the price appears to be government owned heritage.
Meanwhile small business (who cannot move profits offshore) will
continue to be ground into early graves.
My current belief is that the lure of retaining government will force a
deal that will not significantly reduce the government payroll, will
not be able to significantly increase taxes, but will manage to sell
much would you pay for the Acropolis?)
A government enquiry has been set up to promote the use of the E10 (10%
ethanol) mix of petrol. Apparently Australians are avoiding the
E10 fuel in large numbers.
Barvennon was trained as a Mechanical Engineer. I remember the
bomb calorimeter test. A small amount of a fuel (a few grams of
diesel) was placed in a small pressurized steel container (the "bomb")
with sufficient air/oxygen for combustion. The whole was placed
in an insulated bucket (about 5-10 litres) of water with a mechanical
stirrer and a thermometer reading hundredths of a degree.
Temperatures were taken every few minutes, until there was no change
for 10 minutes. Then the fuel was exploded by an electric
spark. Temperatures continued to be read until the temperature
stabilized at a higher temperature (due to the heat from the burnt
fuel). It was then possible to calculate how much heat was
released from the fuel.
Typical CV (calorific value) for ethanol is 30 MJ/Kg.
Typical CV for petrol is 46MJ/Kg.
So a 10% mix of ethanol in petrol would have a CV of 0.1 x 30 + 0.9 x
46 ~ 44.4MJ/Kg
So E10 has only 44.4/46 the CV of petrol., ~ 96.5% That means
there is 3.5% less bang for your litre (or gallon or whatever) of
Therefore E10 should cost ~ 3.5 cents in the dollar less than
petrol. Or the discount should be more than 5c/litre when the
price of ULP is $1.50/litre.
Typically E10 costs 3c/L less than petrol. The government would
need to subsidize E10 to make it value.
Not to mention but that we Australian motorists have a sneaking
suspicion that E10 drives up the price of food grain, so starving
uncounted millions of children in third world countries.
To some of us, no sacrifice is too great if it stops global warming.
CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT
The recent escape of Mexican criminal Gruzman from a supposedly secure
facility has been ascribed to corruption.
It is interesting to speculate as to whether GDP per capita in a nation
has an inverse relationship to some measure of corruption in that
It is also an interesting question as to how corruption should be
defined and measured.
And that question leads to such further questions as to what
correlations might exist between corruption and religion, language and
The debate in Australia in anticipation of the State's COAG meeting is
about taxes. Raising the GST from 10% to 15% is the hot topic.
Alan Jones has called for suggestions on alternatives. Well here
is my 2 cents contribution.
Let's start with Henry
George. Henry proposed property taxes.
Property Taxes have the dual purpose of shifting the tax burden in such
way that citizens can choose the level of tax they pay by choosing
their residence. Let me give a real life example. Dallas-Fort Worth
larger than Sydney. It has high property
taxes. San Francisco is also a megacity. It has low
2014 top ten Dallas suburbs to buy a home
||median home price
|violent crimes 2
||property crimes 2
||owner occupied homes
||population density 3
||annual home value appreciation
Dallas FW TAX RATE ~ 2.3%
Note that the prices above in DFW are for the top 10 suburbs.
Believe it or not, but the median price for houses in some suburbs of
DFW is less than $80k. The median
price for houses in San Francisco is $748k, while that in DFW is
$193k. I have saved a copy here.
Taxes in SF are as follows.
SF TOTAL TAX RATE 1.140%
rate collected in taxes is distributed as follows:
14.41% - Public Protection
12.26% - Schools
3.38% - Culture & Recreation
6.88% - General Administration and Finance
17.84% - Health
10.96% - Human Welfare and Neighborhood Development
34.27% - Public Works, Transportation and Commerce
As a lawyer might say
"Res Ipsi loquitur" = the facts speak for themselves.
If you want to have affordable housing and
solve the tax revenue issue at the same time, tax real estate!!
Which brings up another
issue. In the US, local government is largely independent.
Unlike Australia, State governments in the USA cannot redraw boundaries
so that party members can rule the city of New York or Chicago etc,
(like the Wran government tried on for the City of Sydney in
1981. Neither can they amalgamate councils to make it more
likely that big rich party machines are more likely to gain office at
the municipal level like the Baird government is trying now.).
So my solution to the tax problem is, state
governments should legislate away their control of local government.
Then let local government take over some of the costs of government,
such as topping up school subsidies.
So you can see, my
solution is quite impossible to achieve.
But admit it, it does
look good for we the not so rich people, doesn't it?
I suggested last April "A
feast of conspiracies" that ISIS might not be quite as bad as it was
being painted. I also suggested a reason. Since then
Anooshe Mushtaq a Canberra based adviser on Islamic radicalisation has
written a piece in The Australian of 27-28 June.
She makes some
1. ISIS is an outgrowth of Wahhabi sect of Saudi Arabia.
2. ISIS is not anti Muslim. It is mainstream.