Monday 25 July 2011

The untold expense of being a Global Problem Solver...

There is an enduring saying which all parents will use at some point to allay the fears of their anxious children in those early years: “Don’t stress kiddo; for every problem there is a solution.” The advice is both sage and accurate, regardless of the obstacle which confronts us, there is inevitably a way to overcome it. It is an important message to impart as it teaches the next generation to approach difficulty and adversity with a sense of optimism. Now while I believe in having a positive outlook, I am also a pragmatist (which most confuse with pessimism...) which compels me to point out that while the saying is uplifting, it only tells half of the story. For me, the full saying would read: “For every problem there is a solution, and for every solution there is a cost...” The question is, therefore, how much cash are you willing to throw at the problem to make it go away? More pertinently, how much of the tax-payers’ dollars is the Prime Minister willing to splash to make all of the government’s problems go away?

Let us start with the much maligned ‘Malaysian Solution’. The problem which this plan was designed to solve is, of course, the fleet of illegal boatpeople flooding into Australia. The half-baked solution to send these illegal entrants to Malaysia exposed the extent to which this government is under the influence of the extreme left elements both within parliament and the broader community (I’m looking at you, GetUp!). The government will be sending 800 boatpeople to Malaysia for processing, as our centres are bursting at the seams trying to cope with the exponential influx washing over our shores. However, before we get too excited at the prospect of being rid of this burden we need to ask the very relevant question: “How much is all of this going to cost?” The answer will shock you, I know it shocked me: ($AU) $300 million. That’s right, your eyes are not deceiving you, and it will cost the hard working families of Australia, who are struggling to make ends meet as it is, $300 million to have Malaysia take these people off our hands. That means that each one of these people, who have come to our country illegally and unwelcomed, will cost us $375,000. The government will be supply them with everything they need to enjoy their holiday at Malaysia, on the tax-payer purse, while being processed. The crazy thing is that after they have been processed in Malaysia, there is a very real chance that they will simply be sent back to Australia for resettling. So, essentially, we are paying for a $375,000 vacation for these people just so that they can come back in a couple of months...

The costs do not end there. The figure of $300 million only covers those we are sending to Malaysia, there has been no mention of the cost the tax-payer will bear on the back of accepting 4000 of Malaysia’s refugees and resettling them here is Australia. If we work on the figure of $375,000 per person (which is not an unrealistic number given the government’s history of rolling out the red carpet for these people) we, the tax-payers, could be forking out in the order of a cool $1.5 billion for the great privilege of taking 4000 unwanted refugees off Malaysia’s hands... I wonder if that figure includes all of the Centrelink benefits the government will undoubtedly be handing out to them as they get off at the docks, along with the keys to their brand new, government supplied homes (although I would be wary of the insulation batts in the roof, I hear the government is still looking to off-load a few... maybe we can send them to Malaysia?).

So, all up, we could be looking at a bill in the order of $1.8 billion just for a temporary stopgap solution (if it can be called that...) to a problem which has no end in sight! But the violent haemorrhaging of tax-payer funds does not stop there – oh no! – for our foreign minister has be racking up the frequent flyer miles in a global cash splash. Kevin Rudd recently announced $80 million will go to the Horn of Africa because they are suffering from drought. I can think of somewhere a little closer to home which is more deserving of those tax-payer funded drought relief dollars: it is called regional Australia... you know, those communities on which this country was built, who feed us and who the Greens, especially Comrade Sarah Hanson-Young, seem intent on wiping out? The scary thing is that the $80 million being offered up by K-Rudd is just a drop in the vast ocean of Gillard and Rudd’s global handout scheme, with over $4.8 billion – that’s right, BILLION – which the government is handing out annually in foreign aid, a system which is frequently exploited and defrauded! How many Australia’s would think that China, an economic superpower, needs aid? Very few, except for their comrades in parliament, with Comrade Rudd handing out $22.5 million to the People’s Republic this year alone!
Shouldn't tax-payer dollars be used to help those suffering here, in Australia?

So what, exactly, is the point I am trying to make here? Well I can sum it up best with this reminder to Julia Gillard: Prime Minister, you were not elected to solve the problems of the world nor were you elected to tax the hard working families of Australia into poverty all so that you could pursue your – and Bob Brown’s – perverse wealth distribution agenda. Yes there is war, suffering and famine abroad, but the people of Australia, those who [unfortunately] elected you, are doing it tough. Do not compromise their wellbeing just so that you can alleviate your misplaced liberal guilt over living in the economically developed West... After all, charity begins at home...

So, my friends, what are your views on this matter? Am I right or have I simply confirmed my status as a conservative nut whose ideas make too much sense to be right? I would appreciate your input and feedback on this incredibly important national issue...

5 comments:

  1. Youre absolutely spot on here, Johno. Labors giving our $s away while tallying up a record level of debt! With no benefit to those here, is Oz!

    I always used to vote Labor (it pains me to admit that Julia got my vote at the last election) but not any more; theyve lost me completely!

    Problem is theres no alternative; Abbott is just too much of nut! Unfortunately for you Johno is that you make FAR too much sense. You should be the one leading the charge for the Libs, not action man!

    Johno for PM!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks McDoogle, I appreciate your support. I trust I can count on you on polling day to pull on a 'Johno13' t-shirt?

    Doesn't really have the same ring as Kevin07, does it?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with you, John, 100%. This is a govt of waste which seems very content throwing our money all over the place and, when they realise their coffers are running low/time to make repayments on their colossal debt, they just whack on a new tax!

    Resource Rent Tax - Check!
    Carbon Tax - Check!
    What's next?
    Complaining about the govt tax - that's about the only one I'd be willing to pay!

    Good on you John. I'm with McDoogle, you've got my vote! (and if you do start making 'Johno13' t-shirts, put me down for one...)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ugh, federal politions should be required to complete some form of a business course. While your at it dedicate some $150m in teaching them the definition of "fund management" and "wasted funds"..........as in money spent for inadequate return.....seems pretty simple to me. Oh wait I'm one of those conservative nuts who is making to much sense.

    Kudos John!

    ReplyDelete
  5. You are making too much sense there, Scotty. I still get a laugh out of Wayne Swan stating that the Carbon Tax would be "broadly budget neutral" - What a joke! Swan clearly does not understand basic economic principles, yet this is the man who is in charge of the public purse strings? No wonder the Government is drowning in debt, Swan probably is yet to get his head around the concept of LOAN REPAYMENT! Although this does seem to be a deficit (pun intended...) among all of Labor's ranks.

    What the government sorely needs, as you have pointed out Scotty, is some training in basic business and economics. Or better yet, they should hire some professionals; accountants or, better still, some actuaries.

    ReplyDelete