News Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread II

[7577969923]

He might not be dismissing them just weighing them as les important in the light of other considerations.

For example reopening as these little clusters are happening... I'm thinking of the school and the miscommunication re the third child that was discussed just upthread.

It's different doing that after you've seen a pattern of three or four events like that as opposed to doing so around the time of the first one. You're in a much better position to prevent a third outbreak immediately as the second is controlled and that third outbreak might otherwise cause greater economic problems.

To me an extra week or two before opening up again (and it will be a bit of open slather when that does happen) or even a month is better than the sort stop start thing that happened between the first lockdown and now. Because there will be no benefit to the economy or employment in that situation.

Especially if during that time these minor outbreaks are happening regularly and the Andrews gov is finally getting it's sh*t together in terms of managing it.

If Andrews isn't confident of preventing that situation (and don't say "get someone who can" cos who is there available to do that?) then he has to hold off. Whether he alone is too incompetent or the situation is beyond anyone's competence is irrelevant, the consequences of a failure may be too serious to take that risk at that point.

In an emergency, which this situation is, even here in NSW still, you respond/rescue then you begin the recovery and restoring of normality. The roadmap out is part of the recovery process. It seems Victoria has not got to that bit yet, at least from the outside.

It is pretty clear that he doesn't listen to any concerns. It is not just about a bunch of business people demanding to be open now it is about what happens when they do open.

The idea that another month isn't that big a deal is naive. Our current levels of new infections are well below the rate of infections that NSW managed to address and suppress without shutting down their economy. The current levels of infection are well below that which we suppressed in Victoria in the first wave with much less restrictive measures. For example, general retail was not shut down in the first wave. We need to be able to live with minor outbreaks even if they are caused by the ineptness of the DHHS.

On the original roadmap out the progression to stage 3 with the 5 + % target was based on modelling with a very conservative set of assumptions that indicated at that point with our response capability the likelihood of another surge or wave was 3%. We are currently at 6.1 + 10. What is the difference in probability of that new surge? It is not unreasonable to expect to receive that level of information.

 

[Themanbun]

If you think the grants that the Victorian government has provided make a material difference you really don't understand business.

Didnt you say earlier in the thread that the profit motive isn't the overriding objective of business? LOL

And yes, I do think billions of dollars of grants to help businesses pay bills and to help them materially change their operations to continue functioning during a pandemic when they re-open will make a difference.

Is there any reason that support should have been available before the pandemic? That was kind of a silly statement.

It wasn't available before the pandemic because perhaps, just perhaps, he is listening to business concerns about paying the bills and continuing to operate once we re-open. That was pretty clearly the entire purpose of stating it, not to make some broad statement about pre-Covid support.

I have never said he should consider only business but it is patently obvious that he doesn't listen to them at all and dismisses their concerns.

If every time you said "I never said X" were true then you'd have never said anything at all.

Just because you say "patently obvious" doesn't make it so. You can keep shouting it as much as you want, it won't detract from the clear attention they've been given in the form of billions of dollars and changes to roads, dining areas, etc. before the budget has even been announced.

------

Throwing your state into another 5-10 billion dollars of debt to help out stakeholders who you "patently, obviously dismiss", because that'll show 'em.

As I've said earlier, you've jumped the shark.

 

[DesertRoo]

To me an extra week or two before opening up again (and it will be a bit of open slather when that does happen) or even a month is better than the sort stop start thing that happened between the first lockdown and now. Because there will be no benefit to the economy or employment in that situation.

Typical Newsouthwelshmen trying to keep us Victorians locked up. Bet you’re pissed someone let the storm out of the state too..

 

[Themanbun]

To me an extra week or two before opening up again (and it will be a bit of open slather when that does happen) or even a month is better than the sort stop start thing that happened between the first lockdown and now. Because there will be no benefit to the economy or employment in that situation.

A lot of us here in Vic are along this train of thought Ferb.

None of us are particularly enjoying it but it's one of those things where those of us in this grouping would prefer an overkill that virtually guarantees we won't get lockdown 3.0 (compliance dropping the more these things happen). Our testing and contact tracing may improve but I'm seriously concerned about compliance rates in any future lockdown, so I'd rather we just didn't need one.

Then there's probably two other groupings, the anti-lockdowners (small, I think) and then the pro-lockdowners who think it has gone on too long.

That latter grouping are getting increasingly impatient and I think that's starting to show in a lot of the dialogue. I personally think that in a year we'll have some separation from the lockdown and an extra month (essentially writing off 2020) will seem like a small sacrifice in hindsight. Right now though, for a lot of people, it feels bigger than it is.

For what it's worth, I also know a few anti-lockdowners (they've pissed on every restriction since the beginning) who are trying to masquerade as people who are "just concerned it's gone on a bit too long." Quite a few journos, political commentators and lobbyists have adopted this approach.

It'd be a mess to navigate politically but I reckon you're right in overcoming the emergency, then restoring normality.

 

[DesertRoo]

Didnt you say earlier in the thread that the profit motive isn't the overriding objective of business? LOL

And yes, I do think billions of dollars of grants to help businesses pay bills and to help them materially change their operations to continue functioning during a pandemic when they re-open will make a difference.



It wasn't available before the pandemic because perhaps, just perhaps, he is listening to business concerns about paying the bills and continuing to operate once we re-open. That was pretty clearly the entire purpose of stating it, not to make some broad statement about pre-Covid support.



If every time you said "I never said X" were true then you'd have never said anything at all.

Just because you say "patently obvious" doesn't make it so. You can keep shouting it as much as you want, it won't detract from the clear attention they've been given in the form of billions of dollars and changes to roads, dining areas, etc. before the budget has even been announced.

------

Throwing your state into another 5-10 billion dollars of debt to help out stakeholders who you "patently, obviously dismiss", because that'll show 'em.

As I've said earlier, you've jumped the shark.

Quick question, I know a lot of people in the entertainment sector, who work contract work, it’s pretty regular in that industry, none of them qualified for jobkeeper. Because it’s six months here three months there. So they went on the dole, a lot of them have had to take second mortgages on the family home because school fees/novated leases/general bills haven’t stopped coming in. Will billion dollars of grants not available to them help?
How about another friend of mine who owns a clothing store, they weren’t able to secure a rent reduction, most of there lead times are twelve months in advance, so the stock they ordered for winter didn’t sell, they’ve tentatively placed an order for next winter/autumn, they’re hoping things will open up for spring as they don’t want to burn that stock, plus ordering again, summer stocks coming.
yet they’ve still got bills coming from everywhere...
his accountant doesn’t believe grants will help, but he’s lucky enough to be able to reach out to family. But he’s walking into hundreds of thousands of dollars and he doesn’t want to do it because he’s always made good money and been self sufficient.
this is reality for those two industries.. and there’s many many more just like it.
We can’t just pause the economy and think it’ll reopen, anyone who believes it is detached from reality.

 

[Themanbun]

Quick question, I know a lot of people in the entertainment sector, work work contract work, it’s pretty regular in that industry, none of them qualified for jobkeeper.

If they're sole trader, independent contractors they may just qualify for jobkeeper so that would be good for them to follow up.

But, social security is a federal issue. You won't hear me saying that your mates should be struggling.

Will billion dollars of grants not available to them help?

As noted above, social security is federal jurisdiction and I'd love for your friends to receive more help.

I have my own views about lending practices for people on short term contracts but that would be pretty inappropriate and heartless for me to harp on about right now.

The discussion was about pleas from the business community.

How about another friend of mine who owns a clothing store, they weren’t able to secure a rent reduction, most of there lead times are twelve months m, so the stock they ordered for winter didn’t sell, they’ve tentatively placed an order for next winter/autumn, they’re hoping things will open up for spring as they don’t want to burn that stock, plus ordering again, summer stocks coming.

There's up to $100k federal cash flow grants available and $20k of state grants available, plus payroll tax refunds, etc.

yet they’ve still got bills coming from everywhere...

Tell me about it. I haven't stated this before because, quietly, I enjoyed some of the presumptions being spun about me, but I had to wind up my sports retail business throughout this.

this is reality for those two industries.. and there’s many many more just like it.
We can’t just pause the economy and think it’ll reopen, anyone who believes it is detached from reality.

It will re-open. It will recover. It will take time. There are unfortunate victims of every recession.

There will be victims and they should be supported. For those who've lost their businesses and for whom the grants weren't sufficient, my inclination is to be taking it up with social security administration, not trying to frog-march people back into face-to-face contact amid a pandemic.

---

I think mate you're misunderstanding that I'm addressing a very particular comment - that the leader of this state has "patently, obviously dismissed" business stakeholders. The extra debt he's put the state in to help them out - when most of the available mechanisms for support are federal - suggests otherwise. He could have pumped this into his voters (generally, workers) pockets but didn't.

That's not to say there won't be victims, just as it would be impossible to say there won't be victims (workers, their families, their friends) if we open up while we still have lingering clusters. My entire point was that it's clear that concerns have been listened to, that he has tried to provide some alleviation there, but is still weighing public health against economic concerns. The grants will save some and won't be enough for some others.

It's the idea that he's sitting in some tower scoffing at business owners because he doesn't like them or whatever that I'm addressing, not the idea that the economy will be perfect and no one will suffer.

The key thing is I have never said no business will suffer. I'm saying that billions of dollars of grants will make a difference (for everyone? No. For some? Yes. I know personally of a beauty business that was pretty much saved by these) and by spending such a tremendous amount of money, the suggestion that businesses have just been ignored is just false. I don't think that's too unreasonable.

My comments on this are all about context and I don't really want the goalposts shifted. The key context is the hyperbolic nonsense I was responding to, the idea that rather than being spooked by possible models brought before him and weighing public health concerns against trying to preserve businesses, that the premier is ignoring business concerns because they aren't his voters. I think you can appreciate that and I hope this response gives you some clarity.

 

[DesertRoo]

If they're sole trader, independent contractors they may just qualify for jobkeeper so that would be good for them to follow up.

But, social security is a federal issue. You won't hear me saying that your mates should be struggling.



As noted above, social security is federal jurisdiction and I'd love for your friends to receive more help.

I have my own views about lending practices for people on short term contracts but that would be pretty inappropriate and heartless for me to harp on about right now.

The discussion was about pleas from the business community.



There's up to $100k federal cash flow grants available and $20k of state grants available, plus payroll tax refunds, etc.



Tell me about it. I haven't stated this before because, quietly, I enjoyed some of the presumptions being spun about me, but I had to wind up my sports retail business throughout this.



It will re-open. It will recover. It will take time. There are unfortunate victims of every recession.

There will be victims and they should be supported. For those who've lost their businesses and for whom the grants weren't sufficient, my inclination is to be taking it up with social security administration, not trying to frog-march people back into face-to-face contact amid a pandemic.

---

I think mate you're misunderstanding that I'm addressing a very particular comment - that the leader of this state has "patently, obviously dismissed" business stakeholders. The extra debt he's put the state in to help them out - when most of the available mechanisms for support are federal - suggests otherwise.

That's not to say there won't be victims, just as it would be impossible to say there won't be victims (workers, their families, their friends) if we open up while we still have lingering clusters. My entire point was that it's clear that concerns have been listened to, that he has tried to provide some alleviation there, but is still weighing public health against economic concerns. The grants will save some and won't be enough for some others.

It's the idea that he's sitting in some tower scoffing at business owners because he doesn't like them or whatever that I'm addressing, not the idea that the economy will be perfect and no one will suffer.

My comments are all about context. The key context is the hyperbolic nonsense I was responding to. I think you can appreciate that and I hope this response gives you some clarity.

The key thing is I have never said no business will suffer. I'm saying that billions of dollars of grants will make a difference (for everyone? No. For some? Yes. I know personally of a beauty business that was pretty much saved by these) and by spending such a tremendous amount of money, the suggestion that businesses have just been ignored is just false. I don't think that's too unreasonable.

Cheers mate, I’m so sorry to hear about your sports store, pm me if you’re in need of a hand.

sorry I was reading your posts As if we have some marvellous catch all safety net in place.. reality is there going to carnage next year when the banking freeze on mortgages opens up. I really feel for so many being smashed for little to no fault of their own. And I don’t envy anyone involved in making decisions about when to open up.

 

[Themanbun]

Cheers mate, I’m so sorry to hear about your sports store, pm me if you’re in need of a hand.

sorry I was reading your posts As if we have some marvellous catch all safety net in place.. reality is there going to carnage next year when the banking freeze on mortgages opens up. I really feel for so many being smashed for little to no fault of their own. I don’t pity anyone involved in making decisions about when to open up.

Thanks mate, much appreciated. We're doing better than many and I'm in employment at least so trying to look at the positives. I don't want to mislead people into thinking that I'm in the exact same boat as someone who's lost everything and the only thing keeping their roof above their head.

Agreed re: carnage when the moratorium ends. I can feel some real bad sub-prime mortgage crash juju for early next year.

 

[B4Bear]

I actually think there is far more accountability in most business environments. Unfortunately the keyword there is most not all and there are some egregious examples. I'm not really here to defend the big end of town but every large ASX company demonstrates far more accountability than has been demonstrated by this government. That is not especially difficult given the government has set the bar at zero but if any large ASX company suffered a crisis as big as the one inflicted on Victoria by the government then the CEO, several senior executives, and probably the chairman would have lost their jobs months ago. There is no way they would have been kept around to try and fix things. And there is no way they would have fixated on frontline staff that wasn't given proper training, leadership, or oversight.

Accountability in big business?

What world do you live in. All the banks have been shown to be corrupt to the core, billions in fines, and still they do it.

Mining companies destroying the nations history, with no accountability. And withholding royalties because they can.

Crown casino and organised crime, and the board survives because fat boy Packer decrees it so.

Clive Palmer and his millions corrupting the election and still not paying his workers.

Companies selling land to the government at inflated prices, because they can.

So spare me with the accountability for the big end of town. It is a fig leaf used to convince the gullible that they actually give a s**t for the environment in which they get to operate.

 

[ferball]

I actually think there is far more accountability in most business environments. Unfortunately the keyword there is most not all and there are some egregious examples. I'm not really here to defend the big end of town but every large ASX company demonstrates far more accountability than has been demonstrated by this government. That is not especially difficult given the government has set the bar at zero but if any large ASX company suffered a crisis as big as the one inflicted on Victoria by the government then the CEO, several senior executives, and probably the chairman would have lost their jobs months ago. There is no way they would have been kept around to try and fix things. And there is no way they would have fixated on frontline staff that wasn't given proper training, leadership, or oversight.

Did that happen to SP Ausnet after Black Saturday?

 

[B4Bear]

Did that happen to SP Ausnet after Black Saturday?

How many companies/people are going to be held accountable in the 19 billion dollar subsidised aged care industry after the RC hands it’s findings down.

Exactly ******* zero.

 

[ferball]

It is pretty clear that he doesn't listen to any concerns. It is not just about a bunch of business people demanding to be open now it is about what happens when they do open.

The idea that another month isn't that big a deal is naive. Our current levels of new infections are well below the rate of infections that NSW managed to address and suppress without shutting down their economy. The current levels of infection are well below that which we suppressed in Victoria in the first wave with much less restrictive measures. For example, general retail was not shut down in the first wave. We need to be able to live with minor outbreaks even if they are caused by the ineptness of the DHHS.

On the original roadmap out the progression to stage 3 with the 5 + % target was based on modelling with a very conservative set of assumptions that indicated at that point with our response capability the likelihood of another surge or wave was 3%. We are currently at 6.1 + 10. What is the difference in probability of that new surge? It is not unreasonable to expect to receive that level of information.

I didn't say it was no big deal. I said it was the least worst of two bad choices ie better than ongoing rolling lockdown every couple of weeks.

There is a humongous difference between "no big deal" and picking the best of two shitful options. Do you understand that?

Obviously the point I made in that post you are quoting is that learning to live with minor outbreaks involves managing them in the most controlled situation possible till you understand the parameters of what can go wrong and develop procedures and plans that can deal with those situations.

Re your last paragraph...

It's not clear but is 6.1 + 10 the current infection rate per day? Is the 10 a percentage? Obviously it's not at the target point yet if that is the case.

Why don't you try and find that information. But even so if that turns out to be a small percentage or points ... what of it?

 

[ferball]

Typical Newsouthwelshmen trying to keep us Victorians locked up. Bet you’re pissed someone let the storm out of the state too..

Bloody criminals the lot of you.

I love the storm tho.. Mostly to troll League supporters. It would be a bit like being a Qlder supporting the Bears and living in Melbourne in 2002.

 

[ferball]

A lot of us here in Vic are along this train of thought Ferb.

None of us are particularly enjoying it but it's one of those things where those of us in this grouping would prefer an overkill that virtually guarantees we won't get lockdown 3.0 (compliance dropping the more these things happen). Our testing and contact tracing may improve but I'm seriously concerned about compliance rates in any future lockdown, so I'd rather we just didn't need one.

Then there's probably two other groupings, the anti-lockdowners (small, I think) and then the pro-lockdowners who think it has gone on too long.

That latter grouping are getting increasingly impatient and I think that's starting to show in a lot of the dialogue. I personally think that in a year we'll have some separation from the lockdown and an extra month (essentially writing off 2020) will seem like a small sacrifice in hindsight. Right now though, for a lot of people, it feels bigger than it is.

For what it's worth, I also know a few anti-lockdowners (they've pissed on every restriction since the beginning) who are trying to masquerade as people who are "just concerned it's gone on a bit too long." Quite a few journos, political commentators and lobbyists have adopted this approach.

It'd be a mess to navigate politically but I reckon you're right in overcoming the emergency, then restoring normality.

That is the procedure in every disaster and emergency. There is literally no other way to do it. You can't begin to recover properly until the thing you are recovering from has been dealt with.

Nothing about these situations is great.

What you say about lockdown 3.0 is right. I dunno if you can guarantee you will avoid it but you have to take every reasonable step to avoid it (and then hedge your bets as best you can so you are ready to act if it goes south again.) Youse really don't need to go thru this again.

I understand people's impatience to, whether they are unreasonable about it or not. The whole situation sucks.

 

[ferball]

Quick question, I know a lot of people in the entertainment sector, work work contract work, it’s pretty regular in that industry, none of them qualified for jobkeeper. Because it’s six months here three months there. So they went on the dole, a lot of them have had to take second mortgages on the family home because school fees/novated leases/general bills haven’t stopped coming in. Will billion dollars of grants not available to them help?
How about another friend of mine who owns a clothing store, they weren’t able to secure a rent reduction, most of there lead times are twelve months in advance, so the stock they ordered for winter didn’t sell, they’ve tentatively placed an order for next winter/autumn, they’re hoping things will open up for spring as they don’t want to burn that stock, plus ordering again, summer stocks coming.
yet they’ve still got bills coming from everywhere...
his accountant doesn’t believe grants will help, but he’s lucky enough to be able to reach out to family. But he’s walking into hundreds of thousands of dollars and he doesn’t want to do it because he’s always made good money and been self sufficient.
this is reality for those two industries.. and there’s many many more just like it.
We can’t just pause the economy and think it’ll reopen, anyone who believes it is detached from reality.

No but that will be the situation anyway. Economies shrink In pandemics cos the basis for transmission of goods services and payment and for viruses is human contact.

People will go to the wall cos of COVID regardless of the restrictions or lack of restrictions in places.

Things like entertainment, clothing retail in some cases and other discretionary spending based businesses are built upon the sort of infrastructure and stability that pandemics will destroy. It's gonna be hard for those people cos those industries and businesses will suffer. This isn't a good situation and it may be one we aren't able to fix properly in the long run.

There are still no guarantees that our containment, elimination and suppression strategies won't catastrophically fail either due to incompetence or some unforseen circumstance. The only reason the economy is what it is today is that we were able to build stable, resilient societies to support it. Throughout history pandemics have destroyed that stability and that is what will happen here.

The economy was already struggling before even the fires last year. It's been downhill since.

 

[ferball]

Cheers mate, I’m so sorry to hear about your sports store, pm me if you’re in need of a hand.

sorry I was reading your posts As if we have some marvellous catch all safety net in place.. reality is there going to carnage next year when the banking freeze on mortgages opens up. I really feel for so many being smashed for little to no fault of their own. And I don’t envy anyone involved in making decisions about when to open up.

Thanks mate, much appreciated. We're doing better than many and I'm in employment at least so trying to look at the positives. I don't want to mislead people into thinking that I'm in the exact same boat as someone who's lost everything and the only thing keeping their roof above their head.

Agreed re: carnage when the moratorium ends. I can feel some real bad sub-prime mortgage crash juju for early next year.

Good luck with stuff tmb.

I think a lot of people think things will return to what life was like pre COVID, but that may not happen. It may decades for the worlds economy to recover, if it does and the world may look very different then too. It's gonna impact us here too.

 

[7577969923]

I didn't say it was no big deal. I said it was the least worst of two bad choices ie better than ongoing rolling lockdown every couple of weeks.

There is a humongous difference between "no big deal" and picking the best of two shitful options. Do you understand that?

Obviously the point I made in that post you are quoting is that learning to live with minor outbreaks involves managing them in the most controlled situation possible till you understand the parameters of what can go wrong and develop procedures and plans that can deal with those situations.

Re your last paragraph...

It's not clear but is 6.1 + 10 the current infection rate per day? Is the 10 a percentage? Obviously it's not at the target point yet if that is the case.

Why don't you try and find that information. But even so if that turns out to be a small percentage or points ... what of it?

6.1 cases per day with 10 from "mystery sources".

 

[7577969923]

Did that happen to SP Ausnet after Black Saturday?

You just had a crack at me for not completely understanding what you wrote:

Unfortunately the keyword there is most not all and there are some egregious examples.

SP Ausnet paid out over $600m in legal settlements. I don't know if heads rolled.

 

[7577969923]

How many companies/people are going to be held accountable in the 19 billion dollar subsidised aged care industry after the RC hands it’s findings down.

Exactly ******* zero.

You don't know that. Plenty of heads rolled from the banking RC.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

I am pro-caution on coming out of lockdown, but just have a quick comment on the “it’s only another week/fortnight” thought. When every day is a struggle, every day matters. Whether that’s trying to help a kid through school challenges as an untrained teacher working a full time job, or trying to keep a business from going under, or trying to pay household bills with income slashed, or trying to manage isolation after test results or waiting for test results, every single extra day can be crushingly difficult. I’ve faced a few of those since March and while my broad support for the measures hasn’t faltered, it’s made me very conscious of not being glib about the costs, and the weight of even a small amount of extra time under those pressures.

Hang in, Melbourne people. This has been so hard and you are amazing.

 

[Themanbun]

Good luck with stuff tmb.

I think a lot of people think things will return to what life was like pre COVID, but that may not happen. It may decades for the worlds economy to recover, if it does and the world may look very different then too. It's gonna impact us here too.

Thanks mate, and I agree.

There will be some major, major disruption. This thing has given us a kick in the pants to explore digital and remote working - the other side of that is that when these patterns of work change a lot of people will be left behind. CBD businesses that rely on foot traffic, the landlords of the office skyscrapers (not that I feel sorry for this group in particular), etc. On the other side of that, the revival of the suburban cafe and the creation of coworking spaces and more demand for home office stuff. There is a net good in not having people pack into PT and on the roads to commute for hours a day, so to throw that away because some businesses will unfortunately lose their demand if they can't find a way to adapt, would not be ideal.

Personally I would love to see a government, any government, get on the front foot about this. Invest heavily in highly mechanised production, digital infrastructure, re-gearing human workers through training to the digital world, reforming the social security system to support this, and letting obsolete businesses unfortunately die (we have a habit of trying to preserve rather than move forward) and providing their owners with the support they need to make it in the new world. That's a hope that I don't think will be fulfilled by our current government (which is basically forcing its employees into offices to stimulate business, according to Fairfax) or even most governments across the world.

This has caused a major disruption but it doesn't need to be all bad.

 

[Mr_Nyah]

Thanks mate, and I agree.

There will be some major, major disruption. This thing has given us a kick in the pants to explore digital and remote working - the other side of that is that when these patterns of work change a lot of people will be left behind. CBD businesses that rely on foot traffic, the landlords of the office skyscrapers (not that I feel sorry for this group in particular), etc. On the other side of that, the revival of the suburban cafe and the creation of coworking spaces and more demand for home office stuff. There is a net good in not having people pack into PT and on the roads to commute for hours a day, so to throw that away because some businesses will unfortunately lose their demand if they can't find a way to adapt, would not be ideal.

Personally I would love to see a government, any government, get on the front foot about this. Invest heavily in highly mechanised production, digital infrastructure, re-gearing human workers through training to the digital world, reforming the social security system to support this, and letting obsolete businesses unfortunately die (we have a habit of trying to preserve rather than move forward) and providing their owners with the support they need to make it in the new world. That's a hope that I don't think will be fulfilled by our current government (which is basically forcing its employees into offices to stimulate business, according to Fairfax) or even most governments across the world.

This has caused a major disruption but it doesn't need to be all bad.

I agree, and I think even things like overcrowded suburbs (eg too many townhouses) and overcrowded public transport can be solved by people working remotely. Smaller towns can grow and become their own hubs where local businesses thrive if people don’t NEED to work in the city. I know personally, I’d rather live in a bigger property in a smaller town, but it’s just not feasible because of the need to be close to the city so it doesn’t take too long to get to work. That would also have a positive impact on housing affordability for those that do want to remain closer to the city as lower demand drives house prices down. I think this is something the government at both levels needs to get serious about, it ha given them the perfect chance to address some of the problems that previously seemed unsolvable.

 

[Hojuman]

1 - 0

 

[B4Bear]

You don't know that. Plenty of heads rolled from the banking RC.

You mistake individuals being thrown under the bus, the businesses did not change, they are still there doing the same dodgy dealings; just with different people in charge.

That is the difference with governments, they at least can actually be voted out, mostly for a different shade of s**t, but they are out.

Business just keeps on doing its thing.

 

[ferball]

You just had a crack at me for not completely understanding what you wrote:

Unfortunately the keyword there is most not all and there are some egregious examples.

SP Ausnet paid out over $600m in legal settlements. I don't know if heads rolled.

No me either. Its something I've never been able to find out either.

There are all sorts of non disclosure agreements associated with the settlements and ordered payments. That fire destroyed nearly 2000 homes and killed over 150 people in an hour or two. Even losing your job running that business isn't enough of a punishment for that tho. If heads had literally rolled then maybe it would have been a fair payback. Losing your job is not enough of a payback for that or for the failures of the DHHS this year IMO.

Straight after your bolded sentence you wrote this:

Unfortunately the keyword there is most not all and there are some egregious examples. I'm not really here to defend the big end of town but every large ASX company demonstrates far more accountability than has been demonstrated by this government.

I asked that question simply because I don't think that actually happened in that case. Those settlements took five years to happen as well. As of yet we are a few months from the Andrews gov failure. Yet the failure caused consequences on a par with this disaster. Okay comparing disasters is a bit off, but that isn't my point. Accountability is something that has to be forced on people whether they are in government or business.

If there were only business failure so instead of government ones as we'll would we have disclosure of what happened or would other bulshit secrecy measures limit public accountability?