octave

We had a house built in 1990 (NSW) and the builder went into liquidation. We were covered for the cost of completing the house. I can't remember the name of the scheme back then but in NSW it is now called Home Building Compensation Fund (HBCF) In our case the house was 75% finished so we got our owner builders licence and finished it ourselves and ended up financially slightly ahead. It did cause delays but nothing too drastic. DEALING WITH A BUILDER’S BANKRUPTCY: YOUR ACTION PLAN

What evidence do you have?

I think there are many countries that are more progressive than us that are also stable. Many Scandinavian countries are much more progressive than we are and they don't seem to be unstable. My son moved to NZ 9 years ago. Despite the fact that he had all the rights and benefits of any other Kiwi (after a couple of years) last year he became a New Zealand citizen. He did this for several reasons but one of the reasons was that he feels NZ is a lot like Aus but just a little more progressive. Whilst there are still many social problems with regard to the indigenous peoples there is a least more acknowledgment of its past. My son says that he feels more comfortable in a country that is at least a little further down the road of reconciliation. Of course, all change does involve some risk but also reward. My life would have been safe but boring had I not taken some risks. In the case of the Voice, I don't think the risk is high and certainly, it is difficult to find examples of countries that have enacted similar systems to the Voice that have suffered overly negative consequences. If as some of the no folks say it will be divisive then it makes me think that perhaps we are less cohesive than Canadians the Fins, Norwegians, Kiwis, etc.

Yes, I am not particularly interested in far-right commentary.

Firstly it was just an example of saying "Unless it is perfect, don't do it", and secondly, there are some very wealthy people who have businesses that on paper make a loss. This qualifies them for things like low-income health care cards. I seem to remember a news story about how many seemingly wealthy people are actually getting low-income healthcare cards because their businesses appear to make little profit. We know this is also true of the wealthy folk paying little tax because they claim to make little profit. In terms of the aged pension, there are ways and means. Yes, ‘millionaires’ can qualify for the age pension By the way as an aged pensioner, you can earn a reasonable amount. under the work bonus system. https://www.dss.gov.au/seniors/programmes-services/work-bonus#:~:text=From 1 July 2023%2C the,the maximum rate of pension. The Work Bonus increases the amount an eligible pensioner can earn from work before it affects their pension rate. The first $300 of fortnightly income from work is not counted under the pension income test. The Work Bonus operates in addition to the pension income free area. From 1 July 2023, the pension income free area is $204 a fortnight for single pensioners, and for couples combined, it is $360 a fortnight. This means a single pensioner over Age Pension age with no other private income could earn up to $504 a fortnight from work and still receive the maximum rate of pension.

Apologies if this was an inappropriate post. It is not intended to have a go at anyone. When I read it the number leapt out at me. As a joke, the numbers don't matter and could be anything.

It could be amusing and accurate and make a valid point.

Sorry to be pedantic but this figure is wildly incorrect.

I don't see that between the adviser and the advisee, there is much room for corruption. I suspect that corruption is more likely to occur in the implementation rather than in the act of providing advice that can be accepted or rejected by the government of the day. Corruption and misappropriation are common in most areas of government. There are people who hide their income in order to get an aged pension that they are not entitled to but we ought to work on fixing those problems rather than abolishing the aged pension.

I did not say an improvement of 5% I said a 5% chance of improvement. The odds of some good being done not the amount of good being done.

That being so it seems like a low-risk gamble. If there is a 5% chance of some kind of improvement and little risk of negative consequences then why not? If the voice does not lead to any improvement then "no " voters and others will have the luxury of being able to say "We put you in the driver's seat and you did not improve anything, there is nothing more we can do" Internationally we can also say to countries critical of us that we tried our best. A question, If after a couple of years, the South Australian voice starts to improve things would you change your mind?

I am not sure about that. During the same podcast, Ms White alleged that the Voice would end up "taking over" Parliament and abolishing it. "You can call me a conspiracy theorist if you like," she said. "But I know the way that these people work and that is what will end up happening. Aboriginal people will be running this country and all the white people here will be paying to live here." https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/deeply-hurtful-this-no-campaigner-labelled-the-stolen-generation-as-mistruth/lbruqnqnk This does not seem moderate to me. Is this what "No " supporters here believe? Has this happened in Canada? New Zealand? Norway? Finland? No supporters that I have talked to seem unaware that South Australia has legislated a state-based voice with elections on March 16, 2024. Will this lead to dire predictions of the no-case coming to pass? https://www.agd.sa.gov.au/first-nations-voice I guess time will tell. Other countries seem to manage various arrangements. Although these countries still have their problems it is hard to find a country that has as poor outcomes as we do.

I agree that it seems inequitable. In a different job Dan would have to wait until 60 I think. I guess Andrews is not the only politician to take their super early. Certainly, most CEOs leave their companies much younger and with bigger payouts.

I started taking my superannuation pension at 57 which was my preservation age.

It might be useful at this point in the discussion to "define" what 'Defined benefit is" Defined benefit funds In a defined benefit fund, your retirement benefit is determined by a formula instead of being based on investment return. Most defined benefit funds are corporate or public sector funds. Many are now closed to new members. Typically, your benefit is calculated using: the money put in by you and your employer your average salary over the last few years before you retire the number of years you worked for your employer My father-in-law and my brother-in-law both retired with a defined benefit pension. My brother-in-law retired just before defined benefits became unavailable in his job. If you have a defined benefit and you are on a high income and put a lot in, you will get a lot back. If I could have been in a defined benefit scheme I certainly would have taken full advantage of it. When I was in the RAAF (80s) the super scheme was pretty bad unless you stayed in for 20 years. This scheme was the equivalent of a defined benefit. This is no longer the case because they found that many people who had built up skills over many years would get to the 20-year mark and leave. In most jobs there is usually an optimum time to call it a day with respect to superannuation. It would take quite a special person to throw money away. Defined benefits are no longer a thing however those who joined schemes when they were a thing still get them. They are phasing out. In terms of Andrews, I find it a little bemusing that there are fanboys for whom he was perfect and bashers for who did nothing right. Common sense would suggest that most politicians are a mixed bag, all deserve praise for the good things and fair criticism for mistakes or bad decisions.

Was it out of the blue?????????? Labor promises to ‘move quickly’ on Indigenous voice to parliament referendum if elected

I honestly can't understand this comment. The evidence is pretty clear that aged care facilities were particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 as well as flu. I would have loved to visit my father during the worst of the pandemic however it is obvious that multiple visitors especially before mass vaccination would have endangered many lives. Some seem to have forgotten the terrible consequences of COVID-19 getting into vulnerable groups. Senior doctor tells Newmarch House COVID-19 inquest of his 'crisis day' as the nursing home outbreak unfolded The aged care facility my father was in adhered to the rules and because of this there were no cases or deaths from covid. Now my mother is a resident in the same home. Recently we were unable to visit because there was a case of gastro going around and many of the residents were ill and vulnerable. I don't regard these rules as some kind of fascist regime but merely following good medical practice. Different states handled the pandemic in slightly different ways but I would suggest all states put restrictions on aged care facilities. It is right and proper to analyze how the situation was handled, which things worked and which things didn't. Whilst of course understanding that this pandemic was not something any of us had any experience of.

Red this was not exclusive to Victoria. During the pandemic my father was in aged care in South Australia. The rules in S.A. were just as restrictive as they were in Vic. My father died in 2020 and due to the restrictions in S.A. I had to watch his funeral online. I have never winged and whined about this because I understood the necessity for these restrictions.

https://theshovel.com.au/2023/09/27/victorians-endure-final-day-living-in-brutal-dictatorship/?fbclid=IwAR1Hurnuxs1LlajaO1bVw2p9t26NOSZgPBA3j7CqbH0unvmRuPbRcoszN9Y

Yeah, starting life with Daddy's inheritance and buying up enough news outlets also gives you a strong voice.

Back in the day, there were many interestingly named places in Britain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gropecunt_Lane

Whilst I can't claim to have read the whole Constitution, I have read a lot of it a scanned the rest of it. The Australian Constitution is the equivalent of the Constitution of your local flying club. It tells the committee how it should organize itself, how it should elect members, how often elections should be held etc. It is not the document you would write the rule that for example people should not leave dirty cups in the club kitchen or perhaps. constitution /ˌkɒnstɪˈtjuːʃn/ noun 1. a body of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is acknowledged to be governed.

Red, why you you put advice to the government in the constitution? If an Aboriginal advisory group advised the government to introduce alcohol restrictions in indigenous communities are you seriously thinking that that should be in the constitution? Something I find frustrating is how many people many people haven't read or don't understand the Constitution. The Constitution is not a place where health or educational programs are written. The Constitution sets down things like how parliaments are constituted, the relationship of state and federal governments, the role of the high court, etc. https://www.aph.gov.au/constitution

If the yes case passes the only thing that will be in the constitution and therefore difficult (but possible) to change is the voice itself. The voice does not have the power to put things such as restrictions on climbing rocks into the constitution. Anything the voice recommends will not be in the constitution, at least not without another referendum.

We lived on a rural property between 1990 and 2011. Our place was precisely 100km from our workplace in Canberra. We would finish work at 8 PM and then drive along the King's Highway (one of Australia's more dangerous roads) 5 nights a week this was about 40000Km a year and around half of this was done in the dark. I can only remember hitting one kangaroo with enough force to damage the car and that was only minor damage to the plastic. A roo did once hop into the side of our car. Some of our neighbours (the ones with the rouge necks) thought we were quite mad for not attaching a load of metal to the front of our car. They would also seemingly brag about how many roos a week they hit. I put our good fortune down to knowing the road extremely well and knowing where we were likely to encounter wildlife. But the most important tactic was simply to drive at an appropriate speed at those times when we were likely to encounter wildlife. This is not a 100% guarantee of not hitting anything but it does reduce the chances and reduces the damage if you do hit something.