octave

I used to be in a situation when I was woking at 2 music schools. at one school I was an employee and I could only claim travel if I had to transport my tools of trade (which I did) At the other school I was a contractor operating my own business so I could claim all sorts of inputs. Both jobs were otherwise just about identical. Precisely In my son's business let's say a programmer is tasked to write a bunch of code. This code has a value to the business and this value is the same whether it is written in the office or at someone's home.

There are all sorts of pros and cons when it comes to work from home. Some of these pros and cons benefit the employee and some the employer. During the pandemic I worked from home. I used my own internet connection and equipment provided my own work space which I also heated and cooled. I did not get compensated for these things however I did save heaps on transport and other expenses. Working from home may be ideal for some industries and not so for others. It is not a case of good vs evil. My son has a very successful computer games development company Most of his workers do work from home and some live overseas. This is an ideal situation for working from home. Other areas of enterprise would not be so suited Driving from my home into Melbourne at rush hour is insanely inefficient. The more workers who can work from home the less congestion in the roads or public transport. Perhaps we might even discover that we do not need to continually build more insanely expensive tunnels and roads.

Melbourne is the second fastest growing city in Aus after Brisbane. I don't think it is tumbleweeds any time soon.

I know that with the Westgate tunnel, there is a fixed contract and wage rises come out of the contractor's profit (although probably anticipated) and not the public purse at least according to this article. http://West Gate Tunnel workers reach pay deal: $300k a year. A government spokeswoman said the West Gate Tunnel was a fixed-price contract, meaning any added costs relating to wages would be absorbed by the builders. The only downside I can see is this (from the same article But shadow treasurer Louise Staley said the West Gate Tunnel worker salaries were incredibly large – even for the building industry – and this deal would set a precedent for future transport projects that would ultimately be paid for by the taxpayer. In any case blaming the state government is irrational as far as I can see.

This is not a subject that I am not passionate about nor am I particularly knowledgeable. I am just wondering how much a government can influence interest rates. When comes to modern economies It seems to me that when interest rates are high in one country they tend to be high in most countries despite governments of varied persuasions. I can't see anything particularly bad or good about our position compared to similar countries. https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/interest-rate

Correct the deal was ratified by the fair work commission. I can't really see much of a reason for an anti-Dan rant with this, sure, blame the union or blame the companies, or blame the fair work commission for not opposing it. That kind of money would not entice me to work 12 hours a day 6 days a week so I am not going to lose sleep over people who are willing to do that kind of work.

Just to be more specific here. I would imagine that when you set your price for a project you take into account these kinds of contingencies. The wage rises will of course eat into the profit of the company. In the case of the North East Link, it is a consortium of large companies. In the case of the Westgate tunnel, I think the company is John Holland which I believe is Chinese-owned John Holland Group so I wouldn't lose too much sleep over that. I think these corporations are doing OK.

The company building the tunnel? The Vic gov is not responsible for giving the pay rise and is not having to pay extra because of the wage rise. If you are mad at anyone perhaps it should be the Federal Fair Work Commission and perhaps the union. Geez it must be exhausting being angry 24/7

I am not necessarily in favour of such high wages but my point is that the original post was the usual dig at the Victorian government and the suggestion that these wages were something to do with the Victorian economy. As I understand it these wage increases do not change what the government is paying for the project. These wage increases were set by the Fair Work Commission which is a federal body, not a state body. There are lots of jobs in the mining industry that seem to pay amazingly high wages probably because of the working conditions. From the article, I linked about the wage rise on the Westgate tunnel 2 years ago. An entry-level tunneller working an average six-day working week – common on big projects – would be paid an annual salary of $230,000, once travel and site allowances are included. A more experienced tunneller operating the large tunnel-boring machines would be paid about $320,000 for working 12-hour shifts over seven-day blocks, which alternate between night and day rosters. The rates and conditions are broadly comparable with those agreed to on Melbourne’s Metro Tunnel and the Cross River Rail project in Brisbane.

I would love to hear the recordings he allegedly made. I would suggest that this fellow could present evidence to back up his claims. I am suggesting that these anecdotes need evidence, fair enough inst it. Julian Batchelor (Iam not sure whether he is the interviewee or interviewer) is a head of an organization called "stop co-governance. Evidence backing stop co-governance campaign labelled 'ill-informed' My experience of NZ is based on yearly visits and the experience of my son who moved himself and his business to NZ 9 years ago.

I am not sure about the North East Tunnel but the Westgate Tunnel is a fixed-price contract. It is not an issue for the government but for the construction company West Gate Tunnel workers reach pay deal: $300k a year.

I dont think it is being multilingual I think it is just using the new name along with the old name. When we go to NZ we often take a ferry across Wellington harbour to Matiu/Somes Island. The double name is not there because Europeans can only understand "Somes Island" and Maoris can only understand Matiu Island. The name encompasses the island's history in recent times as a scientific reserve and before that a quarantine station and before the Maori history and archeological sites. We could perhaps drop the Somes and just use the original Maori name, would that be better? How do you feel about Papua New Guinea? This is a blend of its original name and its new name.

Do you have to translate place names? You don't translate Sydney or Wollongong for tourists, they are what they are.

I think when you know a few principles Kiwi names are not so difficult. Mostly quite phonetic but with a few rules like Wh = F. There are plenty of English names that are not easy: Woolfardisworthy Costessey Cockburn Worcester Barnoldswick Wriothesley Aslackby Osbournby Leominster Godmanchester Ulgham Blidworth Ratlinghope Fetherstonhaugh None of these words are pronounced as they are written.

I will bet that the price is relatively cheap. I like the dual naming system. Geographic names do change and it is no big deal (the town of Holbrook for example.) The idea that these names are unpronounceable I think is a red herring. Sure when you see Kgari for the first time it may be easy to stumble but this is true of many less familiar English words. Here is an enormous list of Aboriginal place names List of Australian place names of Aboriginal origin Some of these names may be tricky to pronounce at first however they are quintessentially Australian. When I came to Australia from England (as a baby) our first house was in Elizabeth (named after the queen of course). We then moved to Salisbury (I am guessing named after the English town), When I joined the RAAF I moved interstate and lived in Richmond (again British I would think) Then We moved to Windsor. After this, we built a house at Kurrajong, this was the first place I lived with a truly Australian name. When my son moved to NZ one of the first things he did was learn how to read and pronounce local place names because he did not want to appear to be a thick tourist. When we visit we don't want people (or my son) to think we are thick tourists. To me, there is nothing nicer than after the plane lands and even going through customs to be greeted with "Kia ora, welcome to Aotearoa/New Zealand." You can really tell you are in a country with its own character and not just another mini Britain. I always attempt to use double names where there is first because I don't find it cognitively difficult and secondly, it opens me up to take an interest in the complete history not just the last 200 or so years.

I believe. the k is silent as in knife

A purchase of hundreds of dollars would require a PIN to be input. If the person had the PIN written on the card then they would not be covered however the protections around credit card fraud are pretty good. When you use your Mastercard, you're protected against fraud. Have peace of mind knowing that the financial institution that issued your Mastercard won't hold you responsible for “unauthorised transactions.” As a Mastercard cardholder, Zero Liability applies to your purchases made in the store, over the telephone, online, or via a mobile device and ATM transactions. As a cardholder, you will not be held responsible for unauthorised transactions if: You have used reasonable care in protecting your card from loss or theft; and You promptly reported loss or theft to your financial institution. If you believe there has been unauthorised use of your account and you meet the conditions above, rest easy knowing you have the protection of Mastercard’s Zero Liability promise. For additional protections with respect to unauthorised transactions, please contact your bank or credit union. Note: Zero Liability does not apply to the following Mastercard payment cards: commercial cards, or unregistered prepaid cards, such as gift cards.

Some more NZ pictures Cafe with a brilliant view (including aviation things) The road to Aoraki Mount Cook Th HookerValley walk (10km) Aoraki Mount Cook

We did do a tour around Tassie back in the 80s but I don't think we got to Lake Pedder. We did a trip up the Franklin though which was spectacular.

True, although using a credit card or debit card is hardly cutting edge.

I don't think at any point I have advocated for abolishing cash although I do think it will occur anyway. On numerous occasions, I have mentioned pros and cons. Mainly I have highlighted how for me not carrying and using cash is the rational choice (and I stress for me) I think I acknowledged that there was perhaps less privacy with digital means of payment. But there are also many advantages. I don't really care how other people operate their economies, that is up to them. The title of this thread is "the thin edge of the wedge" which implies some terrible dark trajectory. They may want to but in my opinion, based on exclusively using digital means I have rarely struck this. Mostly it has been for something small like a cup of coffee. I think when I pay my electricity bill there is a credit card surcharge which is a mere few cents and is much cheaper than driving down to wherever I would have to go to pay in person. Surcharges for the use of credit cards are strictly controlled and they are not allowed to charge more than the actual cost of the transaction usually 1% or 1.5% ACCC Card surcharges Cash will remain as long as enough people want to use it. It seems though that fewer people every year want to use cash.

I wonder what a taxi driver would think about this. Taxi drivers being robbed and bashed etc. used to be quite a common crime. Forcing the taxi driver to carry around wads of cash and pick up strangers is not a good mix. Back in the 2000s I worked at a music school. My wife managed the school for the owner. The business was located in a business park that was mostly unoccupied after business hours. The business model involved students paying upfront for the whole term. The school had over 1000 students. This would mean that 10s of thousands of dollars could be handed over in a day. It would be totally crazy for an admin person to sit there with 10 grand in the till. Apart from that, this money would require a trip to the bank the next morning, not very efficient really. Counties such as Sweden are already virtually cash-free and they seem happy enough. The first time I visited NZ I went to the bank and bought some NZ dollars but I quickly realized that NZ is more cash free than we are. In my many trips since have never used NZ cash. The protections offered by credit cards are very good. I mentioned earlier sending my mother who lives interstate flowers which arrived very late and were virtually dead. The florist would not give us a refund so we complained to Mastercard who reversed the transaction within minutes pending their investigation. We never heard back but we got our refund and presumably, the credit card company got their money back from the supplier. I am not trying to convince you to stop using cash, that is your prerogative and it is a business owner's prerogative what forms of payment they will accept.

At my dad's funeral, the celebrant described him as a "proud Yorkshire man" I can't really see the problem with the word proud. Proud (to be Australian

There is a trade-off, a slight reduction in privacy for the ability to be efficient and save a little bit of money if you do it right. How do you feel about writing a cheque? The bank (yours and theirs) know who the cheque is to and how much it is for. There are obviously pros and cons to cash and electronic money. The young person working at a petrol station at night is surely safer when not sitting on a pile of cash. I have no problem with cash remaining for those who want it but like electronic money, cash does come with costs. Apart from transporting it around in armored vans etc. It costs (in 2022) 20 cents to mint a $2 coin and 32 cents to print a $100 note. There are proposals to reduce the cost and weight of coins "In 2016, the Mint developed a proposal to cheapen the metal content of its five, ten and 20 cent coins and shrink the size of its 50 cent coins, which it says was favourably received by retailers and banks who wanted coins that weighed less. The idea was submitted to the Treasury, but "not progressed". I have no problem with people who want to keep using cash however I don't think a business should be compelled to accept all forms of payment. It does not bother me at all if a business accepts cash only or electronic payment only. Another issue for me is that as I get older I do want to keep up. I don't want to become a dinosaur.

I have a credit card fee of $50 per year. I get 4x $50 Bunnings vouchers a year (I could get cash back) I pay no interest because I fully clear my debt every Friday. I do also use my phone which is linked to my debit card. The advantage to the credit card is that there more protections than the debit card.