Proposal for Dick Smith
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: messemate way to bondi icebergs
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Proposal for Dick Smith
Dear Dick
I have a great idea in how you can use your lobbying power for the good of the Industry. How about you lobby the Government to get rid of this
$130 MEDICAL FEE ROBBERY
I'm sure even you have better ways to spend your cash too. If you could do this successfully, I think you would attain a lot of good will, lost in our industry that could be recouped. Little things like this could lead to you getting a wave of support from your fellow aviators on several of your ideas instead of falling on deaf ears
This is a challenge.... Help the industry
Shmoo
I have a great idea in how you can use your lobbying power for the good of the Industry. How about you lobby the Government to get rid of this
$130 MEDICAL FEE ROBBERY
I'm sure even you have better ways to spend your cash too. If you could do this successfully, I think you would attain a lot of good will, lost in our industry that could be recouped. Little things like this could lead to you getting a wave of support from your fellow aviators on several of your ideas instead of falling on deaf ears
This is a challenge.... Help the industry
Shmoo
Moderator
May be easier to walk on water than turn back the tide of "user pays"?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Springfield
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Tail Wheel.
We have over the past decade or so changed the behaviour of government agencies to reduce their drain on consolidated revenue by making user pay. You would be hard pressed making an argument to the Howard Government that Farmer Joe Bloggs has a social responsibility to subsidise a pilot's career. From CASA:
Fortunately, CASA realises $130 is unreasonable and will be reducing the fee to $75 from 1/7/07. To compensate, increases in other fees will have to take place in line with the Australian Government's cost recovery policy.
Note carefully here is a government agency very specifically blaming the government's policy. This is the government YOU elected. I'm sure Costello has cut your tax by more than enough to cover this small impost.
We have over the past decade or so changed the behaviour of government agencies to reduce their drain on consolidated revenue by making user pay. You would be hard pressed making an argument to the Howard Government that Farmer Joe Bloggs has a social responsibility to subsidise a pilot's career. From CASA:
In line with Australian Government policy, CASA is required to recover costs for providing regulatory services to the aviation industry.
Note carefully here is a government agency very specifically blaming the government's policy. This is the government YOU elected. I'm sure Costello has cut your tax by more than enough to cover this small impost.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Canberra
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm thanks Duff Man, i'm sure the good folks at CASA get enough flak from pilots as it is. As with any Government agency their hands are tied by their boses in what they can do, dont forget that WE are their ultimate boses so come the next election think carefully about who your vote goes to, shame we dont have the same political clout as the American GA comunity has
.
Anybody know if any of the polies fly themselves?
. Anybody know if any of the polies fly themselves?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was it not Labor governments who equally or rapaciously introduced and pursued `User Pays'.
Was it not a Labor government who privatised QF & `Which Bank'?
And do you really think with their underlying `greed & envy', record of hatred and lack of positive policies for the aviation industry things will actually change with a change of government.
If so, I have sound investments in `Blue Sky Airlines' you must immediately invest in!
DK
Was it not a Labor government who privatised QF & `Which Bank'?
And do you really think with their underlying `greed & envy', record of hatred and lack of positive policies for the aviation industry things will actually change with a change of government.
If so, I have sound investments in `Blue Sky Airlines' you must immediately invest in!
DK
Dodgybrothers you state:
Obviously you don’t know my background in aviation reform. In fact, I am fortunate because I can afford the high costs. I have however spent the last 15 years working to remove every unnecessary cost so aviation can boom again.
I suggest you look at this.
I receive many letters from young pilots who can’t get jobs. I believe Australia should be a leader in the world in aviation training and other forms of general aviation. To do this we have to be smart and copy the best from others, and combine that with what we already do that is better.
The reason that I “care” is that I can see the potential and I’d get satisfaction from the industry booming, not being destroyed.
By the way, at the moment everyone has to pay.
why would dick care? He's a private pilot and doesn't have to pay.......
I suggest you look at this.
I receive many letters from young pilots who can’t get jobs. I believe Australia should be a leader in the world in aviation training and other forms of general aviation. To do this we have to be smart and copy the best from others, and combine that with what we already do that is better.
The reason that I “care” is that I can see the potential and I’d get satisfaction from the industry booming, not being destroyed.
By the way, at the moment everyone has to pay.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Southern Hemisphere
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'Day Dick
Here's another little challenge when you get a chance...
With Global Warming & Emissions being flavour of the month, the Airways in OZ need a good going over with a comb so tracks become MORE efficient for the airlines AND the environment.
Its like pulling teeth with ATC to get track shortening late at night it seems of late. Say for example the Tassie to Brissy track. Via Canberra, then a left turn to Yass, then Mudgee, Tamworth etc.
Why late at night Melbourne Centre cannot co-ordinate with Brisbane Centre & give you CBR direct to Tamworth or Blaka is beyond me. There is VERY little departures out of Sydney going up to Asia to hinder with crossing traffic (as curfew is or almost in place to boot). Something so simple as that, can potentially save 4 or 5 minutes & a few hundrew kilo's of fuel being spewed into the atmosphere.
And another one......Sydney Airports arrivals & departures. I'd love for Koshie & Mel to get Mark Vaile on Sunrise & give the government a spray over the inefficiencies of that place. The tracks & runways being politically sensitive, yet a complete waste of money to airlines & to accomodate politicians electorates. And burning extra fuel, thus detrimental to the environment.
Im sure if you pursued these kind of issues with your influence, you would get a lot of credit from the aviation industry.
Anyway, its just food for thought.
Here's another little challenge when you get a chance...
With Global Warming & Emissions being flavour of the month, the Airways in OZ need a good going over with a comb so tracks become MORE efficient for the airlines AND the environment.
Its like pulling teeth with ATC to get track shortening late at night it seems of late. Say for example the Tassie to Brissy track. Via Canberra, then a left turn to Yass, then Mudgee, Tamworth etc.
Why late at night Melbourne Centre cannot co-ordinate with Brisbane Centre & give you CBR direct to Tamworth or Blaka is beyond me. There is VERY little departures out of Sydney going up to Asia to hinder with crossing traffic (as curfew is or almost in place to boot). Something so simple as that, can potentially save 4 or 5 minutes & a few hundrew kilo's of fuel being spewed into the atmosphere.
And another one......Sydney Airports arrivals & departures. I'd love for Koshie & Mel to get Mark Vaile on Sunrise & give the government a spray over the inefficiencies of that place. The tracks & runways being politically sensitive, yet a complete waste of money to airlines & to accomodate politicians electorates. And burning extra fuel, thus detrimental to the environment.
Im sure if you pursued these kind of issues with your influence, you would get a lot of credit from the aviation industry.
Anyway, its just food for thought.
Moderator
"I'm sure Costello has cut your tax by more than enough to cover this small impost."
Back to the statement above? I doubt it!!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to agree with the tail wheel.
User pays is a rort, and it might have been labour that introduced it but the Libs certainly haven't turned back the tide, in fact they seem to have enmbraced it. But then again the NSW labour government certianly haven't been backwards in going forward with the concept.
It might not be a bad concept if taxes were reduced accoringly, but that was also surposed to be the theory behind the GST. Introduce the GST and reduce a whole range of other taxes, but, what 9 or 10 years later some off them are still around.
As Mr T says - I pitty the fools (us-voters).
User pays is a rort, and it might have been labour that introduced it but the Libs certainly haven't turned back the tide, in fact they seem to have enmbraced it. But then again the NSW labour government certianly haven't been backwards in going forward with the concept.
It might not be a bad concept if taxes were reduced accoringly, but that was also surposed to be the theory behind the GST. Introduce the GST and reduce a whole range of other taxes, but, what 9 or 10 years later some off them are still around.
As Mr T says - I pitty the fools (us-voters).
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Endor
Age: 83
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Oh Dear! Here we go again........ If you spend any time with farmers, miners, manufacturers, they all say the same thing "I deserve a subsidy because I do good for the community by giving people jobs/exports/foriegn exchange/services/whatever".
I even recall seeing a letter in the local newspaper in Cloncurry from a farmer who said "why should I pay taxes? I send food to the city to feed the people. Without food they die, so I am essential". Of course he was neatly forgetting what the people in the city were sending him, starting with diesel fuel.
So point number one. Everyone has an argument why they should be treated as a special case - its called "special pleading" or "Rent seeking behaviour" in economic terms. The biggest group who still get away with it are the farmers, but their entitlements are slowly being wound back.
The point is that Governments cannot afford to give in to special pleading because it distorts markets something wicked. The Labor Government gave in to special pleading with a 150% tax deduction for R&D and the result was at least a three billoin dollar rorting of the tax system over about ten years, lots of useless tax driven research was done with zero outcome and the relationship between the merchant banking community and the sceintific establishment was poisoned.
I think I understand that a similar type of scheme (accelerated depreciation) was rorted by the aviation industry in the 1970's and the results of the tax driven over expansion followed by inevitable collapse are still evident from the fading names on hangars and offices around the country.
Certain institutions are capable of sustaining a "Public Good" argument, but that depends on demonstrating that the benefits of Government funding will flow to all the community and that it is inefficient for individuals to try and provide them on their own. The best example is the weather Bureau.
Unfortunately I cannot see any reason why airports fit the "public good" test provided that competition can be generated between them. The net result of treating them as a "public good" has meant that ordinary economic considerations have not been applied in the past, which is why you are so surprised to see large unused and unuseable chunks of airports being turned over to property development. To put it another way, the airport would never have been as big as it was if it had been provided by a business. If you want an example, go look at Boeing Field in downtown Seattle, or some of the LA airports if you want to see efficeint use of resources. Thats point number two if the goods are provided for free, they are inevitably not used efficiently.
So please stop banging your heads against a brick wall. User pays is here to stay and there is no getting over it.
On the other hand user pays = user says (my slogan) which means that if you are paying CASA for a medical, or paying parking charges to some airport, then you are entilted to scream blue murder if you do not get service - something you cannot do if that service is provided to you for free.
I even recall seeing a letter in the local newspaper in Cloncurry from a farmer who said "why should I pay taxes? I send food to the city to feed the people. Without food they die, so I am essential". Of course he was neatly forgetting what the people in the city were sending him, starting with diesel fuel.
So point number one. Everyone has an argument why they should be treated as a special case - its called "special pleading" or "Rent seeking behaviour" in economic terms. The biggest group who still get away with it are the farmers, but their entitlements are slowly being wound back.
The point is that Governments cannot afford to give in to special pleading because it distorts markets something wicked. The Labor Government gave in to special pleading with a 150% tax deduction for R&D and the result was at least a three billoin dollar rorting of the tax system over about ten years, lots of useless tax driven research was done with zero outcome and the relationship between the merchant banking community and the sceintific establishment was poisoned.
I think I understand that a similar type of scheme (accelerated depreciation) was rorted by the aviation industry in the 1970's and the results of the tax driven over expansion followed by inevitable collapse are still evident from the fading names on hangars and offices around the country.
Certain institutions are capable of sustaining a "Public Good" argument, but that depends on demonstrating that the benefits of Government funding will flow to all the community and that it is inefficient for individuals to try and provide them on their own. The best example is the weather Bureau.
Unfortunately I cannot see any reason why airports fit the "public good" test provided that competition can be generated between them. The net result of treating them as a "public good" has meant that ordinary economic considerations have not been applied in the past, which is why you are so surprised to see large unused and unuseable chunks of airports being turned over to property development. To put it another way, the airport would never have been as big as it was if it had been provided by a business. If you want an example, go look at Boeing Field in downtown Seattle, or some of the LA airports if you want to see efficeint use of resources. Thats point number two if the goods are provided for free, they are inevitably not used efficiently.
So please stop banging your heads against a brick wall. User pays is here to stay and there is no getting over it.
On the other hand user pays = user says (my slogan) which means that if you are paying CASA for a medical, or paying parking charges to some airport, then you are entilted to scream blue murder if you do not get service - something you cannot do if that service is provided to you for free.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wisdom
Yestam
Yes. There is much wisdom in your post. In the 70's there was frantic activity in GA, and the big manufactureres were bringing out new models almost every year. It was exciting with all that developement. Everyone imagined all kinds of things. The big companies were suggesting that soon almost everyone would have an aeroplane,and would be flying around the country for holidays. The oil and mineral boom started and tax incentives came. Everyone with a tax bill bought an aeroplane. Most could not fly them, but the flying schools were promoting and making money too.(buy one and we'll teach you to fly it.) Most Aeroplane sales companies had a flying school.
The sales companies had the latest models for demonstrators, and put them to work doing cheap charter. They had their own maintenance, got the spares under warranty, and did minimal maintenance (well it's new mate-nothing wrong with this one), and did not worry about depreciation as they sold it soon.
That's where the sub-economic charter originated from. And they kept telling us how cheap it was to run them.
Finally the bottom fell out of it. Sales slowed, and the tax concessions were not there like they used to be. The manufacturers blamed insurance costs, but I think they had just saturated the market. Australia had lots of aeroplanes and not much activity. And lots of pilots.
Yes. There is much wisdom in your post. In the 70's there was frantic activity in GA, and the big manufactureres were bringing out new models almost every year. It was exciting with all that developement. Everyone imagined all kinds of things. The big companies were suggesting that soon almost everyone would have an aeroplane,and would be flying around the country for holidays. The oil and mineral boom started and tax incentives came. Everyone with a tax bill bought an aeroplane. Most could not fly them, but the flying schools were promoting and making money too.(buy one and we'll teach you to fly it.) Most Aeroplane sales companies had a flying school.
The sales companies had the latest models for demonstrators, and put them to work doing cheap charter. They had their own maintenance, got the spares under warranty, and did minimal maintenance (well it's new mate-nothing wrong with this one), and did not worry about depreciation as they sold it soon.
That's where the sub-economic charter originated from. And they kept telling us how cheap it was to run them.
Finally the bottom fell out of it. Sales slowed, and the tax concessions were not there like they used to be. The manufacturers blamed insurance costs, but I think they had just saturated the market. Australia had lots of aeroplanes and not much activity. And lots of pilots.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 57
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by YesTAM
which means that if you are paying CASA for a medical, or paying parking charges to some airport, then you are entilted to scream blue murder if you do not get service - something you cannot do if that service is provided to you for free.
Mmmmmm I've just realised YesTAM that you didn't actually go as far as saying that screaming blue murder would make any difference
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Coral,
He's more than likely the late night Jetstar. (there's no freighter that does that route)
WHO DOESN'T TURN LEFT AT Canberra to go to Yass because.....they almost always get direct MDG (to be greeted by a grunt when you re-clear them).
He's more than likely the late night Jetstar. (there's no freighter that does that route)
WHO DOESN'T TURN LEFT AT Canberra to go to Yass because.....they almost always get direct MDG (to be greeted by a grunt when you re-clear them).
Last edited by En-Rooter; 15th Mar 2007 at 15:11.
Dear YesTam,
Most of "your diesel" in Qld actually comes from the inland Cooper basin, where it is refined from light crude, not from the cities. We just get charged as though it came from the cities.
Just thought I'd clear that up.
185
Of course he was neatly forgetting what the people in the city were sending him, starting with diesel fuel.
Just thought I'd clear that up.
185
