It's the economy, stupid!

 
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
The Australian dollar continues to plumb new depths - probably the financial markets are realising that the RBA will need to cut anyway. Down to US$0.65.9 today, the lowest it's been since the GFC.

Interesting news about Victorian Chairman Dan Andrews - he's telling everyone that fear of corona virus is racist and he's going to light up Melbourne in the yellow-and-red of his communist heroes as well as do a business mission to China (as soon as it's safe, of course). From The Age;

Landmarks across Melbourne – such as the Arts Centre, Flinders Street Station and Melbourne Town Hall – will also be lit in the red and gold colours of the Chinese flag this Friday as part of a campaign to show solidarity with Chinese Victorians.

The coronavirus has taken a massive toll on Chinese-Australian businesses such as restaurants as people fearing infection stay away.

The state government is now launching its “stronger together” campaign, which will include discussions with Chinese community leaders about helping local businesses and enhancing trade.

It is unclear whether Premier Daniel Andrews will join the delegation to China.

The state government will also host a dinner for the Chinese community, including diplomatic, business and community leaders, in recognition of their contributions to Victoria.

Last October,  Victoria signed a fresh deal with the Chinese government and its global Belt and Road infrastructure project, and Mr Andrews urged other Australian governments to follow suit.

The agreement, signed in Beijing, increased co-operation between the state and China in the key areas of infrastructure, innovation, ageing and trade development.

I'm wondering if it's ever occurred to Dan Andrews that not every ethnic Chinese person in Victoria loves the Chinese Communist Party as much as he does?

Sponsored advertisement

  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
The University of Western Sydney is actually going to pay Chinese students $1,500 if they can go to a third-party country for 14 days thus getting around the corona virus ban and ensuring they can come to university and pay all those juicy fees that are so far being withheld. Daily Mail Australia:

Western Sydney University told its international students on Wednesday it would subside the cost of airfares and accommodation to allow them to reach Australia 'through a third country'.  

It comes as the Australian government extended the ban on those coming from mainland China until February 29, affecting an estimated 65,000 Chinese students. The ban can be dodged though by going through a country which does not have a travel ban on those coming from China.

Those countries include Thailand, Cambodia, the United Arab Emirates and Japan.

In the e-mail being circulated online this week, the university said the $1500 payment would be made after arrival in Australia.

'We consider the Australian Government's endorsement of entering Australia through a third country an important development, opening up the opportunity to arrive in time to commence study in Australia,' the e-mail said.

The move has been hailed by the Sydney Student Representatives' Council, which said universities capable of helping subsidise travel costs should be helping out.

'The fact international students are paying $45,000 annually for tuition fees does not mean they should always pay more,' the council's general secretary Abbey Shi told The Australian.

Travel agents are taking advantage of the loophole in the travel ban by selling 14-day travel packages to go-between countries such as Dubai.

You have to wonder what sort of responsibility the University will take if it turns out that the incubation period for the disease is even longer than a fortnight and that in fact they're helping to bring infected people to Australia for no other reason than MONEY? It's pretty obvious that Australian universities have sold out locals with a preference for full-fee paying international students - taking in as many as they can and then forcing locals to compete with them for jobs in Australia after they graduate.

Also, where does the University get the $1,500 from - is that a tax deduction or write-off? Using taxpayer money to circumvent quarantine laws for foreign students, where on earth do these people get off!
  Upven Locomotive Driver

The University of Western Sydney is actually going to pay Chinese students $1,500 if they can go to a third-party country for 14 days thus getting around the corona virus ban and ensuring they can come to university and pay all those juicy fees that are so far being withheld. Daily Mail Australia:

Western Sydney University told its international students on Wednesday it would subside the cost of airfares and accommodation to allow them to reach Australia 'through a third country'.  

It comes as the Australian government extended the ban on those coming from mainland China until February 29, affecting an estimated 65,000 Chinese students. The ban can be dodged though by going through a country which does not have a travel ban on those coming from China.

Those countries include Thailand, Cambodia, the United Arab Emirates and Japan.

In the e-mail being circulated online this week, the university said the $1500 payment would be made after arrival in Australia.

'We consider the Australian Government's endorsement of entering Australia through a third country an important development, opening up the opportunity to arrive in time to commence study in Australia,' the e-mail said.

The move has been hailed by the Sydney Student Representatives' Council, which said universities capable of helping subsidise travel costs should be helping out.

'The fact international students are paying $45,000 annually for tuition fees does not mean they should always pay more,' the council's general secretary Abbey Shi told The Australian.

Travel agents are taking advantage of the loophole in the travel ban by selling 14-day travel packages to go-between countries such as Dubai.

You have to wonder what sort of responsibility the University will take if it turns out that the incubation period for the disease is even longer than a fortnight and that in fact they're helping to bring infected people to Australia for no other reason than MONEY? It's pretty obvious that Australian universities have sold out locals with a preference for full-fee paying international students - taking in as many as they can and then forcing locals to compete with them for jobs in Australia after they graduate.

Also, where does the University get the $1,500 from - is that a tax deduction or write-off? Using taxpayer money to circumvent quarantine laws for foreign students, where on earth do these people get off!
don_dunstan
I read that the top ten universities for international students have a $12b in cash. This is just pure greed from public institutions. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/universities-have-12-billion-war-chest-to-confront-coronavirus-crisis-20200219-p542c0.html
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
I read that the top ten universities for international students have a $12b in cash. This is just pure greed from public institutions. https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/universities-have-12-billion-war-chest-to-confront-coronavirus-crisis-20200219-p542c0.html
Upven
Not only that but the G8 Vice Chancellors also earn over $1,000,000 each in remuneration. Why? What do they do that makes them worth that much money - drag in full-fee paying foreign students? Isn't that a terrible betrayal of local students who have to fight against these graduates once they get residency (as most of them do)?

Interesting to note today that in addition to the Melbourne Metro project blowing out by some $4,000,000,000 that the Sydney Metro project is also blowing out by a similar amount. The respective state governments should be sacked for not being able to manage money.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of ar*eholes - De Beers records lowest profits since 2009 on the back of a glut in the global diamond market - ZeroHedge:

Worldwide global jewelry markets have been pinched by a global slowdown, trade wars, and a virus outbreak, crimping discretionary income among consumers.

The extent of the diamond crisis became more evident on Thursday when De Beers reported profits for 2019, crashed by 50%, now below levels that were last seen since 2009...

...Mark Cutifani, CEO of Anglo-American Plc, which controls De Beers, said a global turnaround was nearing for the industry, then the virus outbreak in China delayed the rebalancing.  

"There aren't as many people walking around jewelry shops in China. In Hong Kong, there are virtually none," Cutifani said. "It'll be a couple of months before we have a better picture."

Diamonds are the biggest rip-off ever, marketed as a lovely gift and fantastic investment by De Beers for decades but in reality they are neither. It's about time the public woke up to the slick marketing of this value-less stone.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Not only that but the G8 Vice Chancellors also earn over $1,000,000 each in remuneration. Why? What do they do that makes them worth that much money - drag in full-fee paying foreign students? Isn't that a terrible betrayal of local students who have to fight against these graduates once they get residency (as most of them do)?
don_dunstan
Its around the right order of magnitude for a COO of a business with that many staff, budget and customers.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Don,
I work in heavy industry and over the years on a number of operational and major project's, one site employed 26,000 people. I've seen the fall out economic benefit these projects create, even with most of the technology actually imported. Hell the job in India almost the entire plant was fabricated in China and shipped to India and yet we still had 26,000 people on site, yes not the most productive but still there. Likewise similar projects but on a smaller scale in Australia. Very noticeable in smaller cities and towns.
This is not the same sort of project - they're engineering the hull of a submarine here and (apparently) not much else. You can't compare that to a project in India where people work for a fraction of the wages of Australians.
You however think Sadie the cleaning lady and her boyfriend will be the only winners and some how $XB will be spent for zero impact on the SA economy. Don, your dreaming......the nice version. Enjoy your BS Don.
You're letting your pathological hatred of me blind you to the realities of this project. You think I'm to blame for posting the truth about what's going on with this thing.

Have you actually read what we've been discussing? I don't think you have - because if you did you'd realise that the promised local jobs and the promised local content is not emerging - the local content likely now to be well below fifty percent according to Naval and in fact it will probably just be the actual hull construction and fit-out in the end. So the assertion that it will be worth 20,000 jobs to our nation is entirely fiction - I know it's incredibly hard for you to admit that you were wrong on this but you were definitely wrong. The number of jobs created will probably be less than 2,000 and even then much of that expertise will probably have to be imported on working visas anyway. It's a far cry from the promised 'jobs for locals' we were told when Pyne signed the contract.

And really, it makes sense for the French to do it that way. Their contract doesn't actually specify a minimum local content level and most of the fittings, equipment, etc are already being made on production lines overseas with existing employees and expertise that will not be easily replicated here. It's the same old story that's been killing Aussie-made for the last 40 years - why should they have to replicate those engineering processes here when they can save money by going off-shore?

You need to stop hating on me because I'm telling the truth about this extremely expensive, inefficient and obsolete boondoggle. I'm just telling it how it is.
don_dunstan
Umm, I can and I did and I will, why because it is comparable.

The Indian's were an assembly team, everything was supplied from China, fabricated into assembly sets. I'm talking even safety stairs.

Also, I wasn't just referencing India, just one of a few examples including Australia where more fabrication was done on site, please keep up.

No hatred Don, that's in your mind, not mine. I have no reason to hate you.

Before asking me what I've read, ask yourself have you read what i posed? Which is a fair comment because you often say you don't or haven't. I've said all along the most likely local content is mostly the most complicated bit, will mostly likely be sourced from Australia and assembled in Australia short of complex alloy's.

Systems such as the Navigation, sonar, engines, war, environmental etc etc will no doubt be imported as assembled plug and play packages, the same that happens with V/line trains. Yes these complex systems will more than likely tie up 50% of the cost as you would expect especially the war system as its military, typically advanced technology, small production and all designed for one of the more complex machines ever built by humans, a sub.

50% local content is 50 x more than what you proposed, which was 100% import of completed product so please don't try and have ago at bit with your anti-Australian comments! Honestly I've never met someone so intent in off-shoring a large fed govt tax payer funded project. You go on and on about immigration and lack of jobs and here you are defending month in month out your decision to off-shore the sub project so that almost no Australian gets the opportunity to gain employment from this project. You won't be happy until the Sub arrives here in turn key fashion from where ever not even with an Australian crew on board.

On the jobs numbers, I used simple common sense for the money spent and industry experience of what might happen and happened elsewhere. On the flip side all you can bring to the table is Sadie the Cleaning Lady and her boyfriend. So am I wrong on the jobs? I never said I was right but i suspect far less wrong than you.

The so called job numbers you keep quoting from me are me using YOUR cost numbers. If you quote me correctly I originally stated a lower number. For every billion dollars in construction there are around 5000 jobs created somewhere directly, do the math! As the project is for nearly a generation, then we are talking jobs for almost life for some people. Providing baseload demand on goods and services and boost employment and create greater job security for people in the region. But again you'd rather import  the subs! Good for you Don, but please for the sake of others financial future, lets hope you don't get your way which thankfully the Australian govt has seen not to.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Umm, I can and I did and I will, why because it is comparable.
RTT_Rules
No, sorry, not even vaguely the same.
No hatred Don, that's in your mind, not mine. I have no reason to hate you.
RTT_Rules
Yeah but you do come across that way. Like I'm so far up your nose that I'm kicking your top lip.
Before asking me what I've read, ask yourself have you read what i posed? Which is a fair comment because you often say you don't or haven't. I've said all along the most likely local content is mostly the most complicated bit, will mostly likely be sourced from Australia and assembled in Australia short of complex alloy's. Systems such as the Navigation, sonar, engines, war, environmental etc etc will no doubt be imported as assembled plug and play packages, the same that happens with V/line trains. Yes these complex systems will more than likely tie up 50% of the cost as you would expect especially the war system as its military, typically advanced technology, small production and all designed for one of the more complex machines ever built by humans, a sub. 50% local content is 50 x more than what you proposed, which was 100% import of completed product so please don't try and have ago at bit with your anti-Australian comments! Honestly I've never met someone so intent in off-shoring a large fed govt tax payer funded project. You go on and on about immigration and lack of jobs and here you are defending month in month out your decision to off-shore the sub project so that almost no Australian gets the opportunity to gain employment from this project. You won't be happy until the Sub arrives here in turn key fashion from where ever not even with an Australian crew on board. On the jobs numbers, I used simple common sense for the money spent and industry experience of what might happen and happened elsewhere. On the flip side all you can bring to the table is Sadie the Cleaning Lady and her boyfriend. So am I wrong on the jobs? I never said I was right but i suspect far less wrong than you. The so called job numbers you keep quoting from me are me using YOUR cost numbers. If you quote me correctly I originally stated a lower number. For every billion dollars in construction there are around 5000 jobs created somewhere directly, do the math! As the project is for nearly a generation, then we are talking jobs for almost life for some people. Providing baseload demand on goods and services and boost employment and create greater job security for people in the region. But again you'd rather import the subs! Good for you Don, but please for the sake of others financial future, lets hope you don't get your way which thankfully the Australian govt has seen not to.
RTT_Rules
Yeah, sorry to say that I do read what you write and it's content-free. You're not taking into account what the French have said about not fulfilling their Aussie content-obligations, the fact that they don't trust Australians to deliver their part of the project as required... etc etc.

You really argue badly, you know that don't you. You don't refer to facts or reference anything, you never cite and you don't distinguish between fact and your opinion. I've told you this repeatedly and you still ignore me. Fine... but don't expect me to take you seriously.

And I'm not anti-Australian jobs, I'm extremely disappointed that Pyne's contract hasn't delivered on-shore jobs as promised. IF you'd actually been following what I've posted you'd realise that. But you either don't read or don't comprehend what I've posted... do you.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Umm, I can and I did and I will, why because it is comparable.
No, sorry, not even vaguely the same.
No hatred Don, that's in your mind, not mine. I have no reason to hate you.
Yeah but you do come across that way. Like I'm so far up your nose that I'm kicking your top lip.
Before asking me what I've read, ask yourself have you read what i posed? Which is a fair comment because you often say you don't or haven't. I've said all along the most likely local content is mostly the most complicated bit, will mostly likely be sourced from Australia and assembled in Australia short of complex alloy's. Systems such as the Navigation, sonar, engines, war, environmental etc etc will no doubt be imported as assembled plug and play packages, the same that happens with V/line trains. Yes these complex systems will more than likely tie up 50% of the cost as you would expect especially the war system as its military, typically advanced technology, small production and all designed for one of the more complex machines ever built by humans, a sub. 50% local content is 50 x more than what you proposed, which was 100% import of completed product so please don't try and have ago at bit with your anti-Australian comments! Honestly I've never met someone so intent in off-shoring a large fed govt tax payer funded project. You go on and on about immigration and lack of jobs and here you are defending month in month out your decision to off-shore the sub project so that almost no Australian gets the opportunity to gain employment from this project. You won't be happy until the Sub arrives here in turn key fashion from where ever not even with an Australian crew on board. On the jobs numbers, I used simple common sense for the money spent and industry experience of what might happen and happened elsewhere. On the flip side all you can bring to the table is Sadie the Cleaning Lady and her boyfriend. So am I wrong on the jobs? I never said I was right but i suspect far less wrong than you. The so called job numbers you keep quoting from me are me using YOUR cost numbers. If you quote me correctly I originally stated a lower number. For every billion dollars in construction there are around 5000 jobs created somewhere directly, do the math! As the project is for nearly a generation, then we are talking jobs for almost life for some people. Providing baseload demand on goods and services and boost employment and create greater job security for people in the region. But again you'd rather import the subs! Good for you Don, but please for the sake of others financial future, lets hope you don't get your way which thankfully the Australian govt has seen not to.
Yeah, sorry to say that I do read what you write and it's content-free. You're not taking into account what the French have said about not fulfilling their Aussie content-obligations, the fact that they don't trust Australians to deliver their part of the project as required... etc etc.

You really argue badly, you know that don't you. You don't refer to facts or reference anything, you never cite and you don't distinguish between fact and your opinion. I've told you this repeatedly and you still ignore me. Fine... but don't expect me to take you seriously.

And I'm not anti-Australian jobs, I'm extremely disappointed that Pyne's contract hasn't delivered on-shore jobs as promised. IF you'd actually been following what I've posted you'd realise that. But you either don't read or don't comprehend what I've posted... do you.
don_dunstan
Yes its the same Don.

Don, I cannot see why you would think I "hate" you? Just because I disagree with some of what you say doesn't mean there is any hate involved. This is a written format forum of opinions and occasionally some facts, nothing more and nothing less.

I posted links previously on job creation directly and indirectly from capital money spent which covered various industries, just go back to that.

You are anti-Australia on job creation. Right from the start you have opposed these subs to be built in Australia for all sorts of reasons. You want these things imported whole, turn-key. You have stated this over and over.

Are you an expert on how many jobs could be created locally for this? I doubt Pyne is. Whether the local content is 30, 40, 50 or 60%, there is a magic number that makes sense for all, what ever it is, but difficult to guarantee from the start.  After all if you say 50% and you cannot practically or economically achieve 50% once you get into the detail down the line then it will be what it will be. The project won't allow itself to be compromised on a guess.

I've said before and I'm saying it again, the most practical thing to build here is the hill and then the team to fit it out with the rest. If this generates a few thousand jobs for locals here, then good news for years to come and more importantly building the skill sets to do the various upgrades, repairs and refits through their operating life.

Don, I think we are done here, time to move on!
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Yes its the same Don.

Don, I cannot see why you would think I "hate" you? Just because I disagree with some of what you say doesn't mean there is any hate involved. This is a written format forum of opinions and occasionally some facts, nothing more and nothing less.

I posted links previously on job creation directly and indirectly from capital money spent which covered various industries, just go back to that.

You are anti-Australia on job creation. Right from the start you have opposed these subs to be built in Australia for all sorts of reasons. You want these things imported whole, turn-key. You have stated this over and over.

Are you an expert on how many jobs could be created locally for this? I doubt Pyne is. Whether the local content is 30, 40, 50 or 60%, there is a magic number that makes sense for all, what ever it is, but difficult to guarantee from the start.  After all if you say 50% and you cannot practically or economically achieve 50% once you get into the detail down the line then it will be what it will be. The project won't allow itself to be compromised on a guess.

I've said before and I'm saying it again, the most practical thing to build here is the hill and then the team to fit it out with the rest. If this generates a few thousand jobs for locals here, then good news for years to come and more importantly building the skill sets to do the various upgrades, repairs and refits through their operating life.

Don, I think we are done here, time to move on!
RTT_Rules
You have no clue about how many jobs are going to be created locally and you still won't repudiate the 20,000 figure. You should definitely work for Pyne's consultancy and spread misinformation about the number - supposition and opinion is your forte.

$100,000,000,000 + for a handful of local jobs, don't you see how dumb that whole paradigm is? No, of course you don't.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Has anybody else noticed that the price of gold and silver has been absolutely flying relative to the Aussie dollar in the last week?

Gold is now AU $2,490 per ounce and silver AU $27.90 per ounce. The gold price has gained almost AU $150 in just over a week (more than five percent) and the silver price AU $1.50 at the same time (also five percent).

Somebody in the know has information about the upcoming weakness of the Australian dollar and they're getting into precious metals? Just a theory.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Hooley dooley! China's new car sales have fallen 92% for the month of February. Guardian Australia:

Car sales in China have collapsed by 92% as the coronavirus shutdown wreaks havoc on the automotive industry.

The China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) said “barely anybody” had looked to buy vehicles in the first half of February. Most dealerships have remained closed as a precaution.

The plummeting domestic sales – down 96% in the first week of February and 92% across the first half of the month – come days after Jaguar Land Rover revealed it was currently making no sales in China.

“There was barely anybody at car dealers in the first week of February as most people stayed at home,” said Cui Dongshu, the secretary general of the CPCA. “Very few dealerships opened in the first weeks of February and they have had very little customer traffic.”

Only 4,909 cars were sold in the first 16 days of the month, down from 59,930 in the same period last year, in a market where more than 25m cars were sold in 2019.

If this keeps up then who knows what impact it will have on raw materials imported from Australia?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
You have no clue about how many jobs are going to be created locally and you still won't repudiate the 20,000 figure. You should definitely work for Pyne's consultancy and spread misinformation about the number - supposition and opinion is your forte.

$100,000,000,000 + for a handful of local jobs, don't you see how dumb that whole paradigm is? No, of course you don't.
don_dunstan
Don
I have demonstrated time and time again your BS data is simply BS on this subject.

If you spend $1B a year on a project for 24 years then you have to create a minimum of 6500 jobs in total with a total employment cost of $150,000/job.  Which is well above average income for Australia. Those jobs go to create further jobs. as per the well established multiplier effect in total, dubiously some is off-shored, just like building an Australian car still required key technology components to be imported as is V/locity DMU's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_multiplier_effect
https://www.triplepundit.com/story/2011/employment-multiplier-important-tool-promoting-burgeoning-green-economy/77886
https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-multiplier-effect-of-innovation-jobs/
https://www.epi.org/publication/updated-employment-multipliers-for-the-u-s-economy/

I posted all this and alot more before.

The number of 20,000 was using your elevated number for the project for which you clearly don't understand the context for that data or you would not have posted it. I simply replied and said if you bother to check, ok using your numbers this is the job creations.
You repeatedly post increasingly BS numbers for which you have no serious reference too or miss read your own link.
You made endless claims about alternative supply options including US which don't make or supply such subs.
You have made erroneous comments about the French subs being nuclear and the design having to be converted to Diesel at "great cost", when the design was always from the start either fuel source.
You have ignore the Aust govts own statement that it wants to keep the nuclear option open.
You claim there is a production line in France, yet such projects don't have production lines
You made claims that I "Hate" you, but I've never said such a thing.

Worst yet, you are so unbelievably un-Australia you'd rather they be imported turn-key projects denying your fellow South Australian's jobs just so you can be right. Much of these jobs will be trade related that will last a generation and has the potential to continue to the next generation of sub or sales to 3rd parties in some way shape of form as Australia is a small exported of military hardware and supplies.

Don, where does this fantasy obsession of yours on subs end?
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Don
I have demonstrated time and time again your BS data is simply BS on this subject.

If you spend $1B a year on a project for 24 years then you have to create a minimum of 6500 jobs in total with a total employment cost of $150,000/job.  Which is well above average income for Australia. Those jobs go to create further jobs. as per the well established multiplier effect in total, dubiously some is off-shored, just like building an Australian car still required key technology components to be imported as is V/locity DMU's.
RTT_Rules
I'm going to explain the fundamental fault in your argument to you one more time.

$1B a year on a project for 24 years then you have to create a minimum of 6500 jobs in total with a total employment cost of $150,000/job.

This assertion about the Attack Class Submarine project has no basis in fact. None. And it's primarily because there is no actual information about the local content or the number of locals who will be employed on the project - and indeed as we've discussed as nauseam in the last week, the French contractors are shrinking that figure all the time. You supposition is that $1,000,000,000 p/a is to be spent without knowing how much of that will actually be spent procuring Australian services or how much goes to overseas contractors supplying fully or mostly imported equipment, software, professional services etc. Therefore your 6,500 number is an opinion.

Furthermore you haven't produced any actual research that shows that your jobs formula is correct. Do you actually understand that? Your formula assumes that 100% of that billion dollars goes to employing people directly translating into the 6,500 jobs when there's no evidence for that claim - so therefore again it's just opinion. This goes back to what I've been trying to tell you repeatedly over this (and other) threads that you don't seem to understand the difference between your own opinions and fact.

Now this is not a personal attack on your intellect, I'm just trying to show you that you haven't actually established a proper case for what it is that you're arguing; ie that the Attack Class Submarine project will create many thousands of direct jobs for Australians.
The number of 20,000 was using your elevated number for the project for which you clearly don't understand the context for that data or you would not have posted it. I simply replied and said if you bother to check, ok using your numbers this is the job creations.
RTT_Rules
I don't understand how I'm liable for your mistake - if you thought 20,000 was wrong then why did you use that number?

Again, think about the argument that you have constructed about the Attack Class Project jobs in relation to this fundamental formula:

A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven.

You need to prove that what you've said about a "minimum of 6,500 jobs" has some actual basis - that either the Department of Defense or the French contractors can confirm
  • A minimum spend on Australian contractors and Australian services on the project. So far you haven't done that so your assertion about 6,500 jobs being created in Australia is just your opinion. And in addition:
  • That any money directly being spent on procuring Australian services directly translates into jobs for Australians, not just on local contractors who then turn around and subcontract their work to off-shore providers.
That's your project for you to work on in order to prove your case has a basis in fact and that it isn't just your opinion.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
...

Worst yet, you are so unbelievably un-Australia you'd rather they be imported turn-key projects denying your fellow South Australian's jobs just so you can be right. Much of these jobs will be trade related that will last a generation and has the potential to continue to the next generation of sub or sales to 3rd parties in some way shape of form as Australia is a small exported of military hardware and supplies.
RTT_Rules
The only thing that is an absolute certainty about the Attack Class Project for South Australia is that around 700 jobs will be directly created at the Osborne Shipyards for the construction and fit-out of the hull.

So using your own figure of $1,000,000,000 p/a that would work out to $1,428,000 per job per year.

To put that into perspective, that's 110 times the annual Centrelink unemployment benefit or about 20 times the average annual adult income in Australia. We're talking about likely the most expensive job creation project in Australia's history if you assume that's the primary purpose.
  Groundrelay Chief Commissioner

Location: Surrounded by Trolls!
The only thing that is an absolute certainty about the Attack Class Project for South Australia is that around 700 jobs will be directly created at the Osborne Shipyards for the construction and fit-out of the hull.

So using your own figure of $1,000,000,000 p/a that would work out to $1,428,000 per job per year.

To put that into perspective, that's 110 times the annual Centrelink unemployment benefit or about 20 times the average annual adult income in Australia. We're talking about likely the most expensive job creation project in Australia's history if you assume that's the primary purpose.
don_dunstan
Is this like the battleship mentality leading into WW2, quickly made irrelevant by Aircraft Carriers with capable aircraft? Who is to say we won't have an ocean full of relatively inexpensive hunter killer sub-drones during the life of these subs making things rather awkward for them.
Could use the money providing solar panels with battery storage for all low income households and they'll never have to fret about their electricity cost or blackouts. Wink
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Is this like the battleship mentality leading into WW2, quickly made irrelevant by Aircraft Carriers with capable aircraft? Who is to say we won't have an ocean full of relatively inexpensive hunter killer sub-drones during the life of these subs making things rather awkward for them.
Could use the money providing solar panels with battery storage for all low income households and they'll never have to fret about their electricity cost or blackouts. Wink
Groundrelay
So your comparing a social welfare scheme, questionable at that with the strategic defense requirements for the country? Why not just shut the whole defense department down and save the $45B or what ever the number is we spend every year, you'd be able to buy EV's for all those low income earners.

Technology is always ongoing, do you just stop everything and wait because something "might" come along thats better?

The Battleships were not a complete right off in WW2 and did their part, the German's and Japanese just through their all into one technology.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
...

Worst yet, you are so unbelievably un-Australia you'd rather they be imported turn-key projects denying your fellow South Australian's jobs just so you can be right. Much of these jobs will be trade related that will last a generation and has the potential to continue to the next generation of sub or sales to 3rd parties in some way shape of form as Australia is a small exported of military hardware and supplies.
The only thing that is an absolute certainty about the Attack Class Project for South Australia is that around 700 jobs will be directly created at the Osborne Shipyards for the construction and fit-out of the hull.

So using your own figure of $1,000,000,000 p/a that would work out to $1,428,000 per job per year.

To put that into perspective, that's 110 times the annual Centrelink unemployment benefit or about 20 times the average annual adult income in Australia. We're talking about likely the most expensive job creation project in Australia's history if you assume that's the primary purpose.
don_dunstan
So once again Don, what do you want to do? Because so far you have contributed zip to a workable solution, just criticized everyone else.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Don
I have demonstrated time and time again your BS data is simply BS on this subject.

If you spend $1B a year on a project for 24 years then you have to create a minimum of 6500 jobs in total with a total employment cost of $150,000/job.  Which is well above average income for Australia. Those jobs go to create further jobs. as per the well established multiplier effect in total, dubiously some is off-shored, just like building an Australian car still required key technology components to be imported as is V/locity DMU's.
I'm going to explain the fundamental fault in your argument to you one more time.

$1B a year on a project for 24 years then you have to create a minimum of 6500 jobs in total with a total employment cost of $150,000/job.

This assertion about the Attack Class Submarine project has no basis in fact. None. And it's primarily because there is no actual information about the local content or the number of locals who will be employed on the project - and indeed as we've discussed as nauseam in the last week, the French contractors are shrinking that figure all the time. You supposition is that $1,000,000,000 p/a is to be spent without knowing how much of that will actually be spent procuring Australian services or how much goes to overseas contractors supplying fully or mostly imported equipment, software, professional services etc. Therefore your 6,500 number is an opinion.

Furthermore you haven't produced any actual research that shows that your jobs formula is correct. Do you actually understand that? Your formula assumes that 100% of that billion dollars goes to employing people directly translating into the 6,500 jobs when there's no evidence for that claim - so therefore again it's just opinion. This goes back to what I've been trying to tell you repeatedly over this (and other) threads that you don't seem to understand the difference between your own opinions and fact.

Now this is not a personal attack on your intellect, I'm just trying to show you that you haven't actually established a proper case for what it is that you're arguing; ie that the Attack Class Submarine project will create many thousands of direct jobs for Australians.
The number of 20,000 was using your elevated number for the project for which you clearly don't understand the context for that data or you would not have posted it. I simply replied and said if you bother to check, ok using your numbers this is the job creations.
I don't understand how I'm liable for your mistake - if you thought 20,000 was wrong then why did you use that number?

Again, think about the argument that you have constructed about the Attack Class Project jobs in relation to this fundamental formula:

A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven.

You need to prove that what you've said about a "minimum of 6,500 jobs" has some actual basis - that either the Department of Defense or the French contractors can confirm
  • A minimum spend on Australian contractors and Australian services on the project. So far you haven't done that so your assertion about 6,500 jobs being created in Australia is just your opinion. And in addition:
  • That any money directly being spent on procuring Australian services directly translates into jobs for Australians, not just on local contractors who then turn around and subcontract their work to off-shore providers.
That's your project for you to work on in order to prove your case has a basis in fact and that it isn't just your opinion.
don_dunstan
Don
I didn't realise Economics 101 had to be a lesson that you needed, but obviously this is incorrect.

When you spend money to buy something, say a TV, ultimately that money is used to produce the product you bought, it pays wages directly. Then that supplier has to source their raw materials and services, they pay wages and so on and so on. At the end of the day, you are paying wages somewhere. The only thing on this planet that has any use for money is humans. So if you are buying meat to feed the works who makes the ink that is used on the label that goes on your TV, the farmer of the beef gets paid and he buys fuel, feed what ever.

So if you spend $1B every year, jobs are created, its not possible to do so unless the money is simply placed in a bank account. I think we all know this won't happen.

I known your anti-Australian workforce mantra hates the very thought that Australian's will be employed in building the subs, but the fact is they will. Again yes jobs will also be in France and many other countries supplying the technical bits an pieces, Surprise, this is only a surprise to you. Did you really think the engines would be made in Australia? I bet the prop is even imported.

Please Don, move on!
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
The only thing that is an absolute certainty about the Attack Class Project for South Australia is that around 700 jobs will be directly created at the Osborne Shipyards for the construction and fit-out of the hull.

So using your own figure of $1,000,000,000 p/a that would work out to $1,428,000 per job per year.

To put that into perspective, that's 110 times the annual Centrelink unemployment benefit or about 20 times the average annual adult income in Australia. We're talking about likely the most expensive job creation project in Australia's history if you assume that's the primary purpose.
Is this like the battleship mentality leading into WW2, quickly made irrelevant by Aircraft Carriers with capable aircraft? Who is to say we won't have an ocean full of relatively inexpensive hunter killer sub-drones during the life of these subs making things rather awkward for them.
Could use the money providing solar panels with battery storage for all low income households and they'll never have to fret about their electricity cost or blackouts. Wink
Groundrelay
I find myself in rare agreement with you, Groundrelay. My concern is that the concept of a manned (staffed?) submarine might be completely redundant by the time the first one rolls of the line in 2034. There might very well be fully autonomous underwater drones that are more effective by then, requiring no personnel and capable of staying hidden underwater for months or even years at at time.

If the goal is actually to build them here for economic stimulation reasons then it's a really expensive program providing bugger all employment and benefit to the public, no likely export or GDP contribution and unlikely to attract additional private sector investment. So it's not really either is it.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
So once again Don, what do you want to do? Because so far you have contributed zip to a workable solution, just criticized everyone else.
RTT_Rules
No, what I'm saying is that this is neither a proper defence project NOR is it a job creation project.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Don
I didn't realise Economics 101 had to be a lesson that you needed, but obviously this is incorrect.

When you spend money to buy something, say a TV, ultimately that money is used to produce the product you bought, it pays wages directly. Then that supplier has to source their raw materials and services, they pay wages and so on and so on. At the end of the day, you are paying wages somewhere. The only thing on this planet that has any use for money is humans. So if you are buying meat to feed the works who makes the ink that is used on the label that goes on your TV, the farmer of the beef gets paid and he buys fuel, feed what ever.

So if you spend $1B every year, jobs are created, its not possible to do so unless the money is simply placed in a bank account. I think we all know this won't happen.

I known your anti-Australian workforce mantra hates the very thought that Australian's will be employed in building the subs, but the fact is they will. Again yes jobs will also be in France and many other countries supplying the technical bits an pieces, Surprise, this is only a surprise to you. Did you really think the engines would be made in Australia? I bet the prop is even imported.

Please Don, move on!
RTT_Rules
So spend the money on something that creates LOTS of jobs for South Australians and something that has the promise of an actual export industry so that we can contribute to GDP. Not this submarine project: Minimal local jobs and engineering content, very little promise of an export-orientated industry and extremely limited opportunities for locals to participate.

It's a rubbish expensive pork-barrelling - you're pretty much the only person on this board who can't see that.
  don_dunstan The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Adelaide proud
Is this like the battleship mentality leading into WW2, quickly made irrelevant by Aircraft Carriers with capable aircraft? Who is to say we won't have an ocean full of relatively inexpensive hunter killer sub-drones during the life of these subs making things rather awkward for them.
Could use the money providing solar panels with battery storage for all low income households and they'll never have to fret about their electricity cost or blackouts. Wink
So your comparing a social welfare scheme, questionable at that with the strategic defense requirements for the country? Why not just shut the whole defense department down and save the $45B or what ever the number is we spend every year, you'd be able to buy EV's for all those low income earners.
RTT_Rules
OR we could buy something off-the-shelf for a fraction of the price from the United States and help shore up the ANZUS agreement.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
OR we could buy something off-the-shelf for a fraction of the price from the United States and help shore up the ANZUS agreement.
don_dunstan
Good one Don,
you just demonstrated that your entire input to this debate is completely null and void and you have again demonstrated you clueless to what the submarine project is all about, who actually bid, what the price was and more to the point, who can actually supply a diesel submarine. In addition you are completely clueless on why the longterm Australian strategic defense requirements started planning the replacement of the existing Sub fleet more than a decade ago, long before the demise of the car industry and any other welfare needs to save the South Australian economy from achieving irrelevancy in the national economy.

Just for you Don and again for the 10,000,000th time,
no American supplier bid on the project, maybe actually read one of your own links because that's how I found out who the bidders were. Why, because no American supplier makes diesel submarines nor are the nuclear models they do make for sale internationally due to restrictions put in place by the US govt regarding nuclear hardware. Even the Canadian's are or are considering buying the same model sub as Australia from the French for all mostly the same reasons Australia did.

Finally Don, you have proved you are done here.
  sydneyshortnorth Train Controller

Location: On the 1 in 40.
- you're pretty much the only person on this board who can't see that.
don_dunstan
That may or may not be true but what is unambiguously clear is that there seems to be only a couple of active players left on this thread. I wonder why that is. Even the simple entertainment value of endless grandstanding wears thin after a while!

Steve

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: