Letters to Jim Main #7

Perplexing Programming (22/7/09)

Dear Jim
A lot of people have written to you with valid gripes about the standard of AFL telecasting in NSW and Quensland and I cannot understand how putting on a dodgy movie works better for the network. Does a network really earn more in advertising that way? Or does it cost too much to relay the "live" feed to Sydney and Brisbane? I am not in the Tv business, so I have no idea of their motivation for such decisions. However I figure that if they spend so much to get the broadcasting rights they might as well show their product, especially as the price is expected to rise with the introduction of two new teams.

Jim Main says:
There is so much disquiet, even anger, over this that something must be done.

A Real Stimulus

I received my group certificate and immediately reflected on the post by Dr H titled “Government Stimulus Impossible”. Referring of course to the stimulus packages that aim to reverse the effects of the global financial crisis (GFC) in Australia.

Dr H uses economically sound logic to explain why these stimulus packages won’t work and why their effect on the GFC will be negligible at best.

I have felt that the stimulus packages are more of a vote grab. Our selfish materialistic culture falls for the bait and sees only dollar signs while failing to see the bigger picture or the long-term outlook.

Inspect your own group certificate. Mine said that I was paid $55,000 gross and was taxed $11,000. Yet Rudd gives me $900 and expects me to be happy and go on a spending spree. How about cutting the taxes altogether, stop stealing my hard earned for useless spending sprees. It might win votes but will most likely have no effect on the GFC whatsoever.

Make some tough decisions instead of popular ones: cut taxes, cut spending, cut regulation.

Subsidies Decline

I read with interest a story in the Daily Telegraph about government subsidies being reduced for call outs and transports from Ambulance services (‘Cheaper to catch a taxi to hospital’ – 7/7/09).

A supposed “price hike” even though patients will only pay just above 50% of the fees, up approximately $200 for transport. Most of our patients are the elderly who have pension cards that cover the costs anyway.

The state Liberal Party are getting caught in the trap of objecting for the sake of it, even though it would match their ideology of small government.

We should be grateful that the ambulance service has been that affordable. Perhaps a price hike, as the media calls it, would make people think twice before calling an ambulance for trivial reasons.

The public expect so much from the government and they take as much as they can. The ambulance service is being taken for granted like every other health service. Perhaps a bill sent in the mail will open people’s eyes to the “real” costs of good health and find out that it doesn’t come freely.