Wednesday, December 01, 2010

Brumby's Demise

I am not sure Big Ted is going to be able to fix all the problems in our city and state. His intentions sound good and so far he is not spooking the horses, but time will tell.

So why did we vote Brumby and the Labor Party out?

People mention water and the Desal plant, the North South Pipeline, public transport, congested roads, a lack of services especially to new suburbs, high stamp duty on property (well something has to pay for facilities for new areas), health care and hospital waiting lists, inappropriate higher density construction in inner areas, loss of our green wedges. You know all these things.

There is a common thread. Too many people. While I don't let the previous government off the hook, with our state and city's population growing at the pace it is, it would be an exceptional government who could keep up with supplying what the rapidly growing population wants and needs. Clearly the previous government failed to keep up.

The Premier to be Baillieu assures us that the financial accounts seem to be in order, so I suspect there is rather a lot of money in the state government's pockets.

Meanwhile our economy rolls along nicely, being supported by housing and building construction. So long as we keep our population growing, all will be well. If population growth stops though, just watch the house of cards fall. Of course eventually population growth must slow or stop. With barely any manufacturing now, we will be dependent on income from agriculture which won't keep too many of us in fine jewellery for long.

Ah well, something will turn up. It always does. Back to the sand pit for some head burial.


  1. Can I just say BaillIEU (thanks, Daniel) looks way better in budgie smugglers than The Mad Monk and Brumby any day?

  2. The (generally non-reading) public wants instant gratification - so when results aren't immediate/satisfactory, sack whoever's responsible & start again (I cite sports coaches, TV programs and previous PMs in support of this theory). Could this have been a contributing factor?

    Happy travels!!

  3. Big Ted! fabulous.

    and ... "income from agriculture" ?
    when will you people start reading The Weekly Times?
    Supermarket deals beat down the dairy farmers to 4c per litre for milk. The farmers aren't going to waste money on keeping the poor cows comfortable on a margin like that.


  4. Ann.
    The Weekly Times explained a few years back how the supermarkets buy the cattle for 2 shillings per animal then make a gazillion bucks per kilo by slicing and dicing each little meat cut into fancy schmancy cuts and flogging it to the highest hip pocket waltzing through the sterile muzak-ed aisles.
    Farmers do what they can but with a supermarket monopoly that no one - not ALP, not Libs, not Greens, not DLP or whatever independent - no one of them gives a fat's rats clacker enough to actually get off their arse to change the laws or propose legislation to improve anything for animals, farmers, consumer or the partridge in a pear tree.
    Have a happy silly season, Ann, me and my vegie soup will xxx.

  5. Anonymous10:00 pm

    The governments are just a big Ponzi scheme.

  6. Jayne, at least Brumby is dignified enough to not display his wares.

    Sad Red, but you may be right. People expected an instant fix from a new train company.

    Ann, I actually meant proper income from agriculture for Victoria where we take another country's money for our produce.

    Yep Jayne, I am not liking the way things work now. No winners except big companies.

    Anon, if one goes, they will all fall down?

  7. Hi Andrew,

    Interesting. The reference to agriculture makes me wonder how big it is in Victoria.

    Referring to ABS info, Agriculture in Victoria contributes relatively small portion of the state's total economy, both in Gross State Product (3.3%), and percentage of workers (3.5%).


  8. Oh, btw, I hope I won't sound like giving lecture.

    But this was what I learnt at uni:

    1. Economic sectors are generally classified into 3 sectors:
    - Primary (agriculture, fishing, mining)
    - Secondary (manufacturing)
    - Tertiary (service; eg: Hospitality, Retail/Wholesale, Financial, Gov't, and various services)

    2. There is a general trend that as economy develops, it progresses from relying on Primary sector to Secondary sector, and from Secondary sector to Tertiary sector.

    3. Australia is a quite developed economy, with 68% of Australian GDP is based on service sector.

    Thus, since Australian economy will continue to shift towards tertiary sector, I think more young people and migrants should be encouraged to take professions in the sector.

    This would relieve the pressure of unemployment in other declining sectors.

    Within the Tertiary Sector, the highest opportunity in Victoria would be seen in Finance, insurance
    and property, where it accounts for 30.5% GSP while employing only 15.3% of total workers.

    This could be an indication of productivity (higher GSP/worker), or a shortage of workers in the profession.

    I might be wrong.

  9. The agri figure sounds about what I would guess, clearly it can't sustain Victoria. Thanks for the rest of the stats. It rather confirms what I think. We are not producing anything, we import more than we export and the rest is just moving money around, which is fine while there is a source of income from a growing population. If the growth stops, then the money will dry up and there will me no money to be moved around. Simplistic perhaps, but I think we need to be concerned.