PROCREATE AND PURCHASE

Our beloved federal treasurer this week called on Australians to have yet more babies. He thinks we aren’t having enough and certainly aren’t pulling our weight as far as developed countries go. But what motive is he really hiding behind that unshifting, smug smirk of his?

Mr Costello claims that we need to have more babies to facilitate the growth that the country needs for the future. He obviously believes this as he has been throwing money at every birth at a rate of $3000 a pop (if you’ll excuse the expression). But I think it’s more than just growth he’s after. I think he’s just trying to save his job.

How could a politician, in good faith, honestly and openly encourage more children into this world considering the following realities of life in Australia?

- The health system is under-funded and overstretched as it is.

- Schools are desperately over-crowded and under resourced.

- Most Australian families are already financially overcommitted.

- There isn’t enough water for the current population as it is.

- Energy supplies and rising fuel costs are a looming and unaddressed problem for the very near future.

- Housing prices are getting beyond the reach of middle income earners.

And he wants MORE people? That’s seems a little strange, until you consider this: Babies are excellent consumers. Every child that is born automatically helps the retail industry to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. Just have a look at how many baby related products there are on the market and then add that to the food, pharmaceuticals and detergents that they also require. BINGO! With every child that is born the economy benefits. And when the economy benefits the treasurer looks good.

Parents think the Baby Bonus is a great idea. $3000 - $4000 for having a baby is a wonderful gift. But it’s not a gift. It’s an investment. They give you $3000 so you will spend $10,000+. It’s the same ploy the government used on new homeowners. “We’ll give you $7000 if you’ll take on $300,000 worth of debt”. The economy gets a massive boost from the government’s ‘generosity’. But what is the cost of this boost?

The downside of this boost is that in ten years there won’t be enough places in schools for the children that get born now. There won’t be enough doctors or hospital beds when they get sick. There won’t be enough fuel to get them around. There may not be enough water for them to drink. But do they care about that? Of course not. By then Mr Costello will have done his term as PM and retired very happily with a huge payout.

Peter Costello wants a quick injection into the economy to save his own bacon. The orchestrated housing boom has kept him afloat but now that is cooling he needs a new trick to fix the bottom line. Short term solutions for a happier treasurer.

If Mr Costello is so concerned about the country’s population, here’s an idea. How about speeding up the processing of refugees? I’m sure they would love to come and help out our economy.

Prophecies Of Doom Are Rarely Funny

Ladies and Gentlemen, the world, as we know it is about to end!
Apocalyptic predictions have long been the domain of alarmists, religious zealots and nutbags who can be easily dismissed as we go about our day-to-day lives. That is why I can’t help feeling a bit uneasy aligning myself with them for this article. But the truth is… the world, as we know it IS about to change.

Whatever your beliefs about the matter, however things may unfold the simple truth is that in the next ten to fifteen years civilisation will succumb to its biggest challenge yet.
That challenge is the reality that the oil is running out.

”Oh dear” you say. “Here we go again. So what? We all know that petrol prices are going up. It’s those bloody oil companies screwing us again”. And so they are, but unfortunately it’s a little more complicated than that.

I, like most people had assumed that the current cost of fuel was just another ploy by big corporations to make massive profits out of the last remaining oil for the next fifty years or so. I foolishly assumed that being big money-making corporations they and the giant transport, airline and petrochemical industries that rely on oil would be ultimately looking after their future wealth with intricate plans for tomorrow involving the slow release of alternate technologies to keep the world running.

I have recently learned that unfortunately, they haven’t actually made those plans. The sad truth is, they, along with governments and even the well meaning scientists actually have no frigging idea what to do once the oil runs out. Worse still, it doesn’t actually even have to run out before the problems arise. Massive problems begin when the oil is on its way out. That is, once we are finding and producing less oil than we are consuming. And the good news is… that’s already starting to happen. For a full and rational explanation have a look at this site:
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

You may not have stopped to consider it but have a quick look around. The computer you are using, the chair you are sitting on, the clothes that you are wearing and even the food that you may be eating are all made from or reliant upon oil. Oil for plastic production, oil for transport, oil for farm machinery, oil for mining equipment and oil as a commodity on which the economy is metered. Our whole civilisation and society is tied to and reliant on oil. If it runs out the economy isn’t just in trouble… IT STOPS!!!

The society that we know will crumble. There will be a market crash, there will be wars and chaos, there will be shortages of food. And the scary truth is that this could, and very likely will happen within the next 20 years. No kidding, no joking, it WILL happen. There are no more oil supplies to be found, there are no alternatives that can stop this happening. The crash will come and no amount of bio fuel, solar panels or nuclear reactors will stop it. The people with the power to fix it were supposed to do it thirty years ago. Unfortunately they didn’t get around to it.

The good news is… people will survive. Society will continue. But the way we live will be changed forever. Every facet of our lives will be affected and life will be very, very different.

I am not telling you this to upset you. I’m not telling you to be a smart-arse. I am telling you because you should start thinking very carefully about the way you live your life. This stuff will probably start to happen within the next ten years. Don’t be afraid and don’t be oblivious to it. Do some research and decide for yourself what you should do.

I’m personally trying to be pragmatic about it. Most generations have felt the sting of history whether it be war, revolution or depression and I don’t think I should feel special enough to be any different. We are starting to see the environmental effects of the oil that we have burnt so it’s probably about time humans paid the price. And society could do with a shake up. Money has taken precedent over health and well being for too long now.

Sure I’m a bit concerned about this bleak future. I hate riding my bike and I’m no good at gardening or sewing so I’m not sure how I’ll keep myself fed and clothed when the shops are empty because they can’t ship in new supplies. I guess I’ll learn to adapt or die trying. Either way it will be interesting to see how the world copes.
I guess when I think about it I’m really looking forward to the end of the world. Does that make me an optimist or a pessimist?

The 10 Pieces of Silver Screen

Last night I, along with many others, headed into the cinema to see Pirates Of The Caribbean – Dead Man’s Chest on its opening night. I’m not a huge fan but friends had organised a group and it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Pirates have become very trendy over the past few years. So much so that I prefer to pronounce the word “Pi–rah-tees” as that seems to be the current, correct pronunciation of words spelt that way. Clearly Johnny Depp has helped these dishevelled seafarers to become so popular again and good on him.

This isn’t a movie review as such. Pirates Of The Caribbean – Dead Man’s Chest or POTCDMC (this is the internet after all. Who has time for full titles?) is a very exciting, special effects extravaganza but without giving too much away the ending was a bit of a let down. Despite sitting through 2 hours of CGI mayhem (in the world’s most uncomfortable cinema seats) the story won’t be concluded until Part III. And this is why I’m a little pissed off. The same thing happened with Kill Bill and to a lesser extent Empire Strikes back. We have to go back again to find out what happened. Basically the movie makers are forcing us to pay for two cinema tickets to get one story. Surely this is a rip off?

I don’t mind if a movie is going to have a sequel. Hollywood is built on the extra ending that leaves things open for another round but usually the chapter we have just watched was complete within itself. When Freddie Krueger or Jason lunge back at the screen just before the credits roll it is usually preceded by a dramatic defeat at the hands of hero or heroine who at least for now feel safe and triumphant. The audience has closure on one chapter and are ready for another, but when a story is just left up in the air it is completely unsatisfying. Hollywood may be upset by people illegally copying DVDs but as far as I’m concerned forcing an audience to pay for another ticket to find out what happened at the end of a story is the real ‘movie piracy’.

Filmmakers may argue that the cliffhanger is a hark back to the old Saturday matinee films and that there is nothing wrong with that. After all, TV shows do it all the time. But the difference here is that in the past we only had to wait a week to see what happened, now we have to wait until next year to see the end of a story which, to be honest, barely made sense anyway.

But, well done to the producers of POTCDMC. They had a theme and ran with it. They are robbing their audience at the point of a sword and luring them onward with mythical tales of great adventure and treasure which probably won’t exist.

And the pillaging didn’t end in the cinema. The theme ran all the way to the Candy Bar where ludicrous prices fleeced every patron. Those that have seen my stand-up routines will know what I think about the prices at the Candy Bar but last night they took it to a whole new level. With absolutely no sense of irony the staff happily tried to upsell my friend’s already ludicrously oversized popcorn with the extremely attractive offer of “For only $2.50 more you can have the large popcorn”. What? For only $2.50 more? Well why not? What a great offer. I remember when an upgrade was 50 cents or maybe a dollar. They are just taking the piss by drawing attention to how overpriced everything is. Seriously, this is the height of stupidity. I dread to think that anybody is actually being sucked in and paying this. And why did they bother stopping with the upgrade? Why don’t they just say “For ONLY $8.50 more you can have a fun size Mars bar. For ONLY $10,000 more you can have a plasma TV. In fact, For ONLY three million dollars more you can buy the whole bloody cinema complex!!!!?”

Get your share.

Remember the good old days when a prosperous business was an expanding business? A time when companies increased profits by attracting more customers and selling more products?

Telstra’s CEO, Sol Trujillo last week announced yet more staff cuts in an effort to increase shareholder wealth. This is becoming a common story. Large corporations are continually recording bigger profits but still laying off more staff. Why does this happen?

The workings of big business are obviously too complex to cover in detail here so here is a basic rundown of how public companies work today.

In order for the share price of a company to increase, increased profits need to be recorded. So if a bank, for example, records a profit of two billion dollars it is not enough to record the same profit again next year. For the share price to increase they must record an even bigger profit. And the word ‘must’ is used advisably. As the laws stand it is the company’s obligation to record a greater profit. This is why CEOs often state that they are responsible only to the shareholders. At the end of the day it is the shareholders who the company is operating for. (I would have thought if you ran a telecommunications company your main interest would be in actually providing a telecommunications service, but then, what do I know?)

So if you are a CEO of a large corporation how do you ensure that your profits will increase when you are already making a profit? One way would be to expand your customer base, offer new services and find new income streams. As an example, Virgin has expanded its airline empire to include a credit card company and a mobile phone service. That’s a lot more customers to get money from. Unfortunately, expansion takes time, money, intelligence and effort. The easier way to increase profits is to produce exactly the same amount of goods and services you did last year (which garnered a profit), but reduce your operating costs.

Operating costs are a huge drain on a company’s finances and the biggest and most annoying operating cost is wages. Those filthy employees selfishly take home the money that should belong to the shareholders. So smart CEOs order ‘downsizing’ across the company. The best bit about reducing staff numbers is that you can always make the remaining staff work harder to fill the gaps. So the same profit is made as last year but added to that is the extra money that you didn’t need to spend on employees and office space and that counts towards an increased profit.

By now the more savvy amongst you are probably thinking “But hang on. If you keep reducing the staff, somewhere along the line you won’t be able to keep producing the same amount of products or services” and you are right. Of course that doesn’t matter. Because, before that happens the smart CEO has moved on to his next appointment and gotten his giant golden handshake in appreciation for increasing the profits of the company. Someone else can fix the mess or sell the hollowed out company to a bigger company.

An interesting sideline to this is the companies who offer their own shares to their employees. Many Telstra workers, for example, have Telstra shares. (We won’t get into the argument that before privatisation all Australian taxpayers already had shares in Telstra but were forced to buy them anyway). If we follow the logic of having shares in the company in which you work you may strike an interesting conundrum. As a shareholder you will want the share price to increase. This means that it is in your best interest to increase profits. But what happens if the only way to increase the profits requires you to lose your job? I guess as a shareholder you must vote to be sacked.

Companies will always claim to be responsible to their shareholders. I guess the only question to ask then is does that make the shareholders ultimately responsible for the company? Maybe lung cancer patients, asbestosis victims and those affected by environmental damage should be suing the shareholders rather than the company. If shareholders want the profits they should be prepared to accept the responsibility for where that money comes from. They might be more cautious about where they invest and about the CEOs that they appoint.

I’m not sure where CEOs actually come from. They must be very clever considering they can move from running railways, to running telecommunications companies to running food processing companies or supermarkets with no real ground roots experience in any industry. No wonder we and our government put so much faith in them. They are clearly better people than us.