Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (
More info?)
bxf <bill@topman.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> bxf <bill@topman.net> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> bxf <bill@topman.net> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>>>> Drives are so cheap that when there is even a hint
>>>>>> of things getting a bit tight, I buy a new bigger one.
>>>>> Hmmm, didn't think anything was cheap in Oz, by the
>>>>> time Fraser and Keating got through with you people
>>>> We gave them both the bums rush a long time ago now.
>>>> Hard drives are as cheap as chips.
>>> Yeah, problem was you kept them around too long.
>> Yeah, particularly with Keating.
>>> I went to OZ in 1979 and heard Malcolm telling
>>> everybody that "life wasn't meant to be easy".
>> And most of the lurkers wont realise
>> that this was a millionaire saying that.
> So, what's a few million more or less? We're all equal, no?
Not according to him.
>>> He then promptly proceeded to make sure it wasn't.
>> That wasnt so much his policys tho, more just his terminal stupidity.
>> That fool still maintains that his greatest achievement was the
>> terminally stupid middle class welfare payment for kids, paid to the
>> mothers. Thats got much worse more recently, just plain barking mad.
> I don't really know what this is. I know that there are many
> countries that give money to the mother, in accordance with
> the number of children (and their ages) in the household.
Yes, but there arent many first world countrys that pay it regardless
of the economic circumstances. Absolutely classic stupid middle class
welfare where its collected from the taxpayers, pumped thru the system,
and straight back to those it was collected from in the first place.
Barking mad.
> I think this type of payment is generally cut back when
> the government wants to reduce population growth,
Ours, like quite a few first world countrys, wants to increase that.
Essentially because if you dont watch out, you can end up with a big
drop in taxpayers in future, and each one is supporting too many no
longer in the workforce etc, with high end of life medical costs etc.
> and I am aware of people who have more children just
> because they will now get more money from the government.
Yeah, we get quite a bit of that. You can see what is driving them
that way too when you end up with a higher nett income with say 5
kids than you can get with a low end job, say running a checkout etc.
You essentially 'work' for yourself, do what you like
hours wise, and the state looks after the brats for a
large chunk of the day once they are of school age too.
> What a great reason for having kids!
Indeed. And those bludgers normally produce generation
after generation of bludgers operating the same way.
>> But the economy does fine regardless.
> I suppose. Though I've long developed the philosophy that when
> the government says something is good for the economy, it is surely
> going to be not-so-good for me. Just seems to work that way.
The modern reality is that first world govts have almost no
effect on the basics of the economy, whatever they claim.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram