Letters

Sydney Morning Herald

Wednesday March 3, 2010

Throwing money at the problem worked a treatLike so many economists, Sinclair Davidson (Letters, March 2) seems determined not to pollute his non-interventionist ideology with information from the real world.He warned a Senate committee and an OECD delegation that the stimulus spending was wasteful. Consider this: the government provided money to individuals and organisations to spend to stimulate the economy. They either spent the money, saved it or paid off debt.Since excessive debt and low bank cash holdings were at the heart of the financial crisis, the two latter options both worked to alleviate the crisis. If this money saved individuals or organisations from going broke, there was a massive cost saving to the government, the public and the banking system.But what happened to the money that was spent? Every dollar that helped keep a person in a job saved the government the cost of providing the dole, and gave that person money to spend to help save other jobs. Part of this money then comes back to the government as income tax. And every time the rest is spent, and spent over and over again, 10 per cent comes back as GST.Not only was it not "wasteful", it worked a treat. It probably helped keep a lot of economists employed.Chris Moon KatoombaSinclair Davidson fails to address the "hard case" that Ross Gittins describes. It is easy to criticise the government; indeed, the real challenge is to do a better job of it than Kevin Rudd. But to properly criticise the home insulation scheme, one cannot absolve home owners or the private enterprises involved of all responsibility.By focusing on when he began asserting that the economic stimulus package would not be effective, Professor Davidson supports Gittins's argument that libertarians are uncomfortable discussing how to deal with shoddy work performed by cowboy businessmen.Michael Cahill Summer HillIt was refreshing to read that Sinclair Davidson testified twice to Senate inquiries that the government's stimulation package was ineffectual. It is a rare thing indeed that an academic admits publicly - nay, draws attention to the fact - that his prognostications were demonstrably wrong. Well done, Professor Davidson.Andrew Lewis South CoogeeLottery sale hides years of ineptitudeThe ALP has sold one of the few remaining state assets, claiming a $1 billion "win" for the people of NSW ("NSW Lotteries sold toTatts in $1 billion deal",smh.com.au, March 2).The NSW Lotteries annual report for 2008-09 says its operating profit for the year was $67.4 million. Excluding state duties, which the government will still claim, and assuming no growth on last financial year for the next 40 years, the sale represents a $1.7 billion revenueloss to NSW during the timeof the licence.That is the price the NSW ALP is prepared to pay in its desperate attempt to hide the fiscal ineptitude of Eric Roozendaal and previous Treasury incumbents as it confronts its political mortality.To trumpet the sale as "a great outcome for the families and taxpayers" is not spin - it is plain, self-serving dishonesty and fiscal irresponsibility on a breathtaking scale, which voters with even basic numeracy can see through.Mike LeClerc Dulwich HillIt's easier to kill than seek peaceTony Letford (Letters, March 2) says the Israelis "target the people they kill". So all those thousands of innocent Palestinians killed by Israel over the years were targeted? Israel kills because it is popular at home and it is easier than talking peace, which means giving back what is stolen.Paul Stephen YambaIn response to Tony Letford, the implications of this assassination clearly will subject us to further "tiresome procedures at airports" - the integrity of Australian passports has been publicly called into question. In the eyes of the world's security agencies, we are now all potential Mossad agents.Robert Drake Frenchs ForestIf Jack Pinczewski (Letters, March 2) justifies Israel's assassination of a Palestinian militant in terms of self-defence under international law, he must accept that the same law applies to everyone.His argument would mean that any Israeli who imports weapons for the purpose of killing Palestinians is a legitimate target for Palestinian assassins.Furthermore, as Pinczewski probably knows, international law gives occupied people such as the Palestinians the right to resist their occupiers, while occupying powers such as Israel have a legal obligation to withdraw from occupied territory.Alexander Lane ThornleighIs there a PhDin the house?Robyn Dalziell (Letters, March 2) may be right about the etymology, but when I say I am going to see the doctor, no one assumes I am heading off for a chat with an academic. The issue is whether people who want to see a doctor for a medical condition can be sure the one they consult is qualified to diagnose and treat them. Cavilling at a physician's right to use a commonly understood title (and to stop others falsely claiming such a title) on the basis of historical usage is specious.Alison Woof South HurstvilleAs a Doctor of Philosophy, I rarely use my title - I am terrified someone may show me some unfortunate symptoms.Elizabeth Denny Watsons BayThe discussion on the use of the salutation "doctor" reminds me of the court appearance of a medical registrar charged with malpractice. The prosecutor said: "You are a Bachelor of Science and a Bachelor of Medicine and as such are not really a doctor. Is that correct?" The registrar replied: "Yes, sir. Being called a doctor is a courtesy similar to your colleagues referring to you as their learned friend."David Graham WahroongaSince most medical courses these days are postgraduate, perhaps Australian universities should adopt the American practice of granting graduates the title MD, thus ending this pointless debate.Malcolm Tester Lennox HeadEating meat is safeAlthough the blood service cannot accept blood donations from people who spent six months or more in Britain between 1980 and 1996, we do accept blood from people who have been there before or after that time (Letters, March 1). The recent decision to allow meat to be imported from Britain is not expected to affect the Australian blood supply. People can eat meat while visiting or living in Britain, and that won't stop them donating blood in Australia. Nor will eating meat imported from Britain.Dr Anthony KellerAustralian Red Cross Blood Service, Osborne Park (WA)Abbott's shame onAboriginal housingI felt sick watching Tony Abbott on last night's news, sporting his shiny R.M. Williams shoes while chatting to David Wingarmara and Michael Gorey in their Third-World-condition humpy near Alice Springs ("Grim day confronts speechless Abbott",March 2). I say this notbecause of the dreadfully impoverished state of the men's dwelling (a disgrace which reflects on all Australians), but because Mr Abbott obviously deems it appropriate to mount a media stunt like this to continue his attack on the Labor government.The Coalition government of which Mr Abbott was a part had more than a decade to address the problem of Aboriginal disadvantage. The previous Labor government had a similar period to find a solution. Neither was capableof doing so.For Mr Abbott to now attempt to score cheap political points by appearing concerned for the welfare of the Aboriginal men in front of the TV cameras is an appalling display of base and hypocritical political opportunism. He should be ashamed of himself.Ross Pulbrook Wyong

© 2010 Sydney Morning Herald

Back to News Index | Back to Home