Malcolm Turnbull: The Blog Post

So, i'm sitting at the first ever Facbook party that Malcolm Turnbull
has organised. Phenomenal tool: Facebook RSVPs were used for the 2nd
most important person in the australian opposition used Facebook to
organise a big rally.

We're talking about the budget. Again. I know I said i'd said i'd
stop, but I can't help it: I find this stuff fascinating. I won't bore
you with the details: Malcolm is the Shadow Treasurer of the
Australian Government, and has a duty to discuss this sort of thing.
Best quote ever: The government is awash with money.

'The general assessment is that the budget is slightly inflationary'—
Ross Gittins/Malcolm Turnbull

Theres a lot of talk about infrastructure, and this is the main
question about what to do with the surplus thats coming out of the
Australian resources boom thats happening; One of the big suggestions
is to reduce spending in any way, to be able to remove money from the
economy and get rid of inflationary pressure: however, due to
international financial issues, this is not really possible.

The main issue in todays media is about the alcopops tax: the 3
billion dollar revenue boost that makes pre mixed rum and coke more
expensive. Malcolm makes the right comment: the idea of the tax is
that it will reduce consumption of these drinks, but the budget papers
assume a 25% growth in revenue per year over 4 years: Why isn't this
part of what we talk about.

The baby bonus: The Liberal government made the baby bonus non means
tested because they wanted to make a broad social statement.

Now ... on to more important issues ... why is it that men in power
attract hot chicks? As I look around the room, I see an abundance of
young conservatives in suits - to be expected. How is it that this
same crowd attracts hot chicks, of which there are multiple? Anyone?
Bueller?

As an aside, it looks like the Facebook crowd have started to fall
asleep,.. surely some budding entrepreneur could have thought of
selling pillowS?

So: Facebook, it's going to give

Question time

No end of hands up for this ... none of the girls with their hands up,
i notice...

Question 1 is something about blocking stuff in the senate. Longest
question ... ever. THe word mandate has been used at least 3 times in
20 seconds - anyone know if this is a record?

Answer - waiting ... waiting ... something about blocking the RTD
tax ... tangent ... tangent ... taxes and spending.

Question 2 - to Ruth ... we're on a first name basis now? Ruth's
actually quite cute... no surprises there.

The question is on immigration - not sure what that's got to do with
the budget, but there's nothing sexier than a hot chick who wants to
talk immigration...

immmigrations, birth rates, lets have a bit of xenophobia... some
smiling wanker asking about the government we all deserve, being
funny, and how petrol pricing would change everything. Give him an
opportunity to get going, and a big opportunity about tax and how
everything the government takes out is great. More tangents about how
tax is going to change the cpi, and my goodness, this is getting in
depth.

Next Gen Broadband : From some smiling guy, claiming that 98% of aus
population doesn't even get power. No aspiration from government: He's
skeptical. However, this is Malcolm, and asecondary question on who
owns it, who pays, who gets the cash: no cute girls asking about the
internet. Isn't that a surprise? And now he's throwing back to the
times he was working with Chris Corrigan about internet in the 90s to
Paul Keating; So now, he's railing against the last government, and
this labor government. Brilliant, good job Malcolm.

And now an exciting question on the GST: The guy who asks reckons his
name is Bamble. Like the male version of Bambi? Asking once again on
the 'lets simplify taxation, tax less, tax more!' . And after 30
seconds or so of answering the question of wanting to simplify and
reduce taxes, is talking about a complete tangent about how
inefficient taxation is today on the federal level.

By the way, all the hot chicks are looking really bored right now, yet
still smiling graciously. A question from the only 50+ year old in the
audience: what about health! Talking about the ludicrous federal /
state split of cost burden of hospitals and GP centres.

Comparing health spending versus his federalisation of the murray
darling basin to get the management of hydrology to match the
governance. And back to health about private health cover changes.
Suggests investing in the sharemarket versus investing in private
health insurance.

The last question: Defence. And the girls in the crowd look more bored
than ever.

Liz asks (she's a hot chick) : Who from the other side would you have
a coffee with? who do you like the most?

Answer: Jenny George, Former head of the ACTU . Far left, but a
practical pragmatic person. That s a quote. But there's lots —
parliament isn't as convivial as it should be, too big. Is this like
the Emirates? Now the arsenal fans don't sit on top of each other,
they've lost all the atmosphere out of the statdium? Apparently
parliament is the same…

And now: Lets get rid of concessions; and make umbrellas a tax
concession. How do you simplify the tax system without hurting
existing investors? Every incremental change just increases entropy,
and big changes become harder.

Thanks, citizens of wentworth, till the next time

(End)

( A joint post with shtinetime.blogspot.com)
--
Robert Schonberger
rschonberger@gmail.com

Marcel Duchamp

In 1917, at an open art exhibition, Marcel Duchamp submitted a Urnial, Signed "R. MUTT", to the exhibition. Controversialy, it wasn't rejected as 'not art' — Which, you know, isn't. Unless you were a 'Dadaist' or whatnot.

So heres the thing: I don't think it was art either. Why is this moment so famous, so well known? It's because it's one of the first recorded cases of what we now know as 'Stirring' or 'Trolling'. Is there a case earlier of an artist messing with the establishment in such an overt way? can someone out there tell me about it?

I think Duchamp was just stirring the pot so that he could garner more fame, which he did, even though he was already doing well before the war. Pretty funny that he later had a really good grasp on the fact that he, simply, had just made a BS statement. He said much later:

This Neo-Dada, which they call New Realism, Pop Art, Assemblage, etc., is an easy way out, and lives on what Dada did. When I discovered the ready-mades I sought to discourage aesthetics. In Neo-Dada they have taken my readymades and found aesthetic beauty in them, I threw the bottle-rack and the urinal into their faces as a challenge and now they admire them for their aesthetic beauty.

So in other words: I was just messing with you guys. Get over it. Go away.

More over, I'm going to try and find more people who wanted to mess with the establishment like Duchamp did, and got some just desserts out of it.

And more…

So, theres more on the budget that i've missed out on.

The interesting change to slow down deprecation allowances also
affects in house developed software. So all of a sudden, the IP and
investment that a company wants to create internally is more
expensive. What this means is less demand for software development,
right? I think so. I think we'll see greater movement and more people
applying for work in software in Australia over the next 4 years or
so, as some companies decide to cut back on their technology spending.

This is going to be the last post in a while about the budget -
economics is interesting, but is more like salt than water when it
comes to how much of it you want in your life.

Todays budget for techonlogy

Well, The australian government budget was rolled out the door last night, to a lot of anxious breaths. Treasurer Wayne Swan had been warning of a tough budget, one that tried to rein in inflation and was going to be spending less and less. He more or less delivered, despite the enormous windfall that Australia's resources boom is giving the country as 20 billion dollar surplus to play with.

So, in interest, what does this mean for those working in Technology. A lot. Heres a smorgasbord selection of some of the interesting money movements:

• The biggest feature by far, is a pledge for 4.7 billion dollars to create a national broadband network, that will give fast internet access to 98% of Australians. The tender to run and build the network is going to go out soon, and has thankfully two bidders (Optus, Telstra). This is going to, perhaps, be the most important part of the technology for the budget. This is delivered out of the surplus from the mining activities in the country, and will serve as part of the infrastructure projects that the government is promising to pay for using the surplus. This will bring Australia into line with other countries in terms of broadband infrastructure. Finally.
• Over a billion dollars going to a desalination plant, which isn't tech, but the power for it is going to be from a Wind Power plant. If we ever want to have data centers, getting power for them is going to be important, and all the alternative energy sources we can get are going to help with every rack that could be built. Australia has been relying coal for a long time, and though the Snowy Mountains Dam is a Hydro powered scheme, few other alternative sources exist, even though we have a lot of potential in solar and wind. Its interesting that the government is going to use Wind Power for something as important as drinking water, and certainly will be a boon to any infrastructure financing companies that have thought about building out alternative power sources. The company that is building the Wind station is Babcock & Brown Wind Power, which has long been a stock market pariah as part of that group. The renewed confidence and bidding for public infrastructure projects in the coming months will be exciting.
• Interestingly, there's 126 million dollars in cyber safety spending, with 50 million dollars going straight to Australian Federal Police child Protection Operations over 4 years. Thats 13 million dollars a year, and presumably may have some contracts for folks to build some software infrastructure to help them do that. There's apparently 91 officers being added to the online protection task force: sounds like a lot of people for me; Frightening that there are so many abused children out there to warrant it.
• 37 million bucks to switch australians to digital t: Who knows whether australians really care? Moreover, do broadcasters?
• Laptop and technology purchases are going to be limited by a much more stringent FBT testing regime, and removing the purchases from depreciable assets lists. This change basically means buying a laptop will be more expensive for anyone that doesn't have a company pay for theirs, and could curtail spending on hardware in Australia. Expect hardware prices & demand to go down, in line with taxation changes.
• Software depreciation time to be extended from 2.5 years to 4 years. This is interesting: the increased depreciation rate makes software purchase more expensive, and will probably push companies towards service based contracts rather than purchase contracts; Any company that needs to buy or upgrade their software solutions is now going to think twice about buying the latest Office, and it may be cheaper to start considering some of the online alternatives that are coming out. The government expects to save about 100 million dollars a year for this change, but I wonder if it will have a bigger effect of encouraging the game change away from purchase to service in Australia.
• The commercial ready grants program, a program to give government angel funding to innovative companies has been canned. Rather, The government will build advisory centers on how to commercialise technology. Part of the reason of why the government VC fund is, as quoted in the governments own report, the grants funded too many projects that would have had the funding to develop without any government funding anyway. It never made sense to me that the government acted like a VC, anyway.

Phew, thats a long list, and it's only what I think is really relevant to Tech. Have you got any thoughts on the Australian budget? and what it means to you? I'd be really interested in anyones opinion, and what they think it will mean for IT in Australia.

Coming up…

Todays Australian budget release is a tight spending budget, with a view to increasing taxes on, as the opposition leader puts it "people the government doesn't like"

Stay tuned here for an indepth analysis of what todays budget means for those in Technology, and what it means for Technology for Australia in general.