Thread: help needed to save our manufacturing.

Originally Posted by Pickles2

LOL:...STILL nothing positive from "The Usual Suspects",.....UNREAL.
Biggest spend in Naval History, biggest ever spend on any Govt project EVER, even bigger spend than the Snowy system, untold amount of work for building & MAINTENANCE,.....but nothing positive from the "Usual Suspects"?
C'Mon Guys, this ain't "Political",....maybe it is to you guys, but NOT TO ME,...this is good for AUSSIE......IMHO of course.
Pickles.
NB:, Can't see ANY negatives about this, BUT, I am of course waiting for the negatives that will eventually come from,.....the usual suspects.

Let's wait and see the contracts,
for about 10,000 tons of specialty steel ,
in 2020!
No it's not an "untold amount of work, it's been told, 2800 jobs at a cost of about $ 20,000,000 each that's twenty million. Or if you believe reports the extra cost of building them here is 30% or $15 billion.
This is to provide 2800 jobs yet the same people who approve this cannot agree to spend 2% of that amount to keep 100,000 jobs safe across the steel production and associated manufacturing industries!
There is already talk that neither the French or German tenders would agree to divulge the specialty grade for the subs production, and at around 10,000 tons it is equal to 1 weeks production by current steel levels.
At the same time in the uk , who make roughly 50% more steel than us (7.5mtpa compared to us at about 5mtpa)and employ directly about 50,000 the Tory govt has offered to nationalise 25% of the steel industry at a cost of AUD$1-3.5 billion to ensure it stays open and keeps people employed as they have realised its in the nations best strategic interest.
Turnbull pledge casts doubt | Illawarra Mercury
Nocookies | The Australian
Here's an interesting story.
http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/20...s.html'm=1

P.s pickles your comparison to the snowy hydro scheme is ridROFLiculous ! Snowy started in 1949, employed over 100,000 and cost only 850 million this costs over 50times as much but only employs 1/33 the number!

Lol:.....Hear you are frantic,...I was waiting for you!!
Not even one positive word?!
You mustn't have been listening/looking re the media,....a couple of the Unions have been on, & mate they're SUPER happy about it,....GRINS from ear to ear, especially about the ongoing maintenance which doesn't even have an end date.
Pickles.

Every one is and should be happy about the Sub Contract. I's great.
That doesn't mean that we should neglect Frantics issue, which is still gravely important especially from a National Sovereignty point of view. That along with guaranteed Energy supplies, still pressing issues.
Frantic is asking for possessive action. How is that Negative?
Perhaps Pickles could explain why 2800 Jobs in SA are more important than 100,000 jobs Australia wide, because I'm too stupid to figure that out.

Originally Posted by cuppabillytea

Every one is and should be happy about the Sub Contract. I's great.
That doesn't mean that we should neglect Frantics issue, which is still gravely important especially from a National Sovereignty point of view. That along with guaranteed Energy supplies, still pressing issues.
Frantic is asking for possessive action. How is that Negative?
Perhaps Pickles could explain why 2800 Jobs in SA are more important than 100,000 jobs Australia wide, because I'm too stupid to figure that out.

No-one is being "Stupid" about anything.
"100,000 jobs Australia wide"etc etc etc....where does that come from?, I simply said this was good stuff. You can agree or disagree.
Nevertheless, the Sub contract & build is VERY good news (IMHO anyway). It's everyone's rights in this country to be critical when they wish to, however, when something good occurs, as in this case, a "favourable word" would be appropriate, to acknowledge that yes, whilst it ain't gonna solve all our woes, it is at least a step in the right direction. (Only IMHO of course)
It's very easy to be critical, but when something good happens, I believe appropriate acknowlegement is required, (I've already said this ain't "Political",...I would suggest this project was on the go during previous Labor Govt terms?...I'm saying it's good for Aussie) or you lose credibility,....unless one doesn't think it is good, of course.
Pickles.

Originally Posted by Pickles2

No-one is being "Stupid" about anything.
"100,000 jobs Australia wide"etc etc etc....where does that come from?, I simply said this was good stuff. You can agree or disagree.
Nevertheless, the Sub contract & build is VERY good news (IMHO anyway). It's everyone's rights in this country to be critical when they wish to, however, when something good occurs, as in this case, a "favourable word" would be appropriate, to acknowledge that yes, whilst it ain't gonna solve all our woes, it is at least a step in the right direction. (Only IMHO of course)
It's very easy to be critical, but when something good happens, I believe appropriate acknowlegement is required, (I've already said this ain't "Political",...I would suggest this project was on the go during previous Labor Govt terms?...I'm saying it's good for Aussie) or you lose credibility,....unless one doesn't think it is good, of course.
Pickles.

No problem with that at all, and as I said the Sub Contact is great.

Lets look at it from two angles,
Defense of the nation, probably the best buy
Job creation, probably not the best way to spend 50B, imagine what you could do with 10-20 B in Northern Australia with a Snowy type project(s)
Possibly sending a few hundred workers to France and building the first sub there may have been better value for money, but politics didn't allow this option. So maybe 10B wasted to keep a few pollies happy, thanks Xylophone (sic)

Moving on, naming etiquette , what are the rules.
I would like to see them named after the great WWI French battles, not some obscure admirals.

thoughts ?

dont be silly, the french never won any battles

Who mentioned winning
At least with French submarines, plenty of head room to lift your arms up in the air

Q: Why does the French Navy suck?
A: Because cardboard doesn't float!

Q: Why do the French have glass bottom boats in their Navy?
A: To see all their other ships.

and so on