...go straight to the soapbox.....do not pass go.....do not collect $200.
No I didn't say anything about 30% extra cost, or was it to murky for you?
Now why would I be doubtful? We can't afford to help a car industry that cost a few hundred million but employs tens of thousands,we can't afford to help a steel industry for maybe a cost of 100-200 million that also employs tens of thousands , yet we are going to pay an extra $15billion to employ 2800 locally ,and here's the BUT of that joke , we don't sign the contract until AFTER THE ELECTIONS!
But nobody "never ever "backs out of election promises do they?
...go straight to the soapbox.....do not pass go.....do not collect $200.
Just more of the same Frantic, just more negativity.
"Backs out of Election Promise"?..What do you mean by that, specifically relative to the Sub contract, relative to the upcoming election?
IN THIS THREAD, I didn't bring politics into it, I simply said from the start, "THIS IS GOOD FOR AUSSIE"......but I have yet to hear any similar sentiments from you, and now you're insinuating that this may not go ahead?....So you're saying that if Shorten wins, He might reneg?...I don't think so. Everyone, from all "sides" have applauded the Sub announcement, that is everyone except you, my friend.
Mate, I just think the Sub deal is great, with all the doom & gloom that is around (unfortunately for real reasons), it's good to have something that is NOT doom & gloom,..that is why I think it's good, I see the S.A. Premier has already been to Paris, I think building the facilities, arranging infrastructure, creating around 3000 (some say a lot more)jobs is ALL positive. Regards, Pickles.
Pickles. I don't think frantic said it wasn't good. What he is saying is that a lot more good could be done for a lot less. Which is true. Then he asked why isn't it? Which is bloody good question.
Now I ask why are you so adamant that he unequivocally and unreservedly say that the Sub Contract is good thing that has no negative aspect, if not for political reasons?
Cheers, Billy.
Keeping it simple is complicated.
1: I've said it 3 times 1/50th the extra (15 billion)cost of building subs here as a motor industry incentive, saves 20-30times the jobs the subs create. 1/100th that cost and a few laws similar or same to our free trade partners saves 30times the jobs in steel/ manufacturing, but we supposedly can't afford those ?
2: Really, honestly?![]()
I don't know how old you are Frantic but I know that by the time the first one is built I'll be probably too old to even go to Adelaide to even look at one.
Maybe one of my young nephews in Adelaide will get a good job there building them.....someones nephews certainly will along with many thousands of others.
I think I worked out what you are trying to say about the motor industry , but it's too late to extrapolate on those matters.
The decision has been made , regardless of costs , it's a good one for Australia (I still don't know if we really need subs), it's a good one for France , it's a real good one for South Australia , it's a real good one for those that successfully gain the employment and it's going to give a substantial boost to the new advanced technology right across our defence forces which is happening almost simultaneously......which will flow on for many years to come.
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks