Maths for beginners
http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2014-joe-hockey... 513-387z6.html "little good news other than a new $20 billion medical research fund – to come from a $5 contribution by patients when visiting the doctor. Each visit will cost $7, with the other $2 going to the doctor." http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/copayment-for-gp-emergency-visits-... 304j8.html "The proposed $6 co-payment for a GP visit would deliver an immediate budget saving of less than $200 million a year." Okay, for the quick and dirty calculation as a "sanity check": that is 2 visits per person (from baby to pensioner, ca. 20 million people) per year paying $5. It's possibly around right. How many years does it take to establish a $20 billion fond? How many years do we have until 2020 to get these 20 billion dollars? Regards Peter
It seems that maths is not their strong point; they has a $12B black hole (if my memory is right), when Abbot tried to buy Windsor and Co. Cheers A.
Told myself not to reply but can not let this go. - First...there is an error in your calc. ABS data shows we were at 22.7 M users as of 2012. Your math is correct based on what you have stated here but it fails the argument in a couple of ways: - Population Growth?: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3222.0Main%20Features... ? - Investment growth of "money in the bank" eg: $200,000,000 per annum at a modest per annum rate of 1.5% = $30,000,000 Then lookup the definition of "compound interest" - Is it really $200,000,000 per annum or could it be more? 2 visits per person per year? The Commission of Audit Wankers put it at 11 per year. This link puts it at around 4: http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/news/factcheck-does-the-average-australian... I could go on but please do answer 1 very important question then suggest that you perhaps take the ill informed fake green tanty somewhere else...that party used to stand for something worthwhile, now they just rant and rave like the extremists they have become: A keystone of the current budget was to levy high income earners 2% for a fixed period to help rein in debt: Why are the Greens so divided on this given past statements? Why and how has "Kristine the Milliner" won an internal "Pseudo Green Party" policy debate on the issue? Could it be just plain hubris, personal hatred and poltix? BW On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Peter <Petros.Listig@fdrive.com.au> wrote:
http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2014-joe- hockey-hurts-his-way-into-history-20140 513-387z6.html
"little good news other than a new $20 billion medical research fund – to come from a $5 contribution by patients when visiting the doctor. Each visit will cost $7, with the other $2 going to the doctor."
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/copayment-for-gp- emergency-visits-is-not-the-right-remedy-20131231- 304j8.html
"The proposed $6 co-payment for a GP visit would deliver an immediate budget saving of less than $200 million a year."
Okay, for the quick and dirty calculation as a "sanity check": that is 2 visits per person (from baby to pensioner, ca. 20 million people) per year paying $5. It's possibly around right.
How many years does it take to establish a $20 billion fond?
How many years do we have until 2020 to get these 20 billion dollars?
Regards Peter _______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
Oops. my last post was in error..silly moi. 1.5% of $200,000,000 = $3,000,000 BW On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Brent Wallis <brent.wallis@gmail.com>wrote:
Told myself not to reply but can not let this go.
- First...there is an error in your calc. ABS data shows we were at 22.7 M users as of 2012.
Your math is correct based on what you have stated here but it fails the argument in a couple of ways: - Population Growth?:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/3222.0Main%20Features... ?
- Investment growth of "money in the bank" eg: $200,000,000 per annum at a modest per annum rate of 1.5% = $30,000,000 Then lookup the definition of "compound interest"
- Is it really $200,000,000 per annum or could it be more? 2 visits per person per year? The Commission of Audit Wankers put it at 11 per year. This link puts it at around 4:
http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/news/factcheck-does-the-average-australian...
I could go on but please do answer 1 very important question then suggest that you perhaps take the ill informed fake green tanty somewhere else...that party used to stand for something worthwhile, now they just rant and rave like the extremists they have become:
A keystone of the current budget was to levy high income earners 2% for a fixed period to help rein in debt:
Why are the Greens so divided on this given past statements? Why and how has "Kristine the Milliner" won an internal "Pseudo Green Party" policy debate on the issue? Could it be just plain hubris, personal hatred and poltix?
BW
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Peter <Petros.Listig@fdrive.com.au>wrote:
http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2014-joe- hockey-hurts-his-way-into-history-20140 513-387z6.html
"little good news other than a new $20 billion medical research fund – to come from a $5 contribution by patients when visiting the doctor. Each visit will cost $7, with the other $2 going to the doctor."
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/copayment-for-gp- emergency-visits-is-not-the-right-remedy-20131231- 304j8.html
"The proposed $6 co-payment for a GP visit would deliver an immediate budget saving of less than $200 million a year."
Okay, for the quick and dirty calculation as a "sanity check": that is 2 visits per person (from baby to pensioner, ca. 20 million people) per year paying $5. It's possibly around right.
How many years does it take to establish a $20 billion fond?
How many years do we have until 2020 to get these 20 billion dollars?
Regards Peter _______________________________________________ luv-talk mailing list luv-talk@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-talk
Brent Wallis wrote:
- Investment growth of "money in the bank" eg: $200,000,000 per annum at a modest per annum rate of 1.5% = $30,000,000 Then lookup the definition of "compound interest"
Presumably they're not adding a tax just so they can put that money in the bank and spend a strict subset of the interest. If you're going to count interest, then you should probably also count inflation.
I could go on but please do answer 1 very important question then suggest that you perhaps take the ill informed fake green tanty somewhere else...that party used to stand for something worthwhile, now they just rant and rave like the extremists they have become:
A keystone of the current budget was to levy high income earners 2% for a fixed period to help rein in debt:
Why are the Greens so divided on this given past statements? Why and how has "Kristine the Milliner" won an internal "Pseudo Green Party" policy debate on the issue? Could it be just plain hubris, personal hatred and poltix?
I don't understand the point of this inflammatory rhetoric. Did the OP mention the Greens at all? I don't see where.
On Wed, 14 May 2014 19:38:23 Brent Wallis wrote:
- Investment growth of "money in the bank" eg: $200,000,000 per annum at a modest per annum rate of 1.5% = $30,000,000 Then lookup the definition of "compound interest"
If there is to be a $20,000,000,000 medical fund, is that at the current value of the dollar or some future value (IE worth a lot less). If it's at the current value then we would have to count the government bond rate for the $20,000,000,000. So the same compound interest rate applied to the payments (the $200,000,000 per annum) would also apply to the money for the medical fund. So it would never catch up.
- Is it really $200,000,000 per annum or could it be more? 2 visits per person per year? The Commission of Audit Wankers put it at 11 per year.
Which still wouldn't cover it.
I could go on but please do answer 1 very important question then suggest that you perhaps take the ill informed fake green tanty somewhere else...that party used to stand for something worthwhile, now they just rant and rave like the extremists they have become:
LOL, your hypocrisy is greater than usual here.
A keystone of the current budget was to levy high income earners 2% for a fixed period to help rein in debt:
Why are the Greens so divided on this given past statements?
What are you referring to here? I think that Tony Abbott should either honor his election promises or give a good explanation of why he couldn't.
Why and how has "Kristine the Milliner" won an internal "Pseudo Green Party" policy debate on the issue? Could it be just plain hubris, personal hatred and poltix?
Hypocrisy again, you talk about hatred and "poltix" (sic) but can't even bring yourself to refer to a politician you disagree with by name. Control your own hatred first and then we can have a reasonable discussion. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
participants (5)
-
Andrew McGlashan -
Brent Wallis -
Peter -
Russell Coker -
Trent W. Buck