Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Most established adults are surely earning more than 50k these days right? Are does this include part timers?
My work employs about 3000 people. About one third would be full time, on less than $70k. Most of those staff would be over 30 and have families.

Then the largest cohort would on between $75k and $90k.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Up here in QLD, the government's covered the last 2 power bills for eligible people. Been a massive help. Not sure if it's happened elsewhere though.
$1000 towards power for 12 months. Should cover 2 bills for most small to medium households.

Plus 50c public transport is helping a lot of people. Saving my brother $40 a week.
 
Average wage in Oz is 75k. Median wage 85k. Half the population under 85k.
Bit of ABS data.

Average salary as opposed to wage in Australia is ~$103k. Median income is ~$65k.


WA better off than most states.
 
You'll get it when you have kids, mate. There's not as many networks and avenues as you imagine to thrash this shit out with other Dads. It's cathartic but also might unlock something somewhere to take a bit of the pressure off.
BigFooty replacing the pub.
 
Since being a mod, I’ve never had to worry about money

wedding crashers comedy GIF
 
Bit of ABS data.

Average salary as opposed to wage in Australia is ~$103k. Median income is ~$65k.


WA better off than most states.
WA better off if you work fifo. We all pay fifo tax in the shops but we don't all earn that.
 
Hayden young signed until 2033 !

With the apparent imminent signing of brayshaw who is a free agent and shai Bolton's reported 1.2m a year contract i think freo have realised they are out of the race for chad warner .

Approximately 2 million a year on 2 rucks as well 🙈
 
I can't quite work this Young contact out in my head.

If he is going to be as gun as everyone is saying, why would he seriously limit his options for the next 9 years? There would have to be some renegotiations clauses in the contract.

If you are a spud, of course you take it any day of the week.

And why would Freo want to sign a player for 9 years. Again makes no sense. You don't wish injury on anyone, but who knows what is around the corner, could even be form nose diving for good.

Just weird all round
 
I can't quite work this Young contact out in my head.

If he is going to be as gun as everyone is saying, why would he seriously limit his options for the next 9 years? There would have to be some renegotiations clauses in the contract.

If you are a spud, of course you take it any day of the week.

And why would Freo want to sign a player for 9 years. Again makes no sense. You don't wish injury on anyone, but who knows what is around the corner, could even be form nose diving for good.

Just weird all round

It's probably a sign that contracts in the AFL now mean f*ck all. Players can dictate when they want out, where they want to go and (to an extent) what the club they're leaving receives. The players have too much power now, just another little quirk of the bush league we follow
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It's probably a sign that contracts in the AFL now mean f*ck all. Players can dictate when they want out, where they want to go and (to an extent) what the club they're leaving receives. The players have too much power now, just another little quirk of the bush league we follow
I think this whole super long contract is a temporary aberration.
Players got more power with RFA/FA and the clubs have countered with the 'keep em a long time' contract that they can enforce.
Sydney largely got away with it with the Buddy deal (was money down the drain the last few years) but all it will take is a couple of career ending concussions/injuries to players with 7-8 years to run and the whole thing will be revisited.
Clubs will work out that ridiculous deals are called ridiculous for a reason and it's better to accept you will lose a percentage of players to FA and trades.

Plus, if you are trading out a contracted player the club is in a strong position to get above real value return.

And there is an strong argument to the sell at peak value (pre inevitable decline) and refresh with lower paid youth that will get better as a list management strategy. I.e. Sell Judd who has 150 games left in him, Buy JK and Masten who are good for over 400 games.
 
It's probably a sign that contracts in the AFL now mean f*ck all. Players can dictate when they want out, where they want to go and (to an extent) what the club they're leaving receives. The players have too much power now, just another little quirk of the bush league we follow

Yeah it basically just secures Freo a skerick of negotiating power by saying he's under contract if he does want to leave. Should Fremantle get into contention and then fall away in 5 years he will be 28ish and be a prime option for Vic clubs. They can be adequately compensated and he can go hunt a flag somewhere else.
 
Hayden young signed until 2033 !

With the apparent imminent signing of brayshaw who is a free agent and shai Bolton's reported 1.2m a year contract i think freo have realised they are out of the race for chad warner .
He won't be young anymore
 
Bit of ABS data.

Average salary as opposed to wage in Australia is ~$103k. Median income is ~$65k.


WA better off than most states.

It is eye-watering how low that figure is for a country that is dripping in wealth.

In times past, populaces would have collectively reached for the pitchforks and stormed the metaphorical Bastille.

Now too busy getting distracted by tiktok vids and social media corrosion to become organised perhaps.


I remember a conversation I had with a federal government advisor before Covid, who argued that the greatest invention of the latter 20th century was high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). The gist was that citizens will only turn to rebellion when faced with starvation, and the incorporation of low cost HFCS into diets effectively prevents this from occurring, regardless of how much destitution is inflicted across society - hence economic stability and growth is maintained despite growing poverty and inequity. A very Machiavellian take on things, which may well be closer to the truth than we'd like to admit.


I certainly feel exceptionally privileged to have the opportunity to earn what I currently do that's for sure.
 
It is eye-watering how low that figure is for a country that is dripping in wealth.

Natural resources being controlled by billionaires and conglomerates will do that.

Government is too weak to wrest back control.

Not saying the private sector shouldn't have the ability to profit from it but having nearly all profits kept private/go offshore when the government should be predominantly benefitting from it and thus, filtered down to the people/services instead, that's why people are struggling.

Paying the tax rate we have would be fine, if the health system was better, government services were more efficient, public schools in all areas were to a high standard and university expenses weren't exorbitant, then people wouldn't mind paying a bit more. Nordic countries are probably a good example of this. High taxes but high living standards and people are overall happy, despite high taxes, because they don't have to pay for any public services and they run efficiently.

Of course, could be far worse. Could be resource-rich like Russia and have all the wealth go to around 20 people.
 
It is eye-watering how low that figure is for a country that is dripping in wealth.

In times past, populaces would have collectively reached for the pitchforks and stormed the metaphorical Bastille.

Now too busy getting distracted by tiktok vids and social media corrosion to become organised perhaps.


I remember a conversation I had with a federal government advisor before Covid, who argued that the greatest invention of the latter 20th century was high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). The gist was that citizens will only turn to rebellion when faced with starvation, and the incorporation of low cost HFCS into diets effectively prevents this from occurring, regardless of how much destitution is inflicted across society - hence economic stability and growth is maintained despite growing poverty and inequity. A very Machiavellian take on things, which may well be closer to the truth than we'd like to admit.


I certainly feel exceptionally privileged to have the opportunity to earn what I currently do that's for sure.
It's still not that low though. It wasnt that ling ago that 60k was considered average. You would be clearing $1000 a week which is enough to get by on. These days most people under that are secondary earners or people early in their career.
 
It's still not that low though. It wasnt that ling ago that 60k was considered average. You would be clearing $1000 a week which is enough to get by on. These days most people under that are secondary earners or people early in their career.
It’s lower enough that if both household earners are on that amount, you likely can not buy a property in most capital cities, and several of the larger satellite cities.

Maybe 40km+ from the CBD, if you’re lucky.
 
$1000 towards power for 12 months. Should cover 2 bills for most small to medium households.

Plus 50c public transport is helping a lot of people. Saving my brother $40 a week.
WA got 2x $350 credits...basically enough to cover 1/3 of the yearly power bill

The government announced free public transport starting this week untill 5th feb, that saves about $55 a week
 
Bit of ABS data.

Average salary as opposed to wage in Australia is ~$103k. Median income is ~$65k.


WA better off than most states.
The data can be spun any way though.

I reckon average and median household income would be another good stat.

A household on 200k with both partners earning 100k would take home more than a single income household earning the same amount.
 
Natural resources being controlled by billionaires and conglomerates will do that.

Government is too weak to wrest back control.

Not saying the private sector shouldn't have the ability to profit from it but having nearly all profits kept private/go offshore when the government should be predominantly benefitting from it and thus, filtered down to the people/services instead, that's why people are struggling.

Paying the tax rate we have would be fine, if the health system was better, government services were more efficient, public schools in all areas were to a high standard and university expenses weren't exorbitant, then people wouldn't mind paying a bit more. Nordic countries are probably a good example of this. High taxes but high living standards and people are overall happy, despite high taxes, because they don't have to pay for any public services and they run efficiently.

Of course, could be far worse. Could be resource-rich like Russia and have all the wealth go to around 20 people.

My thoughts.

Net wealth of ALL Australian billionaires is $202b. Debt of Australia is $923b. And by 2026/27 interest alone will be $53b.

Steal everything (100% tax) they have and you are left with $720b of debt or will pay interest for 4 years.

The issue is not how much the super rich people take despite what people like to think. It’s a spending problem.

A company like bhp employs 30,000 people and pays billions in tax. Is that not enough? And if not, how much is then enough? When will we know it’s enough?

If people want to turn Australia into Venezuela, then so be it. Squeezing resource companies certainly didn’t make them richer (biggest oil reserves in world).

Now real issue is pushing out of manufacturing out of Australia, forcing people into service jobs and then of course needing two incomes to buy a house.

Stop the housing rort, helps families. Unfortunately we are a housing economy so if you give people more money, all they will do is pay more for same house.

Now, did Reid train extra after official training? :p
 
My thoughts.

Net wealth of ALL Australian billionaires is $202b. Debt of Australia is $923b. And by 2026/27 interest alone will be $53b.

Steal everything (100% tax) they have and you are left with $720b of debt or will pay interest for 4 years.

The issue is not how much the super rich people take despite what people like to think. It’s a spending problem.

A company like bhp employs 30,000 people and pays billions in tax. Is that not enough? And if not, how much is then enough? When will we know it’s enough?

If people want to turn Australia into Venezuela, then so be it. Squeezing resource companies certainly didn’t make them richer (biggest oil reserves in world).

Now real issue is pushing out of manufacturing out of Australia, forcing people into service jobs and then of course needing two incomes to buy a house.

Stop the housing rort, helps families. Unfortunately we are a housing economy so if you give people more money, all they will do is pay more for same house.

Now, did Reid train extra after official training? :p
Agreed we have a problem with spending but it's not really a 'billionaires' problem, it's the fact we are pretty much the most resource-rich country in the world, yet we seem to have no issue with big companies hoarding wealth/sending jobs offshore.

Now I'm not going to go full-blown communist, obviously, but the government should be a larger beneficiary of our country's natural resources and not try and follow the failed USA model of capitalism instead.

Reid was 10 minutes early BTW.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Oppo Camp Non-Eagles Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top