not when you take into account the 3% inflation.
Stimulus Package
- Thread starter letiha
- Start date
not when you take into account the 3% inflation.
wedding is different. you don't want to have regrets later. It's your one special day and you only get married once..it's the day you have dreamt of and planned for.
I never understood ppl say it's a waste of money etc etc...the ones that do skimp i.e no professional photos all regret it later..
I know some ppl think we wasted money but it was perfect
and I wouldn't have it any other way and now forward 6 yrs later and I guess majority of couples now think the same way. They would rather cut back spending on other things so they could afford their dream wedding.
The only thing that annoys me is that when you mention the word 'wedding' prices seem the quadruple. My friend told the baker the cake was for a special occasion and it cost her $150, if she had said wedding and had it delivered it would have cost her $350.
I never understood ppl say it's a waste of money etc etc...the ones that do skimp i.e no professional photos all regret it later..
I know some ppl think we wasted money but it was perfect
and I wouldn't have it any other way and now forward 6 yrs later and I guess majority of couples now think the same way. They would rather cut back spending on other things so they could afford their dream wedding.
The only thing that annoys me is that when you mention the word 'wedding' prices seem the quadruple. My friend told the baker the cake was for a special occasion and it cost her $150, if she had said wedding and had it delivered it would have cost her $350.
My wedding photographer cost almost $4K and I still have to buy the images off him in a few years or pay $1K for a bigger album now.
Anyway the photos i did not go tight on, stuff like veils ($200-300) in the boutique i knew i wouldn't be upset if i skipped. Another indulgent that I loved was hiring the chrysler limo.
My friend rang to make an appt for her mother to get hair and makeup done, she said wedding it was $150. Her mother rang the same place and said she wanted to go out for the night and it was $80!
Anyway the photos i did not go tight on, stuff like veils ($200-300) in the boutique i knew i wouldn't be upset if i skipped. Another indulgent that I loved was hiring the chrysler limo.
My friend rang to make an appt for her mother to get hair and makeup done, she said wedding it was $150. Her mother rang the same place and said she wanted to go out for the night and it was $80!
Too true Sue
Wedding = $$$xtra.
We had friends book the reception and said it was a family reunion - well it was! Less than half the cost. Amazing.
On that note look out for that one BayView!
Wedding = $$$xtra.
We had friends book the reception and said it was a family reunion - well it was! Less than half the cost. Amazing.
On that note look out for that one BayView!
Not always, I actually MADE $10K profit from my wedding and thats after spending $8K on a wedding album and $20K on the reception. Yay for asian weddings
And people try to do the guilt thing to, and say you will regret it later if you dont spend up! Kind of like a funeral I guess. My niece married last year, and her bouquet cost around $400. Then the florist said that every bride was getting a duplicate made up so that she could throw the duplicate bouquet as she left the reception, but still keep the real one. The duplicate was going to cost $200 and the florist said everyone expected brides to throw the bouquet and would be disappointed if she didnt get one. WT?
Needless to say she didnt throw a bouquet!
Needless to say she didnt throw a bouquet!
Say it ain't so Pushka, $600 just for her bouquets?
ruroshinSorry for sending the thread off track.
If anyone wants to start a thread on weddings though I think we'll all have lots to contribute.
Time to fire the fiscal cannon
Ross Gittins
February 4, 2009
If you want to retain sanity and avoid insomnia in this year of gloom and doom, it's important to know what is worth worrying about and what isn't. Not every seeming disaster flagged by a breathless media is worth losing sleep over.
For instance, the enormous fuss both sides in Canberra are making about the budget's looming descent into deficit can be safely ignored. They're getting excited not because the event is a disaster for the economy, but because they've turned the budget balance into a political football.
Similarly, don't take much notice when people say nothing the Government has done so far to combat the downturn has worked. They're talking through their hat. I guess the silliness we're hearing is an inevitable consequence of it being so long since the last recession that many people have forgotten how recessions work.
http://business.smh.com.au/business/time-to-fire-the-fiscal-cannon-20090203-7wsq.html?page=-1
Yet another person talking through their hat "It did nothing", "A waste of money!". Seriously, you are all talking through your hats. You don't like the idea of a handout and so come out with unsubstantiated assertions such as these.
What's Turballs alternative? Bring tax cuts in two years earlier than planned. SAME THING (except the IMF advised that one off hand outs were likely to be more effective than tax cuts as stimulus)!!
And if some of the money was saved rather than spent, then so be it, at some stage it will be spent, or will give people the confidence to spend again. Not everybody would have rushed out to buy the first thing they saw.
Ummmmm no, as I said - I don't begrudge people getting the handout, I just don't believe it will have the effect the govt. desired (or maybe it will, I'm sure they'll get a few extra votes as a result). As I said, I'm more than happy my parents got some extra cash - the old age pension isn't exactly a huge amount to live on.
But what about my point? Even if the entire $10B was spent the next day and none of it was saved. So it boosted Myer, Woolies, JB HiFi etc December period a bit - now what? Myer will still start laying off people in the coming months if things don't get better for them. That $10B (and the coming $12B) won't be enough to prevent that and by June (assuming the govt. don't announce more of them) it will be a distant memory.
If my business is experiencing sales declines in the current market downturn of 10% yoy, but the months of Dec and now Apr go up 5% instead - how will that stop me from having to lay off staff/cutting hours etc? Yes it's gives a small cashflow reprieve for a short time, then back to whatever the business was doing without the govt. handouts.
It's designed to help underpin employment. Ask Bob, Jane or Mary whether they would prefer to be retrenched now or in 3 or 4 months time. The retail industry is the biggest employer in Australia. It might only be short term but the difference between someone coming out of the other side of this downturn with their house could hinge upon whether they were unemployed for 6 months or 12 months. You're either underpinning jobs by injecting cash in to the economy or see unemployment rise as businesses lay off people and you end up dishing handouts in the form of unemployment benefits anyway.
It's not a strategy that can go on forever, but it's a strategy that might (depending how long this whole goes on) help a lot of people ride out a period of time that would otherwise be spent collecting the dole.
Hiya,
I really haven't thought this through so forgive me if there's a very simple fundamental error with my way of thinking, but if avoiding unemployment was the main idea... wouldn't it make more sense to give incentives to small business for hiring and (re)training staff?
Cheers
James.
Makes perfect sense to me James, but then Average Joe eyeing off those new golf clubs and cursing Turnbull for dashing his free cash won't like it. Face it, THEHEATH, the Government went for the populist vote by handing out cash rather than carefully managing the fiscal stimulus, and now it's had the effect they wanted - political point scoring. If they wanted to make SURE that it hit the retail sector in Australia, they'd have cut GST for aussie retailers, cut payroll taxes, or directly prop the businesses up with cash. They could have even gone for an intelligent scheme like James proposed.
There was an article today (http://www.theage.com.au/national/facebook-fury-over-turnbull-no-to-cash-splash-20090205-7yo0.html) about a Facebook group set up to trash Turnbull, with a bunch of people posting such enlightened comments as: "$600 for marijuana...the rest will probably be turned into snacks".
Awesome. This is just the sort of dipshit that I want being responsible for propping up the retail sector. You must have way more faith in your uninformed peers, because I know how this will end (more frivolous spending behaviour, a lot of money saved instead of spent, much of the money going overseas, aussie jobs being lost).
Read that comment as well. I actually thought that was quite funny!
In fact he/she has probably underbudgeted their snack bill with that much weed
I understand the theory (although the underlying theory is also votes and placating the traditional Labor supporter base), but I don't think it has/will work - it's that simple. We can agree to disagree that's cool, but as a business owner and employer - I'm telling you in real life practicality, it will hardly make a dent in the difference. IF the economy is going down and the business is going down with it - this little bit of tinkering will not make a difference. The same as their tax break/delay of 20% of one quarters BAS PAYG does SFA.
It won't generally helps businesses ride out much extra time at all - if they're going to get fired, this may at best postpone it a month or possibly two. Is that worth $23B extra debt to the country?
I agree in terms of these cash hand outs - they are a silly idea. Its tantamount to the dart board method of investing and if that's all the IMF/treasury/or KDudd can come up with then Australia is being misrepresented.
I wish there was an icon for rolling on floor laughing! Those are exactly my thoughts too and I have thought about it. Can you imagine the uproar though if businesses were given incentives to employ but there were no handouts!
Last edited:
Hi all,
I have a feeling that the stimulus package is about buying time for the effects of the interest rate cuts to work, along with the longer term aspects of the package.
People who are paying less in interest on their mortgages will save it for a while until they 'feel' better off. The longer term spending in the package will take a few months to roll out the money at least. The real problem is between now and when things pick up.
Currently there is (or we are lead to believe) crashing demand. Businesses will respond by shedding staff as their sales fall. Tax cuts, changes to payroll tax, GST payments etc will not stop this in the short term. Even the IMF has stated that immediate handouts are the way to go (now I'm worried if the IMF think it is a good idea )
Exactly who should be getting the immediate handout, is obviously those that are going to spend it.
bye
I have a feeling that the stimulus package is about buying time for the effects of the interest rate cuts to work, along with the longer term aspects of the package.
People who are paying less in interest on their mortgages will save it for a while until they 'feel' better off. The longer term spending in the package will take a few months to roll out the money at least. The real problem is between now and when things pick up.
Currently there is (or we are lead to believe) crashing demand. Businesses will respond by shedding staff as their sales fall. Tax cuts, changes to payroll tax, GST payments etc will not stop this in the short term. Even the IMF has stated that immediate handouts are the way to go (now I'm worried if the IMF think it is a good idea
)Exactly who should be getting the immediate handout, is obviously those that are going to spend it.
bye
