Re: C Class back in service again !........well...

[pcc@ocean.com.au (Les Brown)]

"Rod" <berlina@bigpond.com> wrote in aus.rail:
>
>>>Rod [no smiley..nothing funny about the transfer of wealth in this State]
>>>
>>No? You don't seem terribly upset now that Marinus is taking over
>>VLine Freight. Isn't that due to a transfer of wealth?
>
>I dont understand a transfer of an ongoing debt cannot have much to do with
>wealth?
>but the people of Victoria certainly suffer a loss of assetts when a Rail
>System with a replacement cost of some 4 billion dollars [low end estimate]
>is sold [leased for x years, some components being sold]

The transfer of wealth I was referring to was the payment by FV to the
government, not from the government.

Now I am not sure what on-going debt you are referring to. The way I
see it, before, railway freight was subsidised to the tune of $15.3
million last year by your Victorian taxpayer. Now under private
ownership, that's not going to happen anymore. Is this correct?

If I assume that you are correct and rails replacement value would be
around $4 billion, then if that $4 bill asset is costing you 250
million a year in subsidies (Vline Freight and all the others), then
after 16 years, it's worth nothing, zilch. 

Actually, since most of Victoria's railways' assets are over 100 years
old and very little is less than 15 years old, the depreciated value
of all this is going to be a lot less, except in the case of the value
of the land, most of which will remain in government ownership and
leased to FV anyway. It would probably be safe to say that what FV
paid for is basically what it was worth plus goodwill (if any), plus
the potential for FV to make money out of the whole deal. No wonder
why Kennett was cock-a-hoop, he probably thinks FV over-paid.

A railway that continually looses money is not an asset, it's a
liability. If goods can be transported by road, cheaper and quicker,
then that will be the preferred means of transport. Tough luck trains.
Vale Rail!! And, uh, sorry about your job, Rod.

The reason why railways were successful in the first place over 140
years ago was because they could transport passengers and goods
cheaper than by using the roads of the time, when transport by road
became cheaper than rail, then passengers and goods, in turn, took
over from rail. If rail is once again going to be the preferred
method, it will have to become cheaper than road.
>
>Dont matter if you are Labour or Liberal The Oil Barons, and many other
>Multi Nationals hold you to ransom
>similar to giving 2 Billion to Indoneasia! Every one knew it would line
>suharto's pockets, but we were too frightened to do anything else!
>No matter how badly you want to slow the spending down..Roads will get it
>all, and rail nothing..thats how it is. Private Enterprise will make very
>little difference to whats happening now. But they will force the Government
>to find something else to blame for the States Financial difficulties.

I disagree. Private enterprise will make a vast difference. The
railways were sold "in good faith", meaning, the government cannot do
anything to jeopardise rail-road competition, ie; a council can't sell
a house and then slap on it a demolition order for a freeway through
the loungeroom. Any unfair bias towards road will cause an outburst of
indignation on the part of the new owners and cries of foul play. 

Compare this with rail under government ownership. You're a manager,
appointed by the government to run rail in Victoria. The government
decides to drop registration charges on truckies' vehicles saving
their owners several thousands on each vehicle a year. They drop their
rates and you are loosing freight. As the manager - government
appointed - are you going to raise a stink by crying foul? Not likely
mate, you are there at the behest of the government and if you value
your job, you will not say too much. Under private enterprise, you
will scream blue-bloody-murder and if you don't, your shareholders
will and they'll sack you!

Regarding trying to find something else to blame for the state's
financial difficulties, well the the Libs have tried very hard to fix
that one and not without some pain, but I'll leave the good people at
the Labour party to worry about who to blame when it's their turn.
>>
>>I wouldn't mind a transfer of wealth if it meant a more secure job in
>>the long run and, with ever declining rail services, that's something
>>you wouldn't get under government ownership. You could also call a
>>large redundancy package a "transfer of wealth".
>
>What large redundancy.. I have been on the job for 25 years. Last year I
>paid into Superannuation $1500
>according to the statement of offer I have a cash benifit of $89,000 and a
>deferred Pension of $12500 at age 60
>the Redundancy Offer is $218,000 which includes 29 weeks Long Service leave
>and a some Holidays not taken.
> WHEN I TRANSFER TO FREIGHT VICTORIA...I get not one cent!! in fact we all
>expect a compulsory cut in pay!! All Leave, sick leave and Super
>Entitlements transfer to the New Owners!! They will be able to use this as
>working capital, and if they go broke.....so do we..

Yes, I am aware of that fact, but if Kennet had not sold VLF, what job
security would you have had then mate? SFA! Rail freight was declining
in Victoria and manpower needs with it. The only benefit of having a
government run service is the redundancy payout when they terminate
your services because their isn't enough work for you. Wodonga Loco
closes down and you're out of a job, what are you going to do then?
You can always move to Dynon, Geelong or Portland if you're lucky to
be offered one there, but I wouldn't hold my breath. This is the
redundancy I am referring to.

However,  you are not redundant, not if the new company rehires you.
At least under a private show you have a better chance of keeping your
job, but that's only because any government is hopeless at running
anything efficiently that they can use for an election pork-barrel.
This is despite the best intentions of many railway staff, such as
Marinus and many others like him to make rail realise its full
potential.

Look at Tasrail. Since it was sold, they have actually hired more
staff because of more work. That's how I expect FV to go - eventually,
because it will not happen overnight.
>
>If I work to 60 I get $20 000 a year till I die! Dont you  dare whimper
>about  payouts, they dont exist for Railway men!  My investment in V/.Line
>was for a decent life, bring up my kids and not to find myself broke and on
>a lousy Pension when I finished work. 20 years ago the State Super gave you
>dignity in your retirement. Thompson and Hamer tried to finish off what
>Bolte started, destruction of the working man!
>Kennett may be just the one to succeed, if the idiots give him another
>chance art it.
>
Don't whimper about payouts? How many drivers left after accepting
voluntary redundancy and payout? Where were you when all this
happened? And it was done UNDER A FRIGGING LABOUR GOVERNMENT!
How many of your mates grabbed the money and ran? Some of those blokes
who took the package, were amongst the best and most experienced
employees Vline had. I'll bet they'll be looking for work now under
the new owner. Some already have.
>And most of this shit that Les and others like him is just Herald Sun
>Propaganda, A Labour Government with a hostile Upper House verses Liberals
>with both.

I don't get the Herald-Sun. We use proper toilet paper.

Look, it's not shit Rod, and since you don't know me from a cow-pat,
don't classify me in with the ratbag-set that you seem to think
everyone is who disgrees with your views on politics. 

I'm no different to large number of Ausralians out there in that I
also have kids, a mortgage and seek dignity in retirement. Since I'm
self employed, I don't have a super fund to rely on unlike you, so I
am worse off. What will happen to me? I am also a working man, a
tradesman of over thirty years experience and no super fund, and you
think you're hard up! Wake up and smell the flowers mate and notice
how relatively well off you really are compared to a lot of other
people. Why not pay someone well for hard work, rather than for merely
surviving the longest on the job?

>Wonder if some boffin out there would go through the Kirner years and see
>what Liberals stopped Labour from doing, and could show some of you boof
>heads what Multi Nationals did to prevent Labour from putting it
>right!!...ahhhhhh..brick bloody walls...knock  knock   anyone home?

The problem with Labour was they were in for too long. Sorry mate, I
voted those pricks in and I voted them out. Political power doesn't
reside with the chauvanistic, die-hard, one-eyed voters of Labour and
Liberal. It rests with people who need to be convinced that voting for
one party or the other will do the best for ourselves, our family and
the country. The only problem with this is the hip-pocket nerve can be
the only consideration.

>>And I certainly do not think that Marinus could do a worse job than
>>Robin Cooper - far from it!
>
>Why direct it at me, I reckon the blokes a bloody genious!
>
It's not directed at you. But I fail to understand why you sling off
at the Libs and private enterprise and yet both have delivered to you
the man you admire the most to do the best for all of you. 

If it was a Labour government, would you have preferred the likes of
Tom Roper to run your railway? Would Marinus have hung around under
Labour? not bloody likely. I'll bet he saw his future in private
enterprise. Did anyone ever ask him why he left? Was it because
because of the government appointed idiots who were running our
railways? Was it not someone (Ian Dobbs, I think) who said that rail
reform had gone as far as it could under government ownership? Why did
he say that? Was he not referring to the remaining, stick-in-the-mud,
railway staff who can't see further past their own retirement?

>>The only transfer of wealth so far has been to the government, not
>>from it. Freight Victoria paid a fair price for VLine Freight, some
>>would say over paid. The Kennett Government needs it to retire the
>>debt incurred during the Labour years, and to buy back what Labour
>>sold and leased back. Now I don't exactly agree with everything
>>Kennett has done, but he has done a helluva lot better that
>>Cain/Kirner's old retinue - remember the shockers they had for
>>transport ministers? And you can't complain now that Marinus is back!
>
>Les who is paying back the debts??

If the government doesn't sell the railways then I do, we ALL do, and
our children will. When they sell the railways, the buyer does; end of
story.

>not the Road Transport Mob, they get magic "free"ways and the little man in
>his holden pays 91% of road costs!
>High transport costs, insurance, deaths pollution, little bloke pays that
>too! added on to everything he buys!

Then why are you voting Labour? Who was it who abolished tolls on the
Westgate Freeway - Labour. Who was it who reduced truck rego fees
(less than half, wasn't it?)  - Labour. Who was it who abolished
regular inspection of trucks at weighing stations? - Labour. Who was
it who sold rollingstock and then leased them back at a higher over
all cost? - Labour. Who was it complained, not about the building of
OneLink, but about the tolls over it? - Labour.

Labour has always favoured road and never rail. What Kennet did was
force the issue by making railways sink or swim; either make a profit
or close down. No different from any normal business operation really.

>We all know it , its just real lazy to lay back, drown it with another beer,
>put an extra TattsLotto on and watch the world spin around in a haze
>who gives a fuck anyway!

>I do!

So you should and so do I. I care very much for our railways as I
always have. It's been an under-capitalised and under-utilised utility
for long enough. I want them to succeed as much as you do. I want you
to have a job and retire with dignity, only don't expect me or anyone
else to pay for it! You don't expect to pay for me - do you? Are you
going to pay for my super? Not bloody likely. You might be a socialist
- I was one once - but socialists are never generous with their own
money, only with someone else's

Anyway, I don't like the taste of beer.

>Rod ;o(
>
>funnything about the Internet, gives me a real thirst, not since Nui Dat in
>1966, have I enjoyed the local brew so much. Can't understand why people
>think they can hide behind such a little bottle....but if I stack 'em along
>the fence........maybe the guns will scream in good old Uk-Da-Loi....a
>revolution would get their attention now wouldn't it....as his light head
>ponders the stupidity of the world, with even more stupidity!
>
Redneck! (:-)

Les Brown