Brisbane CBD evacuated

[Chris OFarrell]

Yup, the screaming and howling is just absurd even now.

"Oh noes, how DARE they take my money! What right do they have?!"

Utterly pathetic.

Here's at least hoping that Gillard actually has the balls to tell them to get stuffed and just keeps pushing it. I don't want vast areas of Queensland to end up looking like New Orleans, waiting for repairs years later...

[bobalot]

The hilarious thing is the total cost is over $5 Billion dollars. 2/3 of that will be raised through cuts to other programs/deferring programs and the remaining $1.8 is being raised through a ONCE OFF tax.

Apparently an extra $1 a week for the average Australian is the end of the world and will collapse the economy.

Tony Abbott being a total hypocrite is against any levy, despite promising to introduce a levy as one of his election promises. A levy that would pay rich mothers to stay at home. He was apart of a government that also legislated many levies. Unbelievable.

[weemadando]

I think I'd prefer to have a permanent "OH SHIT!" levy so we don't have to go through this kerfuffle again.

I just hope that the "rebuilding" efforts actually are improvements on the old, rather than just replacements. Because here's a chance to make some updates to certain bits of infrastructure.

[bobalot]

I think I'd prefer to have a permanent "OH SHIT!" levy so we don't have to go through this kerfuffle again.

I just hope that the "rebuilding" efforts actually are improvements on the old, rather than just replacements. Because here's a chance to make some updates to certain bits of infrastructure.

When old infrastructure is rebuilt, they will be built to new standards and guidelines. So hopefully, Queensland will get better infrastructure.

I'm just finding the crying about a $1-$5 a week levy hilarious. 60% of Australian's will be paying less than a $1 a week (low income earners will pay nothing) .... OH NOES! HOW CAN FAMILIES SURVIVE!?!

[Stark]

The extent of lolbertarian stuff in the media is hilarious. A few invisible bucks people won't even notice will interfere with the charity free market! And I mean, the dam construction charity will totally do the public works required, right?

[weemadando]

But who will pay to drain the coal mines if the public doesn't? Surely you can't expect the miners to risk their super profits by covering their own under-insured losses.

[Stark]

Man if we'd taxed them appropriately, we could afford it and all!

[Broomstick]

I'm just finding the crying about a $1-$5 a week levy hilarious. 60% of Australian's will be paying less than a $1 a week (low income earners will pay nothing) .... OH NOES! HOW CAN FAMILIES SURVIVE!?!

Question about Australia, here - is there any tradition of people donating to disaster relief funds on their own initiative, or is it a country where the expectation and practice has been the government always takes care of these things?

[Stark]

Jesus fucking christ; google 'Queensland flood charity' and there's your answer. There has been a sizeable outpouring of support and assistance, although less than the fires earlier.

It's not hard to find things out for yourself.

[Gandalf]

Question about Australia, here - is there any tradition of people donating to disaster relief funds on their own initiative, or is it a country where the expectation and practice has been the government always takes care of these things?

To provide some anecdotal evidence on that:

We play Star Trek every fortnight. After the floods started, a question was posed on our forum; "Why not give the money to flood relief this time?" We raised $50 (5 dudes at $10 each). When I was depositing the money, an old lady next to me was donating $600.

This isn't the first time we made the game charitable. When our friend Will died of a brain tumour, we donated to the Cancer Council. When I ran one, we sent the money to Epilepsy Australia.

So yeah, we give to charities.

[mr friendly guy]

I'm just finding the crying about a $1-$5 a week levy hilarious. 60% of Australian's will be paying less than a $1 a week (low income earners will pay nothing) .... OH NOES! HOW CAN FAMILIES SURVIVE!?!

Question about Australia, here - is there any tradition of people donating to disaster relief funds on their own initiative, or is it a country where the expectation and practice has been the government always takes care of these things?

We do donate generously to charities. In this case the Queensland government set up a fund for us to donate to. There is also an expectation that the government will help pick up the tab. Already the Federal government gave money not just to the Qld floods, but also to the concurrent flood happening in Western Australia (which received less media attention). And yes I am aware there is another flood happening in Victoria at the moment too.

There is however a lolbertarian streak if you read the comments on news articles. Some people are rhetorically asking for their money back (assuming they even donated in the first place) so they can pay for this tax. I suspect its the same stupid mindset where its great to donate to charity on your own volition, but its somehow wrong for the government to tax it to achieve the same means.

I have seen on a news show someone (some ex advisor to the previous government) who said that the first thing to do is to cut spending and that taxes should only be introduced in the event of wait for it.... a DISASTER. He didn't even lose a beat when its pointed out that the floods was a disaster. He mentioned only if we are at war like WWII levels. So I guess that rules out our commitments as part of the Coalition of the willing then. These guys are about idealogy, and not about the final outcome, that is improving the lives of those hit by the disaster.

[weemadando]

And Broomie, there was a fairly recently released study that showed that despite having such a strong welfare system Australia also had one of the world's highest rates of charitable donation, both monetarily (based on proportion of income) and in terms of volunteerism).

So the idiotic paradigm of "welfare kills charities" is quite wrong.

[Broomstick]

Thank you, those of you who answered the question. It's starting to sound like Aussies pitched in to various charities to help those flooded and only after that was determined to not be enough the government enacted the levy.

I hope the rebuilding goes well, and it's done right.

[Edi]

Jesus fucking christ; google 'Queensland flood charity' and there's your answer. There has been a sizeable outpouring of support and assistance, although less than the fires earlier.

It's not hard to find things out for yourself.

Quit trolling, asshole. In the time it took you to write that post, you could just as well have answered the question, like some of the others did.

If your only answer to questions is "Lol, google it", just shut the fuck up.

[Stark]

I did answer the question. You even quoted it. Asking about the existence or not of charity when people are talking about how a flood tax is being attacked by it's possible REDUCTION OF CHARITIBLE DONATIONS is pretty dumb, don't you think?

I mean far be it for me to get in the way of Broomstick concocting yet another bizarre fantasy due to an allergy to facts and research; as people (again) have already said, how the fuck are charities or aid workers going to fix major infrastructure or capital plant? The government was ALWAYS going to be involved, and community support was ALWAYS there and indeed front page (of newpaper and google) for WEEKS.

[Edi]

I did answer the question. You even quoted it. Asking about the existence or not of charity when people are talking about how a flood tax is being attacked by it's possible REDUCTION OF CHARITIBLE DONATIONS is pretty dumb, don't you think?

I mean far be it for me to get in the way of Broomstick concocting yet another bizarre fantasy due to an allergy to facts and research; as people (again) have already said, how the fuck are charities or aid workers going to fix major infrastructure or capital plant? The government was ALWAYS going to be involved, and community support was ALWAYS there and indeed front page (of newpaper and google) for WEEKS.

I told you elsewhere that you should actually read and understand the posts people make instead of responding to what the voices in your head make you imagine they said. Her question was about Australian giving to disaster charities in general and whether government role in disaster relief affected that. It was not merely about the Brisbane floods one, yet you responded with just "Lol, google it".

But apparently giving an actual factual answer like Mr. Friendly guy's first paragraph (which is all that's needed, the rest is extra, though informative) was beyond what you could be bothered with. You preferred to stir up the pot to create more board drama.

[Winston Blake]

Some people are rhetorically asking for their money back (assuming they even donated in the first place) so they can pay for this tax.

Wow. That's almost cartoonishly evil.

I have seen on a news show someone (some ex advisor to the previous government) who said that the first thing to do is to cut spending and that taxes should only be introduced in the event of wait for it.... a DISASTER. He didn't even lose a beat when its pointed out that the floods was a disaster. He mentioned only if we are at war like WWII levels. So I guess that rules out our commitments as part of the Coalition of the willing then. These guys are about idealogy, and not about the final outcome, that is improving the lives of those hit by the disaster.

Ex-advisor to the previous govmt? A Howard-era advisor? If the Port Arthur massacre was big enough to warrant using a Medicare levy increase to fund the gun buyback scheme, then the floods are certainly big enough. Ah, but that was the brainchild of conservative John Howard HERO OF THE IMPERIUM, not the filthy atheist leftist in power now, taking bread out of the mouths of our children to 'spread the wealth' on silly nonsense like essential infrastructure. (Yes I am exaggerating).

[Norade]

A friend of mine's GF is from Tralgon, and while not effected that's enough for me to say all the best with rebuilding and getting some nicer stuff while doing so. I also might be moving there myself after my degree, I hear IT jobs are rather in demand, at the moment, and the country is just as nice as Canada.

[Broomstick]

So the idiotic paradigm of "welfare kills charities" is quite wrong.

I'm not sure I've heard that one before - I've certainly heard the notion that because there are charities welfare is unnecessary, but not that welfare kills charities.

Well, there certainly are selfish greedy bastards everywhere, aren't there?

My area had some flooding a couple years ago that, while nowhere near what Brisbane went through, was bad enough. We still haven't fixed everything two years + later. Until you've participated in a flood clean up you just don't understand how devastating even a minor flood, something ankle deep or just basement filling, can be. It was heartbreaking to see houses in the Brisbane area submerged up to the eaves and people stranded on roofs. With a flood like that you lose everything just as much as if it had been burned.

[Norade]

So the idiotic paradigm of "welfare kills charities" is quite wrong.

I'm not sure I've heard that one before - I've certainly heard the notion that because there are charities welfare is unnecessary, but not that welfare kills charities.

Well, there certainly are selfish greedy bastards everywhere, aren't there?

My area had some flooding a couple years ago that, while nowhere near what Brisbane went through, was bad enough. We still haven't fixed everything two years + later. Until you've participated in a flood clean up you just don't understand how devastating even a minor flood, something ankle deep or just basement filling, can be. It was heartbreaking to see houses in the Brisbane area submerged up to the eaves and people stranded on roofs. With a flood like that you lose everything just as much as if it had been burned.

What's stopping people from building houses on stilts to avoid these things?

[loomer]

That's what we do here in my part of the Northern Rivers. It's just plain sensible - good for the airflow, too.

[Broomstick]

What's stopping people from building houses on stilts to avoid these things?

In Brisbane? Can't speak for them, though I understand the practice is not unknown.

In my area - flooding to that extent had never happened before. Putting a house on stilts in my area might be a problem, though, due to local soil conditions, frost heaving, and problems with insulating for our severe cold weather. Maybe not insurmountable problems (in fact, I'm sure all of that can be dealt with) but it was not needed before and may conflict with local buildings codes designed for other hazards.

[weemadando]

As I mentioned back on page 1.

People in a lot of areas might be considering a return to the old Queenslander house design.

Which was, you know. ON STILTS.

[Broomstick]

The big downside to building on stilts is that that design is more problematic in earthquake zones. How tectonically active is Queensland? If it's pretty quiet then sure, stilts might be a great idea.

[bobalot]

The big downside to building on stilts is that that design is more problematic in earthquake zones. How tectonically active is Queensland? If it's pretty quiet then sure, stilts might be a great idea.

Australia is right in the middle of a continental plate. So I don't see very many downsides.