Found the taxation is theft person. No disagreement that taxes are high, but good public spaces, parks, a welfare net, and the aged pension cost money.

Somehow no one ever talks about curtailing the aged pension. Wonder why......


Australia hasn't had a "left leaning government" for almost 7 years, and but for a brief spell between 2008 - 2013, the last 25 years Australia hasn't had a "left leaning government".



Dental care is not covered under Medicare. How is "universal healthcare" to blame for "lines to the moon and back just to see a dentist" when it is not even involved in it?

Apparently the free market is supposed to sort it out right since the invisible hand of the market is supposed to allow more dental services to come in and provide better services?



In Malaysia, government doesn't subsidise IPTS'es. Please provide an instance where IPTS fees dropped.

Singapore has no welfare net, much less a aged pension. It is hardly a comparison.

So please don't migrate to Australia if you don't want an "unmitigated disastrous" aged pension.

Also plenty of people, Singaporeans or otherwise, live paycheque to paycheque, and (in the Singaporean context) their CPF monies not enough.

But because they're "Aussies"............

The Liberal/National governments of the last 25 years:

- Sold off public assets like Telstra, Qantas, CSL
- Introduced voluntary student unionism
- Privatised the Commonwealth Employment Service
- Disbanded the Clean Energy Finance Corporation
- Took away guns from private owners

amongst others

The Labor government between 2008 - 2013, 5 years, when they weren't stabbing each other:

- Founded NBNCo
- Reinstated student unionism fees
- Legislated a mining and resources tax
- Initiated a flood levy
- Plain packaging for tobacco products

The same, really? One can mount a argument on the merits of the individual decisions, but "aren't any much different"?

Also, what "communist" legislation did the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd governments legislate? Is the Liberal/National government so lousy that after 6 years they can't even repeal "communist" legislation? (They didn't have a problem abolishing the Carbon Tax, Mining Tax, Clean Energy Finance Corporation, so hardly hamstrung in reversing decisions of previous governments)

In Singapore with minimal intervention patients either don't have enough money in their MediSave to pay for "medical professional", or in Australia (as you say) to have public payment but "long queues". Pick the poison of choice.

Also, that is not how "bulk billing" works. Bulk billing means that each consultation/Medicare item has a amount that Medicare to pay out. Doctors that "bulk bill" don't charge patients beyond what Medicare pays them. Doctors that don't bulk bill patients pay the difference on top of the Medicare rebate amount. Which is still less than someone who has to pay the full amount (ie. temporary residents: international students, working visa's, contributory parent visa holders) because they don't have access to Medicare.

Queues are dependent on demand. In Australia if one has the financial means they can pay outright to "jump the queue", or if they can't they go into the public waiting list. In Singapore if one has the financial means they can pay outright to "jump the queue", else they draw down on their MediSave and hope it doesn't run out.

Pick the poison of choice.


So why are Singaporean PEI fees higher than NUS and NTU?