---

@tall_bearded01 wrote:

You are actually right.  It would appear that though the toll was to be eliminated, it was in fact retained and in fact increased to help pay for the harbour tunnel.

 

Therefore, if the bridge is sold then the tolls currently collected would be paid to the private sector with the public having to foot the bill re the loss in revenue need for the tunnel.

 

NB: My original statement was based on what was happing when I was posted to the School of Guns in the early 80’s.  That is, 20 cents to cross the bridge one way for CBD bound traffic only,which was expected to be eliminated in its entirely in the next couple of years

---

The bridge should never be sold.  There is no logical reason for public infrastructure to be sold when they have been paid for and are generating returns to the govts.   Is the NSW gov seriously considering selling the Bridge?

The Commonwealth and in particular the Armed Forces are a perfect example as to how super be viewed before the mid-eighties.

There used to be what was called the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme (DFRDB).  To qualify you had to be a member of the Regular Defence Forces where you compulsorily paid 5% of you gross wage to the scheme, but you were not entitled to any retirement benefits unless you served 20 years or more, and if you got out earlier you got your contributions back plus bank interest. 

That is super was for career employs only.  The rest would have to rely on the aged pension.

I’m not sure if the NSW government is considering selling, and IMO they would be a fool to do so.

I do however recall that bridge's were used by Abbott as an example of the kinds of assets that the states could be sell so that state governments could use the money to invest in further infrastructure projects.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2015/2/3/australian-news/tackling-intergenerational-thef...

Yes, Polks, and I am always astounded about the ignorance of those posters. At first I was incensed and felt insulted, but then I realised that those people have no idea about our history or the develpement of this country or anything else before they turned 21.

The same atitude our Governement seems to have. My eldest daughter is older than any of the PMs consortium. No wonder we get such statements from those imbeciles whos main aim is to grab as much money as they can at any cost to the people who build this country.

Erica

When I first came to Australia in the early 60s I was surprised that there was no compulsory  "National Insurance" scheme like the one we had in England. I was told that it was included in the income tax we paid. When Mr elephant and I married he was an electrician working for a contractor - no super scheme. Soon afterwards he took a job with the Government - WA Railways, and came under the Government Employees Superannuation scheme, which he was able to roll over when he started as a lecturer at TAFE. As a result he was able to retire ona  pension equal to a percentage of his retiring wage and indexed to CPI.

When you are young and your life is taken up with bringing up five kids you don't have the  time or energy  to worry too much about the future and you certainly don't have the resources to save adequately for it, but we appreciate now how extremely lucky we were. If Mr Elephant had not taken that Government job we would be existing today  on the Age Pension - thereby,  presumably, stealing from the kids we struggled all those years to feed and educate.

The destruction of the NBN is intergenerational theft, big time.