Sometimes the aims of different people collide through no fault of their own. Such seems to be the situation in the heated argument between prominent horse trainer, Gai Waterhouse, her bookmaker son Tom, and a high profile celebrity who owns a champion race horse.
The purpose of a horse trainer is to manage other people's horses and bring them to top condition to win races. This requires a careful exercise regimen, a good diet and the selection of a jockey who will mix well with that horses individual temperament.
A bookmaker needs to craft odds that attract punters but which carefully measure the returns on each runner to ensure that if a favourite wins, the payout is more than covered by wagers on other losing horses in that field. To do that, knowledge of the exact condition of all the runners in that race is necessary.
The owner/punter is the person paying for the care and training of a champion horse and expects to be kept fully aware of all conditions prevailing. This knowledge is essential in making decisions to wager a bet on that horse - and whether such an investment results in gain or loss.
Unfortunately, the aims of both the owner/punter and the bookmaker are diametrically opposed. Both expect to make money, but any gain for one must be at a loss for the other. This invites conflict when there is a close relationship between the three people involved.
Ideally, such relationships should be at arms length, but that becomes impossible when family connections are involved and when a long and profitable relationship has evolved between an owner of many horses and a prominent trainer. Suspicions arises when a horse does not perform to expectations.
The racing industry has always had a " raffish " reputation and the media delights in any argument between high profile celebrities. Those are the stories that sell newspapers and glue viewers to television screens. This dispute will be exploited to the full by racing writers.
Unfortunately, it will not help the industry to have " dirty linen " aired in public. A lot will depend on whether this is settled by a shake of hands - or whether it progresses to messy court action. Any protracted publicity will play into the hands of the anti-gambling lobby !
Tuesday, 30 April 2013
Monday, 29 April 2013
Hiking the price !
We are certainly paying much higher prices here than the same items offered on the American market when it comes to the field of electronics and music, but that differential is even more glaring when applies to automobiles.
At the lower end of the car market, a Nissan Pulsar sells here at $ 19,990, but it's American price is just $ 16,140. The gap widens as it applies to high end luxury cars. The BMW 320i will set us back $ 58,600 and yet the American price sticker is just $ 35,805. At the top of the market, the Mercedes C class has a differential of $ 67,900 to $ 35,350.
The car industry blythely tells us that price difference is relative to our laws that stipulate that cars drive on the left side of the road. Most of the rest of the world drives on the right side of the road and it is more costly to produce vehicles in smaller productions runs for our market.
That doesn't seem to add up. General Motors Australian plants have produced cars for export - and of course these have had to be in left hand drive mode for both the American and European markets. Despite the transport costs of sending them overseas, they retailed at a cheaper price than their right hand drive equivalent here in Australia. These export cars represented a smaller production run than those made for sale in this country.
For a very long time, hiking the price in Australia has been a cozy little scam that was masked by a sharp difference in the trading value between the American and Australian dollars. When the Australian dollar fell to an exchange of about seventy cents some years ago, most people accepted price variations without checking too further. Today - with the values almost even - that mask of deception has been torn away.
The real reason we have a price differential - is " Because they can " !
" Take it - or leave it ! " is the buy option that applies. The price of foreign made cars in Australia has been falling as both the Australian dollar strengthens and the competition hots up. The entry of both South Korea and China into the new car market has forced prices downward - at the same time that it has forced car makers to add refinements at no extra cost. Few cars today come without power steering, safer brakes, air conditioning - and a five star crash rating.
Makers will find it harder to explain away the price discrepancy in electronics and music. Few of these items are actually produced in America. Manufacturing is tasked to sweat shops in China - and there is no left hand - right hand drive excuses for these items.
We have just seen a colossal battle between two electronic giants over patent protection. Expect more of that in the future as new players enter the field - and countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia use their low cost labour force to become players.
It seems that an overwhelming force is moving towards price parity !
At the lower end of the car market, a Nissan Pulsar sells here at $ 19,990, but it's American price is just $ 16,140. The gap widens as it applies to high end luxury cars. The BMW 320i will set us back $ 58,600 and yet the American price sticker is just $ 35,805. At the top of the market, the Mercedes C class has a differential of $ 67,900 to $ 35,350.
The car industry blythely tells us that price difference is relative to our laws that stipulate that cars drive on the left side of the road. Most of the rest of the world drives on the right side of the road and it is more costly to produce vehicles in smaller productions runs for our market.
That doesn't seem to add up. General Motors Australian plants have produced cars for export - and of course these have had to be in left hand drive mode for both the American and European markets. Despite the transport costs of sending them overseas, they retailed at a cheaper price than their right hand drive equivalent here in Australia. These export cars represented a smaller production run than those made for sale in this country.
For a very long time, hiking the price in Australia has been a cozy little scam that was masked by a sharp difference in the trading value between the American and Australian dollars. When the Australian dollar fell to an exchange of about seventy cents some years ago, most people accepted price variations without checking too further. Today - with the values almost even - that mask of deception has been torn away.
The real reason we have a price differential - is " Because they can " !
" Take it - or leave it ! " is the buy option that applies. The price of foreign made cars in Australia has been falling as both the Australian dollar strengthens and the competition hots up. The entry of both South Korea and China into the new car market has forced prices downward - at the same time that it has forced car makers to add refinements at no extra cost. Few cars today come without power steering, safer brakes, air conditioning - and a five star crash rating.
Makers will find it harder to explain away the price discrepancy in electronics and music. Few of these items are actually produced in America. Manufacturing is tasked to sweat shops in China - and there is no left hand - right hand drive excuses for these items.
We have just seen a colossal battle between two electronic giants over patent protection. Expect more of that in the future as new players enter the field - and countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia use their low cost labour force to become players.
It seems that an overwhelming force is moving towards price parity !
Sunday, 28 April 2013
Fragmented government !
Australia has prospered from the regular exchanges between Labor and the Liberal Coalition gaining the numbers to form government. Sometimes neither party has the control of both houses, and usually the Senate contains several maverick " independents " and this tends to curb excess legislation.
The important thing is to have a united group of people delivering government under the banner of one of the traditional political parties. We have just seen the mess that results when we get a " hung " parliament and achieving government depends on cobbling together an alliance with another political party with a vastly different platform and opposing views.
It seems that we are heading for a more splintered political choice at this coming election. Not only will there be independents contesting just about every seat, there will most likely be three minor parties throwing their hats into the ring and appealing for votes.
The Greens have a definite following at both state and Federal level and their extreme socialism will appeal to some supporters. It seems that at this election we will see both Bob Katter's Australia party and newcomer Clive Palmer's yet to be registered United Australia Party join the hustings.
We need to look to Europe to see what happens when the voters desert the main streams of politics and disenfranchise themselves by supporting a plethora of minor parties. Countries like Israel and Italy have a history of short lived amalgamations of unlikely bed fellows which disintegrate and reform without ever having the strength to deal with national issues.
Love them or hate them, both of the traditional political parties deliver stability when they have the numbers to govern. The history of Australian politics mirrors most stable world democracies and delivers a regular exchange between a party with socialist roots and a party with conservative values. Both are prevented from legislating to excess by the need to keep the voters feeling comfortable with the directions taken - and this is kept to public attention by a free press.
We have seen small single purpose political parties rise and fall in the past. Pauline Hanson's " One Nation " burst onto the scene and hitched it's star to a contentious issue that was consuming public opinion. It soared in the support stakes - and then faded into oblivion.
The danger is that Katter and Palmer may bring a host of other single issue parties out of the woodwork, to the detriment of stable government by syphoning support from both the major parties.
It seems to be a case of being very careful of what we wish for !
The important thing is to have a united group of people delivering government under the banner of one of the traditional political parties. We have just seen the mess that results when we get a " hung " parliament and achieving government depends on cobbling together an alliance with another political party with a vastly different platform and opposing views.
It seems that we are heading for a more splintered political choice at this coming election. Not only will there be independents contesting just about every seat, there will most likely be three minor parties throwing their hats into the ring and appealing for votes.
The Greens have a definite following at both state and Federal level and their extreme socialism will appeal to some supporters. It seems that at this election we will see both Bob Katter's Australia party and newcomer Clive Palmer's yet to be registered United Australia Party join the hustings.
We need to look to Europe to see what happens when the voters desert the main streams of politics and disenfranchise themselves by supporting a plethora of minor parties. Countries like Israel and Italy have a history of short lived amalgamations of unlikely bed fellows which disintegrate and reform without ever having the strength to deal with national issues.
Love them or hate them, both of the traditional political parties deliver stability when they have the numbers to govern. The history of Australian politics mirrors most stable world democracies and delivers a regular exchange between a party with socialist roots and a party with conservative values. Both are prevented from legislating to excess by the need to keep the voters feeling comfortable with the directions taken - and this is kept to public attention by a free press.
We have seen small single purpose political parties rise and fall in the past. Pauline Hanson's " One Nation " burst onto the scene and hitched it's star to a contentious issue that was consuming public opinion. It soared in the support stakes - and then faded into oblivion.
The danger is that Katter and Palmer may bring a host of other single issue parties out of the woodwork, to the detriment of stable government by syphoning support from both the major parties.
It seems to be a case of being very careful of what we wish for !
Saturday, 27 April 2013
Putting the " bite " on business !
It is a curious fact of life that all forms of government have the notion that anyone who runs their own business is " rich ". The provision of basic services are divided into two important categories - " Domestic " and " Commercial " - and both are charged at very different rates.
Ask any owner of a small shop about electricity bills, water rates, any of the services that are a necessity in this modern world and you will find a very different charge is applied to what confronts the ordinary householder. This is based on an assumed " ability to pay ".
Unfortunately, this mind set knows no boundaries. The same thinking applies to a major industry that employs thousands and spreads over acres of land - and a tiny little operation in which a sole trader is trying to make a crust to support his or her family. It is a positive disincentive for bright people to think outside the nine dots and create their own business in a world of scarce employment opportunities.
The opportunity to inflict higher charges on small business depended on that business having the use of premises. The mobile trader who supplied services from a vehicle escapes because the facilities of his or her home fall under the " Domestic " category. They were not claimed as a business expense.
So great is the need for more funds that some councils are pushing new horizons, and one council is seeking to license and charge dog walkers - for the use of their parks. They reason that personal trainers who take their clients to a park for work outs are taxed for the privilege - so why not dog walkers ?
Dog walking is a new and expanding industry. Many people find it hard to fit care of a family pet with heavy work requirements and depend on this new service to keep their animal fit and healthy. It is also a boon to those with time limitations - such as single mothers with primary school age children - who can fit this activity into the days schedule and earn a little extra funding.
The obvious outcome of imposing a charge on the use of parks - is dog walkers avoiding such places and exercising their charges on public streets - and nature strips. There remains the possibility of council rangers stopping any person walking a string of dogs and demanding to see some sort of license registration - but that opens up another deep pit of legal contention.
The fact remains that those who try to establish their own business are clearly in the cross hairs of all levels of government - who see them as " rich " and desperately seek to impose an elevated level of fees to satisfy their endless need for more funds.
The dog walking industry is the latest to feel the " bite " !
Ask any owner of a small shop about electricity bills, water rates, any of the services that are a necessity in this modern world and you will find a very different charge is applied to what confronts the ordinary householder. This is based on an assumed " ability to pay ".
Unfortunately, this mind set knows no boundaries. The same thinking applies to a major industry that employs thousands and spreads over acres of land - and a tiny little operation in which a sole trader is trying to make a crust to support his or her family. It is a positive disincentive for bright people to think outside the nine dots and create their own business in a world of scarce employment opportunities.
The opportunity to inflict higher charges on small business depended on that business having the use of premises. The mobile trader who supplied services from a vehicle escapes because the facilities of his or her home fall under the " Domestic " category. They were not claimed as a business expense.
So great is the need for more funds that some councils are pushing new horizons, and one council is seeking to license and charge dog walkers - for the use of their parks. They reason that personal trainers who take their clients to a park for work outs are taxed for the privilege - so why not dog walkers ?
Dog walking is a new and expanding industry. Many people find it hard to fit care of a family pet with heavy work requirements and depend on this new service to keep their animal fit and healthy. It is also a boon to those with time limitations - such as single mothers with primary school age children - who can fit this activity into the days schedule and earn a little extra funding.
The obvious outcome of imposing a charge on the use of parks - is dog walkers avoiding such places and exercising their charges on public streets - and nature strips. There remains the possibility of council rangers stopping any person walking a string of dogs and demanding to see some sort of license registration - but that opens up another deep pit of legal contention.
The fact remains that those who try to establish their own business are clearly in the cross hairs of all levels of government - who see them as " rich " and desperately seek to impose an elevated level of fees to satisfy their endless need for more funds.
The dog walking industry is the latest to feel the " bite " !
Friday, 26 April 2013
The " Hacker " Menace !
The computer - and it's by-product, the " Internet " have changed the world in a few decades. It is so entrenched in our lives now that if it suddenly ceased to function our world would come crashing down. It runs the traffic lights that allow us to drive safely. It is the only means of pricing goods we buy at the supermarkets. It runs the delivery systems that provide electricity and gas to our homes - and without computers our news services and all forms of communications would go silent.
It is also a vengeful weapon in the hands of those who bear us ill will. We live in the age of the " Hacker " - and the recent actions of just one person led to the loss of $ 136 billion on the United States stock market.
This person hacked into the website of respected news source Associated Press and issued a bogus news item that claimed that two bombs had exploded at the White House , and that President Barak Obama had been injured.
The Dow Jones immediately plunged a hundred points on the expectation that such bad news would bring a stock market negative reaction. Those same computers are geared to make massive transaction moves in mini seconds and they react automatically to pre-set instructions monitoring price movements. The losses incurred will be keenly felt by investment houses that manage the superannuation of millions of ordinary people.
There is no doubt that the computer and the systems it controls has emerged as a weapon of war. It can be used to cripple an opposing country's military defence systems and throw all forms of commerce into total disarray. Government sponsored hackers work to improve their skills and practice by invading the communications and commercial networks of target nations. The " spy game " has developed into a move and counter move to protect the functions of commerce and government.
Here in Australia, a 24 year old hacker was caught breaking into a government website and unlawfully modifying data. That offence carries a maximum twelve years gaol term - and it will be interesting to see how seriously a court treats a hacking case if he is convicted at trial.
It is thought that this hacker is a member of an organization named Lulzsec, composed of freelance hackers who are part of the international " Anonymous " hacking syndicate that carries out audacious hacking raids in support of it's agenda to implement social change.
It seems that our way of life is vulnerable to attacks on the very systems that deliver the benefits that computers and the communications age has bestowed on the world. Each year our reliance on the computer reaches new bounds. It is a worrying thought that if any nation's computer system was shut down by an attack by another country - or a very clever malignant individual - the victim country would be plunged back into the dark ages.
Unfortunately, that is a risk that we must take. There is simply no alternative !
It is also a vengeful weapon in the hands of those who bear us ill will. We live in the age of the " Hacker " - and the recent actions of just one person led to the loss of $ 136 billion on the United States stock market.
This person hacked into the website of respected news source Associated Press and issued a bogus news item that claimed that two bombs had exploded at the White House , and that President Barak Obama had been injured.
The Dow Jones immediately plunged a hundred points on the expectation that such bad news would bring a stock market negative reaction. Those same computers are geared to make massive transaction moves in mini seconds and they react automatically to pre-set instructions monitoring price movements. The losses incurred will be keenly felt by investment houses that manage the superannuation of millions of ordinary people.
There is no doubt that the computer and the systems it controls has emerged as a weapon of war. It can be used to cripple an opposing country's military defence systems and throw all forms of commerce into total disarray. Government sponsored hackers work to improve their skills and practice by invading the communications and commercial networks of target nations. The " spy game " has developed into a move and counter move to protect the functions of commerce and government.
Here in Australia, a 24 year old hacker was caught breaking into a government website and unlawfully modifying data. That offence carries a maximum twelve years gaol term - and it will be interesting to see how seriously a court treats a hacking case if he is convicted at trial.
It is thought that this hacker is a member of an organization named Lulzsec, composed of freelance hackers who are part of the international " Anonymous " hacking syndicate that carries out audacious hacking raids in support of it's agenda to implement social change.
It seems that our way of life is vulnerable to attacks on the very systems that deliver the benefits that computers and the communications age has bestowed on the world. Each year our reliance on the computer reaches new bounds. It is a worrying thought that if any nation's computer system was shut down by an attack by another country - or a very clever malignant individual - the victim country would be plunged back into the dark ages.
Unfortunately, that is a risk that we must take. There is simply no alternative !
Thursday, 25 April 2013
Populate - or perish !
We have just ticked over to twenty-three million people who call Australia home. That will spark an interesting debate between people who think we must continue to grow our numbers and those who think we are already over populated. Entrepreneur Dick Smith claims that our present population exceeds the capacity of this country to host even the present numbers.
When the second world war engulfed Australia we were a perilously small number of people living in a vast continent. At the end of that war, the motto " Populate or perish " was in the ascendancy and we opened our doors to the people wishing to exit the devastation that was Europe. Looking back now, this was a successful melding of many cultures, religions and languages. The original settlers from that time are now in their twilight years, but their children - and their children's children - are unmistakably - Australian !
Those wishing to lock Australia into a no further growth culture would be wise to expand their thinking and view the world scene. Planet earth has over seven billion people calling it home, and that number is rising steadily with little sign of change to come. There is another portend for the future happening on our doorstep. War - religious intolerance - shortage of food and shelter - and a host of other grievances has the tribes of planet Earth on the move. We call them " refugees " They cross national borders like a plague of locusts - looking for food and shelter - and survival !
Our reputation precedes us. This is " the Lucky country ". This is where the people live the " good life " - and it has become the Mecca for those prepared to sell everything to pay people smugglers for their journey here. Some drown along the way. Some are looted and murdered by pirates. Those that arrive are not greeted with enthusiasm - and many are turned away after their circumstances are investigated.
We are a country that successfully absorbs people of different cultures and melds them into what it takes to be " Australian " ! If we managed to stop our numbers growing by reducing both our birth rate and our acceptance of new settlers, we would contract into the dangerous statistic of a small population occupying a huge land mass - in a vastly overpopulated world.
Further down the track it would be inevitable that the need for living space would see our borders face an unstoppable inflow of desperate people, far beyond our ability to absorb into our Australian culture. It would be the culture of these invaders that would prevail, simply because they would eventually outnumber us.
It is one of the laws of nature that this " nature abhors a vacuum ". We would be creating that vacuum if we were stupid enough to think we could isolate the Australian continent from the expansion needs of a world whose numbers are spinning out of control.
The only way Australia can survive and maintain it's present culture is to steadily increase it's population by absorbing a stream of new settlers and do what we do best - have them distance themselves from their former life and embrace the Australian culture.
To do otherwise, is to ignore that " Populate or perish " warning !
When the second world war engulfed Australia we were a perilously small number of people living in a vast continent. At the end of that war, the motto " Populate or perish " was in the ascendancy and we opened our doors to the people wishing to exit the devastation that was Europe. Looking back now, this was a successful melding of many cultures, religions and languages. The original settlers from that time are now in their twilight years, but their children - and their children's children - are unmistakably - Australian !
Those wishing to lock Australia into a no further growth culture would be wise to expand their thinking and view the world scene. Planet earth has over seven billion people calling it home, and that number is rising steadily with little sign of change to come. There is another portend for the future happening on our doorstep. War - religious intolerance - shortage of food and shelter - and a host of other grievances has the tribes of planet Earth on the move. We call them " refugees " They cross national borders like a plague of locusts - looking for food and shelter - and survival !
Our reputation precedes us. This is " the Lucky country ". This is where the people live the " good life " - and it has become the Mecca for those prepared to sell everything to pay people smugglers for their journey here. Some drown along the way. Some are looted and murdered by pirates. Those that arrive are not greeted with enthusiasm - and many are turned away after their circumstances are investigated.
We are a country that successfully absorbs people of different cultures and melds them into what it takes to be " Australian " ! If we managed to stop our numbers growing by reducing both our birth rate and our acceptance of new settlers, we would contract into the dangerous statistic of a small population occupying a huge land mass - in a vastly overpopulated world.
Further down the track it would be inevitable that the need for living space would see our borders face an unstoppable inflow of desperate people, far beyond our ability to absorb into our Australian culture. It would be the culture of these invaders that would prevail, simply because they would eventually outnumber us.
It is one of the laws of nature that this " nature abhors a vacuum ". We would be creating that vacuum if we were stupid enough to think we could isolate the Australian continent from the expansion needs of a world whose numbers are spinning out of control.
The only way Australia can survive and maintain it's present culture is to steadily increase it's population by absorbing a stream of new settlers and do what we do best - have them distance themselves from their former life and embrace the Australian culture.
To do otherwise, is to ignore that " Populate or perish " warning !
Wednesday, 24 April 2013
Incentives !
No doubt a plan put in place by the ANZ bank to reward it's top performers with a luxury trip to Disneyland will bring a spray of protest from those members of the public who disagree with incentives for merit. Those will be the same people who disagree that employees who use their brains to deliver a better service to customers are worth more money than drones who contribute little.
In particular, the ANZ bank will stir the ire of many because it has just announced a profit of $ 1.53 billion for the past three months trading, and because of that some people think that profits should be redirected into lowering interest rates.
This tends to miss the point of why banks like ANZ exist. They are a public institution which is owned by ordinary people by way of buying shares. Profits are distributed by paying dividends to the holders of those shares, but trading in shares is also a risky business. Share prices rise and fall at the whim of the market - and that dividend depends on the level of prosperity achieved. It is the objective of the bank to make as much profit as possible to satisfy it's shareholders.
Within the banking structure, reward is needed to focus attention on refining the services offered and creating new areas of trading to enhance profits. It is inevitable that some employees will have outstanding aptitude to these tasks, and they will become prime targets for poaching by rival trading organizations. It is essential if the organization is to continue to expand that talented staff be retained and wise management ensures that rewards are commensurate with the value of those employees.
That brings salaries into the equation. The best and brightest deserve more money that those who contribute less to the company, but it is also wise to look beyond mere money and remember that exemplary service also infringes on family time and quality of life. The wise ensure that this is catered for in the reward package.
ANZ bank has selected it's best and brightest - and their spouses - to fly with Qantas for a four night trip to the United States - with all expenses paid. This will cost $ 11,000 per couple and will include a day at Disneyland. The group will be drawn from fourteen countries - and thirty-five of them will be Australian.
While this rewards ANZ people for their outstanding contribution to excellent trading results, it also delivers a reward to the bank. It creates a bond to discourage key employees from offering their services on the general market and leaving the bank. It recognises that a happy family environment plays a big part in worker satisfaction.
The grumbles from the public are the usual pangs of jealousy from workers who contribute little to the advancement of their employer. That old adage that " you need to give - to receive " holds true. Bringing interest rates into the question is simply a furphy. The events that govern interest rates are deep and complex, and governed by a host of external factors.
Love them - or hate them ! There is a lot to be thankful for when we see evidence that one of our key financial pillars has the good sense to guard it's trove of most valued employees - with adequate incentives.
The economy may look grim - but at least some of our national institutions are in good hands !
In particular, the ANZ bank will stir the ire of many because it has just announced a profit of $ 1.53 billion for the past three months trading, and because of that some people think that profits should be redirected into lowering interest rates.
This tends to miss the point of why banks like ANZ exist. They are a public institution which is owned by ordinary people by way of buying shares. Profits are distributed by paying dividends to the holders of those shares, but trading in shares is also a risky business. Share prices rise and fall at the whim of the market - and that dividend depends on the level of prosperity achieved. It is the objective of the bank to make as much profit as possible to satisfy it's shareholders.
Within the banking structure, reward is needed to focus attention on refining the services offered and creating new areas of trading to enhance profits. It is inevitable that some employees will have outstanding aptitude to these tasks, and they will become prime targets for poaching by rival trading organizations. It is essential if the organization is to continue to expand that talented staff be retained and wise management ensures that rewards are commensurate with the value of those employees.
That brings salaries into the equation. The best and brightest deserve more money that those who contribute less to the company, but it is also wise to look beyond mere money and remember that exemplary service also infringes on family time and quality of life. The wise ensure that this is catered for in the reward package.
ANZ bank has selected it's best and brightest - and their spouses - to fly with Qantas for a four night trip to the United States - with all expenses paid. This will cost $ 11,000 per couple and will include a day at Disneyland. The group will be drawn from fourteen countries - and thirty-five of them will be Australian.
While this rewards ANZ people for their outstanding contribution to excellent trading results, it also delivers a reward to the bank. It creates a bond to discourage key employees from offering their services on the general market and leaving the bank. It recognises that a happy family environment plays a big part in worker satisfaction.
The grumbles from the public are the usual pangs of jealousy from workers who contribute little to the advancement of their employer. That old adage that " you need to give - to receive " holds true. Bringing interest rates into the question is simply a furphy. The events that govern interest rates are deep and complex, and governed by a host of external factors.
Love them - or hate them ! There is a lot to be thankful for when we see evidence that one of our key financial pillars has the good sense to guard it's trove of most valued employees - with adequate incentives.
The economy may look grim - but at least some of our national institutions are in good hands !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)