Local Government structure reform method proposal (post constitution reform)

(A) According to the Federal Electoral District of the House of Representative, divide the territory of the Commonwealth into multiple Districts

(B) Modify the Districts, by

1. Splitting Districts that are larger then 3000km2 in area size, into multiple Districts smaller then 3000km2

2. Combining multiple Districts that are smaller than 500km2 in area size, into a District that is larger then 500km2 in area size

3. Continue to modify via such method, until, each Districts are smaller than 3000km2 in area size and larger than 500km2 in area size.

(C) Combine New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and Tasmania into The State of "Eastern Australia"

(D) Combine South Australia, Western Australia and Northern Territory into The State of "Central and Western Australia"

(E) Territory of

1. New South Wales divided into that of "Outer New South Wales Province" (Eastern Districts of New South Wales") and "Inner New South Wales Province" (West and Central Districts of New South Wales)

2. Queensland divided into that of "Northern Queensland Province" (Northern Districts of Queensland) and "Southern Queensland Province" (Southern Districts of Queensland)

3. Victoria become that of "Victoria Province"

4. Tasmanian become that of "Tasmanian Province"

5. South Australia become that of "South Australia Province"

6. Western Australia become that of "Western Australia Province"

(K) Subject to each Province, multiple Districts combined together to form


the local Councils combine together to form a Town Government

Districts that

1. Qualify as Federal District, become Federal Districts

2/ Qualify as State District, become State Districts

3. Qualify as Province District, become Province Districts.

(L) Other Districts, either as a single District or multiple Districts combine, become a Town or County.

(M) If any territory is to become a Federal District

1. The percentage of resource of New South Wales that is to become that of Eastern Australia, should meet the percentage of population of New South Wales that is to become that of Eastern Australia

2. The percentage of resource of New South Wales that is to become that of a Federal District, should meet the percentage of population of New South Wales that is to become that of such Federal District

3. Same principle above should apply to Victoria, Tasmania and Queensland

4. The percentage of resource of Western Australia that is to become that of Eastern Australia, should meet the percentage of population of New South Wales that is to become that of Eastern Australia

5. The percentage of resource of Western Australia that is to become that of a Federal District, should meet the percentage of population of New South Wales that is to become that of such Federal District

6. Same principle above should apply to South Australia and Northern Territory

(N) Subject to the determination of the Federal Government, what resources of a State should be given to its Provinces and its State Districts, should be determined by the State Government.

(O) Subject to the determination of the Federal Government and State Government, what resource of a Province should be given to its Province District, should be determined by the Province Government.

(P) For each Federal District, State District and Province District, one local council (ideally elected by the people of the District) should be upgraded to become the government of the District

The other councils should be split into the government of the Sub Districts and Special Sub Districts.

(Q) Subject to the determination of the Federal Government and the State it belongs to and the Province it belongs to,

The government of such Federal District, State District and Province District, should determine what level of resource of the councils, should belong to the District government and what level of resources of the councils should belong to the Sub District or Special Sub District government.

(R) According to the existing suburb structuring and the rule of the constitution,

1. the Town, County and Special Sub District government, can combine multiple suburbs into that of one suburb council and split a single suburbs into that of multiple suburb council, shire council or regional council

2. and the Sub District government, can advice the District government, in regards to combine multiple suburbs into that of one suburb council and split a single suburbs into that of multiple suburb council (because Sub District government, according to this constitution reform, got no legislative authority)

(S) The Suburb Council, Shire Council or Regional Council government can advice the Special Sub District, Sub District, Town or County, in regards to how to divide territory of such Council in that of Neighbourhood Committee (Because Suburb Council, Shire Council and Regional Council, according to this constitution reform, got no legislative authority)

Sub District government can transmit those recommendation to the District government (because Sub District government, according to this constitution reform got no legislative authority)

Conversation with people who disapprove of our policy proposal #1 (James Baker)

James Baker says: Sure, the tax cuts would just kill government revenue, leading to a reduction in government services, leading to a higher financial burden on the people, either through higher costs of living or through tax hikes to compensate or a reduction in taxes in these areas. For what? Tax rates aren't why we don't have a manufacturing base, so lowering them won't bring manufacturing back, nor would they have any real impact on the agriculture sector nor telecommunications/transportation. Corporations have already admitted the planned tax cuts won't go into hiring more people. There's also no evidence to suggest otherwise. Australia already has trade deals with many of these countries, though they use the British East india as an example, ignoring they pretty much used either slaves outright or indentured servitude, not exactly a fruitful exercise in the modern world. On top of that, it still resulted in concentration of wealth at the top. Their solution to unemployment is to give them a loan, as though that will give them a job. This does nothing to address the lack of jobs, particularly jobs that provide a living wage (as opposed to one that just puts them into poverty). More people with more money from stable long term jobs that pay above poverty rates is what will boost our economy and this does nothing to address that (nor do any of the other policies). This is a borderline libertarian policy and reads like it came from the IPA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U made some good points. But here are the counter argument

[Sure, the tax cuts would just kill government revenue, leading to a reduction in government services, leading to a higher financial burden on the people, either through higher costs of living or through tax hikes to compensate or a reduction in taxes in these areas. For what? ]

High tax rate is good for the short run, but bad for the long run. Low tax rate is bad for the short run, but good for the long run. Think of it this way, if people get wealthier, wouldn't it mean, the government become wealthier also? For example, if the tax rate is 50%, a business that make $100 in profit, need to pay $50 in tax, leaving him only $50 to use for his business. But if the tax rate is 10%, that same business that make $100 in profit, need only pay %10 in tax, leaving him only $90 to use for his business. It allow him to better strengthen and expend his business. Also, as a small business owner, I know the important of having financial reserves, for your business. When you are running a business shit happens, in some years, we might even be lossing money, having more finance, allow those business to survive such recession. So, low tax rate, allow business to strengthen during era of better finance and allow them to have a better chance to survive a recession. That is why, most countries, keep tax rate, as low as possible. With the recession economy today, businesses are all trying to do more with less and it is much harder to try to make a business work, with very little money, then with lots of money. For example, image trying to keep a business alive, when the tax rate is 100% percent.

Thus, decrease tax rate is bad for the short run, as it lead to decrease in tax revenue, but it is good for the long run, as it help to strengthen businesses or help them to better survive a recession, thus, help avoid a decrease in job rate and regain the tax revenue, intitally lost, due to tax decrease.

Increase tax rate, is good for the short run, but bad for the long run. It allow government, to provide more services or to maintain the level of service, they currently have, but, it leads to, heavier burden on businesses, with lesser money, it make it harder for businesses to grow stronger and make it harder for them to survive a recession, thus, they are less likely to create more jobs and more likely to do cut back or fail. Which is exactly what is happening in Australia right now. Australia did survive the global economic crisis, under the leadership of Kevin Rudd, it is when Juliet Gillard started introducing the carbon tax, where things start going bad and since then, there was continue of increase tax rate, to maintain government service, but sucking businesses dry, resulting in a lack of resource, leading to business cut back, leading to lost of jobs and leading to lack of B2B trade, which further lead to cut back and lost of jobs, leading to people making cut back, leading to fewer B2P revenue and so on.

in regards to the fact that it would kill government revenue, it would for certain be an issue in the short run and could lead to reduce in government service in the short run. This is why, there is a limitation of how much tax cut, can afford to be given and such tax cut must be strategically given in an arena that would provide long term, positive return, for example, I would not recommend giving this tax cut to the mining industry, due to, the industry is currently dying, due to Ausstralia running low on coal  and countries such as China, are now mining their own resources. (in fact I have spoken to number of homeless people, many of them are miners, which never thought they would get laid off and are not prepared for it.) The manufacturing and agriculture industry on the other hand proven to be promising.

As a result, it is also not recommended for transportation, manufacturing and agriculture tax cut, to all take place within a period of a year, instead, over a period of time e.g. 3 years~ 5 years. Thus e.g. By 1st year give tax cut to transportation, by 3rd year give tax cut to agriculture too, by 5th year give tax cut to manufacturing too or 1st year give tax cut to transportation too, by 2nd year give tax cut to agriculture too and by 3rd year give tax cut to manufacturing too.

As for the fear of compensating for the lack of revenue, the government can substitute it for decrease in wasteful spending. For example, stop providing churches with millions of dollars per year, could save down much money. Replace unemployment benefit with unemployment loan can also saved down some money, due to people now need to repay the government for the money. As for [leading to a higher financial burden on the people, either through higher costs of living or through tax hikes to compensate or a reduction in taxes in these areas] giving people "higher financial burden through higher cost of living or through tax hikes, to compensate or a reduction in taxes in these area" might not be necessary and if it is not necessary, don't do it. In addition, part of those compensation tax can be taken from industry we don't want or need and can do better without, for example adding tax to the cigarette industry and gambling industry. In addition the point of strategically tax decrease's point also is, to cut as many tax as possible, without having to rise tax in other arena or only rise tax in arena, we don't want or need (e.g. cigarette industry and gambling industry.)

[Tax rates aren't why we don't have a manufacturing base, so lowering them won't bring manufacturing back, nor would they have any real impact on the agriculture sector nor telecommunications/transportation. Corporations have already admitted the planned tax cuts won't go into hiring more people. There's also no evidence to suggest otherwise.]

Lowering tax could help to bring some manufacturing back. This has been evidence in the US, where, when Donald Trump increase import tax on foreign manufacture good, has led, many US company, decide to take some of its manufacturing back into US, due to it is cheaper. The same principle, decrease manufacturing cost in Australia, would also mean, some manufacturing, would become cheaper in Australia, then oversea, thus, encourage foreign and domestic manufacturing back into Australia.

As for transportation industry, it is about trying to get the transportation industry into a price war. We see it between Colse and Woolworth all the time, where both company try to lower their prices as much as possible, to win over customer, from the other. The whole purpose of transportation tax decrease, is to try encourage the transportation companies to lower their prices, to beat the other in a price war. After tax cut, they would have more profit after tax, allowing them, to decrease their price further, in a price war. This price cut, would not necessary benefit the transporation industry, but it would benefit all other industry, that have transportation need.

Usually, the best way of reviving a bad economy, is through infastructure, but that is only if, the infastructure created, is able to have lasting positive effect. Wrong infastructure would be counter productive. While our Grand parent's generation (WW2 gen) have the intelligent to know the right infastructure to make, their children's generation the baby boomers, has proven themself, not competent in leadership role, due to this generation got an unusually high ratio of over arrogant people, as a result, they are less likely to listen to expert advice and more likely to under estimate the difficulty of the situation, leading to bad decisions. Our generation, knows better to make that same mistake our parents make, but, it does not necessary mean, we have the same level of intelligence to our grand parent's generation, and the next best thing, to spending money in infastructure development, to revive economy, is to give as much strategic tax cut, we can afford to give, in arenas that would benefit the country in the long run, without increasing tax rate in other arena, (except industry that we don't want and need, such as gambling industry and cigarate industry)

In regards to agriculture industry, Australia has traditionally proven to be a strong agriculture industry nation, in recent years, this industry suffered, due to focus on mining industry. Now, this mining industry is dying, but the agriculture industry has proven to be promising. What we want is to strengthen this industry, by allowing them to have more money, just like how Australia use to give money to the mining industry. However, in Australia current cripple economic state, Australia cannot afford to give too much money to the agriculture industry, this is especially consider some businesses fail, due to its own ill policy, funding should be given to businesses that is proven promising to succeed, but how are we suppose to know which business would succeed? Thus, the next best thing, is to give tax cut. Therefore, Australia won't be wasting tax payer money, funding fail businesses and the other businesses can better servive recession and/or to grow strong.

Of course, agriculture industry might instead of having more money, thus, growing stronger or better survive a recession, it is also possible they enter a price war instead, but, if they enter a price war, it helps to lower the cost of food, thus, a win for the Australia consumers, also. Thus, either way, people win.

[Australia already has trade deals with many of these countries, though they use the British East india as an example, ignoring they pretty much used either slaves outright or indentured servitude, not exactly a fruitful exercise in the modern world. On top of that, it still resulted in concentration of wealth at the top.]

The problem with British East India is that, they don't really have much understanding towards trade. After the fall of Roman Empire and rise of Christianity, most knwoledge of the western world is lost, this is due to according to the teaching of the bible education is a sin, as the bible claim everything not from Christ to be demonic things from Satan. After the Age of Enlightenment, the western world regain much of the knowledge, but many of those knowledge are passed to the west from either the Arabs or Asians, rather then original research (at least within the 1st 100 years of age of enlightenment) for example modern western medicine, are in fact, Arabic medicine and the Arabic world remain as the leader of this school of medicine till the fall of Ottoman Empire in 1919. Traditional international trade company, focus is usually with small businesses. For example, in 17th century China, the only big businesses was professional international trade company, agriculture and manufacturing are all small businesses. What happen is that these international trade company know the international demand and the demand of each region of China. What these traders do, is to fulfil the demand, they search for Chinese agriculture and manufacturing small businesses that make the product, the small businesses sign a contract with these trader big businesses, where they sell goods to these big businesses and then, the traders sell the goods to other countries. For example, during the 17th and 18th century, China was the international largest supplier of china, tea, sugar and medicine. The Arabs use to do the exact same thing, their traders via road and via sea, do the exact same thing as the Chinese.

It is this sort of trade company that is ideal for Australia to model after. For example, India and Australia trade co-operation, India is highly over populated and cannot produce enough food, Australia on the other hand produce lots of food, thus, can fulfil at least some of that India demand, India due to much cheap labor cost, can help produce cheap labor goods, such as clothing, which Australia need, due to its insane cost of living. So, Australia India trade co-operation, a company co created by Australia and India government can purchase huge quantity of Australia agriculture goods, to be sold in India and purchase huge quantity of India cheap labor goods e.g. clothing, to be sold in Australia.

Take a further example, Australia Taiwan Trade Co-operation and Australia Japan Trade Co-operation, Australia is in need of much more hospital care than it can afford to give right now, frequently, not even enough hospital bed and for some reason, this seem to be a problem nearly every western countries are facing today. On the other hand, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea's health care has proven to be better then Australia and most western countries, but is only at a fraction of the price, to western nations. While many western people believe, the western world is still the leader in western medicine (the political correct term should be "Arabic medicine"), in reality, these three countries has already surpassed the west. This is due to unlike the west that only got western medicine, Asia got both western and eastern medicine. Eastern medicine is just as good as western medicine, although both school of medicine have its strength and weaknesses (for example, a while ago, I got months of pain in my feet, I went to number of western medicine doctors, but they can't figure what is going on, I went to an Eastern medicine doctor, after only 2 weeks, my feet is fine. But in arenas such as optometry, eastern medicine is hopeless and I only trust western medicine for it.) After mastering western medicine, the Japanese, Taiwanese and South Koreans, combined these 2 school of medicine to compensate each other, in term of both medicine treatment and medical research. The end result, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, is still the leader in Eastern medicine and they have also replace the west, as the leader of western medicine. For example a few years ago, there was a massive explosion in Taiwan, during the opening of a theme park, leaving up to hundred injured (and not just explosion, it was a special effect instrument malfunction resulting in further complication e.g. buring toxic absorb into victim's lungs, resulting in the lungs been cooked, while inside their body.) Base on the experience of western hospitals, most western medical associations, estimate up to 50% of the injured victim would die, base on their cost and medical skills, but in Taiwan, 100% of the injured victim, made a full recovery within 6 months, something that surprised every western nations.

For the past 10 years, one of Taiwan and Japan's export involve allowing foreigners (including westerners) to come to their country, to recieve medical treatments, due to having way more hospital beds and supply then needed, thus, they can provide many foreigners with world class treatment, at a price a fraction to their nations and make a lot of money, as a result

On the other hand, Australia own lots of foreign debt, up to 20% is own to China. But China themselves own a great deal of foreign debt, they own Taiwan and Japan, more foreign debt, above all other nations. The Taiwanese and Japanese are currently very angry at China, because the Chinese are not repaying the foreign debt they own to their nation, but the Chinese some how, is still borrowing money to Australia, US and some other nations, while owning Taiwan and Japan a truck load of foreign debt.

So, image this, Australia Taiwan Trade Co-operation and Australia Japan Trade Co-operation, working with Australia, Japan and Taiwan hospital, to let Taiwan and Japan, to take on cases Australia is not able to resolve and to help relieve some of Australia's over burden hospital system, the Japanese and Taiwanese can make a lot of money, from Australians going there to recieve medical care. In exchange, the Taiwanese and Japanese government can purchase some of the foreign debt Australia own to China. As a result, it would be, as if, China repay Taiwan and Japan, for those money, China own to them and Australia would own a bit lesser foreign debt.

[Their solution to unemployment is to give them a loan, as though that will give them a job. This does nothing to address the lack of jobs, particularly jobs that provide a living wage]

This policy is not about giving them loan, but replacing unemployment benefit with unemployment loan.

Currently, Australia provide unemployment benefit to those who are looking for a job, but don't have a job, some, might be unemploy for years. Unemployment benefit is basically, the government giving these people money, as a gift. But, by Australia's current economically fragille state, it cannot afford to give away much money as gift. So, if we replace unemployment benefit, with unemployment loan, what that mean is, these people after getting a job, still need to repay the government, for the money they own.


It is more affordable for the government, to borrow unemploy people money and have them repay the government, when they get a job (kind of like university student loan from government), then for the government, to give unemploy people money as a gift, which is what the government is currecntly doing.

11. A more strict rule for Australians adopting foreign children and strategically allow selected foreign nations to adopt Australian children

Currently, in the western world, there are more people that want to adopt Asian and Black babies, then the number that is actually available for adoption, while on the other hand, nobody wants to adopt white babies, resulting in great burden for the child welfare of western nations.

The issue of children in need of adoption, in the none western world, is highly over exaggerated, especially in term of Asia and the Middle East, usually by Christian groups. In fact, many western countries, got an issue of children in need of adoption that is way worse then many none western nations. For example, in Russia 1/4 children is living on the streets. However, most western nations does not allow foreign adoption and some due to the influence of racist people, only allow western nations to adopt children from their nation, but due to nobody westerners wanting to adopt, white babies and people from none western nations, who are interest in adopting white babies, but western nations, usually, does not allowed those from none western countries, to adopt children from their countries, most of these children would spend their life in foster care and be a burden on child welfare until they turn 16.

There are three main type of people that desire to adopt none western children.

1. Those who are been misled by racist and/or Christian society, in regards to the issue of the number of none western children that need adoption. As a result, wanting to help
2. Racist people, who wanting to feel superior
3. People who felt by adopting foreign, they can better as if get a child that is fully their own.

Western adoption agencies is currently making much money, via the adoption process of none western children, sometime, even holding baby auctions. And even then, currently, 1/10 none western children been adopted by western family, are in fact stolen babies, who are not in need of adoption, they are stolen by human trafficking from happy homes, to be smuggle into western nations and sold to child adoption agency, which would again make money, via western parents who pay the adoption agency to adopt a none western baby. More none western first world countries, are now making it harder for western countries to adopt children from their countries, due to these issues. Sometime these issues of stolen babies, can become really blizzard, for example, look at the video below

A lot of racist people generally believe "white race is the master race", the reason they believe "white race is the master race" is due to, by believing in it, it make their pride feel good. People who are losers are more likely to believe in this concept, due to they have little or no accomplishment of their own to feel proud of and they believe in it so much, they will ignore everything that undermine the believe/ By adopting a child that is none white, it can help to enhance their believe of been the master race and more often then less, those who are adopted by racist people, also become victim of child abuse and later, become a burden upon the child welfare system of western nations e.g. take a look at the video below

Country such as the US, has in recent years, also been starting to make it harder for Americans to adopt foreign children. 

Thus, there should be a policy change, to allow more Australian children be adopted to ease the burden on child welfare and lesser foreign adoptions, to avoid the issue of over populated Australia, these include

1. Australia should only allow foreign adoptions, if they have been trying to adopt Australian children for three years and is not able to do so. To do so, 

a. People who are Australian citizens, are not able to sponsor for adopted children who are not Australian citizens, to come to Australia, unless. they have been trying to adopt a child that is an Australian citizen for at least three years or they have already adopted an child that is an Australian citizen, for at least three years. For each adopted child to be sponsor to come to Australia, such Australia citizen, must have also adopted a child that is an Australian citizen for at least three years or have been trying to adopt a child that is an Australian citizen for a period of three years

People who are not Australian citizen, are not able to sponsor for their adopted children who are not Australian citizen, to come to Australia, regardless of circumstances

b. Allowing selected none western countries to adopt, Australian children, the reason we select none western countries, is due to, like Australia, most western countries only want to adopt children that is not white.

But Australian policy must also prevent unethical adoption of Australian children, thus, for a person who is not an Australian citizen to adopt a child that is under the custody of the State,

1. If the child got citizenship to a nation other then Australia, Australia can allow people from that nation to adopt the child.

2. If the child got citizenship to a nation other then Australia and is not an Australian citizen, he/she should be return to the other nation upon request and if he/she is an Australian citizen, he/she should be return to that nation, if he/she wants to.

3. Australia can allow people from a few selected none western nation, to adopt Australian children that is under custody of the State, but firstly, they must be somebody who currently live in Australia, via some form of visa and must go through the same process to adopt an Australian child, as to those who are Australian citizens, in addition, children who are under custody of the State, must be categorize as temporary under the custody of the Commonwealth and permanently under the custody of the Commonwealth. Children such as those who are lost and missing and the State cannot find who their parents are, are categorized as temporary under the custody of the Commonwealth, thus, they are not eligible to be adopted by those who are not Australian citizens (and when adopted by an Australian citizen, it is also temporary adoption, till the child's real parents can be found), unless the State continue not able to find the parents of the child for a period of five years, then, the child will become permanently under the custody of the Commonwealth and will be eligible to be adopted by those who are not Australian citizens.

In addition, until the child turn 16, Australia law does not allow the child to abandon his/her Australian citizenship, thus, Australian government, can continue to watch over these children, in case of issues such as child abuse.

4. Apart from those who are currently living in Australia via various form of visa, allow citizens of five none western countries to adopt Australian children, who are permanently under the custody of the Commonwealth, (recommend, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Japan and South Africa) but they must come to Australia and go through the same adoption process as Australian citizens adopting Australian children.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

10. Encourage people to migrate out of Australia, rather then migrating in

Australia is currently over populated, over populated as in

(1) Too many people, but not enough jobs
(2) Too many people, but not enough goods.

Too many people, but not enough goods, helps to drive up the cost of goods, basic economic principle dictate that,

1. When the goods are low in supply but high in demand: Worth of good goes up.
2. When the goods are high in supply but low in demand: Worth of good goes down

Thus, decreasing the population of Australia can

(1) helps to decrease unemployment rate and
(2) might help to decrease the cost of living.

To do so, Australia should
(1) stop encouraging people to migrate into Australia and
(2) encourage people to migrate out of Australia

To discourage people to migrate into Australia via
1. Moving into Australia should be limited to
a. Working visa
b. student visa
c. investment visa
d. spouse visa
e. tourist visa
f. biological or adopted parent of an Australia citizen
g. biological children (under the age of 16) of Australian citizens.

Currently, Australia allow any children of Australian citizens to come to Australia. The end result is, usually, when people from 2nd or 3rd world country come to Australia, via working visa or student visa and become a citizen, they would either

1. first sponsor their parents and spouse would sponsor their parents, which would sponsor any of their children (including middle age adult children), which would then sponsor their spouse, which would then sponsor their parents and so on and/or
2. sponsor their spouse, which would then sponsor their parents, which would then sponsor any of their children (including middle age adult children), which would then sponsor their spouse, which would then sponsor their spouse, which would then sponsor their parents and son on.

People from first world country, usually would not conduct mass migration into Australia vis such method, due to, most of them, who came here come via working or student visa and then decided to become an Australian citizen, after they become fluent in the language and settle in here, due to liking Australia very much or their country allows dual citizenship, but usually with the exception of their spouse, most of their children or parents, would have little or no interest in coming, due to it is moving to a new country they know nothing about and it take time for immigrants to get use to and settle into a new country, especially if they don't speak the language, can be difficult, in the early year and consider they are also from 1st world country, coming to Australia does not give them a better life. For example, most Taiwanese that come to Australia via been sponsor as a child who is an Australian citizen or been sponsor as a child of somebody who is in Australia with a student or working visa, are children or young teenagers, thus, it wasn't their decision to come, it is just like, kids who moved to live in a new city, when their parents get a new job there.

But those who came to Australia from 2nd or 3rd world country, they would all want to come to Australia, even if settle into a new country can be difficult, due to they can have a better life here (although, in recent year, due to Australia is quickly on its way to become a 2nd world country, most people from 2nd world country, are loosing interest in moving to Australia, but those from 3rd world country, still want to move into Australia via such mass migration, through spouse, children and parent sponsorship)

As a result, it mean, Australia is taking in way more immigrant then it can afford to take in. In country such as Japan and Taiwan, they only allow parents to sponsor children that is under the age of sixteen, thus, this same problem that is happening in Australia does not happen in Taiwan and Japan.

On the other hand, Australia should start encouraging people to migrate out of Australia, via, allowing those who are Australian citizen by birth to have dual citizenship. Currently, Australia only allow those who are Australian citizen by naturalized to have dual citizenship, but those who are Australian citizen by birth, must give up their Australian citizenship, if they want to become the citizen of another nation.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

9. Cut funding to churches by 50% per year, for the next 10 years and no further funding to churches after year 10

A lot of devoted Christians might not like hearing this but the fact is, funding Christian churches is a waste of money. Not only is funding the Christian church unnecessary, but real Christianity, is not even a good religion. Lots of people criticized Islam to be a bad religion, base on the action of Taliban and ISIS, but real Christianity, is a pretty bad religion. For example, take a look at the following passages of the bible.

And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul, but that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman. (Chronicles 15:12~13)

"And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire." (Leviticus 21:9)

Radical biblical teaching of such, is the main reason, why during Roman era, Christianity was been suppressed and it was in fact a suppression of Christian fanatics, not all Christians. The only reason Christianity became mainstream, is due to it was forced upon people, when Emperor Constancy became the Emperor and wanted to use Christianity, to secure his own power, by making himself the pope. 

Since the Age of Enlightenment, there has been attempts after attempts to reform Christianity, but, no matter how much we reform the religion, we cannot change the bible itself and till date there are still many Christian radicals causing problem and if given the opportunity would become a Christian version of ISIS and Taliban. 

Even amount those who come from, a none radical Christian background, can become a radical Christian. For example, Pastor Steven Anderson, who preach the mass murder of gays.

Religion is for spiritual fulfilment only and in hard time like this, funding spiritual fulfilment is wasteful spending, especially if it is funding a problematic religion, which after reforming for so many times, since the age of enlightenment in the 17th century, is still causing trouble. 

The same money that is been used to fund churches, would be better spend else where.

Religion continues its free ride without our blessing (ABC News Online)

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

8. Replace unemployment benefit, with unemployment loan

Former US Secretary of State and one of the founding father of the US Benjamin Franklin once said "A Penny save is a penny earned"

Australia is currently financially desperate and every penny count. More and more Australians are now living on the streets, due to social welfare not having enough money, to help people, who are financially in trouble, leading to an increase homeless rate in Australia.

Thus, a policy that could help to resolve the problem, is to replace unemployment benefit, with unemployment loan. So, the social welfare borrow the money, to those who are unemployed and after they get a job, they pay the government back, via taking a small percentage of their salary, while they are paying their taxes. The percentage of salary the government take, depend on their income. Somebody with low income salary the government only take (e.g. 1% of their salary), somebody with high salary the government take (e.g. 20% of their salary) Somebody with middle income salary the government take (10% of their salary).

Then, the money they return to the government, the government can again borrow those money to other people in need of social welfare support and if one day, things in Australia improve to the extend where the money returned to the government, is more then social welfare needed, the extra money can be used elsewhere.

It is likely, the government will not be able to get back all of the money it borrowed, but been able to get back only a percentage of the money, is still better then, nothing, especially considering the circumstances.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

7. No export tax for the exporting of Australian agriculture products

Australia got an extremely strong agriculture industry, due to its long term build foundation and to be a country with a great deal of fertile lands.

Australia is already the second largest food exporter in the world, it would be a great idea to further expend on that to make Australia agriculture industry more competitive in the international market, by allowing exporting of Australian agriculture goods, come with no export tax, to make them more price compatible in the international market.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

6. Australia government work with foreign nations to create fair trade co-operation to induce trade (Indonesia, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India, Singapore and New Zealand)

Prior to the 20th century, professional traders play an important role, in the economy, due to the difficulty of travel. In ancient days, professional traders, trade from one place to another. They will buy goods that district B need but don't produce, from district A to be sold in district B, then they will buy goods district C need but don't produce, from district B to be sold in district C, then they will buy goods district A need but don't produce, from district C to be sold in district A.

Some of these professional trader within the country, others travel internationally. In ancient China and Persia, there are domestic traders, that travel from cities to cities for their entire life. Then there are international traders, they travel between nations, in the beginning, they travel via the silk road, from China, Persia, India, Egypt and Rome. Then, after the fall of Rome and rise of Islam, via the water route, they travel between Japan, China, South Asia, India, Middle East and East Africa and via land route also to Egypt, some record also show, they travel along the west coast of America.

After the Age of Enlightenment the Europeans rejoin this international trade, after been absent for 1000 years since the fall of Rome. With companies such as British East India Company, whose sole duty is to sell European goods to the world, to fulfil foreign demand and purchase foreign goods that Europe need, to fulfil Europe's demand.

Since the 20th century, with the increase of globalization, professional international trade companies, has started to disappear, due to businesses are now conducting foreign trades them self. But professional international trade companies, are still capable of doing international trade better, due to having

1. A better understanding of the market need, each country need
2. A better understanding of what Australia got to offer each foreign nation
3. A better understanding of what this foreign nation got to offer Australia
4. A better understanding to the culture of that nations, thus, better know how to market a product in that country (for example, during the middle ages, Arabic traders, draw the Christian cross onto the compass they purchased in Asia to be sold in Europe, due to in then Europe, people think compass use the magic of the devil, thus, the product was originally struggling to be sold in Europe, Arabic traders knowing about then western culture, know of what marketing strategy to overcome it. The Chinese, not knowing of such western culture, would struggle to sell the product to Europe, directly.)

Thus, this article propose the idea to induce fair trade between Australia and selected nations in our own Asia Pacific region, by working in partnership with their government to create a fair trade co-operation. These include

1. Australia Indonesia Trade Co-Operation, (with an office in Australia and an office in Indonesia): Indonesia is one of Australia's closest neighbour and with a population of 2 million, it is a large market.

2. Australia Japan Trade Co-Operation (with an office in Australia and an office in Japan)

3. Australia Korea(South Korea) Trade Co-Operation (with an office in Australia and an office in South Korea)

4. Australia Chinese Taipei (Taiwan) Trade Co-Operation (with an office in Australia and an office in Taiwan)

Japan, Taiwan and South Korea is the three most powerful free countries of the Asia/Pacific region and are industrial and economic power houses, Australia on the the other hand, got a weak manufacturing industry, but a strong agriculture industry.

5. Australia India Trade Co-Operation (with an office in Australia and an office in India), India is a highly over populated country with a high demand of agriculture goods and is capable of producing many cheap labor goods.

6. Australia Singapore Trade Co-Operation (with an office in Australia and an office in Singapore): Singapore is the wealthiest country per capital in all of Asia Pacific region, despite having a small population

7. Australia New Zealand Trade Co-Operation (with an office in Australia and an office in New Zealand) Despite New Zealand might not have much to offer Australia in trade, as the only other English speaking country in the Asia Pacific region, the ease of communication and similar culture, also make them an ideal trade partner.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

5. Allowing foreign universities to join Australia universities for Australian students.

Currently, the cost of university tuition fee in Australia, is literally insane, costing up to $4000.00 per subject in some university. Making it difficult to be afforded by some families.

But, unlike Australia, which have one of the highest cost of living in the world, there are many countries that have universities that is just as prestigious, some even more prestigious then Australia, but the cost of university tuition fee in those countries is at a fraction of the price, comparing to Australia. For example Taiwan university is consider as just as prestigious as Australia's University of New South Wales, by the international education community, but for arts degree, which is the cheapest, it is only $1570.00 Australian dollar per subject (according to google currency converter on 24th May 2018) and for med school, which is the most expensive it is only $2124.05 per subject (according to google currency converter on 24th May 2018) Thus, even if they charge Australian students more money per subject, e.g. $2000.00 Australian dollar per subject, it still cost only half to Australian university, which can be as high as $4000.00 per subject.

Currently, the UAI board of Australia only include Australia universities, so, high school graduates can only attend Australian university. But some foreign nations, for example Taiwan, currently can afford to take in more students into their universities, then needed. In Taiwan currently, it got 100% acceptance for local students and that is even after taking in a huge quantity of international students. As a result, chances are, might be willing to sign a treaty with Australia, to reserve 10% of their seats within each university for Australian student and for Australia to let their universities to also hold seats within Australian UAI board.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

Policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy

Australia has for the past 10 years been on its way to become a 2nd world country. The 10 policy below are some idea that might help to revive Australia economy or at least slow down the deterioration or make things a bit easier for the people

1. Strategic tax cut to transportation and communication industry (Click here for details)

2. Strengthen Australia manufacture industry via 50% Tax cut to manufacture industry. (Click here for details)

3. Strengthen Australia agriculture industry via 50% Tax cut to agriculture industry (Click here for detail)

4. Child care for children age 4 and above in primary school (Click here for details)

5. Allowing foreign universities to join Australia universities for Australian students. (Click here for details)

6. Australia government work with foreign nations to create fair trade co-operation to induce trade (Indonesia, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India, Singapore and New Zealand) (Click here for details)

7. No export tax for the exporting of Australian agriculture products (Click here for details)

8. Replace unemployment benefit, with unemployment loan, (but if you are over the age of 50 you don't need to repay the loan) (Click here for details)

9. Cut funding to churches by 50% per year, for the next 10 years and no further funding to churches after year 10. (Click here for detail)

10. Encourage people to migrate out of Australia, rather then migrating in, by (a) allowing Australian citizens by birth to hold dual citizenship and (b) Australian citizen sponsor family to come to Australia, should be limit to spouse, parents and children under the age of 16. (Click here for detail)

11. Confiscate assets of drug dealer and drug smuggler and exile them from Australia if they got dual citizenship, after they completed their sentence.

12. A more strict rule for Australians adopting foreign children and strategically allow selected foreign nations to adopt Australian children (Click here for detail)

13. Legalize Australian women to act as segregates (both paid and unpaid) and to sell their eggs.

Long term resolution: Reform Australia's outdated government structure

4. Child care for children age 4 and above in primary school

One of the reason, life in Australia is so difficult, is the increase cost of childcare, in a world, where the cost of living is so high, both parents working, is needed for many young families, just to live pay check to pay check.

Thus, a good idea is to find a way to decrease the cost of childcare. One of the reason cost of childcare is so high, is due to, the principle of supply and demand, a basic economic principle.

When supply is high and demand is low, the economic value of the good is low. When the supply is low and the demand is high, it become more expensive. It is why, despite water is essential, it is cheap, gold on the other hand, is not essential, but it worth a lot of money. 

Currently, the cost of child care is increasing, due to the increase demand for child care, due to more young family requiring both parent working, just to live paycheck to paycheck. But the supply of childcare, is not increasing.

However, public schools, is not a business, thus, they don't increase their cost, due to the increase demand for low supply. 

Unlike Australia, in many countries, kindergarten is not compulsory education, so not all kids attend kindergarten. But, for them kindergarten runs for 3 years, starting from 4 years old, 5 years old and 6 years old. Thus, by increasing kindergarten to start from the age of 4, but not making kindergarten compulsory means, more parents, who are sending their kids to childcare, can now, start sending their kids to public school, by the time they turn 4 years old. 

This can decrease the demand for childcare by 50%, consider, instead of kids that are 2, 3, 4 and 5 years old, needing to be send to daycare, now, only kids that are 2 and 3 years old, need to be send to childcare. 

Decreasing the demand of childcare by up to 50%, also allow decrease the cost of childcare, up to 50%.

More policies that might help to resolve Australia's economy