Interestingly, said son was quite able to buy his home with some help from Dad (company as well?), just so long as the loan didn’t have to be mortgage insured. The lender involved – one of the Big Four – simply turned a blind eye to the Visa restriction and applied a little commercial commonsense. Technically, the lender broke a federal law which requires non-permanent residents to obtain Foreign Investment Review Board approval for the purchase. FIRB were never consulted.

It’s a perverse bureaucratic system we operate under.

2. As a Blues supporter in Origin, yes the referee did give the opposition a lot of unnecessary help and perpetrated a double standard in his decisions. That is the worst adjudication of rugby league I have seen since the International Judiciary didn’t suspend Nigel Vagana for his dirty high tackle in a match a few years ago.

I like Kosolapov’s title better because it’s ambiguous. Which one is which?

No need to keep this comment for posterity unless you think the spelling is of inherent interest.

If some people care enough about getting treatment faster, then they will pay extra money for that service, just as they will pay extra for having their own rooms etc. What I would object to is paying higher (private) health insurance to obtain access to more expensive procedures and drugs. Those are not things you choose simply because they seem like a good thing to have: they’re something you need when you have rare and difficult medical conditions: i.e., not a matter of personal volition.

Did anyone watch the quite good doco on SBS the other night comparing various healthcare systems around the world?

Charles Livingstone, senior lecturer in the Department of Health Science at Monash University, says that what private health insurance does is help people jump the queue, as Howard government advertising highlighted. It does this by paying practitioners more in the private system, and exploiting the differential created between public sector rates of remuneration and those on offer in the private sector

So in order to stop queue jumping we should:

1. Prevent people from seeking treatment outside medicare etc. through laws? And if we impose laws should the patient along with the doctor receive a fine, a jail sentence or just one of the potential lawbreakers?

2. Should we impose a restrictions on doctors not seeing patients outside the system and if they do should we impose harsh sanctions? Jail, fine , both?

3. Should we impose a law on Australian seeking medical treatment outside the country as that should also be considered line jumping and if so how would it be policed? Should all overseas travelers maintain a travel diary that clearly shows where they were at any particular time. Would the diary run the risk of audit?

These are fair questions to ask if we’re to prevent “line jumpers” getting unfair advantage by paying for their treatment. So has Gary considered any of these questions?