Obilix

Yes, of course you are right.

I just found it amusing to think that a doctor would risk his/her reputation and practicing certificate  just to please a friend/patient/relative, whereas a low grade public servant would obviously be considered more trustworthy!

Now if the task were to be given to a lawyer on the other hand ....

17 hours ago, OzKiwiJJ said:

Which neatly stops people going to a shonky GP to get an exemption.

Of course, if you know a shonky junior clerk at the Immunisation Registry, you might still be OK.

Oh, and valet parking expenses.

22 minutes ago, mr walker said:

Yes, never really considered law when at school & became a scientist... cost myself a lot of  money I guess 🙂

 

Have a long-time friend who is our lawyer. Last year we met with him re possible move into a over 55's place. He gave us some advice as friends and basically left the legal aspects aside. We got a 'mate's rates' bill for $880 😮 Should have invited him to dinner at the most expensive restaurant in town & had a chat - would've been much cheaper!

I don't think so Mr. Walker.

You would have additionally been charged travelling time to and from the restaurant and home, plus  motor vehicle kilometrage,  fee on accepting your call to make the invitation, fee on consulting with his wife as to their availability to accept, fee on letter confirming his acceptance,  and fees on his conversation with you at $600 per hour (plus GST).

Not to mention postage and petties.

You got off cheap.

30 minutes ago, MMDown Under said:

   

Until recent time married women's names were Mrs John Smith.  Royal invitations are still written that way. 

I'll have to check some of the more recent ones I received to check on that ....

What does "fully vaccinated" mean?

Will Australians over 50 years of age, whom the Government insists be vaccinated with Astra Zeneca, because they signed up and paid for it before it was recognised as a dud, be accepted to travel in the rest of the world, which has largely rejected the AZ  vaccine?

Will Australians of "cruising and travelling age" actually be allowed to cruise and travel because our government backed the wrong horse?

What a mess!!

29 minutes ago, Aus Traveller said:

I agree that it should not be compulsory to get a jab, however, I believe it is essential that vaccination should be required before people (pax and crew) board a cruise ship.

Or a plane, or a train, or a bus, or a taxi, or a shop, or a theatre, or .....

The Commonwealth health care card is available to self funded retirees who earn less than $55,000 (single) or $89,000 (couple) as NSWP states, and is indexed, so these limits increase annually (minimally, but still).

While eligibility is income tested, it is not asset tested. However, the value of your assets is taken into account (except for your home) and you are deemed to have an income from those assets set at 0.25 percent on the first $88,000 and 2.25 percent for the balance.

So far I understand it. But let's say you have a commercial property valued at $1,000,000. Aside from the income from this source, your other income from (say) a trust fund or an annuity, amounts to  $29,000 pa.

Your rental income from your commercial property is $40,000 pa, which is greater than the deeming amount, which works out to be $20,740.

So, if Centrelink add together your actual income, your income is $69,000 ($29,000 + $40,000) and you are over the $55,000 cut off, but if they calculate it on your deemed income it is $49,740 ($29,000 + $20,740) and you are eligible for the Card.

Does anyone know how they work it? I suspect that the deeming route would be less attractive to the Government than the monies received route, in these circumstances!

I've read the Govt, bumph on this, but this question isn't specifically addressed, as far as I can see

Just an update on my passport application saga.

After calming down yesterday, I asked my better half (an office administrator in a previous life) to print out the form again for me. 

Same result. 1cm margin on top of page, 4 cm margin at the bottom. Our conclusion: probably a settings glitch in our computer, or possibly a formatting problem in the proforma which no far queue clerk has picked up on before.

After some skillful manipulations with the photocopier, my wonderful wife came up with a copy which had approximate margins of 2.5 cm top and bottom.

I returned today to visit my favourite clerk at my favourite Post office, who eyed me suspiciously (good memories these clerks), inspected the form minutely, especially the top and bottom  margins, and eventually broke out in  smile of approval. Or at least her pursed lips parted ever so slightly.

Within 5 minutes I was photographed (I suspect a copy was retained for the post office dark ops file), had signed the application, was given a receipt for payment and was on my way, with a promise that I would have the passport in 3 - 4 weeks.

I even thanked her, such was my sense of gratitude.

I chose my words carefully Aus Taveller!

So I need to renew my passport by the end of the year. Done it before, easy peasy.

I go to the Passport Office. website.

Apparently, to renew online I have to open an account. Why do I need an account? Do they think I'm likely to order a truckload of passports ,on an ongoing basis? Nothing else for it though. 

So I press the link to open an account.

Before I can open an account however, I have to click an acceptance that they are free to do whatever they want with my personal particulars. What, am I now a greater risk than I was before, when I periodically applied for my last four or five passports over the past four decades?

No other option, click the acceptance or apply for a brand new passport (not just a renewal) with all the additional paperwork involved. And by the way, I'd still have to provide them with a click of acceptance. Otherwise I have to attend personally at a passport office, where no doubt I'd have to sign my acceptance anyway.

Nothing else for it. I click the bloody acceptance and pleasurably spend the next 20 minutes filling in the form with the same information that they already have on me. Only inexplicably, they require me to provide it twice on the same form.

Done. Now I am told to print out the form and take it to the Post Office, presumably for verification that I am who I say I am, and for them to take photos of me for the passport. Why Do I have to take my photographic requirements to Australia Post? Even our Prime Minister doesn't trust them! And why can't the verification required not be provided by some qualified professional, as it was in the past, and I can then post the documents to the Passport Office? Surely not to just make Australia Post more lucrative to a prospective purchaser when they privatise it? Surely?

Anyway, dutifully I trot off to Australia Post with my completed form, having abandoned forever my right to privacy.

I wait in line for 15 minutes enjoying the spats taking place between a harassed mum and her voluble offspring in front of me, until I arrive at the counter. There I'm told I'm in the wrong queue. and to go to the far queue.

Eventually, you'll all be pleased to know, I'm attended to by the far queue clerk.

She examines the form, glances at my still current passport, and tells me she cannot accept the form because the last line of the form must be no more than 2.5 cms above the bottom of the page upon which it is printed. Furthermore, I can't have my photo taken until I return with the form in correct format.

Now none of this was mentioned on the Application form or on the Passport Office webpage.

I Gather my documents, seething, go to the nearby chemist, and photocopy the printed form. making sure the last line was the beaurocratically desirable distance from the bottom of the page.

With a triumphant yet steely gleam in my eye I return to the post office, wait in the far queue, and finally slap my documentation on the counter.

"Oh no" she says, "I can't accept this, the first line has to be no less than 2.5 cm from the top of the paper."

I went home and wrote this. 

We're bored out of our skulls without cruising, aren't we?

I was sardonically suggesting that if he had people to ring, it is those people who should be primarily extending the hand of charity to him.

Though the fact is of course, that they obviously haven't, hence his turning to strangers.

I can't understand why  he sees the need to bother with them anymore, in these circumstances.

On 1/8/2021 at 1:18 PM, By The Bay said:

So heart warming to hear that Bondy is being looked after by the considerate people in the block.😘

I wonder if the numerous relatives and friends he rings on his mobile phone appreciate your kindness in allowing him to charge his phone at your expense ....

I've only very occasionally visited this site since Covid 19 has wreaked its havoc on cruising, but tonight has been on of those times.

May I be indulged to the extent of making some observations?

 As a non pejorative stereotype, cruisers on this site are  often older citizens, often retired or facing or considering retirement, financially in reasonably good shape in respect of their accumulated assets, but concerned about the continuity of their income streams, and politically conservative, but measured in their views.

The expression of mild political opinions here in the past has been reluctantly tolerated, but not approved, and anyone strident in their views has been sternly reprimanded by some of the other members, and had their comments removed by the moderators, presumably as a result of complaints.

This is not necessarily a bad thing; after all this is a forum primarily for people anticipating the enjoyment of cruising  and exchanging cruising information and suggestions, and there are any number of dedicated sites where political commentary is welcomed..

But this thread has been a revelation to me. The views expressed have been openly political, have been directed against a particular side of politics, have been fairly strongly supported by other members, there has been no crying foul over what has been posted, and no moderation (that I have perceived in any event).

Now I am in agreement with most of the commentary in this thread, and I am not complaining at all, but I do wonder , what has changed in our community, in our demographic, and in our psyche for the above changes to have occurred? Or am I reading too much into this, too late at night?

You guys are going stir crazy with this Covid thingy.

Ever considered going on a cruise?

1 hour ago, Blackduck59 said:

 

So what you are saying is that while I'm driving on the wrong side of the road in an unfamiliar car I should be a calm cool and collected Canadian. But should I crash the car then act like an American and blame the other guy.

By Jove, Professor Higgins, he's got it!

I suggest a bex, a cup of tea, a good lie down, and a dose of reality is called for from some posters here. 

Dungeness crab ....  mmmmmm ....

.

Don't you hate it when you muck up a post?

Just now, Obilix said:

Now, I know that when people refer to their spouse on web sites they often call them OH, meaning "better half". or "other half'.

 

But when someone refers to their male partner as DH, it conjures my imagination ....

Now, I know that when people refer to their spouse on web sites they often call them OH, meaning "better half".

But when someone refers to their male partner as DH, it conjures my imagination ....

One man's Leghorn is Reg Ansett's old boiler.

In January this year my wife and I were having early discussions about the possibility of cruising from  New York to LA  (or vice versa) via the Panama Canal.

Got as far as googling what was available, but couldn't pin anything down for when we were considering travel, about May 2021. Put off further consideration until later this year, because of the paucity of information.

Now, between Covid, the decimation of our super by 25% (at least), and the suspension of our modest rental income because of Covid, it ain't gonna happen until a while later.

Edit: 25% is actually 2.5 x decimation, isn't it?

I must acknowledge that I was a lot more hopeful a week or two ago that this would blow over in two or three months.

I haven't been following this thread too closely, but here's my take on things.

Cruise lines will be suffering, and some may go bust, but their ships will still be there.

Someone else will buy them, rename them, sanitise them, refurbish them, change their country of registration, and open for business as soon as it is practical and financially viable to do so.

Australia has had a huge appetite for cruising, and I doubt that will change. The ships will return with the same itineraries as before, with some variations and additions, in order to exploit this battered but lucrative and cashed up market. Travel agents will be back in business to earn their cut.

We are all wary, careful and concerned at this time. Many of us (most?) are on the elderly and most at risk side of the Covid equation..But the vast majority of us, including the elderly, will survive it, that's a promise.

A new form of normalcy will return, and we will continue our lives, including our cruising activities.

In the initial stages of recovery I expect there will be travel bargains to be had, and hopefully I will take advantage of them.

Take care, and see you on the other side.