Search

New report reveals huge amount of super needed to retire

Australians will need nearly $600,000 in their superannuation to retire comfortably, according to a new report. The Association of Superannuation Funds (ASFA) Retirement Standard report found that home-owning singles would need $595,000 to retire at 67 with a “comfortable” lifestyle, while a home-owning couple in relatively good health would need $690,000. This means that home-owning couples would need $73,337 per year while home-owning singles would need $52,085 for a comfortable lifestyle. Their analysis also found that for a more modest lifestyle, a superannuation balance of $100,000 is needed for both singles or couples. Both budgets assume the retirees own their homes and are relatively healthy. On Wednesday, financial commentator Betsy Westcott told Sunrise that Aussies needed to start thinking about retirement earlier to make the most of their savings. “The longer that you contribute to super and pay attention it to it, the less you have to do to create that really golden retirement because age is your superpower,” Westcott said. “If you’re not paying attention to your super, which, let’s be honest, most of us aren’t, you could be missing out on some really big gains (to the overall balance).” She added that most people retired closer to 65 than 67 and ended up with a lot less superannuation than the benchmark. While the ASFA retirement standard took into account “everyday spending,” Wescott said it did not factor in expenses like helping children buy a home, or buying into a retirement village. She also stressed that these benchmarks were just a guide saying: "Personal finance is just that, it is personal.” “Your idea of a golden retirement will look different to your neighbour’s, your cousin’s, your best friend’s." Image: Shutterstock

Retirement Life

The extraordinary amount the I'm A Celebrity contestants are paid

Each year, an array of reality stars, sporting legends and international names head into the South African jungle, fighting for the chance to emerge victorious. At the end of each season of I'm A Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here when the winner is crowned, their prize is revealed as a huge cash donation to a charity of their choice. Despite the celebs not taking anything home for winning, that doesn't mean they walk away from the jungle empty handed, as each of the celebrities are paid a hefty salary for their appearance on the show. As season 10 of the show premiered on Monday, season two winner Brendan ‘Fev’ Fevola spoke candidly about the salaries and explained that you get more money the longer you stay in the jungle. “In 2015 I got paid $250,000 upfront, and then $5,000 every show after the [first] two weeks,” he said on The Fox’s Fifi, Fev & Nick on Monday. “So you’d lay there on a Sunday and you’d think, ‘There’s another 7 days, there’s $35,000, boom. Hopefully, they don’t have an eviction during the week’.” According to <a href="https://www.pedestrian.tv/entertainment/how-much-im-a-celebrity-pay-australia/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener" data-i13n="cpos:6;pos:1" data-ylk="slk:Pedestrian;cpos:6;pos:1;elm:context_link;itc:0;sec:content-canvas" data-rapid_p="13" data-v9y="1">Pedestrian</a>, one of this year’s male celebrities is being paid $90,000 for a minimum of two weeks in the jungle and will receive an extra $5,500 every day following that they don't get evicted. The publication also asked a handful of 2024 contestants directly about their pay cheques, with reality star Callum Hole revealing that he was paid “good money” and “a lot more than Love Island”. Despite Hole's claims, influencer and former Big Brother star Skye Wheatley said money wasn’t her motivation for going on the show and she would actually be earning more if she stayed home. “I’d do it for free,” she said. “It’s for charity, babes, who gives a f**k about the money. I love that it can be for charity and I love the opportunity. So I’m very grateful.” Former MasterChef contestant Khanh Ong revealed that he had been asked to head into the jungle several times, and this year he was offered “a considerable amount more” than the first time he was asked. Image credits: Network 10

The shocking amount of compensation awarded to the Abdallah family

The Abdallah family have been awarded a tiny amount of compensation, four years after the deaths of three young kids. In February 2020, Samuel William Davidson was driving in the Sydney suburb of Oatlands when he struck a group of four kids, killing Abdallah children Antony, 13, Angelina, 12 and Sienna Abdallah, 9, and their cousin Veronique Sakr, 11. Now, four years on, father Danny and mother Leila have won a payout from Davidson totalling a mere $90,000. The NSW District Court ordering Davidson pay $60,000, plus costs, to Abdallah's three surviving children, Liana, Alex and Michael. Mr Abdallah sued Mr Davidson last year seeking payment for ongoing trauma to Liana, who was injured but survived the catastrophic accident, and his sons who suffered the psychological trauma of losing their siblings. The court order, obtained by <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13234123/Abdallah-family-compensation-Oatlands-crash.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daily Mail Australia</a>, said that the net sum for three children was to be paid to the NSW Trustee and Guardian for investment until each of them turns 18 years old. Following the deadly crash, Samuel William Davidson, who was under the influence of alcohol and drugs at the time of the incident, was sentenced in 2021 to 28 years' jail with a non-parole period of 21 years, which was reduced on appeal last year to a maximum of 20 years with a minimum of 15 years. Mr Abdallah's court action against Davidson, who will be in prison until at least 2035, is believed to have been lodged against the driver's insurance company which will make the payout. Image credits: Facebook

Legal

Should you be worried about the amount of coffee or tea you drink?

Before you reach for that cup of coffee or tea, have you ever thought about whether that caffeinated beverage is <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/body-and-mind/debunks-vices-coffee-caffeine/">good or bad for you</a>? <iframe title="Vices: Is coffee good or bad for you?" src="https://omny.fm/shows/debunks/vices-is-coffee-good-or-bad-for-you/embed?style=Cover" width="100%" height="180" frameborder="0"></iframe> Most of us will drink coffee or tea each day. It helps keep us alert, especially in a world of the nine-to-five grind. Some workers rely on caffeine to get them through shift work and night shifts. Many, like me, would just collapse in a heap if it weren’t for that liquid black gold to keep us peppy in the morning. <h2 class="wp-block-heading">What is caffeine?</h2> To get a better picture of how coffee or tea affects us, let’s examine the active ingredient: <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/podcast/huh-science-explained-stirring-the-science-of-caffeine/">caffeine</a>. Caffeine is a <a href="https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/healthyliving/caffeine" target="_blank" rel="noopener">drug</a>. It’s a white, odourless substance known to chemists as 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine and is made up of 8 carbon, 10 hydrogen, 4 nitrogen and 2 oxygen atoms. Caffeine occurs naturally in coffee beans, cocoa beans, kola nuts, and tea leaves. It is an adenosine antagonist, blocking the A1, A2A, and A2B receptors in the brain and body to promote wakefulness. Normally, adenosine (a chemical compound with a similar 3D structure to caffeine) binds to its receptors, slowing neural activity and making you sleepy. When caffeine, instead, binds to the receptors, adenosine is blocked and brain activity speeds up, making you feel more alert. <h2 class="wp-block-heading">History lesson</h2> Tea and coffee are the most common way for humans to get their caffeine fix. Drinks made using coffee beans date back more than a thousand years to the coffee forests of the horn of Africa. Legend says that, around 800 CE, an Ethiopian goat herder named Kaldi noticed his goats were energetic and didn’t sleep when they ate the coffee beans. Coffee then spread eastward to the Arabian Peninsula, reaching Yemen in the 15th century, and Egypt, Syria, Persia and Turkey in the 1500s. From their it made it to Europe and eventually the whole world. But caffeine is also present in other beverages like tea, cola and even some foods like chocolate. <h2 class="wp-block-heading">Is it bad for you?</h2> Given how prevalent the drug is, are there negative side effects we should be worried about? For one thing, it is an addictive substance. And the more you drink, the more you need. “Our body tends to adjust to a new level of consumption,” Kitty Pham, a PhD candidate at the University of South Australia and expert in nutritional and genetic epidemiology, tells Cosmos. “Your body does develop a tolerance to the caffeine. So, you start to need to drink more and more to feel the same effect as before.” Caffeine can also act as an anxiogenic – a substance that can trigger heightened levels of anxiety. Pham notes some risks associated with too much caffeine consumption over a long period of time. “Greater than 6 cups per day, we did see an increase in dementia risk,” she notes. “There’s also some research on how it might increase your cholesterol. There’s a substance in coffee called cafestol that can regulate your blood cholesterol. If you’re drinking too much coffee, it might be increasing your cholesterol. So, there are risks, but often they are at really high consumption.” <h2 class="wp-block-heading">What’s the limit?</h2> So, how much caffeine is too much according to science? “That’s, the million-dollar question, isn’t it?” Pham laughs. “There’s a lot of varying research on it. It’s hard to tell a definite limit. But generally, most studies really agree that one to two cups of coffee, or an equivalent of 100 to 200 milligrams of caffeine is safe and okay.” The average cup of coffee has about 100 mg of caffeine. On average, instant coffee with one teaspoon of powder contains about 70 mg of caffeine, while a coffee pod has 60–90 mg. Other drinks containing might have even more caffeine, making it important to monitor your consumption more carefully. A 355 mL can of Red Bull energy drink has more than 110 mg of caffeine. Meanwhile, an average bar of dark chocolate has about 70 mg of caffeine. Many people are moving away from coffee to drinks like tea and matcha which may have <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/flavonoids-black-tea/">additional</a> <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/tea-drinkers-may-well-live-longer/">health</a> <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/black-tea-mortality-risk/">benefits</a>. A 100-gram cup of black tea has only about 20 mg of caffeine, while matcha can have 140–170 mg of caffeine! “Looking at the US, they usually recommend less than 400 milligrams. So overall, moderation and keeping your consumption to one to two cups – that’s what I’d recommend.” Now that I’ve written about caffeine, I think I need another cuppa. It’s only my second of the day, I swear. Image credits: Getty Images <div> <h3><a href="https://link.cosmosmagazine.com/JQ4R"><noscript data-spai="1"><img decoding="async" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-198773" src="https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/spai/ret_img/cosmosmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Apple-Podcasts.svg" data-spai-egr="1" alt="Subscribe to our podcasts" width="300" height="54" title="should you be worried about the amount of coffee or tea you drink? 2"></noscript></a><a href="https://link.cosmosmagazine.com/JQ4U"><noscript data-spai="1"><img decoding="async" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-198773" src="https://cdn.shortpixel.ai/spai/ret_img/cosmosmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Spotify.svg" data-spai-egr="1" alt="Subscribe to our podcasts" width="300" height="54" title="should you be worried about the amount of coffee or tea you drink? 3"></noscript></a></h3> </div>  <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/health/body-and-mind/coffee-tea-caffeine-debunks/">This article</a> was originally published on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com">Cosmos Magazine</a> and was written by <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/contributor/evrim-yazgin/">Evrim Yazgin</a>.

Body

"Worth it": Insane amount woman spends to clone dead cat

Kelly Anderson from Texas, US was devastated when she lost her "soulmate" cat Chai more than four years ago. Not long after, in what she calls "fate", Anderson decided to clone her beloved pet, a process which cost her a whopping $USD25,000 ($AUD38,000). "It was just one of those moments where I had been talking about cloning a few weeks before and fate kicked in," she told Weekend Today. "I remembered the conversation and decided to clone." The process took about four years, which is roughly twice the average time it takes to clone a pet. "It was not money that I had come easily to me but it was a very important process for me to do," she said. "It was 100 per cent worth it. The process saved my life." Anderson added that Belle, the successfully cloned cat, has grown to be as "bold, bossy, sassy" as Chai, and their personalities have become more alike. Despite the similarities, Anderson said that she doesn't set any expectations on Belle to be Chai's replacement. "I would still say she's very much her own cat and I treat her that way. I always try to treat them as individuals. "I never wanted to put expectations on Belle to be Chai. But I would say that they're very similar in a lot of ways." According to <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60924936" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BBC</a>, the process itself involves extracting DNA from the pet to be cloned, then injecting that into a donor egg that has had its genetic material removed. The egg then grows into an embryo before being implanted into a surrogate mother, who then gives birth to the kitten. Pet cloning has become an increasingly popular practice, , despite how controversial and expensive it is, with celebrities like Barbra Streisand and Simon Cowell using the process to clone their own beloved pets. Anderson, who decided to document her story on social media added that people have mixed reactions to the process. "I think there's people who are fascinated and don't even realise that we're cloning animals ... so a lot of people are learning about cloning," she said. "But a lot of people also have opinions. So it's a mixed bag." Images: Weekend Today

Money & Banking

Shocking amount Australia's richest people earn per hour

Three of Australia's richest people — Gina Rinehart, Andrew Forrest and Harry Triguboff — have more than doubled their wealth since 2020, according to the charity Oxfam. A report from the charity published on Monday, found that the fortune of Australia's richest people doubled at a staggering rate of $1.5 million per hour. The report also found that the total wealth of the country’s billionaires increased by $120 billion in that same period, which is over 70 per cent. Tech tycoons Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos, are among the top five richest men worldwide, with the report finding that it would take them 476 years to spend all of their wealth if they spent $1.5 million daily. The global wealth of billionaires grew three times faster than the inflation rate, and they are $4.9 trillion richer today than they were in 2020, despite nearly five billion people worldwide growing poorer. According to the Australian Council of Social Services, one in eight adults are living in poverty, earning half of the median household income which ranges from $489 a week for a single adult to $1,027 for a couple with two kids. The report was released to raise concern over the growing global inequality, as they urge the federal government to reduce the wealth gap by scrapping the stage three tax cuts coming into effect on July 1. The tax cuts will lower marginal tax rates for high-earning Australians. Oxfam Australia chief executive Lyn Morgain has urged governments to step up. “We cannot accept a society that promotes the gross accumulation of wealth alongside widespread global poverty,” she said. “One of the best mechanisms we have to address this is progressive taxation. “The shame of our woeful global response to catastrophic disasters, displacement, famine and the climate crisis cannot be attributed to a scarcity of resources, it is distribution — and that’s a problem all governments, including the Australian government, need to tackle urgently.” Oxfam have also called for a wealth tax on the world's millionaires and billionaires that it claims could bring in $2.7 trillion each year. The report also called to cap CEO pay and break up private monopolies, which have gained significant power thanks to surging stock prices. Images: Getty

Money & Banking

The staggering amount of young Aussies giving up on home owning dreams

New research has determined that most young people and middle-income earners in Australia have completely given up on ever owning their own home. The <a href="https://www.smh.com.au" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Sydney Morning Herald</a> questioned over 1600 people in their Resolve Political Monitor poll, and found that two-thirds of the respondents agreed that young Aussies will never be able to buy a home. From respondents who do not currently own a home, 63 percent of low-income earners and 54 percent of those on middle incomes thought they will never purchase their own home. Housing affordability has long been an issue in Australia, with the recent housing crisis further pushing property prices out of reach for many. Even for those who do own homes in Australia, which has one of the world's most expensive property markets, many are battling continual increases on mortgage repayments after a string of interest rate rises. These extortionate increases have only added to the difficulty of younger Australians trying to break onto the property market. This harsh realisation comes without also taking into consideration the ongoing cost of living crisis, which is continually making all aspects of life more expensive. Resolve director Jim Reed said high house prices and rents meant younger people were impacted by not buying, and also facing pressure if they did manage to purchase a home. “They are buggered if they do and buggered if they don't," he said. "My researchers in this area tell me that many young people have simply given up on the dream of owning a home, at least in their early careers, and some are even telling me that they are giving up on having a family because they can't afford to look after themselves, let alone more mouths." Image credits: Getty Images

Real Estate

What does a conductor actually do? A surprising amount

At the age of three, I remember jumping on my parent’s sofa, waving my arms in the air conducting a record of <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Pirates-of-Penzance">Gilbert and Sullivans Pirates of Penzance</a>. Last week, my four-year-old son was doing the same thing, only to the soundtrack of Disney’s Frozen. “What are you doing?” I said. “I am being you, Daddy,” he replied as he continued directing his imaginary orchestra. I felt a heartstring pluck and I remembered as a child getting excited at the music and just letting my arms wave and wiggle. Fifty years later I do it for real. But what conductors actually do can be a bit of a mystery. It’s a misconception that the sole purpose of a conductor is to wave their arms around <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_yIn8V3UcU">while the musicians follow</a>. Yes, the animation signifies the speed and placement of a beat of music, but have you seen any two conductors wave their arms around in the same way? In most cases, their work takes place well before an audience sees them on the concert platform. <h2>Physical communication</h2> A conductor is a translator visualising their interpretation of little black dots on a page into an audible delight. Yes, they hold their musicians together on the day, but their primary importance is to feed an interpretation to the musicians, encouraging them to communicate a melodic and rhythmic message to the best of their capabilities. A conductor works at different levels ranging from educational, amateur and professional situations with different genres such as choral, orchestral, opera and musical. In all categories standards, styles and techniques vary, so the job is challenging, often requiring a unique and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diwV2HGKerE">eccentric approach</a>. A good conductor has a bag of tricks (developed through experience) to call upon for any musical situation. For example, the proximity between my hands influences volume. The closer my hands are together, the softer I want the choir to be, the larger the distance, the louder the sound. Primarily we are communicators, both verbal and physical. Conductors need to form a relationship with their musicians: trust, skill and leadership are essential. The physical becomes important when verbal is not possible (when the audience is present and in earshot). This is when the arm waving comes into play. The movement in the left hand signifies dynamics, emotion and expression while the right hand is mainly used to signify speed and beat. Conductors have unique styles and skills. Watch <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo45uRKIA8w">Igor Stravinsky</a>conduct and you will see how he keeps an exact beat, very rigid and solid with no emotion. He allows the musicians emotional control but leads the very difficult rhythmic timing, speeds and beat. He is a human metronome. <h2>Unique styles</h2> A conductor is also an educator. It is our job to coach musicians in the accuracy of music. You would think it’s an easier job when working with professionals than youngsters, but interpretation can lead to disagreements. Sometimes the music is incredibly difficult, sometimes musicians might not be prepared, so a degree of diplomacy is required to get the effect the conductor is after. Or, if you are Bernstein – arguably one of the greatest composers and conductors of the 20th century – nothing less than excellence is good enough and no diplomatic communication is possible. There is a famous excerpt that demonstrates the tension between Bernstein and the young tenor soloist Jose Carreras through rehearsals for the recording of Westside Story. It’s awkward and at times cringe worthy. They are both trying to create perfection. You can see communication and passion expressed through Bernstein’s face and then Carreras’ frustration at not being able to deliver the level of precision required. Conductors can seem to be the most <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkMEK7u0fAI">stubborn of breeds</a>. The late Romanian conductor <a href="https://theviolinchannel.com/sergiu-celibidache-played-by-actor-in-upcoming-film/">Sergiu Celibidache</a> is well known for his refusal to have his music recorded, believing it should only be heard in the concert hall. His determined attitude towards the orchestras he worked with was infamous, displaying strong views on and off the concert platform. However, his techniques worked and he is now seen as one of the greatest conductors of the 20th century. Conductors’ interpretations are different, every performance is unique. Each has developed a unique style to get the desired effect. The American conductor <a href="https://www.proscenium.at/kuenstler/joseph_olefirowicz_en.php">Joseph R. Olefirowicz</a> is known for his genius abilities and methods to deliver his interpretations. There’s an awful lot more going on than just arm waving, as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJU0lC3iHaY">demonstrated in the beautiful clip above</a> of him conducting Candide. His unique and comic personality combined with his facial expressions convey his interpretation of the music to the orchestra who can’t help being infected by his charisma. You can see he keeps time with his body, not just his arms. Unfortunately, the audience rarely sees what he is doing as his back is to the auditorium. In comparison, British-German conductor <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbPmED_Xwn0">Simon Rattle</a> takes a much more relaxed body style to Candide, but the emotion he wants to convey is translated through facial expression and flowing arm movements. So, if you’re thinking about taking up the baton and waving those arms around, reflect on the weeks of rehearsals that get to the point of performance. Consider the months of planning to organise such a mass of people to perform and fill an auditorium. Finally, contemplate the years of practice undertaken by singers, musicians and the figure at the front, flapping their arms around, and that’s what a conductor does. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared in <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-does-a-conductor-actually-do-a-surprising-amount-195988" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Music

The exact amount Aussies need to save for a comfortable retirement

A confronting new financial survey has revealed how much money Australians need to save annually in order to have a comfortable retirement. The survey, conducted by financial planner Merit Planning, concluded that the average Aussie may need to save around $75,000 to $100,000 per year to have enough funds to retire. And while superannuation is a major asset on the path towards retirement, the fund you invest with may not be giving you the full picture of where your money is going. New analysis by Market Forces revealed several major super funds are potentially misleading consumers by “greenwashing”, with eight of the 11 super fund investment options labelled “sustainable” or “socially responsible”, choosing to invest in fossil fuel giants. Both issues have cast light on major problems the average Aussie will face going forward as inflation and cost of living prices continue to surge. Merit Planning’s survey took hundreds of responses from retirees about their retirement experience, showing how big their nest egg will need to be for the years ahead. Almost half of respondents, or 42 per cent, said between $75,000 and $100,000 is needed, while about 20 per cent said the average person needs over $100,000 a year. Only 6 per cent of respondents said the age pension level of around $40,000 per year was enough to retire with. Financial planner Darren Howard said the average couple in Sydney would need to earn about $85,000 per annum combined to retire comfortably given the ongoing cost of living crisis. Craig McDonald, owner of CBM Mortgages, said: “We speak to all our clients about their retirement and their superannuation position and how that will look when they enter into retirement. “We recommend they speak to a financial planner to ensure they are putting those steps in place early.” Image credits: Getty Images

Retirement Income

Don’t look Up! has a surprising amount to tell us about economics, much of it useful

In the new Netflix sensation <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.netflix.com/au/title/81252357" target="_blank">Don’t Look Up</a>, two astronomers, played by Jennifer Lawrence and Leonardo Di Caprio, discover a massive comet heading towards Earth, and desperately try to warn the US president, played by Meryl Streep. Their hope is the government will take action to avert catastrophe while there is time. Their efforts are subverted by a combination of self-serving political cynicism, billionaire business interests, a media that sees its job as respecting those interests and that cynicism, and a population conditioned not to look up. It is an obvious metaphor for the threat of climate breakdown, where warnings and pleadings from climatologists and scientists and from a growing number of campaigners, ecological economists and others, are being ignored, trivialised and sometimes even ridiculed by political insiders. But after 40 years marked by the dominance of <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/neoliberalism.asp" target="_blank">neoliberal</a> pro-market economic policies, the metaphor can be extended to almost any challenge requiring a serious response, particularly where it involves standing up to vested interests. There’s more amiss than vision and courage. Public services no longer have the capacity they did to respond to problems like long-term climate change and short-term pandemics. Their administrative and decision-making capacity has been stripped away, as has the surge capacity in health systems and in many countries the ability to react to disruptions to supply chains – all in the name of efficiency, but with the effect of creating fragility while contributing to inequality and extremism. Hayek, Friedman and Buchanan got us here Neoliberalism is rooted in the work of three Chicago School economists: Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and James Buchanan. <a rel="noopener" href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/friedrich-hayek/" target="_blank">Hayek</a>, though a famous name, was probably the least influential of the three. He saw mixed economies, market-based but regulated by governments, as inevitable steps on the road to totalitarianism. <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/milton-friedman.asp" target="_blank">Friedman</a> espoused a naïve and outdated theory of money, which was no sooner adopted than abandoned in the early 1980s, but like Hayek saw freedom in low taxes and championed privatisation and deregulation. It was Friedman who argued that many people had to remain unemployed in order to suppress wages. <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.libertarianism.org/topics/james-m-buchanan" target="_blank">Buchanan</a>, like Friedman, argued that politicians and public servants could be trusted to act in in their own interests at a cost to society, and that almost anything that could be done by public servants could be done better by the private sector. In the 1980s the trio effectively took over the conservative side of politics in high-income countries. Their ideas also helped intimidate those on the other side, including the Hawke-Keating Labor government in Australia, and every Labor front bench that succeeded them. That influence persists to this day. Mazzucato, Kelton and Raworth want to get us out In her book <a rel="noopener" href="https://marianamazzucato.com/books/mission-economy" target="_blank">Mission Economy</a>, the University College London economist Marianna Mazzucato imagines a different relationship between the public and private sectors: a proactive, problem-solving government cooperating with the private sector to address, among other things, climate change and the problems and opportunities associated with a rapid transition to sustainability. This would require rebuilding public capacity and an approach to government experimentation and risk-taking not seen for 40 years. Aligned with her are modern monetary theorist Stephanie Kelton and ecological economist Kate Raworth. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/439590/original/file-20220106-27-iufaef.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/439590/original/file-20220106-27-iufaef.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> Stephanie Kelton, at Adelaide university in January 2020. John Staines Kelton’s <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/bernie-sanders-economic-adviser-has-a-message-we-might-just-need-130182" target="_blank">The Deficit Myth</a> describes how modern monetary systems work and demolishes the metaphor of the government as a household used by neoliberals to push for balanced budgets and minimalist governments. Kelton points out it is normal for governments to run deficits (Australia’s Commonwealth government <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/memories-in-1961-labor-promised-to-boost-the-deficit-to-fight-unemployment-the-promise-won-115376" target="_blank">nearly always has</a>) and that these deficits allow the private sector to avoid building up debt. Governments that create their own currencies such as America’s or Australia’s are well-placed to guide the private sector to serve a public purpose. While both Mazzucato and Kelton discuss what this means, and give examples, it is Raworth’s book that most clearly identifies the goal governments should aspire to. That book is called <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/stay-in-the-doughnut-not-the-hole-how-to-get-out-of-the-crisis-with-both-our-economy-and-environment-intact-151917" target="_blank">Doughnut Economics</a>. It sets out a framework for providing everyone with an opportunity to enjoy a secure, dignified and connected life, while respecting nine environmental planetary boundaries that are prerequisites for the maintenance of the planet. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374713/original/file-20201214-19-1wp3kad.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/374713/original/file-20201214-19-1wp3kad.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> <a rel="noopener" href="https://doughnuteconomics.org/" target="_blank" class="source">doughnuteconomics.org</a> The framework requires a shift of focus away from the goal of economic growth as defined by gross domestic product towards a set of indicators of a successful society. The indicators are similar to the UN <a rel="noopener" href="https://sdgs.un.org/goals" target="_blank">sustainable development goals</a>. Both Kelton and Raworth are members of the World Health Organization’s <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.who.int/groups/who-council-on-the-economics-of-health-for-all" target="_blank">Council on the Economics of Health for All</a>, chaired by Mazzucato. Its guiding principle is that health should be seen not only as a human right but also as an investment in continued prosperity. It is an approach that would have led, among much else, to better preparations for the long-predicted pandemic. Deficit-funded spending pays dividends With Kelton and others, including leading medical researcher Steve Robson and health economist Martin Hensher, I have discussed the implications of modern monetary theory for health in an article for the Insight magazine of the <a rel="noopener" href="https://insightplus.mja.com.au/2021/21/whos-afraid-of-the-deficit-what-it-means-for-health-care/" target="_blank">Medical Journal of Australia</a>, and in a position paper for the <a rel="noopener" href="https://iht.deakin.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/153/2021/06/IHT_Position_Paper.MMT_healthcareinAust_140621.pdf" target="_blank">Institute for Health Transformation</a> at Deakin University. As a nation, we should not have been worried by the prospect of health spending climbing above 10% of gross domestic product as it did in 2015-16, nor by the prospect of it climbing higher in future decades. We should be investing in resources including the skills, health infrastructure and technology we will need to deal with future pandemics and the consequences of climate change. On climate change, it is gradually dawning on people that the outcome of COP26 in Glasgow was not up to the challenge we face and that many countries will not even achieve what they committed themselves to at Glasgow. To a greater or lesser extent, every leader of a high-income country is failing to articulate a mission in regard to climate change, to drive that mission with the right public investments, and to locate the problems of climate change within the broader context of the planetary boundaries identified by Raworth – the most obvious of which is biodiversity. The attitude is “Don’t Look Up!”, we have got this. Or “technology will save us”, as President Orlean (Meryl Streep) believed in the movie. Few leaders any better than Streep <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/439603/original/file-20220106-15-gnu99g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/439603/original/file-20220106-15-gnu99g.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> Meryl Streep as President Orlean. Tavernise/Netflix A search by Raworth’s colleagues at the University of Leeds has failed to identify any country anywhere in the world that is providing its citizens with the social foundations for a good life while remaining inside planetary boundaries. If that was to be the definition of a developed economy, none of our economies are developed. We are either not meeting the needs of our people or exceeding the carrying capacity of our planet, or (in the case of about <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-021-00799-z" target="_blank">a third</a> of countries) doing both at once. Therein lies both a warning and a challenge; a threat and an opportunity. Our mission ought to be to meet social foundations everywhere without destroying the environment of which we are a part and on which we depend. We have an opportunity to govern differently Governments, and especially monetary sovereign governments in high income countries such as Australia, will have to lead the way. They will have to throw off the neoliberalism of Friedman, Hayek and Buchanan, and the baggage which goes with it and buy into the new economics of Kelton, Raworth, Mazzucato and their colleagues. Then we can look up, with some confidence that we can deflect the metaphorical comets that threaten the lives of millions and the quality of life for us all. The resources and the technology to do what’s needed already exist. But until now we have been trapped in an outmoded way of thinking about both the role of government and the purpose of economic activity that has held us back to the point where the comet is bearing down upon us.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/174399/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steven-hail-1302961" target="_blank">Steven Hail</a>, Adjunct Associate Professor, <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/torrens-university-australia-899" target="_blank">Torrens University Australia</a> This article is republished from <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/dont-look-up-has-a-surprising-amount-to-tell-us-about-economics-much-of-it-useful-174399" target="_blank">original article</a>. Image: Netflix

Movies

Reducing air travel by small amounts each year could level off the climate impact

Just before the pandemic, aircraft engines were burning <a href="https://www.iata.org/en/iata-repository/pressroom/fact-sheets/industry-statistics/">one billion litres</a> of fuel a day. But then the number of daily civil aviation flights fell from <a href="https://www.iata.org/en/iata-repository/pressroom/fact-sheets/industry-statistics/">110,000</a> to less than 50,000 during 2020, on average. With the easing of travel restrictions, air traffic is increasing back towards its pre-pandemic peak. Most world leaders and delegates will have flown to Glasgow to attend COP26 – the 26th annual UN climate change summit – in person. But as they haggle over emissions targets to limit global warming to 1.5°C, and not <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop26-what-would-the-world-be-like-at-3-c-of-warming-and-how-would-it-be-different-from-1-5-c-171030">3°C or more</a>, aviation is unlikely to be included in them, given the lack of low-carbon alternatives to long-haul flights. But it should be. <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac286e">In new research</a>, my colleagues and I calculated that if the aviation sector continues to grow on its present trajectory, its jet fuel consumption will have added 0.1˚C to global warming by 2050 – half of it to date, the other half in the next three decades. Aviation is responsible for 4% of the 1.2°C rise in the global mean temperature we have already experienced since the industrial revolution. Without action to reduce flights, the sector will account for 17% of the remaining 0.3°C left in the 1.5°C temperature target, and 6% of the 0.8°C left to stay within 2°C. Airlines effectively add more to global warming <a href="http://globalcarbonatlas.org/en/CO2-emissions">than most countries.</a> <h2>Warming footprints</h2> At the current rate, the world will have warmed by 2°C <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_SPM_final.pdf">within three decades</a>. To quantify how different activities contribute to warming, scientists measure carbon emissions. This is because how much the Earth warms is proportional to cumulative carbon emissions in the atmosphere. This is a very good approximation in many cases, but it is inaccurate for emissions caused by aeroplanes travelling at altitudes of up to 12 kilometres. As well as CO₂, aircraft engines emit nitrogen oxides, water vapour, sulphur and soot, causing <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04068-0">contrail cirrus clouds</a> and other complicated chemical reactions in the atmosphere. The sum of these so-called non-CO₂ effects adds more warming on top of the CO₂ emissions. So the total warming footprint of aviation is between two and three times higher than a conventional carbon footprint. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430221/original/file-20211104-21-xa7pet.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="An aeroplane's trail viewed from between two tall buildings" /> Condensation trails produced by aircraft engines contribute to global warming. <a href="https://pixabay.com/photos/architecture-skyscraper-skyline-3984725/" class="source">MichaelGaida/Pixabay</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" class="license">CC BY</a> While a large share of a flight’s CO₂ emissions remain in the atmosphere for many thousands of years, the non-CO₂ effects diminish over time, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117834">vanishing within about ten years</a>. So any growth in aviation, measured in global jet fuel consumption, has an amplified impact as both CO₂ and non-CO₂ effects add up. But a decline in aviation can partly reverse some warming, as the non-CO₂ effects disappear over time until only the CO₂ effects remain. Think of the non-CO₂ effects like a bathtub – it fills up when the taps are turned further and further, despite a slow outflow down the plughole. But the same bathtub will eventually empty if the taps are gradually turned down. The non-CO₂ effects of flights on the atmosphere will slowly disappear if fewer and fewer flights are taken, so that aviation’s contribution to warming eventually levels off. In that situation, the increase from continued CO₂ emissions would balance the fall in non-CO₂ effects, and although aviation would still contribute to climate change, the total warming from both would remain constant over time. How much would aviation need to shrink to level off its influence on global warming? Our calculations show that flying does not need to stop immediately to prevent aviation’s contribution to global warming expanding. Flying has already caused 0.04°C of warming to date. But with a yearly decrease of 2.5% in jet fuel consumption, currently only achievable with cuts in air traffic, this warming will level off at a constant level over the coming decades. <h2>When do we really need to fly?</h2> COVID-19 had a huge impact on the aviation sector. Air traffic is still approximately 10-20% below pre-pandemic levels, but is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac286e">rebounding quickly</a>. Politicians should shift subsidies from flying to more sustainable modes of transport, such as train journeys. And there is much more that can be done. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430217/original/file-20211104-25-1v0sxdb.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="An aeroplane parked at an airport" /> Forced changes in flying habits due to the pandemic have led some to permanently cut back on flights. <a href="https://pixabay.com/photos/airplane-aircraft-airport-travel-4885803/" class="source">Dmncwndrlch/Pixabay</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" class="license">CC BY</a> Lockdowns and the shift to remote working made many people rethink the necessity of flying. People resolving to fly less can contribute considerably to reducing the number of unnecessary flights. Combining in-person and virtual attendance in hybrid meetings wherever possible is a great way to support that shift. Reducing the space that business classes take on aeroplanes is another way to cut the number of flights, as it allows more passengers to travel on one flight. Not allowing airport expansions could also have a big impact. The UK’s Climate Change Committee, an expert body which advises the UK government, has recommended <a href="https://www.theccc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Sector-summary-Aviation.pdf">not expanding airports</a> to align the sector with climate targets. Yet the expansion of Heathrow airport is currently <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-51646562">planned to go ahead</a>. Sustainable aviation fuels, and hydrogen or electric planes, are being developed, but none of these technologies are currently available at the necessary scale. At the moment, there is little chance of the aviation industry meeting any climate targets if it aims for a return to its pre-pandemic rate of growth. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/milan-klower-879339">Milan Klöwer</a>, Postdoctoral Researcher in Weather and Climate Modelling, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-oxford-1260">University of Oxford</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/reducing-air-travel-by-small-amounts-each-year-could-level-off-the-climate-impact-171184">original article</a>. Image: Free-Photos/Pixabay

International Travel

Banksy pandemic painting sells for record amount

Banksy has achieved something not many others can claim by raking in an incredible £16.8 million ($30.18 million) for Britain’s frontline workers during an auction. After selling an artwork, Christie’s auction house has said the sale would be used to fund health organisations and charities across the UK. The work titled "Game Changer", features a young boy sitting on the floor playing with a nurse superhero toy while Batman and Spider-Man figurines lay in a rubbish bin next to him. The picture appeared on a wall at Southampton General Hospital in southern England in May of 2020. <img style="width: 0px; height: 0px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7840433/banksy.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/cb3d9e75e6144335be3ff1f5530cf8d1" /> The hospital said Banksy had left a note for workers that read: "Thanks for all you're doing. I hope this brightens the place up a bit, even if it's only black and white." The sale price was a world auction record for Banksy and Christie’s, the auction house said it will donate a "significant portion" of the buyer's premium to health organisations. "Banksy is an extraordinary artist who is a constant barometer of nationwide sentiment," said Katharine Arnold, who runs the European post-war and contemporary art era at the auction house. "With the perfect image of a little boy playing with his superhero doll, a nurse sporting the international Red Cross, he perfectly captured the essence of this moment in time."

Art

How to pick the right amount to spend on holiday gifts

Gift giving is a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/06/us-christmas-retail-sales-to-surpass-1-trillion-this-year-emarketer.html">big deal</a> this time of year. To find the <a href="https://www.today.com/shop/gift-guide">“perfect” gift</a>, <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2010/11/americans-spend-42-hours-each-on-holiday-shopping-and-partying/index.htm">Americans will spend about 15 hours</a> shopping. Women will do about twice as much as men. And they’ll <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/1112/average-cost-of-an-american-christmas.aspx">shell out about US$1 trillion</a> on gifts. While retailers <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/24/investing/stocks-week-ahead/index.html">relish the holiday shopping season</a> as a time when consumers open their purses or wallets, for many consumers – especially those <a href="https://www.retailwire.com/discussion/study-consumers-dont-enjoy-doing-their-holiday-shopping-online/">who do not like shopping</a> – these days are <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11747-011-0284-z">filled with dread</a>. They mark moments when shoppers clog malls, websites become <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/30/cyber-monday-why-retailers-cant-keep-their-sites-from-crashing.html">overloaded</a> and <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/carolineodonovan/amazon-next-day-delivery-deaths">delivery trucks block streets</a>. The entire process generates untold amounts of <a href="https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/stress-management/in-depth/stress/art-20047544">stress</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(93)90049-U">anxiety</a>. One source of stress is just how much to spend on gifts. Spending too much can put you in financial distress. Spending too little may make you look cheap. How do you decide what’s the “right” amount to spend on gifts? As an <a href="http://businessmacroeconomics.com/">economist</a>, I study holidays and gift giving because a large fraction of retail shopping is driven by seasonal events like Black Friday, Cyber Monday and Super Saturday – also and more appropriately known as <a href="https://www.wkyc.com/article/life/holidays/holiday-season/high-anxiety-theres-a-new-name-for-last-minute-shopping-panic-saturday/95-ab9d1714-01f8-4624-9075-e1d09a15628b">Panic Saturday</a> – which is the last Saturday before Christmas. ‘Dead weight loss’ Gift giving is stressful because nobody wants to buy what they think is a perfect gift only to discover it is a dud. The long lines of people <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/21/how-to-navigate-store-holiday-return-policies.html">returning items after the holidays</a> seem evidence enough for that. This has led some economists to argue there’s a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/21/upshot/an-economist-goes-christmas-shopping.html">“dead weight loss” to Christmas presents</a> that “destroys” <a href="https://www.amherst.edu/media/view/104699/original/christmas.pdf">as much as a third of their actual value</a>. A 2018 study estimated <a href="https://www.finder.com/unwanted-gifts">Americans spend $13 billion a year on unwanted gifts</a>. Other economists, however, have resisted this Scrooge-like view of gift giving and <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2118293">point to evidence that a present can actually have more value</a> to the recipient than the price the giver paid. In other words, a gift, even when technically unwanted, could have more value simply because someone else bought it for you. Setting a budget So if you’re dead set on buying some gifts, how much should you budget for it? Since gifting is a social act, it makes sense to consider how much other people typically spend. There are a number of surveys run each year that ask people during the fall to estimate what they plan on spending for holiday gifts. The National Retail Federation’s <a href="https://nrf.com/insights/holiday-and-seasonal-trends/winter-holidays/winter-holidays-data-center">annual survey of holiday spending</a> estimates the typical American will spend $659 on gifts for family, friends and co-workers in 2019. On the high end, <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/267914/americans-plan-spend-generously-christmas.aspx">Gallup</a> puts the average at $942, with more than a third of respondents expecting to spend over $1,000 on gifts. But these figures aren’t that helpful for an individual since $659 means something different to someone making $40,000 a year versus $200,000. That’s where the <a href="https://www.bls.gov/cex/home.htm">Consumer Expenditure Survey</a> comes in. It’s a large survey run by the Bureau of Labor Statistics that tracks the spending habits of 12,000 to 15,000 families each year. The government uses the survey to determine the cost of living and inflation rates for the typical family. The survey follows gift giving very precisely. It <a href="https://www.bls.gov/cex/tables.htm#annual">has categories for common holiday presents</a> like electronics, books and clothes, as well as gifts that typically aren’t associated with the season such as housing and transportation. After removing these non-holiday gifts, the typical U.S. family spends about 1% of its annual take-home pay on gifts. So whatever you earn, you could multiply it by 1% to get a figure that is in the ballpark of what the average American spends – but won’t break the bank. Making the holidays memorable While calculating a gift budget is one way to take the stress out of how much to spend on gifts, my family has another: Only give gifts to children. Adults get wrapped boxes filled with paper. After the real gifts are opened and the young children are safely moved out of the way, we crumple up the paper and throw it at each other in our annual paper fight. That keeps the cost down while making the kids feel special. It also ensures the kids don’t feel left out when their friends talk about the gifts they received. Other families follow their own methods for <a href="https://www.laurengreutman.com/3-gift-christmas-rule/">controlling expenses</a>, such as <a href="http://www.secretsanta.com">secret Santa gifts</a> or by <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/tech-support/201312/the-5-types-gift-givers">focusing attention more on togetherness</a> than on the stuff received. Whether you have a paper fight or follow another family tradition, my main message is that it doesn’t take very much money to make the winter holidays memorable. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jay-l-zagorsky-152952">Jay L. Zagorsky</a>, Senior Lecturer, Questrom School of Business, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/boston-university-898">Boston University</a> This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-pick-the-right-amount-to-spend-on-holiday-gifts-according-to-an-economist-127767">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Senior Aussies travelling to the Outback are causing increasing amounts of pressure on healthcare system

Senior Australian’s are applying pressure to the healthcare system as the number of older Aussies touring the outback is increasing. Dr Clare Walker, president of the Rural Doctors Association of Queensland said tourists with existing health complications have become a common occurrence in the outback. “We see a lot of people with significant illnesses, sometimes even in the last month of their life, travelling to some seriously remote places with very few services and without very much preparation,” Dr Walker told the <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-14/outback-grey-nomads-rfds-busy-queensland/11478538" target="_blank">ABC</a>. “I’ve actually seen that more this year than I have done in the past. There’s been a few patients that have said that this was on their bucket list – the Birdsville races, or this or that.” Officials at Charleville Royal Flying Doctor Service base, which is located 750km from Brisbane, have revealed that they will be facing their busiest year yet with over 1200 flights already recorded for 2019. The same time last year, RFDS had flown 1080 hours. Dr Fergus Gardiner says it’s becoming increasingly common for older tourists to require aeromedical retrievals. Data showed that of the 22000 aeromedical retrievals conducted for those aged 65 years or above between 2014 and 2017, 18000 were non-Indigenous and 4000 were Indigenous. “We suspect it’s related to an ageing population,” he said.

Domestic Travel

The ridiculous amount a royal visit costs: "I cannot stand over this type of expenditure"

The staggering price of a royal visit has been revealed after one councillor in Ireland shared a breakdown of the cost of a visit from Prince Charles and Duchess Camilla. In June, the heir to the throne and his wife visited Cork, Ireland, for an overnight stop in the university town. Despite their short stay, Cork City Council spent an excessive amount of money to prepare for the trip. And now, Thomas Gould, Sinn Féin Councillor for Cork North Central, has shared a breakdown of the cost on Twitter. He wrote: "Cork City Council’s spent €19,770 ($31,078) for a dinner for Charles & Camilla along with 70 guests. In total €203,761 ($320,310).” "I have no issue with them visiting but I cannot stand over this type of expenditure when we have the high levels of homelessness, hospital waiting lists € much more." <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"> Cork City Council’s spent €19,770 for a dinner for Charles & Camilla along with 70 guests. In total €203,761. I have no issue with them visiting but I cannot stand over this type of expenditure when we have the high levels of homelessness, hospital waiting lists € much more. <a href="https://t.co/WmaUK4SI6o">pic.twitter.com/WmaUK4SI6o</a> — CLLRThomas Gould (@ThomasGouldsf) <a href="https://twitter.com/ThomasGouldsf/status/1072292561333686272?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 11, 2018</a></blockquote> The cost for the visit included $9331 spent on polishing door handles in Town Hall and $9780 on replacing a light in the foyer. However, the council has defended the costs in a statement to CCN, saying the expenditure included “specialist reconditioning, polishing and lacquering of over 260 individual brass items by a local specialist firm". The council also spent money on "reconditioning, polishing and lacquering door handles, escutcheons, push plates, finger plates, brass fittings and kick plates. "These items had not been refurbished since they were first put in place over 80 years ago and were due to be refinished but the project was brought forward due to (the) Royal visit," they said. During Charles and Camilla’s stay, they also visited the English Market which was decorated with $14,669 worth of banners to mark its 230th birthday. What are your thoughts on the cost of Prince Charles and Camilla's royal visit to Ireland? Let us know in the comments below.

News

What's the right amount of custard: Dessert photo sparks heated debate

What’s the right amount of custard to add to your dessert? It’s a question you never thought you needed to answer but a fierce debate is currently raging online about this very issue. After a husband posted a photo of his wife’s dessert on <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/CasualUK/comments/991kxx/the_two_types_of_custard_eater/?st=jl3v05ej&sh=ffd7489f">Reddit</a>, a heated debate ensued over the “correct” custard to dessert ratio. The user posted a picture of two bowls of crumble, but the bowls had vastly different amounts of custard poured over them. The husband wrote: “This was plum crumble, if anyone is wondering. I’m on the right, wife in the wrong.” <img style="width: 500px; height: 281.25px; display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7820471/custard-reddit.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/7d8ebd61fb404790b9259f8cc614af06" /> The photo immediately created controversy over which bowl depicted the correct amount of custard. “The left side is the right amount. The right side looks like an accidental spillage of custard that you might expect in any given meal, on average,” one person said. One person thought neither were correct, writing: “Left side’s too much. Right side’s not enough.” Another user wrote: “What is the point if it’s not literally smothered in it?” “The one on the left with just a little more custard methinks,” another posted. How much custard do you like on your dessert?

Food & Wine

The amount of sugar in your favourite cereals will shock you

They say breakfast is the most important meal of the day, so it stands to reason that we should be choosing food that’s going to keep us as energised as possible throughout the day. Cereals and muesli are the go-to for many Aussies, but if you thought you were making a healthy choice with your brekkie, you may be sorely mistaken. The Australian Government’s Eat for Health program <a href="https://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/Eating%20Well/efh_food_label_example_large.pdf" target="_blank">recommends</a> avoiding foods with more than 15g of sugar per 100g, but as it turns out, many of our favourite cereals exceed this. Scroll through the gallery above to see some of the biggest offenders and tell us in the comments below, were you surprised to see how much sugar is in your breakfast?

Body

The unbelievable amount of rent Dave Hughes is getting for his The Block house

Comedian Dave Hughes might be better known for his exploits on the stages, but recent moves in the property market suggest he’s just as savvy a customer off the stage as well! Hughesy made headlines when he snapped up the <a href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/finance/money-banking/2017/10/why-everyone-is-furious-at-the-blocks-villains/" target="_blank">Elsternwick house on last year’s season</a> of The Block, which ended up the winning project for contestants Josh and Elyse. And while the radio personality paid an eye-watering $3.067 million for the winning project in October, he’s set to receive a handy rental income out of the arrangement. “The Block house has been rented,” Hughesy told Triple M’s Hot Breakfast this week. “We’ve found someone to move in. We’re very happy about that.” According to Advantage Property Consulting Director Frank Valentic, Hughesy is set to reign in $2,500-$3,000 per week for the property, a record for the hit reality show. Scroll through the gallery above to take a look inside! We think you’ll agree it’s worth the price, and Hughesy seems as though he’s ready to start seeing some returns. “I emailed my real estate agent last night about 11pm saying, ‘when’s this month’s rent coming into my bank?’ I haven’t seen it for a while,” he said. “I had trouble renting it. It took a while. “At one point the real estate agent rang me and said, ‘someone wants to move in but they’ve got a dog’. I felt like saying, ‘I don’t care whether they’ve got a meth lab’. “It’s a little dog and it’s fine. They put in their own doggie door.” Do you think it deserved to win?

Money & Banking

Revealed: The staggering amount Larry Emdur's Sydney mansion sold for

Channel 7 Morning Show co-host Larry Emdur has sold his beloved Dover Heights clifftop home for a record-setting $11.5 million. Celebrity accountant Anthony Bell, who has recently had a much-publicised split to estranged wife Kelly, is the new homeowner. He initially tried to keep the price from public records but the details have been revealed in the NSW land title system. The sale tops previous sales in the affluent Dover Heights. In 2014 when South African tech investor Kevin Bermeister and wife Beverley bought a clifftop home nearby for $9.5 million. Emdur and wife Sylvie have since purchased a $3 million heritage apartment in The Rocks. They lived in their Dover Heights home for more than two decades. Their earlier home, which cost $770,000 back in 1994, later sold for $3.89 million before they paid $6.8 million for the clifftop mansion in 2011. Emdur has hosted Seven’s The Morning Show beside Kylie Gillies since 2007. Scroll through the gallery above to peek inside Emdur's newly-sold mansion.

Domestic Travel

The amount of money tourists throw into the Trevi Fountain is staggering

Tossing a coin over your shoulder and into the Trevi Fountain is as quintessential a part of the Italian holiday experience as getting stomach cramps from too much pasta and gelato, or spending 40 minutes trying to figure out where you are in Venice. But did you have any idea how much tourist’s throw into Rome’s most popular baroque fountain? Well, it turns out all those coins add up together to a small fortune. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/U210dFCSpvg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> NBC News estimates tourists threw a combined $2 million into the fountain in 2016, with the money collected by Rome’s city council workers at the end of each day. The money is clean, weighed, counted and sent to Caritas, a Catholic non-profit that supports various causes including health, disaster relief and ending poverty. Rome’s city council recently passed a law deeming it illegal for thieves to take coins for the fountain and Caritas said this has led to a 20 to 30 per cent spike in its takings. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z_GhQOr81TE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> And it’s not just coins that make their way into the fountain. "Among the coins often we find other objects, including glasses, religious medals, and even a couple of dentures," the Caritas spokesperson told NBC News. So, there you have it! Did you imagine $2 million would pass through the fountain in just one year? Have you ever been to Italy, and if so how did you find it?

International Travel

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

New report reveals huge amount of super needed to retire

The extraordinary amount the I'm A Celebrity contestants are paid

The shocking amount of compensation awarded to the Abdallah family

Should you be worried about the amount of coffee or tea you drink?

"Worth it": Insane amount woman spends to clone dead cat

Shocking amount Australia's richest people earn per hour

The staggering amount of young Aussies giving up on home owning dreams

What does a conductor actually do? A surprising amount

The exact amount Aussies need to save for a comfortable retirement

Don’t look Up! has a surprising amount to tell us about economics, much of it useful

Reducing air travel by small amounts each year could level off the climate impact

Banksy pandemic painting sells for record amount

How to pick the right amount to spend on holiday gifts

Senior Aussies travelling to the Outback are causing increasing amounts of pressure on healthcare system

The ridiculous amount a royal visit costs: "I cannot stand over this type of expenditure"

What's the right amount of custard: Dessert photo sparks heated debate

The amount of sugar in your favourite cereals will shock you

The unbelievable amount of rent Dave Hughes is getting for his The Block house

Revealed: The staggering amount Larry Emdur's Sydney mansion sold for

The amount of money tourists throw into the Trevi Fountain is staggering

Our Partners