u/Classic_Abies8621

I’m trying to understand the logic behind the model. My understanding is...

Metro Trains, Yarra Trams and various bus lines ie Ventura are private businesses who the government gives contracts to so they can run local trains trams and buses. V line however is fully government owned.

So from the government's view, what is the actual economic rationale for this split?

Is it basically that the government keeps services that are heavily loss-making like regional trains because they're considered essential public services, while private operators get to run parts of the system where there's actually potential to make a profit? Lol. If so, what's the benefit?

And if a private operator does make a profit from running a public transport service, where does that money ultimately come from and go to? Is the government effectively paying a private company to run the service and allowing it to retain a potential profit margin on top? If so, why?

Why not just have the government expand the Department of Transport and employ the drivers, maintenance workers, station staff, etc directly?

Yesterday I had zero motivation to make lunch for work, but I also didn't want to spend $15-20 on takeaway.

So, I grabbed a $2.50 McDonald's hamburger and brought a banana from Woolworths that cost about 50 cents.

Total cost: around $3.

Is it the healthiest lunch ever? No. Is it perfectly filling? No. But it's filling enough to get me through the afternoon, and much better for my wallet than buying a full takeaway meal.

What are some other ideas to eat "out" on the cheap?

Media is reporting that Trump has reached a deal with Hamas that includes:

- complete disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza (in phases)

- Israeli forces withdrawing as the disarmament is verified

- An International Stabilization Force + new Palestinian police taking over security

-;Gaza moving under a new technocratic Palestinian government (not Hamas)

View Poll

Getting married next year and we have enough assets (all personally held, nothing in trusts) that a BFA makes sense - we want clarity on who gets what inc real estate, superannuation, inheritance, and liquid investments in case we split up and already agree (so there's no need for negotiations). Just need this contractually formalised. Option A is roughly $2.5k total for one party through a basic specialist service to draft and advise, plus about $1k for the other party’s independent advice (elsewhere).

The alternative is closer to $10k all-up through a larger big-name firm.

For a straightforward personal-asset situation with no trusts or complex structures, am I on the right track in assuming the cheaper option will be adequate for us, or are there genuine advantages that would justify paying the premium? Does anyone have experience in this or has seen someone get burnt out for going the cheap route?

View Poll

View Poll

Heading out to ringwood during peak hour:

Option 1: Take the train that goes around the City Loop (11-15 mins according to the PTV app) and get a seat straight away.

Option 2: direct FSS>Richmond (~3 mins), swap platforms, then wait for the next outbound train. During the peak you're guaranteed to be standing but could save a bit of time.

What's the general preference? Curious to hear from people who do this regularly!