Originally posted by JonnoH
From Senate Estimates - My bold
"«Ms» mce-anchor
«Wilkinson» : I guess the thing that I would like to explore with that analysis is a better understanding about, first of all, why they presumed that we hadn't taken into account any behavioural responses and,
therefore, what's the baseline and the starting point for that analysis, because, as we've discussed, you've got to start with your baseline as to what's the likely outcome without this policy, and then you make an assumption about the direct impact of the policy and the behavioural responses, and that's how you get what your policy costing is."
Where did Rice Warner say this or are you just making up fiction?
In their report they came up with a 500mil pa difference to the PBO due to investor behaviour changes.
Problem for you and Rice Warner is that the behaviour changes were ALREADY included in the PBO figures.
As I said, where did RICE WARNER say this (that the PBO assumed no reaction) or are you just making up fiction?
Problem for you is that you believe the claims about what Rice Warner said.
