Oh dear! Australia and its nanny state!
TheEngineer wrote:The issue is that these traders are freeloading.
Sorry!? Freeloading off whom? The only thing they seem to be freeloading off is a solid piece of ground to stand on. But of course so are all those non rego paying cyclists.
TheEngineer wrote:They provide a service but they do not give back to the council.
What does the council do for them? Why should they be compelled to give back to "the council". They place far less of a burden on the council than the thousands of cyclists going through and the tens of thousands of cars going through the council.
TheEngineer wrote:Abbotsford Cycles is 500m up the road. They pay rent, wages, have regular supplier and pay tax on profits.
Yes they pay rent for a building and premises. Wages, sure they pay wages for labour. Regular supplier, so doug buys his items from an irregular supplier!? What basis do you have to suggest that Abbotsford cycles pay tax on all their profits and Doug doesn't.
(I highly respect Abborsford Cycles, my comments are not meant to reflect poorly on them.)
TheEngineer wrote:I dare say that much of the money from both traders is cash in hand.
There is nothing wrong or abnormal about cash in hand businesses.
TheEngineer wrote:They are also using public land for free with no insurance or it would be voided without council approval, which exposes them and their customers.
What does it expose them to? How are customers exposed?
**I recognise that there there are numerous issues revolving around a free-for-all approach to street sellers. However the key issues are certainly none of the ones listed. Melbourne city seems to run a lottery and allocate busking sites with surprising (for a council) practicality. Hmmmm, nobody is complaining about buskers being cash in hat (guitar case) or insurance.