Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 1671 comments are related to the topic:
Labour= tax tax tax......and tax again
Labour= tax tax tax......and tax again
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 1,671
|
By:
AFL, I can copy and paste propaganda from columnists as well - its not so bad to paste an article as we both have, but to continually paste excerpts is fruitless - I saw it all the first time.
The bottom line is this is rushed, ill-thought policy that strikes at the heart of the Australian economy - its the Rudd Government's continued attack at success, class warfare even - and its current target - the mining sector. A US investment adviser wrote in the Gartman newsletter circulated earlier this month: “Never ever, ever discount governmental stupidity. We have always been strong supporters of almost everything that the recent administrations in Australia have done but we are shocked, dismayed and stunned by the decision on the part of the Australian Government to impose a huge 40 per cent tax on profits on the nation’s mining industry! What in the world is this Government thinking? What purpose shall this serve other than to get an increase in tax receipts this year and perhaps for another year or two, but as the same time chase a highly productive, highly important and highly labour intensive industry out of the country and send it elsewhere?” And AFL, do you think the few hundred bucks workers will "according to Laurie" be better off by, make up for the $15 Billion plus wiped off superannuation accounts over the past 3 weeks? This wipes away the government proposed super increase from 9%-12% - which, unlike the lies told by Mr Swan, are predominantly is paid by the private sector. |
|
By:
AFL, I can copy and paste propaganda from columnists as well - its not so bad to paste an article as we both have, but to continually paste excerpts is fruitless - I saw it all the first time.
The bottom line is this is rushed, ill-thought policy that strikes at the heart of the Australian economy - its the Rudd Government's continued attack at success, class warfare even - and its current target - the mining sector. A US investment adviser wrote in the Gartman newsletter circulated earlier this month: “Never ever, ever discount governmental stupidity. We have always been strong supporters of almost everything that the recent administrations in Australia have done but we are shocked, dismayed and stunned by the decision on the part of the Australian Government to impose a huge 40 per cent tax on profits on the nation’s mining industry! What in the world is this Government thinking? What purpose shall this serve other than to get an increase in tax receipts this year and perhaps for another year or two, but as the same time chase a highly productive, highly important and highly labour intensive industry out of the country and send it elsewhere?” And AFL, do you think the few hundred bucks workers will "according to Laurie" be better off by, make up for the $15 Billion plus wiped off superannuation accounts over the past 3 weeks? This wipes away the government proposed super increase from 9%-12% - which, unlike the lies told by Mr Swan, are predominantly is paid by the private sector. |
|
By:
Sorry for the double post.
You know the irony AFL. The Rudd Government claims it will raise about $9 billion a year from its big new tax - almost exactly the amount it will have to pay in interest on its burgeoning debt. |
|
By:
G'day Judge,
Yes the lines can sometimes be quite blurred - between the party's. It's a fascinating business, politics.  |
|
By:
fascinating, yeah i suppose, i find it fascinating, that they only have to be in politics for 7 years, then qualify for a lifetime pension, the average joe works for 40+ years to qualify, and then its means tested, and these cnuts say they're serving the public ffs
|
|
By:
reba meagher - how much is she on and indexed for life
|
|
By:
Current retirement benefits have been toned down - and I agree, it has in the past been incredibly generous.
I'll play devils advocate here. I think politicians are entitled to decent remuneration & superannuation entitlements. It's a tough business and we want to attract high quality persons to enter parliament - what's the saying - you pay peanuts you get monkeys? Its a thankless job, if your in a portfolio, its high stress, high pressure and your life is in the spotlight. And when you play the democratic game, your going to lose eventually - job security isn't exactly an attractive side to politics. |
|
By:
how much useless reba $400k per year and she will probably live another 40 - costly conceyance
|
|
By:
Jez, sounds like you are closely aligned to someone in politics, is that correct?
well what we have ATM, is monkeys getting massively overpaid, and a large number of corrupt ones as well |
|
By:
Yes Judge.
Don't think they're overpaid, Labor, Liberal or independant. Corrupt, I think we're fortunate here, that we don't have any bad apples. (If we do, none that I know of, presently). Reba Meagher has an indexed pension of $120,000 p.a. |
|
By:
sorry about the misinformation there, when i entered i thought that was too high
still $120k indexed for 40 years ffs - what a joke and was it her boyfriend who blew the whistle on that politician? |
|
By:
They are very generous super schemes - no doubt about it.
I think former prime ministers soak up the most in long-lasting privelidges. Most states have reigned in Premier entitlements. Fmr PM John Howard after 33 years in parliament and 11 1/2 as PM has a super pension of $330,000 p.a as well as free travel domestically, a staffed office & comm car with driver. |
|
By:
personally i don't mind PM's getting that after all they have risen to lead their country but party hacks like Reba it truly is astonishingly bad imo
|
|
By:
Yeah - Adam Walters.
I must say, that whole gay club drama with David Campbell was a disgrace - it really didn't need to be aired in the way it was - I feel sorry for Mr Campbell to be honest. The way Walters presented seemed very vengeful & personal - rather than the alleged breach of government resources. Not a good look, but officially, he was not breaking any rules in relation to his vehicle. |
|
By:
yeah adam walters and reba meagher - england have "the royals" we have "the rottens" imo
|
|
By:
DA and Jez re : politicians : Qld is very dodgy atm. G.Nuttal as a example , the gov't falling over themselves into state asset sell-offs even though if the numbers are to believed about the economy , isn't imperative now to sell.
Health pay debacle up here , where a lot aren't getting paid- no industrial action etc etc etc |
|
By:
Jez, take the blinkers off, its littered with corruption, also tell me of 1 private company that could run successfully with a worker payment scheme similar to the governments? ZERO is the answer, so just in the way they have set up their entitlements is corrupt.
|
|
By:
ps Jez, i thought my question would get a yes answer, thanks for your honesty, and by your honesty, i take it, that it isn't you thats in politics lol
|
|
By:
Pay peanuts, get monkeys - we have a few of those on both sides. What other job do u have the chance to get voted out of every 3 years???
Simple question for you and your conservatives mates Jez - how big would the debt be now if the Libs had been in power??? recongising of course that the tax take last year was down over $100 million dollars WITH the stimulus spending going on Also what year was the IGA bought in and who was in power??? Would love to be more involved in the discussion but too much other stuff going on at present, give me a couple of weeks :) VOTE 1 Australian Sex Party  |
|
By:
Yes - job security certainly not a perk to the job [;)]
When the Howard government lost in 2007, the nation lost. Kevin Rudd faced a GFC with this country in the most secure & prosperous position of any other western nation - courtesy of the hard work of the fmr Coalition government. What did the self-proclaimed economic conservative do? He and his Labor mates, panicked. Big time. In an unprecedented monster government spend, he splashed $900 for all, cash for halls, laptops, you name it - everybody wins a prize with Kevin. A Coalition government would of used stimulus, most definetely, they supported stimulus - but not in the irresponsible fashion of Rudd Labor - the blatant waste of public finances under Rudd is breathtaking. The constant tricks & excuses of Rudd Labor. Though I cannot be 100% of what the Howard approach would of been - I can assure you the stark turn-around from surplus to debt would not have been as significant as under Rudd & the devastating waste of taxpayers money would not have been allowed or excused as it is currently. Rudd Labor Surplus in 2013?  GOODLUCK!!!!! |
|
By:
Rudd's only an economic conservative when the election is near.
You know Rudd Labor is in dire straits when big Richo comes out in defence of the "unluckiest PM ever". Reeeeeeeeeeeeks of desperation. How low can you go Labor? |
|
By:
Kevin Rudd unluckiest PM ever, says ALP hardman Graham Richardson
From: The Sunday Telegraph May 30, 2010 LABOR hardman Graham Richardson has re-entered public life as a political commentator, saying he wouldn't dream of entering politics today. Politics is "a horrible business", Mr Richardson said in his first major newspaper interview for several years, in which he offered conditional praise for Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, tipped Labor to win the election and declared NSW "corruption-free". He also revealed he will be commentating on the federal election for the Nine Network. The former Labor senator and federal minister, now 60, said he was thinking about retiring from his lobbying business, and added he would not dream of entering politics if he were a young man today. "There is a nasty edge to it, which is getting nastier all the time," Mr Richardson said. "My suspicion is it'll get worse. It's an awful business these days. You sit back and watch Question Time now and I think: how did I ever do that? It's amazing. You wouldn't go back for all the tea in China. It's an awful business." The exposure of former NSW Roads Minister David Campbell proved there was "no private life" in politics any more, said Mr Richardson, whose own career has been blighted by unproved allegations of corruption, intimidation and undue influence. "There are some journalists who've had me as a target for 25 or 30 years and it frustrates them that they've failed to see me imprisoned, and the key thrown away, in some dark dungeon," he said. "It annoys the s*** out of some of them." Mr Richardson described Mr Rudd as "the unluckiest prime minister ever elected. There are few politicians who've lost popularity as quickly as Rudd but he's had a shocking run of luck. You get elected and then the worst financial crisis in 80 years comes along. But he's tough; he's not a weakling." He rubbished claims that Julia Gillard may challenge for Mr Rudd's job. He also said federal Labor must strongly tackle the Opposition's proposal to revive offshore processing for asylum-seekers, describing the so-called Pacific Solution as "one of the great frauds of all time. Labor's gotta take this on." He praised Mr Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan for saving the economy with stimulus and bank-guarantees, but said that Mr Rudd failed at selling the Emissions Trading Scheme, and should have known the Copenhagen summit would fail. "The worst job of selling has been the ETS," he said. "He ran it up the flagpole, the Senate knocked it back (so) the right thing to do was back off. "But it was done so poorly. I think he could have made a virtue of it. It was politically handled badly. "(Rudd's) flaw has been he retreated into his shell a bit in the last year instead of going out and selling things. He coasted. And I think that was a big mistake. "He's had a battering, and it's not easy to come off a battering, as I can tell you from personal experience. "But you have to put one foot after the other and keep on walking." |
|
By:
Graham Richardson, an honorable man there ffs, Alpine offset ring a bell
|
|
By:
Jez, They took advice from Treasury "Go hard,Go Households"
The retail Industry would of lost 30% of it's work- force overnight. The miners sacked 15% of it's workforce basically overnight. It is pure speculation what if's and how much was needed. We will never know , but what we do know we came through relatively unscathed largely because of it and the Bank Guarantees ! Other things are going unnoticed with all this bullshit going on. Cost of Power for eg: Why is this becoming so expensive ? What causes 60% increases approx in 10 years. Housing bubble about to hit etc etc |
|
By:
We came out unscathed because of the position the country was in courtesy of John Howard & Peter Costello.
Stimulus helped, granted - but it has gone further than the GFC - its a Labor induced disaster - the debt, the interest bill, the chronic waste, the blatant disregard to public finances & the incredible non-existance of accountability.  And to this day....it continues....[>o] This cannot be excused simply by reason of - "but we escaped the crisis" - it just doesn't wash - Australia was incredibly cushioned from the GFC storm. But Rudd Labor panicked & vandalised our strong position economically- they threw the baby out with the bath water.  Treasury boffins have released some rather questionable "rubbery" numbers over the past 2 and half years - numbers that have been WAY off, on numerous occasions.  |
|
By:
But hey...with a super tax on the heart of the Australian economy (the old class wars) and the best terms of trade in over 60 years.....
...with a bit of luck & a fair breeze; We'll be back in surplus in 2013 under Labor. [smiley:crazy][smiley:crazy][smiley:crazy] |
|
By:
Jea, when hawke won leadership, didn't labour inherit a record deficit at the time, and wasn't howard the treasurer?
|
|
By:
The deficit under John Howard as Treasurer was less than $9 billion with drought conditions playing havoc on the balance sheet.
The biggest deficit until Rudd Labor came along was under Bob Hawke & Paul Keating & Labor in 1002 - 4.1% of GDP. Do you know what the debt is currently? The Rudd Labor is borrowing up to $300 billion. Currently under Rudd Labor: $140 Billion gross debt. Paul & Bob would be proud. |
|
By:
1992 not 1002
|
|
By:
Da_Judge Joined: 16 Dec 08
Replies: 3475 29 May 10 13:51 Jez, sounds like you are closely aligned to someone in politics, is that correct? Jez Melb Punter Joined: 25 Oct 04 Replies: 1358 29 May 10 14:04 Yes Judge. ............. FFS....Sounds like I might be up against the combined forces of the Liberal Party on here......How much have they budgeted to put your Propaganda on here....lol Any wonder you knew how to spell Labor...as it is a word used more by the Libs this campaign than Labor themselves.....LOL Cheers. |
|
By:
Under $9 deficit in the early 80's under Howard as Treasurer.
In government the Howard government repaid $96 Billion in Labor debt. Mmmm |
|
By:
*$9 Billion
lol AFL |
|
By:
My $100 million before was $100 billion tax shortfall - i.e. basically what the debt is at present, no stimulus or at least no effective stimulus and we would still be in debt and unemployment would have more than a 5 in front of it.
I'm very ordinary at budgeting but I reckon even I could've managed the economy through the million boom with hundreds of billions of extra revenue rolling on in - mind you I would have spent a lot more of it on badly needed infrastructure rather than middle class welfare and election year cash splashes. There's two sides to most stories |
|
By:
Here Here , Wombleoz,
Badly failing Infrastructure.(failure of Libs)- but we have plenty of cash in the bank[;)] Im still in disbelief why a ambition of computers for every secondary student in schools is a bad thing, and why the Libs won't have it. Class Wars ? - Only for full fee paying private schools ? oK , SO SOME PARENTS ARE WASTEFUL , SMOKES, DRUGS,POKIES, GROG, but surely the poor buggers can get a education ffs |
|
By:
i truly thought with every thing going on Labor would have eased dramatically but they still can be layed at 1.44
i must be out of touch |
|
By:
i was reading in the fin review that the resources tax will only deliver the promised 12 billion in tax rev for about 2 years. After this the cancelled projects and the reduced production from existing projects will mean that tax revenue falls and in about 8 years the net revenue will be nowhere near 12 billion.The interesting thing is that had the tax NOT been put on the net tax revenue after 5 years would EXCEED the revenue from the super tax.That is because projects would not have been cancelled and hence the tax stream is continuous.
The word is Dudd will expand spending because he believes tax from resources will rise indefinitly, apparently he has trouble counting.After this proves not to be the case in order to support massive spending he will introduce a super profits tax on banks and then on coles& woolies.Guess whose pockets that tax will come out. of. |
|
By:
According to Treasury analysis, the Government's proposal - a 40 per cent tax on resource industry "super profits", combined with a cut in the company tax rate from 30 per cent to 28 per cent - would mean money in the kick of the average worker.
An extra $450 a year to be precise. Abbott's alternative - no mining tax, no company tax cut, and a 1.7 per cent tax increase for large companies - would see the same worker around $100 a year worse off. A table in the document says that the plan adopted by Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan - based on recommendations from Ken Henry's tax reform task force - would eventually boost gross domestic product (economic output) by 0.7 per cent. The Abbott plan would reduce GDP by 0.2 per cent. Investment would increase by 2.1 per cent under the Government plan, but fall by 0.55 per cent under Abbott's. Inflation would be affected, too - consumer price levels would be 1.1 per cent lower with Rudd's tax mix, 0.25 per cent higher with the coalition's. And average real after-tax wages would be up 1.1 per cent under the Rudd-Swan package, but down 0.25 per cent under Abbott's. There is another table kicking around - also based on Econtech modelling -showing the impact of the Government's tax plan on prices: food lower by 0.9 per cent, clothing and footwear by 1.3 per cent, housing by 1.1 per cent, transportation by 1.7 per cent, communication by 1.4 per cent. But it's interesting to read comments by more independent experts, including those whose job is to help clients make money. Rory Robertson, a Macquarie Bank interest rate strategist, for one. In a report a few days ago, Robertson said resource companies were not paying their share in tax because "flat-footed state governments were slow to adjust their 'royalties' to take account of the surge in global prices". HE spoke of "the basic logic" of the Federal Government's approach, suggested it was being criticised simply because the resources sector believed it should not have to make substantially larger payments to Government, and added that "the only surprise is that the now-proposed arrangements were so long in coming". Robertson also demolished the resources sector's key argument that the proposed tax is "retrospective". "After all," he wrote, "every city-based household knows that its local government rate payments will trend higher over time, even if the home was bought many years earlier. "Similarly, owners of rural property know that the Government rates and rents are linked directly to the latest assessed value of the property, and that if that value doubles, payments to Government will ... rise in proportion. "Those of us working hard over decades to build 'human capital' would struggle to argue with a straight face that any increase in income tax rates is unfair because it is 'retrospective'." Laurie Oakes is political editor for the Nine Network. His column appears every Saturday in the Herald Sun |
|
By:
AFL You really are starting to prove yourself to be rather gullible.Treasury works for the govt of the day.The govt goes to treasury and says' we want to prove this" now give us some statistics to back it up.If you followed politics for a while you will realise howards govt did the same thing.Treasury is bogus.The givewaway is that treasury ALWAYS supports the govt of the day and NEVER comes out and says any govt plan is no good.
AFL you are a deluded comrade indeed.Rory Robertson you quoted is a well known labour sympathiser.Laurie oaks is practically a communist. Most of the posters here are looking at things not from a political perspective but from a whats a good decision angle.You just swallow political propaganda. The canadian resources minister this weekend confirmed he is gleeeful that canada's iron ore is now competitive with aust for the first time ever and he intends to push it to canadas advantage.I think he has more clout than ROry who is is probably trying to get in on the next dudd govt float as underwriter. AFL stop playing the staunch labour supporter and start supporting your country instead.Anyone with an IQ over 80 realises that dudd and swann are destroying our country and disguising it as empathy and fairness. It looks ok now because we have not yet collapsed.But if dudd wins a second term the weatlth of all aussies will end up in the govt squanderous pockets. No doubt you will comment back but I will be off air for a few days as Im going away. |
|
By:
Ben Bjelke Petersen
|
|
By:
Mrben Joined: 25 Oct 03
Replies: 2100 31 May 10 09:04 It looks ok now because we have not yet collapsed. LOL, It looks ok now because it is. |