Well you have made about a thousand posts in this thread so sooner or later I was going to agree with one of them.
Okay, so how can I make an appointment with the ATO to lock in my tax rate for the next ten years? You're talking about a completely different concept in finance: fixed percentage rates. You can't get fixed percentage rates on your taxes. Tax rates are variable. Fixed rates of tax don't exist here.
GP - are you denying that tax compliance is enforced through the threat of violence? Refusing to pay what the ATO deems one to owe them is seen as a criminal offence and i've seen enough video material to know what happens if anybody resists arrest. In fact i'd argue that "tax evasion" is treated more harshly than any other criminal offence as one is deemed to be "guilty until proven innocent"
I doubt GP would suggest that tax collection isn't enforced on the threat of violence (i.e give us your money or we'll send goons around to throw you in jail) and probably just means that I haven't heard of anybody being shot for not paying their taxes lol. Tax very literally equals slavery. If the government taxes me at 30% then I am being forced to work for no pay 30% of the time.
Um...you know we have a system in Australia called Torrens title where there is a central registry of land ownership, right? Torrens title was created because the old title deeds system was buggered. The deeds were bearer negotiable so you could create a copy and sell the same property to two different people. I f your house burnt down and the deeds went up in flames, you couldn't prove you owned it. It was like a $5 note except it had "1 block of land" written on it. We actually invented Torrens title in Australia a century and a half ago. We've since exported it to virtually every other country in the Commonwealth. The only thing that gives you any property rights to begin with and which stops me from breaking into your house, stealing your title deeds and saying I'm the real owner of your house is the Torrens title system which is administered by the government. So yeah, they get to charge some fees for providing a valuable service. Where you got the impression that you can be the one true owner of a piece of land I don't know. Maybe you've been watching to many flashy bank commercials about "owning" your own home (for only 10% down and 7.2% p.a. Hurry while stocks last.) The Crown is the legal owner of all land in Australia. You and I merely purchase the right to use it. On a more philosophical level, we're only custodians of the land anyway, holding it in trust for future generations. The mining tax is about not taking our children's inheritance and pissing all of it against the wall.
If you can give back the time and effort that it takes to create wealth using one's own toil then you can tax them whether they're creating software or doing whatever
I'm talking about exactly the same thing, I just used a finance analogy, which fits the bill perfectly. A business or company owner should be able to make a decision after weighing up the risks to go into business and be able to stand on it's own feet without the threat of a socialist government, waiting for it to pull off success then walk in after the fact and rip the rug out from under them. Australian share holders should be able to invest in a company, look at the balance sheet, look at the risk v reward and be able to make a sound decision on if they want to invest in that company without the government walking in and changing the rules on them, plumeting the share price and cutting their dividend cheque (of which govt receive 30% of that as well). Mining companies all over the world do a risk assessment and they use a matrix that has political risk as one part. When the super tax was announced Australia's political risk shot up the ranks in multiples.-FACT. Scaremongering about Chavez style political risk helps no one in this discussion. Your right for an individual fixed rates of tax don't exist here but I think they bloody well should. As far as corporate Tax here is concerned it is fixed and purely for no other reason that one sector is doing better than others the government wants to discriminate against them. It's wrong morally and does nothing but stifle entremureship(sp) and innovation. What's stopping the government turning around next month and lowering what it defines a "super" profit? Adding a thousand more companies to the list of evil super profiting. This is a very slippery slope you are defending and the sooner we roll over and accept it once the sooner we do it twice and the next thing, anything that is profitable is on the table to nationalise.
I agree - but this just illustrates that we dont live in a truly free society. I guess i base my ideals of freedom on the principles on which the US was founded - enshrined in their constitution. It is true that Australia (and other Commonwealth countries) have never been "as free" but that is because they never "took" their freedom the way the US did. Pity the bankers and their puppets in government have increasingly pissed all over that hard won freedom during much of the past 90 years though
If the same government wasn't doing exactly that we wouldn't even be having this discussion at all. You need to be advocating better spendiature of revenue (of which is at an all time high thanks to the mining industry). Instead of advocating we tax more of it to piss against the wall.
Oh FFS. When was the last time anybody had a gun pointed at them for not paying taxes? We all know how it really works: the ATO sends a piece of paper to the mining company saying they have to turn up in court, the mining company's lawyers have a dignified squabble with the ATO's lawyers for a decade or so and everyone forgets about the issue until one side loses and if its the mining company there is a small line their annual report called "Extraordinary and Non-Recurring Item" with a number next to it that represents the amount of money the company got to use for ten years before finally handing it over to the taxman. You're not confusing non-payment of tax with non-payment of debts owed to Big Benny the loan shark are you?
It's true, see the Paul Hogan saga. They're pretty tough on the small-fry, but not really that good when it comes to legal stuff. That said, watch out for draconian legislation relating to tax. They get it through pretty sneakily.
Well you get to drive to work on well maintained roads and I assume you have the bins collected and your children get to go to school* so I don't quite think that there is a direct link with slavery in the traditional sense. Sure you have to pay some money but you get something in exchange. Whether you think you pay too much money or if it is well spent that is down to you, I don't think paying for Australian soldiers to get shot at overseas is a good use of my money, but I also don't think paying for other peoples kids to get educated is the best use of my money either but as I said, I am selfish that way! Tax does get mentioned three times on the Slavery Wiki so you may have something there! No one is forcing you to work in order to pay taxes, lots of other people don't work and there are no death squads rounding them up. In fact I think some of your taxes are going to support them even as we speak. * This is an example only you may work from home with no kids and have to drop off you rubbish at the local dump. I don't know.
I don't trust any politicians at all. They come up with all sorts of excuses and diversions if it suits them. There is a big difference between introducing a new tax and repealing an existing tax. By introducing a new one you get a lot of hassle from people who are simply resistant to change. Plus the idea of taxation in general is unpopular. But if a tax already exists, all you serve to do by repealing it is to gain the support of those that were vehemently against it in the first place, not necessarily the general population. I'm not saying they 100% wouldn't repeal these taxes, I just don't think it is a certainty, or even a very high probability.
Time is a constant non-renewable resource. It exists for everyone. Miners and software designers both spend time creating something of value, but only the miner has to go back and do it all again to keep making money. Seriously, are we going to get into a debate about the nature of the space-time continuum here? I mean, can we at least agree that gold doesn't grow either on trees or in the hole where another lump of gold was dug from?
I still dont accept that as a justification for upping the (already high) tax rates. In fact i dont accept your premise that the gold "belongs to the people" because it doesn't. It's worthless while its laying under the ground.
If Federal Labor becomes (or is) as unpopular as NSW Labor, then I think any party will gain and maintain ground on them for a while. The aim of politicians is to gain ground and do whatever it takes to get into power. When in power the game changes and they then follow their own agenda. Politicians lie all the time and we continually let them get away with it, whether it be by shifting the agenda to pointless prejudice against a handful of refugees, wars, terrorism, the economy, whatever. I'm arguing that Abbott sticking to his word is not a certainty, that's all. If we expect something to be a certainty, we open ourselves up for nasty surprises if we're wrong. If we plan for a variable outcome, we're more likely to have an alternate strategy in place. Where we're headed, neither the Coalition or Labor (or Greens) can save us. Desperate times may call for desperate measures. Besides, since when has a Government wanted less tax revenue?
Not worthless... just potential that has yet been unrealised to it's maximum. For example, if you owned the rights to mine a known resource, can you not sell those rights? People do it all the time, for lots of money. If on the other hand the resource was irradiated, toxic, or situated on the disputed bordeline of Israel and Palestine, then yes, mostly worthless.
