I get to drive on roads where the workers are overpaid because of government contracts (not their money so who cares how much they spend), I get the Prussian education system which is designed to dumb us down (critical thinking is almost nonexistant in our society and that is not by accident). A highway robber doesn't rob somebody with nothing, I work and therefore earn money which puts me on their "to rob" list. You're right in that noone forces me to work, but because i do work I am forced to support people who don't work.
You two might like this article then: Socialism : The modern form of slavery http://blogs.fin24.com/Motley.Fool/socialism-the-modern-form-of-slavery I'm not saying I agree with all of it, but I think it is saying what many of us are thinking.
Also if you look at the budget: http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_46.htm You may notice that income tax collected is only marginally higher than welfare payments doled out. Wouldn't take much in the way of unemployment to shift that the other way (I calculated roughly a 6-8% change might do it).
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd-SLRyuRq0&feature=channel_video_title[/youtube]
I do believe in getting value for money on government expenditure and I do believe in responsible investment of monies held in trust by the government for specific purposes. I don't agree that the government is going to piss away all the resource tax money provided a proper system is set up to manage it. Look at the Future Fund for example: it has generated a 5.6% return (compounding) p.a. since it was set up. The Future Fund also achieved that return for the three other funds it manages: the Building Australia Fund, the Education Investment Fund and the Health and Hospitals Fund. So yes, we should be saving some money during the boom times and investing it responsibly for future generations. We're doing that to an extent already, but we could be doing it more and we should be doing it if there is extra cash being generated by digging Australian minerals our of Australian ground and selling it, regardless of who is doing the digging.
The same government you are supporting in increasing taxes has already said that they will strip the future fund to get back into surplus. The previous government managed to not only run a surplus, they managed to start the future fund without having to extort more money out of one sector over another. The issue here isn't how much miners pay, they already pay more than any other sector, the issue is how those funds are utilised.
And I'm not at all in favour of raiding the Future Fund or any other other nation-building funds it manages for a short term gain. The whole point of the Future Fund and the mining tax is to save for the future and create a passive income stream for when the resources run out. Whether or not a particular party ran the country's finances at a surplus during a period of booming global markets isn't particularly important here (and we've discussed it at length in other threads) - once those minerals are gone, they're not going to grow back. If we end up finding ourselves in a position with no minerals and no money in the bank, we're going to have to rely solely on the government to make this place worth living in. I don't know about you, but that scares me and I'm the one who apparently loves big government here.
Please tell me how far down the track that you expect our two main resources, Iron Ore and Coal to run out? Please also outline why one single Australian should support a government with this track record to implement this and NOT piss it up the wall like they have the surplus AND the future fund. On one hand you are telling us that raping the future fund is not a good thing but on the other you are telling us that the same government is capable of making best use of revenue after discriminating against one sector of the economy that happens to be the only one that is truly profitable. Do I have this right?
To me, adding a further tax is basically changing the contract unilaterally halfway through. Not good business sense and certainly doesn't foster good will. And if Aussies think they are the only game in town and can do what they want they'll soon realise that folly. It reminds me of that Simpsons episode where the Hollywood producers came into town to make a movie and the Mayor kept on thinking up new taxes just because he knew they had the money to pay.
Well, there is a point where they will run out, a point where all the easy-to-get-to stuff has run out and a point when the world doesn't want what we have. The world is rapidly moving away from coal for example. We can already fit a mini nuke plant that can power 50,000 homes into a shipping container and if better reactors are developed such as the thorium ones India is working on then we could see a fall off in coal demand in maybe 50 years. Its quite possible that the coal industry won't exist in any meaningful sense in a hundred years. A hundred years isn't a long time - the last house I lived in was about a hundred years old and it was a perfectly good house, canned food was invented about a hundred years ago and before that everyone had to eat what came fresh from the fields, the core of Sydney's railway network was built less than a hundred years ago and we rely on it to be able to function as one of the world's major cities. Look at Newcastle in the UK to see what happens when other energy sources become cheaper and coal becomes too expensive to mine any more - the main industry dies (causing unemployment), all the secondary industries die (causing unemployment) and after a period of being a complete shithole, the area has to reinvent itself and rely on services to generate income which may or may not drop off depending on what's flavour of the month. 1. The current government hasn't tapped the Future Fund yet (and hopefully they won't), 2. Who implements a mining tax doesn't matter, only the fact that one is implemented. Well done to the Liberals for establishing the Future Fund - it was a sensible idea to put the Telstra proceeds money aside for the future and so is putting aside money that comes from the mining tax. No, you're confusing "the government" with "an independent managed trust fund". I don't trust Julia Gillard to always do the right thing. I certainly don't trust Tony Abbott to always do the right thing. I didn't trust John Howard and Peter Costello to always do the right thing and I don't trust the people who come after our current crop of politicians to do the right thing either. This is precisely the reason for separating monies held in trust on behalf of the Australian people from the government's general revenue that comes from regular corporate taxes.
Really? So china building a new coal fire plant every 10 days translates to "rapidly moving away" ? Germany also has many 800MW plants in the pipeline.... is this also called "rapidly moving away"? Turn off the ABC champ... it aint happenin that way
And yet, by the very nature of this discussion, we observe that they can change the rules at any time to do anything they like. Let's face it Big A.D. , our Big Australian Democracy is just a hollow sham, where touted solutions are just politically expedient, predatory decisions to expropriate more wealth from non-government individuals and corporations and redistribute to welfare recipients and to fund globalist agendas that are not in our interest. . . to appease those they report to, while increasing the dependency of voters and there-by controlling their votes. There is no altruism or benevolence from government for the interests of the people at all. It is clear your stoic belief in such is at the root of your communist leaning, however it is not our reality and clinging to that belief is simply delusional, IMO. But it is well that you expound your beliefs for we all get to consider our own delusions in this area. I for one appreciate the opportunity you provide. Thanks.
Big A.D, Labor have already announced they will raid the super fund to get back into surplus. Let's stop arguing "I hope they don't" because it is happening if they make it that far. Again long term pain for short term political gain. The same way Rudd got to spruk about avoiding a "technical" recession because of governement expenditure. If you had taken out the 100billion or so he spent out of the GDP figure we contracted. That spruking was basically a lie. The super tax is going straight into consolidated revenue mate. They will piss it against the wall like they have everything else. I too would like the future fund, fully funded, spent into super etc to fully fund govt super etc then make unfunded govt super abolished and put into each budget-period. Then and only then can we create a sovereign wealth fund. None of the above are the plans for the government that wants to introduce this tax. You want your cake and eat it also. You are not going to get it. If they survive you will get your cake alright, but that's about it.
