It's got nothing to do with time.
It's about reality.
It's about reality.
Labor's superannuation bill
- Thread starter mmm....shiney!
- Start date
Latest development- Albo states that super is a $4 Trillion national asset. That is should be used for national projects
I'm guessing for things like expanding the NDIS, getting Snowy 2.0 half finished and closing the gap a few millimetres.
PS- Paul Keating says super should be merged with centerlink to create an integrated wealth transfer system. (Oops, I meant integrated social welfare and retirement system)
I'm guessing for things like expanding the NDIS, getting Snowy 2.0 half finished and closing the gap a few millimetres.
PS- Paul Keating says super should be merged with centerlink to create an integrated wealth transfer system. (Oops, I meant integrated social welfare and retirement system)
He wasn't saying that the government should use them to fund expenditure at all. He said that super funds should invest in corporate bonds to provide funds for those companies to invest in projects of "national interest".
The issue is not that Albo wants our super, he doesn't, it's that he's trying to influence where our funds are invested.
That's the same thing that EUSSR is doing, they are just going straight for the bank accounts to force citizens to invest in green scams.
Isn't it wonderful how all the socialist governments manage to wreck their economies, and then simultaneously get these brilliant ideas of abolishing private property rights.
More central planning. More government meddling in private savings.
Where have we seen this before?
www.france24.com
Isn't it wonderful how all the socialist governments manage to wreck their economies, and then simultaneously get these brilliant ideas of abolishing private property rights.
More central planning. More government meddling in private savings.
Where have we seen this before?
EU wants to tap citizens' savings. Easier said than done
The idea sounds simple: tap trillions of euros of EU citizens' savings to unlock capital for European companies through a more integrated financial market.
www.france24.com
That's correct. The function of government is to spend not invest for profit. How much does the Bruce Hwy return on paper?
They're not forcing anyone to invest in green "scams". The EU wants to create a centralised financial market out of the 27 separate ones that currently exist and provide a pool of funding for market yielding instruments which would include investing in businesses involved in green "scams".
Countries like the US and Australia have a centralised financial market. The EU's is fragmented meaning businesses cannot access the savings that many Europeans have in stashed in low yielding, secure funds and bank accounts because they're spread across multiple markets and regulatory systems. By centralising the market businesses could access a larger pool of funds by incentivising those savers into investing in higher yielding instruments.
I think the problem is: if the gov is in the market of: creating money out of thin air to fund a budget, AND, governance of the rules for businesses to operate in australia, AND essencially running "schemes, promotions and initiatives" otheresie called "for profit businesses", then theirs clear conflict of interest..
And I for one want to be IN on that corrupt action like every other greedy person who can beneft from being first to the trough...
Therefore... whether its a bad idea or not.. (and ill leave that one for others to debate but im siding whith whoever says "hairbrained" first).. its not going to be implemented without further changing the balance of wealth and power..
Wealth: either more to rich at the expense of the others.. or more to the poor at the expense of the middle class...
Power: out of the hands of those that seek to actually look after themselves and more to the government and super industries that should be looking after our interestes for the sake of looking after the "nation" i.e.. funding for the "stuff" that the gov cant print more money for without raising inflation of the money supply and thus, tax...
Way to increase the velocity of money.. but at the expense as fertiliser for things that wont survive when the bs stops.
And I for one want to be IN on that corrupt action like every other greedy person who can beneft from being first to the trough...
Therefore... whether its a bad idea or not.. (and ill leave that one for others to debate but im siding whith whoever says "hairbrained" first).. its not going to be implemented without further changing the balance of wealth and power..
Wealth: either more to rich at the expense of the others.. or more to the poor at the expense of the middle class...
Power: out of the hands of those that seek to actually look after themselves and more to the government and super industries that should be looking after our interestes for the sake of looking after the "nation" i.e.. funding for the "stuff" that the gov cant print more money for without raising inflation of the money supply and thus, tax...
Way to increase the velocity of money.. but at the expense as fertiliser for things that wont survive when the bs stops.
Honestly the gov wuld be better of plainly stating what is wrong with the country and where businesses could. In the existing system without change: reliably operate and grow profitably and legally.. i.e. spotlight for economic healing...
They dont.. all you hear from them are the things they need to change that ultimately is like accusations or confessions of addiction and cycling through all the different phazes of denial, half-baked semi-commitments and issues they can have.
Look at the ocean.
See how its reliable and constantly "there".. just.. "there".. they say dont build you house on sand, but honestly it would be better to build a houseboat, than rely on the rules and regulations as something "real that you can rely on" as a foundation for anything.
They dont.. all you hear from them are the things they need to change that ultimately is like accusations or confessions of addiction and cycling through all the different phazes of denial, half-baked semi-commitments and issues they can have.
Look at the ocean.
See how its reliable and constantly "there".. just.. "there".. they say dont build you house on sand, but honestly it would be better to build a houseboat, than rely on the rules and regulations as something "real that you can rely on" as a foundation for anything.
Last edited: