"Mateship tax"

[mmm....shiney!]

Don't know if this is OT or not considering where the discussion has been heading , but long range computer models have 2 cyclones (or 1 cyclone and an intense low) to cross the Qld coast within about a week of each other. Now, (a) will the anticipated flood levy be able to cover the costs of any damage from these potential crossings? (b) Should the flood levy be used to cover costs for damage repair caused by these systems?

My answer to (a) is no, as the gov't will end up "losing" most of the funding collected. My answer to (b) is also no, even though I live in possibly the path of the 2nd system, as it sets a dangerous precedent that any time there is a disaster, we'll cop another levy. We already have a permanent disaster management levy - taxation. Good grief, what a disaster.

For those interested, the 2 models I refer to are linked below.
http://radar.strikeone.net.au/?fuseaction=loops.cola&modelID=4&modelType=18
http://www.ecmwf.int/products/forec...lots!2010031400!!!relative_archive_date!step/

 

[Guest]

They'll create another levy for it.

And leave it perpetually as the new 'natural disaster tax'

 

[THUCYDIDES79]

The government setting up a new tax for natural disasters, is like mixing sugar and pepper andeating it together.
Julia was talking about the aussie charitable spirit or whatever, but it goes thru the gov and
removes the 'charitable' bit imo.


Auspm GO GO GO !!!!

 

[dickmojo]

The government setting up a new tax for natural disasters, is like mixing sugar and pepper andeating it together.
Julia was talking about the aussie charitable spirit or whatever, but it goes thru the gov and
removes the 'charitable' bit imo.


Auspm GO GO GO !!!!

Fully Auspm, you got my support 100%~

I'm nearly through Atlas Shrugged, sheesh what a novel, the fattest novel I've ever read, but also the awesomest ^^

 

[Randomz]

Imagine a world where every cent you earn goes in your pocket and you only spend it on what you wish to spend it on?

Mememe....

Imagine a world with no roads, schools, police or healthcare.

 

[dickmojo]

Imagine a world where every cent you earn goes in your pocket and you only spend it on what you wish to spend it on?

Mememe....

Imagine a world with no roads, schools, police or healthcare.

No, your lack of imagination is stunning.

Why do you think that the ONLY possible way of these services being made available is if the government steps in, with its heavy-handed, ham-fisted, bureaucratically bungling manner which its infamously characterised by?

Surely there are better ways of organising the delivery of essential services that by-passes all the bureaucratic snouts-in-the-trough feeding frenzies, all the waste and inefficiency, all the kick-backs and corruption.

Nothing comes free mate, but the only difference between the government mandating something and the free market having its wicked way with it is the wide disparity in their respective efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Its a provable fact of nature that the free market is the most efficient system of organising economic transactions.

It causes prices to reduce year on year at the same time as quality increases year on year.

Now why wouldn't we want that inherent process to operate in the health-care sector? In the education sector? Why is it acceptible for health care costs to spiral out of control, higher and higher each year, for education cost to increase every year, when its simply not necessary to be like that?

Get the socialist government out of the way and let the free market do its work unfettered.

In the long-run, that would be the best thing for everyone... yes, even the poor.

 

[chimpanchu]

The treasury is so broke they used up all our tax money for bullshit stuff, now they make you do "Compulsory donation" to fix Queensland which suppose to be Federal government's job to do!

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind donating money to Queensland victims, but paying taxes to government to help Queensland??? I wonder how much of this money ACTUALLY goes to Queensland???

 

[Guest]

Imagine a world where every cent you earn goes in your pocket and you only spend it on what you wish to spend it on?

Mememe....

Imagine a world with no roads, schools, police or healthcare.

No, your lack of imagination is stunning.

Why do you think that the ONLY possible way of these services being made available is if the government steps in, with its heavy-handed, ham-fisted, bureaucratically bungling manner which its infamously characterised by?

Surely there are better ways of organising the delivery of essential services that by-passes all the bureaucratic snouts-in-the-trough feeding frenzies, all the waste and inefficiency, all the kick-backs and corruption.

Nothing comes free mate, but the only difference between the government mandating something and the free market having its wicked way with it is the wide disparity in their respective efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

Its a provable fact of nature that the free market is the most efficient system of organising economic transactions.

It causes prices to reduce year on year at the same time as quality increases year on year.

Now why wouldn't we want that inherent process to operate in the health-care sector? In the education sector? Why is it acceptible for health care costs to spiral out of control, higher and higher each year, for education cost to increase every year, when its simply not necessary to be like that?

Get the socialist government out of the way and let the free market do its work unfettered.

In the long-run, that would be the best thing for everyone... yes, even the poor.

I would have responded, but you've beaten me to the punch.

You can plainly see why I'm banging my head against a wall on this one. It's simply ignorance behind the vitriol, the lack of real understanding I find most frustrating.

As you said, the assumption is that without a functional government these service won't exist is short sighted.

You're near through the book (just wait until you get to John's speech - it's about 30-40 PAGES from memory!) but you at least 'get' what I'm trying to impart to our friends here.

It's almost like trying to discuss the virtues of precious metals investment all over again with someone who is indoctrinated to reject it at all costs (like a financial advisor perhaps?). The conflict of interest stems from not just the personal character clash I have with these guys, but moreso from the learned behaviours and ideals of this society which impart succinctly that GOVERNMENT is the only feasible way to get things done in this fashion.

My suggestion is that whilst government can and will provide these 'services' they do so in the worst possible fashion as their accounting methods and measurements for success are completely figurative, subjective and ultimately, not held up to scrutiny.

The very best you can hope to achieve in 'managing' how your tax dollars are spent on the quality and delivery of goods and services in society is your ballot vote and you all well know just how 'effective' that is.

But people will not see the arguement without having the foundation under the belt first.

Hence why I suggest those who are negative on the view, at least take the time to read and research what I have done so - especially on the free market capitalism model - and then we can have a rational discussion on the issue.

I'm just saying at the end of the day that there's a far better way of doing things than what people commonly accept as the status quo.

When I became a stacker, I didn't just wake up to the financial system. I woke up to the WHOLE system and can see it in a light now I never thought possible even 10 years ago.

But being able to impart those ideals and philosiphies on those who haven't walked the same path or reached similar enlightenment is difficult.

That is to say, I'm reading from a different playbook to most now and it's trying to relay the virtue and benefits of that new rules set to those who won't budge from the 'tried and true' that's causing most friction.

Objectivism literally changed my thinking and my life and I have to say, I'm a much better person for it.

Until you read up on it yourselves and understand the fundamentals at the very least, it'll be very difficult to impart the virtues of it in any manner that will make logical sense.

 

[boston]

Imagine a world where every cent you earn goes in your pocket and you only spend it on what you wish to spend it on?

Mememe....

Imagine a world with no roads, schools, police or healthcare.

Up until 1915, there was no income tax. Yet we managed to field an army and navy, have basic education and medical facilities, police protection and very basic roads.

It appears that our rate of taxation increase is/was, amongst other issues, proportional to our government sponsored public service sector. Just for the record, I used to be a semi-government employee.

 

[Randomz]

Mememe....

Imagine a world with no roads, schools, police or healthcare.

No, your lack of imagination is stunning.

[deleted for brevity.]

Get the socialist government out of the way and let the free market do its work unfettered.

In the long-run, that would be the best thing for everyone... yes, even the poor.

I would have responded, but you've beaten me to the punch.

You can plainly see why I'm banging my head against a wall on this one. It's simply ignorance behind the vitriol, the lack of real understanding I find most frustrating.

As you said, the assumption is that without a functional government these service won't exist is short sighted.

[deleted for brevity.]

Until you read up on it yourselves and understand the fundamentals at the very least, it'll be very difficult to impart the virtues of it in any manner that will make logical sense.

Gentlemen, the simple premise that you can have it all and keep everything to yourself is a selfish fallacy.

This is Australia, we don't have a national industry that can finance it all for us.

That is the simple point I addressed, yet it earned 2 essays which I suspect deliberately missed the point as usual.

Auspm, I read all the Ayn Rand stuff probably 15 years ago. I felt the frustration and understood all the implications.

Perhaps we would all be best served if like John Galt, you withdrew your services.