Government won’t be turfed out for taxing miners

EssJay says:

02:09pm | 18/05/10

Grow up. The 2 stimulus packages kept us out of the s*it that other developed nations got into through the GFC. Interest rates are only coming back to normal levels since the emergency level brought about by the GFC. The ETS has been blocked by the parliament twice through no fault of the government. The new industrial regime has not blown out wages and has given workers new security that they did not have under the Workplace Servitude Bill (WorkChoices). If the government can’t get it’s legislation through a hostile Senate where the Coalition simply oppose for opposition’s sake, it’s not the fault of the government. How much longer should I go on ...

TrueOz says:

04:18pm | 18/05/10

Please EssJay - don’t say any more. Just go back to your well worn copies of Das Capital, On the Dictatorship of the Proletariat and Chairman Rudd’s latest “Little Red Essay”. You might as well swallow another dose of bull-shit from the mainstream media whilst you’re at - it’s clear you’ve been getting a steady diet of it.

persephone says:

03:57pm | 18/05/10

Wayne

because Essential is taken over two weeks and Peter Lewis has access to the figures for both weeks separately.

The first week of this polling round, Labor was behind. The second week, they were ahead.

So, although the fortnightly poll average shows the two parties neck and necking, Labor’s vote is on the rise.

Oh, and angry electorate? Not really.

Remember: most people don’t ‘feel’ an issue nationally, they respond to it as it affects their own lives.

So with school buildings, they may think the program as a whole wasn’t well run, but if they’re happy with their school and think they got value for money, that will outweigh any concerns they have about the program overall.

And they might feel miners are being hard done by, but as long as they themselves are paying less tax, it really won’t worry them.

When people decide how to vote, it won’t be on big issues necessarily; it will be on their own situation and whether they’re happy with it.

This is particularly so of ‘swinging’ voters who - contrary to popular opinion - do not tend to belong to the ‘engaged and politically aware’ voter cohort. They tend to be people who aren’t that interested in politics and ‘go with the flow’ .

If the ‘flow’ is going back to Labor, a large proportion of these will come back too.

Of course, coming polls may prove me wrong!!

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

05:56pm | 18/05/10

persephone :  Just keep in mind how far behind the Coalition was only six months ago .  Your spin in this instance is rather out of kilter with reality . If the polls were 5% apart , i would tend to agree . It is just a wee bit early to make the judgement you have come up with.
The backflips , bungled programs , broken promises and jetissioned policy is going to stay in swinging voters minds for a lot longer than you think ,  and the Opposition will make certain they are kept well reminded of Labor’s record of failed governing.

Sherekahn says:

12:11pm | 18/05/10

You say that you used to be in Financial Services, well that says it all.
you were one of the parasites of the years 2001 to 2007.
Alan Koehler has warned us all about you people, unfortunately just too late for me.
One of the top three banks told me in 2001-4 that Australian shares were not worthwhile as they covered only 3% of the possibilities, so he put mine in International shares.  I lost 50% of my savings.

persephone says:

03:59pm | 18/05/10

You’re all right, Jack, pull the ladder up?

So very Liberal.

People at ‘the lower end’ are a bit less selfish.

Phil says:

12:09am | 19/05/10

Sherekahn

Actually I have never sold a financial services investment, superannuation, nor advised anyone other than my close clients and in that capacity only as a mate on any form of investment. On that note I consider myself an amateur invester. I also sold my business in 2004 well before any GFC was even on the horizon, for health reasons and as I wanted to spend more time with my young family.

My company was considered in the industry, but it has ever invested money on behalf of others nor earned any commision from it. It was in the finance industry grouping.

What do you two do, work for the labor party, or at least one of their staff?

By the way if you were too dumb to work out where your money goes/went and did not do the due dilegence on risk nor ask appropriate questions, that is hardly my fault.

I too had some of my super in shares in international funds but the ones I am in, didnt fare to bad over the past few years, but I do most of the investments myself nowadays, with help from one of my mates who has time to study it properly, and whilst we did out shirt in late 2008 & most of 2009 we are just about back to square one now. The idea is to spread risk, not put all your eggs in one basket. For what it is worth I would never invest more than 10% of my assets in anything, let alone international shares. Mind you I bet you didnt mind the double digit returns whilst they lasted. You probably panicked and sold them at their lowest, rather than riding the wave back up the crest.

Slandering and blaming someone whose company is related to financial services, but not life insurance nor any investment products, is like saying every NRL player is a drunk, woman basher, cause one or more may have done so.

Why is it that bitterness and class envy is always a trait of labor people. Do you see many comments of hate from the right? As much as I disagree with many of their policies, and think some are d..kheads, I do not hate the labor party members. You lot really need to get out more and enjoy life rather than get all bitter.

My the way Persephone, I wouldnt mind paying the extra super for my former employees, as if they were not hard committed workers they would not be employed by me. I paid them very well. I do think that the extra 3% shoudl be 6% with 50/50 employer/employee payments.

persephone says:

08:47am | 19/05/10

Do you see many comments of hate from the right?

Um, yes, I do.

In fact, most of my posts are followed by streams of abuse, with very few attempts to actually engage with the arguments I’ve put forward.

Always figure it’s a kind of compliment - it my arguments were able to be refuted, then they would be.

Philip says:

11:10am | 19/05/10

Persephone

Most of your comments are simply labor spin. Thats my opinion anyway. I rarely do agree with you, but as in all things I am prepared to give credit when it is due, albeit that this is a rarety for labor.

Ask yourself this questions, if you feel the batts and BER programs are/were such a great success and your Messiah should be crowned kind of kings, would you ask Joolia, Kevin, Wayne, Lindsay and Peter to arrange your home extension, and get it insulated, at the rip off prices they paid with our monies under their programs.

You know the answer to the above question would be of course no. Not one of labor’s supporters/sheeple would personally pay the price per square metre for any type of work with the exception of Paul Keating who whist a tw.t at least has taste.

What I meant by hate is comments attacking people personally. Whilst I disagree with your ideas and many points I dont hate you, maybe feel sorry that you are deluded, but hate is a wasted emotion. I do however respect your right to have an opinion even if in my opinion it is wrong.

Opinions are like as.holes, everyone has one.

The labor party always seems to do things for themselves rather than for the country. Whilst I did not vote for them, I acknowledge that Hawke and Keating did engage in some serious reforms, which benefited our nation immensly. I even mentioned this to Paul Keating during a business meeting once, and that whilst I did not vote for him, I respected some of his reforms, but disliked others. I also stated that some of his reforms and that of Hawke made the job of John Howard easier.

I will give credit where it is due, however other than signing Kyoto (symbolic BS) and Sorry (symbolic BS without anything further done) the current government has done little, promised great things, but very short on detail and proper, appropriate and diligent execution.

persephone says:

04:02pm | 18/05/10

Drecked

So investors and self funded retirees are workers?

And putting in an appearance and whining about their fate seems to be what the mining companies are doing at present.

Amy Brunner says:

09:57pm | 18/05/10

persephone, Most of the “investors and self funded retirees” whom you denigrate, were for the most part workers; workers who saved their money and invested their money for their self-support in their retirement, only to now have the rug pulled out from under them by a fanatical socialists/communists.

Do you really, for a moment, believe that the Mining Industry is to be the one and only to be attacked by this ideologue.

For a industry to be taxed an extra 40% on any taxable profits over 6% over the Bond Rate, is straight out of the Rudd Red Book.

persephone says:

08:50am | 19/05/10

I am not denigrating them, Amy, just pointing out a flaw in Drecked’s ‘argument’.

And you’re right - Abbott’s going to slug all companies who make substantial profits with extra taxes - he has already indicated he will do so to fund his parental leave plan.

Ryan says:

11:29am | 18/05/10

@Henry: 100% agreed, if I were the unions and Rudd I would be preparing for something big because I cannot believe that they will just sit back and be robbed like this.

Roja says:

12:26pm | 18/05/10

Well it’s true Labor should be worried - the mining companies do have an incredibly large amount of spare cash to fund such a campaign after all.

Waker says:

12:39pm | 18/05/10

lol. Good luck. I know who’ll be eating their words. Labor will thump this election home, you are so closed off from the real world you wouldn’t have a clue. Don’t forget your also up against the financial sector who are serious hard-nosed business people as well.

Shane From Melbourne says:

01:12pm | 18/05/10

@Ryan. Mining Companies being robbed? Hate to tell you but the government actually owns all that stuff in the ground. It can charge the mining companies whatever it likes. Funny how the Liberals go on about the free market until it doesn’t work in their favor….

Willy K says:

03:32pm | 18/05/10

The finance sector agrees with the miners I’m sorry to inform you!

Shane the whole point is that it is supposed to be a ‘free’ market.

Why is the govt interfering?  To gouge miners for money to pay for their debt.

Socialism by stealth.  What can we expect from a treasurer with an Arts degree and a PM with nil but Public Service hack on his CV.

Ryan says:

04:04pm | 18/05/10

@Shane From Melbourne : for sure and the mining companies are ALREADY paying for that stuff in the ground, getting it out of the ground costs the mining companies does it not. If the government wants the money from it, why don’t they do all the hard yards in exploration and setting up and running the mining companies, negotiating contracts with customers etc, oh how convenient to forget that.
Shane, what do you do for a living, you use the roads? The government owns those roads, why not put a super tax on using roads. You breathe don’t you Shane? The government owns that air you breathe Shane, why not put a super tax on that.. oh wait they already tied to do that!

persephone says:

04:08pm | 18/05/10

Henry

firstly, if the mining companies haven’t started fighting yet, it’s already too late.

People tend to make decisions about issues fairly rapidly and it’s then very difficult to change their minds.

Secondly, the relevant union is the CFMEU, which supports the tax.

I really think that shonky financial advisers and big multinationals beating up on Labor will gain the government votes, not lose them.

Ryan says:

04:45pm | 18/05/10

@Shane From Melbourne: if the government actually owns that stuff in the ground and you are attempting to portray like the mines don’t already pay for that then why doesn’t the government just mine it themselves?
I can’t wait to see the response, this is going to be a laugh a minute for dumb and dumber (aka Rudd and Swann).

Shane From Melbourne says:

05:04pm | 18/05/10

@Ryan again, I’ll bet the mining companies are not crying tears over gouging the Chinese Steel Mills. The australian government gouges the mining companies who gouge the chinese steel mills who gouge the builders who gouge the private sector or government (especially over BER) I doubt the mining companies will be crying poor, even after this tax….

john says:

09:31pm | 18/05/10

the unions are backing labor because they are in bed together.. they are not looking after their members who will lose jobs when projects are scaled back.. Boom times don’t stay around forever.. when it slows the workers will lose pay and conditions.. while the Kevin Renoylds of the world will still have their multimillion dollar apartments and workers out of the job..

I’m not saying don’t tax miners.. but make it workable.. 5 to 10% more increasing 5 to 10 years.. on new projects..

persephone says:

04:10pm | 18/05/10

3) Lower unemployment, leading to higher take home wages and a sense of job security.

.....which tends to wipe out any impact the other two might have.

john says:

09:24pm | 18/05/10

@persephone..how do you get lower employment when you tax an industry nearly 20% more.. something has to give..

the 3% super will cause real take home pay to decrease..

persephone says:

08:54am | 19/05/10

john

on profits - profits being the things left over after you’ve paid your workers.

Of course, if you’re implication is that mining companies are so greedy that, to protect their 50% return on investment, they’ll resort to sacking workers, I suppose you’re right.

It makes it a bit difficult, however,  to maintain high levels of productivity and profits if there’s no one there to dig it out for you, but I’m sure they’ll find a way around that.

persephone says:

04:17pm | 18/05/10

cybacaT

well, yes they did.

Firstly, the ETS was never going to be a massive cost to the Budget, because the vast majority of the money spent came in and went straight back out again, with a little extra.

The ETS was accounted for - this is what first alerted analysts to the fact it had been delayed. It’s simply that, with no carbon levy coming in and no compensation going out, there wasn’t much left to account for.

The NBN is (a) a work in progress so not that expensive at present and (b) to be financed mostly by borrowings, so it shows in the budget mainly as an increase in debt & interest payments.

This is why removing NBN spending makes no difference to the budget bottom line and can’t be counted as a saving - it is all borrowings.

Yes, the government did make cuts. What’s wrong with that? As Tony Abbott said, there are two ways to reduce government debt; one fo them is to cut costs. It is what he is proposing to do himself.

TrueOz says:

11:01pm | 18/05/10

Nosthow, I’m wondering exactly what you ever did to deserve a share of “(Australia’s) own resources”. At a guess, I’d say stuff all. In fact - what did you ever do to deserve becoming a beneficiary of the redistribution of wealth (i.e. legalised theft) perpetrated by successive Australian governments. Let me guess (again) - you vote for a living - public servant, union official or some other form of parasite. No doubt, the perspective from which you assess “fair” is that of a thief.

persephone says:

08:59am | 19/05/10

True Oz

so on your logic, we should just give the mining companies our mineral resources?

Mineral resources belong to the Crown, which represents the people, so we all have ‘ownership’ of them.

It would be interesting to know what terrific contribution you made to this country, to be so dismissive about other Australians.

Dingo says:

03:02pm | 19/05/10

nosthow, it is disgusting how quickly some people will buy into the class warfare that the ALP are using to try to justify this tax grab.

Mining companies pay State royalties to pay for the privilege of exacting resources. They spend 100’s of millions on exploration and extraction. Sometimes it’s not fruitful and they make a loss. Other times they are very successful and employ thousands of workers who get paid very well. They pay payroll tax for the privilege of employing people. Then they negotiate contracts to sell the resources in an open and fluid international market. Once they make a profit they pay company tax. Some companies (and therefore their directors) have been very successful and have become very wealthy. That’s what often happens when people work hard and persevere.

So you can see that you are already getting more than your fair share of a resource that happens to be found in a country you happen to live in, that a whole lot of other people put a whole lot of work into selling which allows us all to get a return on resources that would otherwise sit idly underground.