Mining tax: take two

May 2, 2014
Written by: Dr Victoria Fielding
60 Replies

Look, I don’t mean to sound like Wayne Swan did anything wrong when he released the mining tax four years to this day. Because clearly history will show the mining tax was great for Australia. And especially this week, after the release of the Tea-Party-like Commission of Audit, we have seen exactly why the mining tax was an important policy. The upcoming repeal of the mining tax is a turning point in Australia’s history, and one that I’m not sure we’ll ever recover from. I just wish that when Swan released the policy, he communicated it better. Because perhaps then the mining tax would have survived an Abbott scare campaign and the $22 million dollar mining PR campaign funded by the richest of the richest 1%. Perhaps if the public understood why the mining tax was in their best interest, and repealing it is in no one’s best interest except the likes of Gina Rinehart, Abbott wouldn’t have successfully used the policy as a stick to beat Labor with, and it wouldn’t have contributed to the downfall of the Labor government. Perhaps.

And perhaps if voters understood that the government revenue given up in gross super-profits that the likes of Gina Rinehart will now keep, will be made up for tenfold by cuts to government services and increases in consumer taxes through the outrageously cruel Commission of Audit inspired budget, they would have defended the mining tax in the election instead of voting against it. Perhaps.

So in celebration / commiseration of the four-year anniversary of Wayne Swan and Kevin Rudd’s release of the Resources Super Profits Tax, I have re-written their original press release using the argument I think Labor should have gone with, which may have had a very different outcome for all of us.

Mining dividends for resource owners

The long-term tax plan we release today will provide Australians with long overdue dividends from the resources that we all own. Every man, women and child in Australia – all twenty-two million of us – own shares in Australia’s natural resource wealth. But for a long time, we have not been receiving our share of the huge profits a few companies are reaping from digging up the resources we own. And worse than this, many mining companies are not even Australian owned, so this wealth that belongs to all of us is, in many cases, not even staying in our country. So we need to change this. We need to make sure the wealth from the resources we all own is better distributed amongst Australian shareholders. All of us are shareholders.

Now, let’s be clear. This mining tax is not designed as a disincentive to investment in Australia. Just because we want everyone to have their fair share, does not mean we don’t encourage investment by mining companies. And of course, profit is needed to ensure investment takes place. But, as recommended in the Henry Tax Review, the best way to tax mining companies without harming investment, and without harming jobs, is to tax super profits. No job was ever lost from a super profits tax, because we know that while the resources are in the ground, and while profit can be made digging them out, there are plenty of companies lining up to do just that. And we know that these companies can’t take this business elsewhere, because the resources are here, in our country. We all own these resources, they belong to us, and we should be receiving our fair share of dividends to share this wealth more successfully amongst our whole community. Not just those rich enough to part-own, or in some cases, solely own mining companies.

There is no doubt that this announcement today will ruffle some feathers. The big mining companies have got used to making billions and billions of dollars profit and they won’t appreciate being reminded that the resources aren’t theirs in the first place. But this government doesn’t make policy based on the priorities of a wealthy few. We represent all Australians, and it would be wrong of us to continue to stand by and let our wealth drain away, without making sure we all receive our dividend. Once we start collecting your fair share, we will be distributing it fairly across the community, where it is needed most to:

generate more superannuation savings for working families;
lower tax for all companies, especially small businesses; and
invest in our future infrastructure needs, particularly for mining states.

This is a monumental day in Australia’s history, when we will start the process of reversing the inequitable distribution of wealth from our resources. We will finally do what is right by our community, our children and all our futures by ensuring we all reap the benefits of our share in the natural resources we all own. This is a proud day to be Australian Treasurer.

Perhaps?

Thank you to LOVO whose comment on my last post inspired this press release re-write, and to Luke Mansillo who provided further inspiration with this article comparing Australian’s attitude to the mining tax, with Norway’s successful future fund.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Post Views: 172

60 comments

Login here

Register here

Graeme RustMay 2, 2014 at 8:55 pm

liked this a lot Victoria; I wonder when Labor will come out and say they will repeal a lot of abbott’s stupid policies?? as an OAP I seem to feel as though Labor are being very quiet on a lot of abbott’s crap, would have Hawke or Keating let them off so easy??

amarkoneMay 2, 2014 at 9:06 pm

Thank you, thank you, thank you somebody else with half a brain and I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense. You are absolutely right, Norway know how to do it and the mining tax was not sold in the right fashion at the last election and now we pay the price. We need to have advocates in this country who can sell ice to Eskimos because poor old Wayne couldn’t sell ice water in the Sahara. Maybe he was just too nice.

hemingway13May 2, 2014 at 9:28 pm

‘Tis another compelling and lucid argument from Ms. Rollison today.

Alas, if Treasurer Swan had been remotely as passionate and cogent when defending the RSPT as he was when expressing his utter contempt for the Labor colleague who lead his party into government after 11 long years in the wilderness, then the level of public support for the RSPT might have been significantly higher.

After two decades witnessing frequent factional fights-to-the-death at my Labor Party branch meetings and conferences, it saddens me that we’ve neglected to focus all of our energies on defeating the malevolent efforts of dead-set Social Darwinist Coalition governments to redistribute an obscene percentage of Australia’s wealth into the pockets of their mega-rich cronies.

StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:18 pm

Clearly written by somebody who doesn’t understand investment and the commonwealth. The resources belong to the states and not the commonwealth and that is why they didn’t go ahead with the tax with the vigour they intended. Secondly investors would have laughed at this as they did with Swan. They are the ones who risk the capital (and often lose) and they expect great rewards for it when it comes off. How many junior mining explorers (or even BHP) have the advocates of this tax invested in? I would hazard not many but am happy to be corrected. For every FMG there are many more PDYs and MMXs but it is easy to ask for the profits when you haven’t risked the losses. Isn’t it?

I will say though, Swan may have come across with much more credibility if he didn’t pick 3 or 4 out of 138 recommendations of Henry’s. Massive fail by Swan.

RobMay 2, 2014 at 11:33 pm

Maybe you could apply o be the editor of their news channel. Seriously.

Matters NotMay 2, 2014 at 11:35 pm

I live in Swan’s electorate of Lilley, and while I am not a member of the ALP, I worked to ensure Swan was returned at the last election. Having said that I think that Swan’s handling of the MRRT was a complete disaster. That criticism applies equally to Gillard.

One of the big problems we have in Australia is the mistaken belief that when politicians are elevated to ministerial portfolios they suddenly acquire ‘expertise’. The really sad part is that some, but not all, politicians are under the same misapprehension. I’ve worked with Ministers whose claim to fame bore no correlation with the responsibilities bestowed. They survived because in large part they recognised the limitations of their capabilities and were prepared to be ‘advised’..

When Swan and Gillard ‘knifed’ Rudd (and having worked with Rudd in QLD over a number of years, I can understand why) they decided they would do the negotiations with the miners and do so on their own. In short, they became the ‘experts’. The public servants who understood the ‘issues’ involved were physically and metaphorically ‘locked out’.

The result was a disaster. And we as citizens are the ‘poorer’, broadly defined, now and in the future.

The irony is that the punters ‘buy’ the need to get a fair share when the miners export both the minerals and the resulting profits overseas. They understood it then and they understand it now.

When will the ALP make a song and dance about the proposed repeal?

RobMay 2, 2014 at 11:36 pm

Stephen, its hard to PAY a SUPER PROFITS TAX if you are not making SUPER PROFITS. Your argument voids itself.

Bill MorrisMay 2, 2014 at 11:45 pm

It should also be pointed out that the reason that the Resources Tax generated so little revenue was due to the mining companies minimising their super profits in capital expenditure, plant, equipment and infrastructure that in the normal course they would not have done for many years, when they actually needed to. Also enabled them to stockpile and manipulate the market price. They could not have continued to do this for much longer unless they started to give their super profits away or their accountants came up with a new way to wrought the system. Removal of the tax at this stage will ensure that the increased production capacity now lying idle can be brought into service for even greater super profits long into the future.

StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:45 pm

Matters Not some good comments there. However I believe Aussies have had every chance to ‘buy’ into huge profits and am of the opinion that those who have done so deserve to benefit most. Most fair minded Aussies realise that they had the chance to buy FMG at 3 cents in 2003 and those that risked it deserved the benefits.

philasophigasMay 2, 2014 at 11:47 pm

Good work Stephen. Your bottle of grange odds in the mail.

StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:52 pm

Rob, it’s even harder to make super profits without people investing with the hope of super profits. Do you invest in mining explorers/producers or do you just wait until they are profitable before expecting your cut from the government?

Matters NotMay 2, 2014 at 11:56 pm

Stephen said:

resources belong to the states and not the commonwealth and that is why they didn’t go ahead with the tax

Clearly someone who hasn’t kept up. A really, really slow learner. That crap was blown away in August last year. Here’s a quote.

“Fortescue challenged the MRRT because it was an unreasonable intrusion into an area of state responsibility and that it was also an unfair, discriminatory and complex tax,” chief executive officer Nev Power said in a statement.

“We’re disappointed by today’s decision.”

Dear oh dear Stephen. Now who is it that doesn’t understand. Hilarious!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-07/high-court-rules-on-mineral-resource-rent-tax/4870228

BTW, I make investment decisions on a daily basis, across the spectrum, and I spend within Australia unlike most mining investors who transfer wealth overseas.

Stephen, why do you hate Australia?

StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:56 pm

Doesn’t even make sense phil. Aside from that a bottle of grange would be wasted on somebody who earns $1204 a fortnight supporting a family of four. I hope to improve on that but I don’t need your ridiculous comments when you know nothing about me.

charybdsMay 2, 2014 at 11:57 pm

Stephen,
it seems that you have a limited grasp of commonwealth .. Break it down; common – wealth.
Risking capitol to dig up something that belongs to everyone in the expectation of a profit for .. NOT everyone .. hardly entitles you to take from the rest of the owners of the resource, access to the benefits of same.
Just because you risk loss to make profit, doesn’t entitle you to deprive the owners of the asset you exploit of a share in the wealth generated.
The tragedy of your argument is similar to expecting to eat all the food at the table because you booked the restaurant ..

ken sveyMay 3, 2014 at 12:06 am

Matters is spot on, Labor had some shocking ministers like Conroy and that pop singer. And they couldnt sell a policy.
I used to be in Bishops electorate and for a while, Stephen Smith. Smith never replied to correspondence whilst Bishop used to. Lazy ex union hacks, ambitious staffers and bloody lawyers should all be disqualifiec from pre selection.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:08 am

Matters Not, Massive Fail. My point was that the reason the RSPT didn’t go ahead in it’s initial form is that it wouldn’t have got through because of the ownership of the states. Why do you think it was watered down? My comment had nothing to do with the RSPT which is what this article refers to.

Matters Not, why can’t you comprehend what I have written?

charybds, the tragedy of your argument is that you expect to share in the rewards of those who take risks to make profits and who without those profits would exist. People like you are the first to laugh at those who lose money and that is what I find sad.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:23 am

Ken, the problem is that the pop singer sold his soul and never belonged. I am of the view that Smith was the ALPs most valuable asset as he came across well to the public and did a reasonable job. If all Bishop has is getting back to you then we are in trouble but to a true ‘independent’ observer she lets herself down with comments about others when at home but holds her own when in the company of overseas delegates. The jury is out on Bishop but I was disappointed to see Smith go (union ties aside). Sorry about being off topic.

Matters NotMay 3, 2014 at 12:26 am

My point was that the reason the RSPT didn’t go ahead in it’s (sic) initial form is that it wouldn’t have got through because of the ownership of the states

Clearly Stephen, you are ahistorical. When Twiggy ‘challenged’ he was supported by several States, including Queensland who wanted to establish ‘states rights’. He, and they, lost with costs awarded against.

As for comprehension skills …?

Perhaps, you might return to the education/training sector and sharpen up your communication skills.

And yes, I admit I know nothing about you, and further I don’t wish to. It’s your ‘ideas’ and construct of ‘reality’ that engages me.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:30 am

‘My comment had nothing to do with the RSPT which is what this article refers to’. Apologies should have read MRRT instead of RSPT. I think Matters Not knows what I meant. Still a fail from somebody who doesn’t understand. ‘Hilarious’.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:37 am

Lol Matters Not. Stop making a fool of yourself. My comment referred to the binning of the RSPT and not the MRRT (the watered down version). The RSPT was never challenged because it was never going to pass. We can argue that all you like but the RSPT was never even challenged on constitutional grounds for the reason it would have never got through. Or are Swan and Gillard just massive sell-outs to the major miners? I give them more credit but am I wrong?

philasophigasMay 3, 2014 at 12:44 am

A poor and flippant response on my part I admit. But Stephen, I fundamentally disagree with your approach. People on the left (I hate that term) don’t want to enact change by indulging in risk for reward on the stock market. We don’t hope to enact change by collectively investing billions in socially and environmentally destructive programs in order to at some point in the future gain control of the corporate entities that run them. We want our elected representatives to work for the interests of the common people and legislate to reduce the power of the destructive entities. It can be done. We need to win the hearts and minds of the good people of Australia in the hope that they will elect a government that will pursue an agenda of compassion and hope, rather than the agenda currently being pursued.

If you’re not pushing your angle for a bottle of grange as such, then I do wonder what it is that motivates you to put forward such thinking on this and other threads of late. You ideology does not seem to strike a chord with other posters from what I see.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:46 am

Matters Not, I agree that you don’t need to know anything more about me. All you need to know is that you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself.

philasophigasMay 3, 2014 at 12:56 am

You said it. You’re out for what you can get. Join the liberal party if you haven’t already.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:07 am

phil thanks for the response and it is one of the more reasoned responses I have received on here (you asked instead of simply having a crack which I just tend to come back from). For that I will be frank and you may make your own judgement.

My current situation may strike a cord with many here and I am under the impression that many may think I am full of it. I’m not. I am stressed to the max. Things are tough. Saying that, I had good years investing between 2000 and 2011 which allowed me to pay the majority of my house of which leaves me without too much rent stress. None of that money was made through mining investments aside from LICs. I have had good times which will allow me to come out of the testing times.

I am a believer that people create their own destiny. I had a good phase and the next good phase will come. I took risks but I reaped the rewards. Who would have given me the money back if I went broke? The answer is nobody. I am all for my family and bettering myself and ensuring they have options. It will happen and I will have to take risks. I expect nothing from the government (they provide well at times though) and they should expect nothing from me. People need to take responsibility for themselves and make it happen. Don’t worry, the worst off will be looked after.

Australia is a very fair country. I love it (not hate it as some said). It is one one of the fairest places on earth even though benefits to the rich may be too generous. I will always argue that money is made from risk and nothing is made from safety. That’s what term deposits are for. Let people make their own choices but don’t expect others to pay extra when their’s come off. It is the old races mantra: don’t make the winner at the races pay because it doesn’t last forever.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:11 am

Sorry phil. Didn’t get to read your last response before posting mine. It seems poor and flippant responses are the norm for you. I’ll make it even simpler, you’re just a flogger who expects everything given to them. Pretty pathetic really.

Greg RapmundMay 3, 2014 at 6:01 am

Victoria, there was a story a couple of days ago, possibly SMH, regarding Labor Party considering their own newspaper with a figure quoted of $95,000 pay for a journalist. I am wondering if you or any of the other excellent writers for AIMN could suggest to them that you could perform this task in a very competent and coherent way given, as is obvious, the Labor Party obviously haven’t got a clue. At the very least post all AIMN articles to them, someone there may recognise clear communication.
As you say these resources belong to all of us. In my mind there is no federal or state ownership, these entities exist for and because of us. Governments are elected representatives of the people, not seperate entities. The super profits from the sale of our resources should be gathered and used for the benefit of all Australians. Norway has been investing a portion of their resource income since the 1970’s, theoretically making all citizens millionaires. Have visited Norway, their public transport system, social security etc., are very impressive, even a little too generous in some Norwegian minds. Still they put wealth aside for the day oil runs out and seem to spend the proceeds wisely. I’m sure we could, too.

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 6:36 am

“The upcoming repeal of the mining tax is a turning point in Australia’s history, and one that I’m not sure we’ll ever recover from”

INDEED.

I always find it hard to see from what governments’ policicy announcements say to me – from all over the world, not just ours – whether they KNOW global economies are going to shit, or not.

They don’t want to scare the little children and therefore aren’t saying, at least not directly. The last thing they’d want is a run on the banks and people hoarding money, food and petrol….. because that would precipitate the unavoidable collapse of Capitalism. But what the Rabbit/Hockey government is doing is also precipitating this collapse.

The original mining tax was badly done, it should have raised billions…….. but at least it was there. By protecting their minions at any cost, the LNP is speeding up the demise of our great nation…… and the shit will have hit the fan so hard by next election, I predict the utter demise of this government. If there’s one thing they’re good at, it’s making enemies.

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 6:40 am

“They are the ones who risk the capital (and often lose) and they expect great rewards for it when it comes off.”

REALLY Stephen……..??? When was the last time a mine was started in Australia and……. they found no coal or metal ore?

IF you were risking money in oil well, then I’d support your argument, because all the oil companies are slowly going broke, but mines? A risk?

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 8:36 am

Stephen,

” I expect nothing from the government ”

Do you use the schools, hospitals and roads provided by the government? When you go the chemist do you say I insist on paying cost price plus 30% for my medications in recognition of the risk you have taken in opening a pharmacy?

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 9:19 am

Mike, mining companies go broke all the time. For every BHP there are hundreds that come and go and investors lose their money. If it was so easy to make money everybody here would invest in mining instead of asking the government to tax those risk takers who become successful more.

Kaye that is a ridiculous argument when you know exactly what I mean. But as for expecting it, no I don’t. That is just the way it is. Your pharmacy analogy is just plain stupid.

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 9:26 am

Stephen,

Your assertion that you expect nothing from the government is what is stupid. Governments collect taxes to provide services for its citizens, which is the whole point of this article. We own the resources, they are finite, we deserve some return from their development to help provide the services that even you use Stephen, and to provide a safety net for our vulnerable which I am sure will never be you Stephen. You and your family will never suffer from mental illness. You will never have an accident that leaves you disabled.

And the pharmacy example is very relevant considering this government’s ridiculous path of repealing a mining tax and then asking us to make co-payments to doctors and chemists.

LeeMay 3, 2014 at 9:50 am

“For every FMG there are many more PDYs and MMXs but it is easy to ask for the profits when you haven’t risked the losses. Isn’t it?”

Stephen, capitalism relies on a high level of unemployment to make people desperate enough to do anything. That includes desperate enough to perform the dangerous work in mines. Gina wants us desperate enough to do it for $2 per hour. The mine owners are not willing to perform that work themselves. They want to reap huge profits while other people put their lives on the line. I also recall that Gina recently got a huge injections of funds from the US government (that was a fraction of her personal wealth) for her mining activities, so she isn’t risking her own money. She is taking money from a country that is already up to their eyeballs in debt.

Deriving energy from coal pollutes our planet. We’re all paying for that. The residents of Morwell who were pregnant, elderly or had respiratory problems had to leave their homes last year due to a fire in the mine. One way or another we all take risks and we pay to mine coal. Yet this government wants to keep us dependant on a finite, filthy, dangerous energy source rather than create safer employment opportunities around an environmentally and human friendly, renewable energy source.

LeeMay 3, 2014 at 9:57 am

“All you need to know is that you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself.”

So you don’t expect roads to drive on, a good public transport system, or schools for your children, or electricity or gas to be supplied to your home, or hospitals to care for you when you are sick, or people to protect your home and your family against natural disaster, criminals or invading enemies, nor the myriad of other services that governments provide? Yeah right.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 10:21 am

Kaye without investors risking capital there would be no profits and the government would miss billions in revenue and the essential services you bang on about would not exist except for higher government debt. I’ll all for providing essential services for the less well off, mentally ill, disabled etc but if everybody had your attitude the money that provides for those services wouldn’t exist. You’d still be expecting somebody else to take risk to make profits and then ask for your cut. Do you even pay tax or just blog on here full time?

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 10:47 am

Lee thanks for the poor and hysterical explanation of capitalism. Most people I know on the mines are on $200,000+ but going ahead and roll out the $2 rubbish if it makes you feel better. As for the understanding of funding, it was simply laughable.

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 11:00 am

“So you don’t expect roads to drive on, a good public transport system, or schools for your children, or electricity or gas to be supplied to your home, or hospitals to care for you when you are sick, or people to protect your home and your family against natural disaster, criminals or invading enemies, nor the myriad of other services that governments provide?”

TWENTY years from now……………..? Absolutely not. The whole world will be in collapse mode by then.

I have to say, I’d really like to know if that’s what Stephen has in mind with his “you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself” comment…….

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 11:01 am

Stephen…. PAY TAX? Are you mad?

16 Signs That You’re a Slave to the Matrix

KerriMay 3, 2014 at 11:12 am

Victoria, you need to be writing for Bill Shorten, Chris Bowen Labor Party Media Team.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 11:20 am

I feel mad laughing at somebody who has clearly got a few screws loose Mike but you’ve given me a chuckle this morning. Cheers.

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 11:26 am

You’re welcome Stephen……. we’ll see who has the last laugh in a few years time…

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 11:33 am

“Kaye without investors risking capital there would be no profits ”

And without labour just what are those investors going to invest in Stephen? How will they make their profits? And if income inequity continues on its logarithmic trajectory, who is going to buy the stuff the investors produce?

You seem to think that business is an entity that the people should serve and sacrifice to maintain. How about a little bit of manus manum lavat. Marie Antoinette pushed the people too far by ignoring their plight. All we are asking for is for business to pay their fair share and then we will indeed all benefit. At the moment business and wealthy individuals do everything they can to cry poor mouth and avoid paying any tax by whatever means they can. Spin it any way you want – they are getting ahead by standing on our shoulders and if we decide we don’t want to carry them any longer, or become so poor that we cannot, then they all come tumbling down. Ignore the people at your peril.

Joe BanksMay 3, 2014 at 11:33 am

Victoria, if only…..

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:03 pm

What’s fair Kaye? 30% company tax plus royalties except of course if you are successful then you pay more? The whole premise of the mining tax was to go after the miners because they were making high profits in a boom period. The way you and others dribble on you’d think they paid no tax and paid low wages. If you want to make money from mining a go and buy shares like everybody else. Or you can just continue to expect others to take the risk and expect them to pay more when it comes off. You didn’t answer my question about having a job and paying tax. You seem to spend a hell of a lot if time on here.

AnomanderMay 3, 2014 at 12:08 pm

Ahhh… Stephen, so you’re a devotee of Libertarianism.

The common trite phrases uttered by delusional Libertarians the world over – Government should get out of my face and give me the freedom to do what I want; to work hard, take risks, and enjoy the benefits of my labour. I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else, they aren’t my concern. I don’t expect them to pay for me. I can look after myself. Eliminate red tape. But out and let the markets to efficiently do their job. Big government is bad. The private sector is more efficient because it is able to cut costs. People should be responsible for themselves. If others worked hard like me, we would all be rich and happy.

I am a believer that people create their own destiny. I had a good phase and the next good phase will come. I took risks but I reaped the rewards. Who would have given me the money back if I went broke? The answer is nobody. I am all for my family and bettering myself and ensuring they have options. It will happen and I will have to take risks. I expect nothing from the government (they provide well at times though) and they should expect nothing from me. People need to take responsibility for themselves and make it happen. Don’t worry, the worst off will be looked after…

All you need to know is that you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself.

Absolutely, hard work should be encouraged and rewarded. But implicit in the statement is the lack of recognition that the opportunities you had would not have been possible without government providing services and infrastructure built off the back of our collective wealth.

The school you attended, the roads upon which you have ever driven, the water pipes that fed and bathed you, the electricity that enabled your study, entertainment, cooked your food, lighted your house, the hospital that healed you, the university that taught you, the police who kept your suburb safe 24 hours a day – these myriad services are the things that combined to provide you with the opportunities to learn, to grow, to take the risks and enjoy the proceeds.

All these services came from everyone paying their taxes and governments building them to benefit everyone equally. And because you partake of the benefit, it is incumbent upon you to contribute toward the same allocation of services and infrastructure that benefits everyone else.

Hell, we often have to pay for many things we don’t use and never will use. That bridge in South Australia that I will never use – my tax dollars paid for that. The same as the taxes from a Queenslander helped pay for my kids schooling.

But society does more than that, we not only acknowledge and encourage endeavour and reward those who contribute and work hard, we also recognise that some individuals simply aren’t in a position to look after themselves. Some of these people were born that way, others through accident or misadventure, and some because the stresses of life simply became too great to bear and they broke down. For many, it is a temporary situation for which they need a helping hand, so they can get themselves back into action, but for some they are simply helpless and will forever need our support.

Whatever the cause, we as a society decided we owed a duty of care to these people. Sometimes altruistically, but often we do so as a form of insurance, because none of us know what the future may hold, and it is reassuring the know society has your back and that you aren’t just going to be thrown to the dogs.

To say you seek nothing of government and want to look after yourself is disingenuous, because every opportunity you had, have, or ever will have, has been a result of government and society providing for you, without you even needing to ask.

Sure you have the freedom to work hard and earn more and gain rewards, but in doing so you also have a responsibility to repay the favours you have been afforded, because it is only when we all play our part that those opportunities exist for everyone.

Imagine if centuries ago, people all thought like you. “I don’t need anything from society. I will work hard for me and me alone. I don’t want to pay for everyone else”. You can imagine how well that person would have fared? Yeah, they may have survived or even thrived during the good times, but once injury or illness struck, they would very likely have died, without the shelter of everyone else supporting them and providing them with a chance to recover and to again contribute to the greater good.

This is the price of society and it is anathema to Libertarianism.

Bill MorrisMay 3, 2014 at 12:16 pm

Stephen I can see what you are one of those wannabes that confuses working for a living with sitting on your arse and watching your investments grow.

Investing is a way of making money without actually contributing anything e.g.”work”. It is little more than gambling so it is great when government reduces the risk for you and also increases the odds (returns), the exact opposite of how gambling works down at the track or the casino.

You also need to have money, or borrow, to invest it. If you have more money than you need it is quite easy to make more in blue chip investments and gold plated investment like mining.

But it is not in the interest of big business for anyone but the elite selected few (those of calibre) to have money to spare for investment. If too many workers got wealthy from investing who who would do the actual work that generates the profit?

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:22 pm

Bill I can see you are somebody whose is bitter that they never took those risks and are annoyed that you life has amounted to very little. We all live with our choices

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 1:09 pm

Stephen,

You say “I don’t need your ridiculous comments when you know nothing about me.” but I would suggest that when you said “I believe Aussies have had every chance to ‘buy’ into huge profits and am of the opinion that those who have done so deserve to benefit most.” we got a fairly clear picture about you.

“You didn’t answer my question about having a job and paying tax. You seem to spend a hell of a lot if time on here.”

I don’t feel obliged to explain myself to you Stephen. You may be used to bullying people into answering you. It won’t work with me sunshine. Your obvious disregard for people here and what they post – “Stop making a fool of yourself.” and “you’re just a flogger who expects everything given to them. Pretty pathetic really.” and “thanks for the poor and hysterical explanation” and “somebody who has clearly got a few screws loose ” and “The way you and others dribble on” and “I can see you are somebody whose is bitter that they never took those risks and are annoyed that you life has amounted to very little.” – makes me wonder why YOU are spending so much time with we cretins.

Möbius EckoMay 3, 2014 at 1:21 pm

Telling isn’t it that Stephen doesn’t need others comments as they know nothing about him but he professes to know all about them in his attacks against them.

More right wing double standards.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:25 pm

I don’t think you are cretins Kaye. The world takes all sorts and this site is full of those who expect others to take the risk and share the rewards. I accept that doesn’t make you a cretin, just a bludger. For all those that want to profit from mining the ASX opens ten am Mon morning. For those that don’t, stop whinging.

StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:28 pm

Mobi hypocrisy exists on both ‘sides’ it’s the left that won’t admit that.

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 1:30 pm

somebody whose (sic) is bitter that they never took those risks and are annoyed that you life has amounted to very little.

You rude bastard…….. I have NEVER ‘invested’. I bet you anything you like MY life is far more meaningful than yours…… I can look around and see the house I built with my own hands, the garden I planted, the ducks I bred, the bounty I have gathered with very very little of YOUR money….

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 1:32 pm

And I wouldn’t buy mining shares if you GAVE ME the money….. environmental vandals plus!

Bill MorrisMay 3, 2014 at 1:34 pm

Ah Stephen, “We all live with our choices” is reasonably accurate but what is worrying is that you can extrapolate the other from what I said, considering that you are 100% wrong. A model of consistency?

Bill MorrisMay 3, 2014 at 1:40 pm

Gee mikestasse, we have a live one here don’t we, at least from the neck down.

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 1:48 pm

” that doesn’t make you a cretin, just a bludger”

You have no idea of who I am or what I do or what I earn. Facts based evidence is what seems to be lacking with many conservatives. They believe what they are told, they think one-dimensionally. They are incapable of critical thinking about anything that doesn’t make a profit, especially for them. They think holistic has something to do with smoking pot, doing yoga, and channelling the power of crystals whilst chaining oneself to a tree.

The phrase “long-term” only applies to how long till you get a return on your investment. It has nothing to do with social costs or productivity gains or investment in things that might help future generations. They don’t appear on their accountant’s profit and loss statement and therefore do not exist.

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 2:02 pm

It’s an interesting concept that only people who are less well off can have a social conscience. That if you advocate for social justice you must be an ill-informed bludger. Gina Rinehart agrees with you. I wonder, however, if Bill Gates agrees.

mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 2:30 pm

“Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear”
William E. Gladstone

Paul ScahillMay 3, 2014 at 6:49 pm

What an excellent blog, I was so enjoying comments which are always informative- then guess what? Along came Stephen! What a Moran. I got a pretty good idea of what his character is like, typical ‘me, myself and I’ we have plenty of those supposedly running our country at the moment, a lot of them like Gina R Stephen who inherited money to start with, these people never work, and incidentally the Mining Tax was to discourage pollution, you do know what that is. Hope we never hear from u again. Maybe when u join Gamblers Anon!

BacchusMay 3, 2014 at 7:57 pm

Perhaps we should have just imposed a 78% tax on the miners, like Norway 😉

Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 11:57 pm

Oh and Stephen,

“30% company tax plus royalties ”

The average rate of corporate tax paid by mining companies is around 14 per cent, mainly thanks to generous tax deductions by the Government. Under the MRRT agreement the federal government also agreed to pay for any increase in royalties which of course the states took advantage of by immediately increasing them.

You and I pay 38c per litre fuel excise….they pay 6c. Over 80% of their profit goes overseas. Even though we have rising unemployment the miners want us to import 457 visa workers.

I don’t believe we need to thank the miners for making billions whilst using every trick possible to avoid paying us anything for our resources.

Return to home page

Login here Register here

Graeme RustMay 2, 2014 at 8:55 pm

liked this a lot Victoria; I wonder when Labor will come out and say they will repeal a lot of abbott’s stupid policies?? as an OAP I seem to feel as though Labor are being very quiet on a lot of abbott’s crap, would have Hawke or Keating let them off so easy??

I
amarkoneMay 2, 2014 at 9:06 pm

Thank you, thank you, thank you somebody else with half a brain and I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense. You are absolutely right, Norway know how to do it and the mining tax was not sold in the right fashion at the last election and now we pay the price. We need to have advocates in this country who can sell ice to Eskimos because poor old Wayne couldn’t sell ice water in the Sahara. Maybe he was just too nice.
hemingway13May 2, 2014 at 9:28 pm

‘Tis another compelling and lucid argument from Ms. Rollison today.

Alas, if Treasurer Swan had been remotely as passionate and cogent when defending the RSPT as he was when expressing his utter contempt for the Labor colleague who lead his party into government after 11 long years in the wilderness, then the level of public support for the RSPT might have been significantly higher.

After two decades witnessing frequent factional fights-to-the-death at my Labor Party branch meetings and conferences, it saddens me that we’ve neglected to focus all of our energies on defeating the malevolent efforts of dead-set Social Darwinist Coalition governments to redistribute an obscene percentage of Australia’s wealth into the pockets of their mega-rich cronies.
StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:18 pm

Clearly written by somebody who doesn’t understand investment and the commonwealth. The resources belong to the states and not the commonwealth and that is why they didn’t go ahead with the tax with the vigour they intended. Secondly investors would have laughed at this as they did with Swan. They are the ones who risk the capital (and often lose) and they expect great rewards for it when it comes off. How many junior mining explorers (or even BHP) have the advocates of this tax invested in? I would hazard not many but am happy to be corrected. For every FMG there are many more PDYs and MMXs but it is easy to ask for the profits when you haven’t risked the losses. Isn’t it?

I will say though, Swan may have come across with much more credibility if he didn’t pick 3 or 4 out of 138 recommendations of Henry’s. Massive fail by Swan.
RobMay 2, 2014 at 11:33 pm

Maybe you could apply o be the editor of their news channel. Seriously.
Matters NotMay 2, 2014 at 11:35 pm

I live in Swan’s electorate of Lilley, and while I am not a member of the ALP, I worked to ensure Swan was returned at the last election. Having said that I think that Swan’s handling of the MRRT was a complete disaster. That criticism applies equally to Gillard.

One of the big problems we have in Australia is the mistaken belief that when politicians are elevated to ministerial portfolios they suddenly acquire ‘expertise’. The really sad part is that some, but not all, politicians are under the same misapprehension. I’ve worked with Ministers whose claim to fame bore no correlation with the responsibilities bestowed. They survived because in large part they recognised the limitations of their capabilities and were prepared to be ‘advised’..

When Swan and Gillard ‘knifed’ Rudd (and having worked with Rudd in QLD over a number of years, I can understand why) they decided they would do the negotiations with the miners and do so on their own. In short, they became the ‘experts’. The public servants who understood the ‘issues’ involved were physically and metaphorically ‘locked out’.

The result was a disaster. And we as citizens are the ‘poorer’, broadly defined, now and in the future.

The irony is that the punters ‘buy’ the need to get a fair share when the miners export both the minerals and the resulting profits overseas. They understood it then and they understand it now.

When will the ALP make a song and dance about the proposed repeal?
RobMay 2, 2014 at 11:36 pm

Stephen, its hard to PAY a SUPER PROFITS TAX if you are not making SUPER PROFITS. Your argument voids itself.
Bill MorrisMay 2, 2014 at 11:45 pm

It should also be pointed out that the reason that the Resources Tax generated so little revenue was due to the mining companies minimising their super profits in capital expenditure, plant, equipment and infrastructure that in the normal course they would not have done for many years, when they actually needed to. Also enabled them to stockpile and manipulate the market price. They could not have continued to do this for much longer unless they started to give their super profits away or their accountants came up with a new way to wrought the system. Removal of the tax at this stage will ensure that the increased production capacity now lying idle can be brought into service for even greater super profits long into the future.
StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:45 pm

Matters Not some good comments there. However I believe Aussies have had every chance to ‘buy’ into huge profits and am of the opinion that those who have done so deserve to benefit most. Most fair minded Aussies realise that they had the chance to buy FMG at 3 cents in 2003 and those that risked it deserved the benefits.
philasophigasMay 2, 2014 at 11:47 pm

Good work Stephen. Your bottle of grange odds in the mail.
StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:52 pm

Rob, it’s even harder to make super profits without people investing with the hope of super profits. Do you invest in mining explorers/producers or do you just wait until they are profitable before expecting your cut from the government?
Matters NotMay 2, 2014 at 11:56 pm

Stephen said:

resources belong to the states and not the commonwealth and that is why they didn’t go ahead with the tax

Clearly someone who hasn’t kept up. A really, really slow learner. That crap was blown away in August last year. Here’s a quote.

“Fortescue challenged the MRRT because it was an unreasonable intrusion into an area of state responsibility and that it was also an unfair, discriminatory and complex tax,” chief executive officer Nev Power said in a statement.

“We’re disappointed by today’s decision.”

Dear oh dear Stephen. Now who is it that doesn’t understand. Hilarious!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-07/high-court-rules-on-mineral-resource-rent-tax/4870228

BTW, I make investment decisions on a daily basis, across the spectrum, and I spend within Australia unlike most mining investors who transfer wealth overseas.

Stephen, why do you hate Australia?
StephenMay 2, 2014 at 11:56 pm

Doesn’t even make sense phil. Aside from that a bottle of grange would be wasted on somebody who earns $1204 a fortnight supporting a family of four. I hope to improve on that but I don’t need your ridiculous comments when you know nothing about me.
charybdsMay 2, 2014 at 11:57 pm

Stephen,
it seems that you have a limited grasp of commonwealth .. Break it down; common – wealth.
Risking capitol to dig up something that belongs to everyone in the expectation of a profit for .. NOT everyone .. hardly entitles you to take from the rest of the owners of the resource, access to the benefits of same.
Just because you risk loss to make profit, doesn’t entitle you to deprive the owners of the asset you exploit of a share in the wealth generated.
The tragedy of your argument is similar to expecting to eat all the food at the table because you booked the restaurant ..
ken sveyMay 3, 2014 at 12:06 am

Matters is spot on, Labor had some shocking ministers like Conroy and that pop singer. And they couldnt sell a policy.
I used to be in Bishops electorate and for a while, Stephen Smith. Smith never replied to correspondence whilst Bishop used to. Lazy ex union hacks, ambitious staffers and bloody lawyers should all be disqualifiec from pre selection.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:08 am

Matters Not, Massive Fail. My point was that the reason the RSPT didn’t go ahead in it’s initial form is that it wouldn’t have got through because of the ownership of the states. Why do you think it was watered down? My comment had nothing to do with the RSPT which is what this article refers to.

Matters Not, why can’t you comprehend what I have written?

charybds, the tragedy of your argument is that you expect to share in the rewards of those who take risks to make profits and who without those profits would exist. People like you are the first to laugh at those who lose money and that is what I find sad.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:23 am

Ken, the problem is that the pop singer sold his soul and never belonged. I am of the view that Smith was the ALPs most valuable asset as he came across well to the public and did a reasonable job. If all Bishop has is getting back to you then we are in trouble but to a true ‘independent’ observer she lets herself down with comments about others when at home but holds her own when in the company of overseas delegates. The jury is out on Bishop but I was disappointed to see Smith go (union ties aside). Sorry about being off topic.
Matters NotMay 3, 2014 at 12:26 am

My point was that the reason the RSPT didn’t go ahead in it’s (sic) initial form is that it wouldn’t have got through because of the ownership of the states

Clearly Stephen, you are ahistorical. When Twiggy ‘challenged’ he was supported by several States, including Queensland who wanted to establish ‘states rights’. He, and they, lost with costs awarded against.

As for comprehension skills …?

Perhaps, you might return to the education/training sector and sharpen up your communication skills.

And yes, I admit I know nothing about you, and further I don’t wish to. It’s your ‘ideas’ and construct of ‘reality’ that engages me.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:30 am

‘My comment had nothing to do with the RSPT which is what this article refers to’. Apologies should have read MRRT instead of RSPT. I think Matters Not knows what I meant. Still a fail from somebody who doesn’t understand. ‘Hilarious’.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:37 am

Lol Matters Not. Stop making a fool of yourself. My comment referred to the binning of the RSPT and not the MRRT (the watered down version). The RSPT was never challenged because it was never going to pass. We can argue that all you like but the RSPT was never even challenged on constitutional grounds for the reason it would have never got through. Or are Swan and Gillard just massive sell-outs to the major miners? I give them more credit but am I wrong?
philasophigasMay 3, 2014 at 12:44 am

A poor and flippant response on my part I admit. But Stephen, I fundamentally disagree with your approach. People on the left (I hate that term) don’t want to enact change by indulging in risk for reward on the stock market. We don’t hope to enact change by collectively investing billions in socially and environmentally destructive programs in order to at some point in the future gain control of the corporate entities that run them. We want our elected representatives to work for the interests of the common people and legislate to reduce the power of the destructive entities. It can be done. We need to win the hearts and minds of the good people of Australia in the hope that they will elect a government that will pursue an agenda of compassion and hope, rather than the agenda currently being pursued.

If you’re not pushing your angle for a bottle of grange as such, then I do wonder what it is that motivates you to put forward such thinking on this and other threads of late. You ideology does not seem to strike a chord with other posters from what I see.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:46 am

Matters Not, I agree that you don’t need to know anything more about me. All you need to know is that you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself.
philasophigasMay 3, 2014 at 12:56 am

You said it. You’re out for what you can get. Join the liberal party if you haven’t already.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:07 am

phil thanks for the response and it is one of the more reasoned responses I have received on here (you asked instead of simply having a crack which I just tend to come back from). For that I will be frank and you may make your own judgement.

My current situation may strike a cord with many here and I am under the impression that many may think I am full of it. I’m not. I am stressed to the max. Things are tough. Saying that, I had good years investing between 2000 and 2011 which allowed me to pay the majority of my house of which leaves me without too much rent stress. None of that money was made through mining investments aside from LICs. I have had good times which will allow me to come out of the testing times.

I am a believer that people create their own destiny. I had a good phase and the next good phase will come. I took risks but I reaped the rewards. Who would have given me the money back if I went broke? The answer is nobody. I am all for my family and bettering myself and ensuring they have options. It will happen and I will have to take risks. I expect nothing from the government (they provide well at times though) and they should expect nothing from me. People need to take responsibility for themselves and make it happen. Don’t worry, the worst off will be looked after.

Australia is a very fair country. I love it (not hate it as some said). It is one one of the fairest places on earth even though benefits to the rich may be too generous. I will always argue that money is made from risk and nothing is made from safety. That’s what term deposits are for. Let people make their own choices but don’t expect others to pay extra when their’s come off. It is the old races mantra: don’t make the winner at the races pay because it doesn’t last forever.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:11 am

Sorry phil. Didn’t get to read your last response before posting mine. It seems poor and flippant responses are the norm for you. I’ll make it even simpler, you’re just a flogger who expects everything given to them. Pretty pathetic really.
Greg RapmundMay 3, 2014 at 6:01 am

Victoria, there was a story a couple of days ago, possibly SMH, regarding Labor Party considering their own newspaper with a figure quoted of $95,000 pay for a journalist. I am wondering if you or any of the other excellent writers for AIMN could suggest to them that you could perform this task in a very competent and coherent way given, as is obvious, the Labor Party obviously haven’t got a clue. At the very least post all AIMN articles to them, someone there may recognise clear communication.
As you say these resources belong to all of us. In my mind there is no federal or state ownership, these entities exist for and because of us. Governments are elected representatives of the people, not seperate entities. The super profits from the sale of our resources should be gathered and used for the benefit of all Australians. Norway has been investing a portion of their resource income since the 1970’s, theoretically making all citizens millionaires. Have visited Norway, their public transport system, social security etc., are very impressive, even a little too generous in some Norwegian minds. Still they put wealth aside for the day oil runs out and seem to spend the proceeds wisely. I’m sure we could, too.
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 6:36 am

“The upcoming repeal of the mining tax is a turning point in Australia’s history, and one that I’m not sure we’ll ever recover from”

INDEED.

I always find it hard to see from what governments’ policicy announcements say to me – from all over the world, not just ours – whether they KNOW global economies are going to shit, or not.

They don’t want to scare the little children and therefore aren’t saying, at least not directly. The last thing they’d want is a run on the banks and people hoarding money, food and petrol….. because that would precipitate the unavoidable collapse of Capitalism. But what the Rabbit/Hockey government is doing is also precipitating this collapse.

The original mining tax was badly done, it should have raised billions…….. but at least it was there. By protecting their minions at any cost, the LNP is speeding up the demise of our great nation…… and the shit will have hit the fan so hard by next election, I predict the utter demise of this government. If there’s one thing they’re good at, it’s making enemies.
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 6:40 am

“They are the ones who risk the capital (and often lose) and they expect great rewards for it when it comes off.”

REALLY Stephen……..??? When was the last time a mine was started in Australia and……. they found no coal or metal ore?

IF you were risking money in oil well, then I’d support your argument, because all the oil companies are slowly going broke, but mines? A risk?
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 8:36 am

Stephen,

” I expect nothing from the government ”

Do you use the schools, hospitals and roads provided by the government? When you go the chemist do you say I insist on paying cost price plus 30% for my medications in recognition of the risk you have taken in opening a pharmacy?
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 9:19 am

Mike, mining companies go broke all the time. For every BHP there are hundreds that come and go and investors lose their money. If it was so easy to make money everybody here would invest in mining instead of asking the government to tax those risk takers who become successful more.

Kaye that is a ridiculous argument when you know exactly what I mean. But as for expecting it, no I don’t. That is just the way it is. Your pharmacy analogy is just plain stupid.
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 9:26 am

Stephen,

Your assertion that you expect nothing from the government is what is stupid. Governments collect taxes to provide services for its citizens, which is the whole point of this article. We own the resources, they are finite, we deserve some return from their development to help provide the services that even you use Stephen, and to provide a safety net for our vulnerable which I am sure will never be you Stephen. You and your family will never suffer from mental illness. You will never have an accident that leaves you disabled.

And the pharmacy example is very relevant considering this government’s ridiculous path of repealing a mining tax and then asking us to make co-payments to doctors and chemists.
LeeMay 3, 2014 at 9:50 am

“For every FMG there are many more PDYs and MMXs but it is easy to ask for the profits when you haven’t risked the losses. Isn’t it?”

Stephen, capitalism relies on a high level of unemployment to make people desperate enough to do anything. That includes desperate enough to perform the dangerous work in mines. Gina wants us desperate enough to do it for $2 per hour. The mine owners are not willing to perform that work themselves. They want to reap huge profits while other people put their lives on the line. I also recall that Gina recently got a huge injections of funds from the US government (that was a fraction of her personal wealth) for her mining activities, so she isn’t risking her own money. She is taking money from a country that is already up to their eyeballs in debt.

Deriving energy from coal pollutes our planet. We’re all paying for that. The residents of Morwell who were pregnant, elderly or had respiratory problems had to leave their homes last year due to a fire in the mine. One way or another we all take risks and we pay to mine coal. Yet this government wants to keep us dependant on a finite, filthy, dangerous energy source rather than create safer employment opportunities around an environmentally and human friendly, renewable energy source.
LeeMay 3, 2014 at 9:57 am

“All you need to know is that you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself.”

So you don’t expect roads to drive on, a good public transport system, or schools for your children, or electricity or gas to be supplied to your home, or hospitals to care for you when you are sick, or people to protect your home and your family against natural disaster, criminals or invading enemies, nor the myriad of other services that governments provide? Yeah right.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 10:21 am

Kaye without investors risking capital there would be no profits and the government would miss billions in revenue and the essential services you bang on about would not exist except for higher government debt. I’ll all for providing essential services for the less well off, mentally ill, disabled etc but if everybody had your attitude the money that provides for those services wouldn’t exist. You’d still be expecting somebody else to take risk to make profits and then ask for your cut. Do you even pay tax or just blog on here full time?
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 10:47 am

Lee thanks for the poor and hysterical explanation of capitalism. Most people I know on the mines are on $200,000+ but going ahead and roll out the $2 rubbish if it makes you feel better. As for the understanding of funding, it was simply laughable.
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 11:00 am

“So you don’t expect roads to drive on, a good public transport system, or schools for your children, or electricity or gas to be supplied to your home, or hospitals to care for you when you are sick, or people to protect your home and your family against natural disaster, criminals or invading enemies, nor the myriad of other services that governments provide?”

TWENTY years from now……………..? Absolutely not. The whole world will be in collapse mode by then.

I have to say, I’d really like to know if that’s what Stephen has in mind with his “you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself” comment…….
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 11:01 am

Stephen…. PAY TAX? Are you mad?

16 Signs That You’re a Slave to the Matrix
KerriMay 3, 2014 at 11:12 am

Victoria, you need to be writing for Bill Shorten, Chris Bowen Labor Party Media Team.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 11:20 am

I feel mad laughing at somebody who has clearly got a few screws loose Mike but you’ve given me a chuckle this morning. Cheers.
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 11:26 am

You’re welcome Stephen……. we’ll see who has the last laugh in a few years time…
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 11:33 am

“Kaye without investors risking capital there would be no profits ”

And without labour just what are those investors going to invest in Stephen? How will they make their profits? And if income inequity continues on its logarithmic trajectory, who is going to buy the stuff the investors produce?

You seem to think that business is an entity that the people should serve and sacrifice to maintain. How about a little bit of manus manum lavat. Marie Antoinette pushed the people too far by ignoring their plight. All we are asking for is for business to pay their fair share and then we will indeed all benefit. At the moment business and wealthy individuals do everything they can to cry poor mouth and avoid paying any tax by whatever means they can. Spin it any way you want – they are getting ahead by standing on our shoulders and if we decide we don’t want to carry them any longer, or become so poor that we cannot, then they all come tumbling down. Ignore the people at your peril.
Joe BanksMay 3, 2014 at 11:33 am

Victoria, if only…..
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:03 pm

What’s fair Kaye? 30% company tax plus royalties except of course if you are successful then you pay more? The whole premise of the mining tax was to go after the miners because they were making high profits in a boom period. The way you and others dribble on you’d think they paid no tax and paid low wages. If you want to make money from mining a go and buy shares like everybody else. Or you can just continue to expect others to take the risk and expect them to pay more when it comes off. You didn’t answer my question about having a job and paying tax. You seem to spend a hell of a lot if time on here.
AnomanderMay 3, 2014 at 12:08 pm

Ahhh… Stephen, so you’re a devotee of Libertarianism.

The common trite phrases uttered by delusional Libertarians the world over – Government should get out of my face and give me the freedom to do what I want; to work hard, take risks, and enjoy the benefits of my labour. I shouldn’t have to pay for anyone else, they aren’t my concern. I don’t expect them to pay for me. I can look after myself. Eliminate red tape. But out and let the markets to efficiently do their job. Big government is bad. The private sector is more efficient because it is able to cut costs. People should be responsible for themselves. If others worked hard like me, we would all be rich and happy.

I am a believer that people create their own destiny. I had a good phase and the next good phase will come. I took risks but I reaped the rewards. Who would have given me the money back if I went broke? The answer is nobody. I am all for my family and bettering myself and ensuring they have options. It will happen and I will have to take risks. I expect nothing from the government (they provide well at times though) and they should expect nothing from me. People need to take responsibility for themselves and make it happen. Don’t worry, the worst off will be looked after…

All you need to know is that you won’t ever see or hear me asking what I can get from the government and others. I’ll be going after it myself.

Absolutely, hard work should be encouraged and rewarded. But implicit in the statement is the lack of recognition that the opportunities you had would not have been possible without government providing services and infrastructure built off the back of our collective wealth.

The school you attended, the roads upon which you have ever driven, the water pipes that fed and bathed you, the electricity that enabled your study, entertainment, cooked your food, lighted your house, the hospital that healed you, the university that taught you, the police who kept your suburb safe 24 hours a day – these myriad services are the things that combined to provide you with the opportunities to learn, to grow, to take the risks and enjoy the proceeds.

All these services came from everyone paying their taxes and governments building them to benefit everyone equally. And because you partake of the benefit, it is incumbent upon you to contribute toward the same allocation of services and infrastructure that benefits everyone else.

Hell, we often have to pay for many things we don’t use and never will use. That bridge in South Australia that I will never use – my tax dollars paid for that. The same as the taxes from a Queenslander helped pay for my kids schooling.

But society does more than that, we not only acknowledge and encourage endeavour and reward those who contribute and work hard, we also recognise that some individuals simply aren’t in a position to look after themselves. Some of these people were born that way, others through accident or misadventure, and some because the stresses of life simply became too great to bear and they broke down. For many, it is a temporary situation for which they need a helping hand, so they can get themselves back into action, but for some they are simply helpless and will forever need our support.

Whatever the cause, we as a society decided we owed a duty of care to these people. Sometimes altruistically, but often we do so as a form of insurance, because none of us know what the future may hold, and it is reassuring the know society has your back and that you aren’t just going to be thrown to the dogs.

To say you seek nothing of government and want to look after yourself is disingenuous, because every opportunity you had, have, or ever will have, has been a result of government and society providing for you, without you even needing to ask.

Sure you have the freedom to work hard and earn more and gain rewards, but in doing so you also have a responsibility to repay the favours you have been afforded, because it is only when we all play our part that those opportunities exist for everyone.

Imagine if centuries ago, people all thought like you. “I don’t need anything from society. I will work hard for me and me alone. I don’t want to pay for everyone else”. You can imagine how well that person would have fared? Yeah, they may have survived or even thrived during the good times, but once injury or illness struck, they would very likely have died, without the shelter of everyone else supporting them and providing them with a chance to recover and to again contribute to the greater good.

This is the price of society and it is anathema to Libertarianism.
Bill MorrisMay 3, 2014 at 12:16 pm

Stephen I can see what you are one of those wannabes that confuses working for a living with sitting on your arse and watching your investments grow.

Investing is a way of making money without actually contributing anything e.g.”work”. It is little more than gambling so it is great when government reduces the risk for you and also increases the odds (returns), the exact opposite of how gambling works down at the track or the casino.

You also need to have money, or borrow, to invest it. If you have more money than you need it is quite easy to make more in blue chip investments and gold plated investment like mining.

But it is not in the interest of big business for anyone but the elite selected few (those of calibre) to have money to spare for investment. If too many workers got wealthy from investing who who would do the actual work that generates the profit?
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 12:22 pm

Bill I can see you are somebody whose is bitter that they never took those risks and are annoyed that you life has amounted to very little. We all live with our choices
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 1:09 pm

Stephen,

You say “I don’t need your ridiculous comments when you know nothing about me.” but I would suggest that when you said “I believe Aussies have had every chance to ‘buy’ into huge profits and am of the opinion that those who have done so deserve to benefit most.” we got a fairly clear picture about you.

“You didn’t answer my question about having a job and paying tax. You seem to spend a hell of a lot if time on here.”

I don’t feel obliged to explain myself to you Stephen. You may be used to bullying people into answering you. It won’t work with me sunshine. Your obvious disregard for people here and what they post – “Stop making a fool of yourself.” and “you’re just a flogger who expects everything given to them. Pretty pathetic really.” and “thanks for the poor and hysterical explanation” and “somebody who has clearly got a few screws loose ” and “The way you and others dribble on” and “I can see you are somebody whose is bitter that they never took those risks and are annoyed that you life has amounted to very little.” – makes me wonder why YOU are spending so much time with we cretins.
Möbius EckoMay 3, 2014 at 1:21 pm

Telling isn’t it that Stephen doesn’t need others comments as they know nothing about him but he professes to know all about them in his attacks against them.

More right wing double standards.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:25 pm

I don’t think you are cretins Kaye. The world takes all sorts and this site is full of those who expect others to take the risk and share the rewards. I accept that doesn’t make you a cretin, just a bludger. For all those that want to profit from mining the ASX opens ten am Mon morning. For those that don’t, stop whinging.
StephenMay 3, 2014 at 1:28 pm

Mobi hypocrisy exists on both ‘sides’ it’s the left that won’t admit that.
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 1:30 pm

somebody whose (sic) is bitter that they never took those risks and are annoyed that you life has amounted to very little.

You rude bastard…….. I have NEVER ‘invested’. I bet you anything you like MY life is far more meaningful than yours…… I can look around and see the house I built with my own hands, the garden I planted, the ducks I bred, the bounty I have gathered with very very little of YOUR money….
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 1:32 pm

And I wouldn’t buy mining shares if you GAVE ME the money….. environmental vandals plus!
Bill MorrisMay 3, 2014 at 1:34 pm

Ah Stephen, “We all live with our choices” is reasonably accurate but what is worrying is that you can extrapolate the other from what I said, considering that you are 100% wrong. A model of consistency?
Bill MorrisMay 3, 2014 at 1:40 pm

Gee mikestasse, we have a live one here don’t we, at least from the neck down.
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 1:48 pm

” that doesn’t make you a cretin, just a bludger”

You have no idea of who I am or what I do or what I earn. Facts based evidence is what seems to be lacking with many conservatives. They believe what they are told, they think one-dimensionally. They are incapable of critical thinking about anything that doesn’t make a profit, especially for them. They think holistic has something to do with smoking pot, doing yoga, and channelling the power of crystals whilst chaining oneself to a tree.

The phrase “long-term” only applies to how long till you get a return on your investment. It has nothing to do with social costs or productivity gains or investment in things that might help future generations. They don’t appear on their accountant’s profit and loss statement and therefore do not exist.
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 2:02 pm

It’s an interesting concept that only people who are less well off can have a social conscience. That if you advocate for social justice you must be an ill-informed bludger. Gina Rinehart agrees with you. I wonder, however, if Bill Gates agrees.
mikestasseMay 3, 2014 at 2:30 pm

“Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear”
William E. Gladstone
Paul ScahillMay 3, 2014 at 6:49 pm

What an excellent blog, I was so enjoying comments which are always informative- then guess what? Along came Stephen! What a Moran. I got a pretty good idea of what his character is like, typical ‘me, myself and I’ we have plenty of those supposedly running our country at the moment, a lot of them like Gina R Stephen who inherited money to start with, these people never work, and incidentally the Mining Tax was to discourage pollution, you do know what that is. Hope we never hear from u again. Maybe when u join Gamblers Anon!
BacchusMay 3, 2014 at 7:57 pm

Perhaps we should have just imposed a 78% tax on the miners, like Norway 😉
Kaye LeeMay 3, 2014 at 11:57 pm

Oh and Stephen,

“30% company tax plus royalties ”

The average rate of corporate tax paid by mining companies is around 14 per cent, mainly thanks to generous tax deductions by the Government. Under the MRRT agreement the federal government also agreed to pay for any increase in royalties which of course the states took advantage of by immediately increasing them.

You and I pay 38c per litre fuel excise….they pay 6c. Over 80% of their profit goes overseas. Even though we have rising unemployment the miners want us to import 457 visa workers.

I don’t believe we need to thank the miners for making billions whilst using every trick possible to avoid paying us anything for our resources.

Dutton is a man of little compassion and…

Compost: a climate action solution

The River Road

Balancing eSafety and Online Censorship, 2024

Ignorant. Woke.

Violence in our churches

Treasuring the moment: a military tattoo

Top water experts urge renewed action to secure…

Mining tax: take two

Like this:

Related Articles

60 comments

Leave a Reply

The Harman Undertaking

New Zealand is under siege by the Atlas Network

Share this:

Like this:

Related Articles

60 comments

Leave a Reply