Anthem for Tomorrow’s Child

By Roger Chao Anthem for Tomorrow’s Child Dear child of mine, a seed of…

Inter-Generational Trauma

Trauma slithers epigenetically through time with nipping-sharp teeth. It fastens to bloodlines…

Reaching Out to the Metropolitan Growth Corridors in…

By Denis Bright Metropolitan growth plans for inner city and outer suburban residential…

Experts Call For Transfer of Last Refugees in…

Media Release Religious leaders and healthcare professionals present Open Letters calling for the immediate transfer to Australia of the…

Battle Cry of the Unbowed

By Roger Chao Battle Cry of the Unbowed In this hallowed land downunder, where…

Rot in the Civil Service: Farewelling Mike Pezzullo

There was no better example of Australia’s politicised public service than its…

Brownsville, We Have a Problem

By James Moore I have never bought into the hype and general BS…

It's You Lot Again !

Reserve Bank governor Michele Bullock has now told us that the latest…


The time has come to say fair’s fair

Why do we have a deficit?

The Coalition will tell you it’s because Labor locked in unsustainable spending and that cutting services is the only way to fix it.

This is untrue.

We have a deficit because our government insists on pandering to the demands of business.

First they insisted that the proposed changes to fringe benefits tax must go to save the car industry – or not.

Then they got rid of the gambling reform laws and watered down the Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) reforms

Then they insisted that the carbon tax must go because it was costing jobs and restricting investment. Except business investment has fallen for three straight years, employment in manufacturing fell 6 percent in 2015 alone, and some NSW families are now paying the highest electricity prices in the world.

The mining tax was the next to go because apparently it was stopping investment whilst raising no money – somewhat like the Coalition’s negative gearing scare campaign which said Labor’s policy was going to smash house prices but negative gearing had nothing to do with inflating them.

The temporary budget repair levy on high income earners will also go because, despite us still needing budget repair, we only pay attention to the ‘temporary’ part of the equation – unless we are talking about the superannuation guarantee or the medicare rebate freezes.

New Zealand’s call to halt fossil fuel subsidies fell on deaf ears with the Australian contingent in Paris. Not only will they stay, we now also pay the polluters from our taxpayer-funded emission reduction fund.

Much of the royalties collected from mining is spent building infrastructure specifically for the mining companies. We now have a $5 billion Northern Development fund to build them some more.

Despite stagnant wages and negative GNI, business lobbyists insist penalty rates must go. They are quick to shed staff when times are tight but they always find the millions to pay the CEO’s salary, even if it leaves creditors and workers’ entitlements unpaid.

Businesses insist that they must import 457 visa workers and the government obliges despite the many examples of exploitation both of the rules and of the workers.

The Coalition government has increased defence spending above and beyond budget allocations every year and, much to the delight of foreign arms manufacturers, plan to spend $400 billion on defence materiel over the next two decades.

The Science and Innovation package seems to be mostly about protecting and incentivising investors and the Medical Research Fund sits there accumulating a store of cash to eventually be given to big pharma.

But all of this pales into insignificance when compared to the tax avoidance facilitated by our government and the big four accounting firms who advise them.

At least $US1 trillion in tax revenue is lost worldwide, and $50 billion in Australia, as a result of aggressive tax minimisation schemes established by the four giant firms who audit the books of nearly all the world’s major companies, said George Rozvany, a 32-year veteran of the corporate tax industry.

“It’s very clear to me that the big four accounting firms are the masterminds of international tax avoidance. They work with government to deliver what they want for their clients. It’s not set in a social context; it’s designed to deliver an outcome for their clients. The people who are most affected are the most underprivileged in our society, those without a voice. The homeless, foreign aid programs.”

So what does the Liberal Party do?

Offer substantial tax cuts to the very people who are hampering the nation’s ability to do anything about climate change or inequality, to the people who cry “anti-business” whenever they are asked to pay their share, to the people who want to pay workers less so they can pay their foreign shareholders more.

Until business groups start fulfilling their part of the social contract, they have no place dictating policy.

As Richard Denniss said, “If the business community do want a seat at the reform table they need to abandon the idea that they will sit at its head. They need to figure out what they are willing to help other groups achieve. They must admit there are more pressing goals than delivering tax cuts to themselves.”

To Jennifer Westacott, Kate Carnell, Innes Willox and others, the time has come to say fair’s fair, to pay the rent, to pay your share.


Login here Register here
  1. townsvilleblog

    Kaye, another beautifully written piece that is spot on highlighting Australia’s largest problem. Sadly the tory govt will do naught to fix it.

  2. denisc

    and sadly more people than not.

  3. Freethinker

    Kaye, I share your pain but we are the minority, and the solutions put forward by this government in the last 3 years and the ones for the future of the country is what the people want.
    They prefer the management of the economy in the way that the coalition want that the system of the “old some Labor”
    If it cost attack to health, education, science and the climate so bi it.
    As I have said before grand percentage of the population have it to good and the other have their life mortgaged and would not risk a change.

  4. ozibody

    Indeed Kaye, a comprehensive list and well delivered …thank you !

    In reference to the Big Four, the journalist who first broke the news about George Rozani was (now) freelancer Michael West who is well worth reading at his website
    My belief is that the Conservative doctrine simply cannot ever allow a government under their flag, to dispense evenly. Until such time as the Australian public wakes up to this and votes them out, our struggle for fairness will persist!,

  5. Kaye Lee

    We are continually told by the Liberal Party that “a nation can’t tax its way into prosperity.” I would suggest that Norway blows that lie out of the water. The Norwegian tax authority’s own website even states, “The Norwegian tax system is based on the principle that everybody should pay tax according to their means and receive services according to their needs.”

    The truth is that you can’t make a profitable business unprofitable through taxation. At the very worst, they will pay 30% of their profit. Wage earners who get above $37,000 are already paying a higher rate than that. As for the rate being too high to be competitive, it is significantly higher in the US and that doesn’t seem to have stopped investment there.

    Taxation is not the deciding factor for companies looking to invest. They want political stability, a good legal system, a well-developed and regulated financial sector, adequate infrastructure, and a well-educated skilled workforce.

    Every time I hear Jennifer Westacott and Kate Carnell do their routine I long for someone to expose their lies but it never happens. They have our politicians and our journalists conned.

  6. Neil of Sydney

    The Coalition will tell you it’s because Labor locked in unsustainable spending and that cutting services is the only way to fix it.

    This is true. No need to say anything more.

  7. Freethinker

    Yes Neal, according to the destructive ideology of the coalition and yours.

  8. Kaye Lee

    If you adhere to mantras then I suppose it’s easy to ignore the evidence Neil. If businesses paid the tax they were supposed to and stopped asking for handouts then we wouldn’t have a deficit.

  9. John Kelly

    Neil, didn’t you read ALL of the article? Most of it demonstrated where unsustainable tax breaks were the problem, not spending.

  10. Matters Not

    If I rob a bank, I won’t be fined. I will do time. If a ‘company’ ‘robs’ the tax office, then they will be fined. You can’t send a company to gaol so, in a sense, human responsibility simply evaporates. As George Rozvany recommends, the CEO of ‘guilty’ companies must do time.

    The GFC was caused by people in power making ‘bad’ decisions. As a result, other people lost homes, businesses, and the like. There was severe social, political and economic dislocation. And yet only one person went to jail. A relatively minor player – Kareem Serageldin. The other ‘criminals’ not only got off scot free but received massive financial assistance from government. (If you get a chance see the film, The Big Short.)

    ozibody, thanks for the link to Michael West. He is a journalist, in the best sense of the word.

  11. The AIM Network

    Neil, didn’t you read ALL of the article?

    John, he skimmed over the title only.

  12. Peter F

    NOS: it IS true that this is what they say, but WHAT THEY SAY IS NOT TRUE.

  13. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Kaye Lee,

    another spot on article but you are being too kind to the rich Biz leeches by saying it’s now time ” to pay the rent, to pay your share.”

    That time arrived a long time ago, so not only will the leeches be made to pay their way but they will be made to pay all retrospective missed payments, as well as fines and/or gaol-time and accrued interest for tax avoidance.

  14. Kaye Lee


    I would be happy to look to the future. Anything retrospective will be fought to the death and considering the tax avoidance is “legal”, if not ethical, we would be wasting resources to go too hard. The ATO agrees that they should work with business to improve future transparency, ASIC will pursue governance and accountability, but it takes the government to improve legislation and regulation.

    The unions asked for the same thing – to work with government to improve their governance – instead we were taken to an election based on crucifying them for relatively petty misdemeanors.

    It is astonishing how public perception trumps reality.

  15. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Fair enough for now. But remember there is no statute of limitations on fraud and tax avoidance is fraud. Big Biz is a prime target, if we decide to get stroppy sometime in the future.

  16. Don Winter

    “First they insisted that the proposed changes to fringe benefits tax must go to save the car industry – or not.”

    I have not heard anyone, Liberal or Labour say they wanted to save the Australian car industry destroyed by Abbott. The death of Australian manufacturing. Hundreds of thousands of skilled Australian job lost.
    They shut down GMH in South Australia and replace it with a Global Nuclear Waste Dump, the worlds rubbish, brilliant, and we pay these idiots.

  17. Kaye Lee

    I have this idealistic notion of a table where representatives from government, business, unions, the social service sector, the Indigenous community, the Human Rights Commission, the science community and the environmentalists sit down together and write a list of priorities for the society we want.

    They then work backwards on how to achieve it.

  18. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    why idealistic? It should be mandatory.

  19. Michael Taylor

    When Rudd was PM he wanted to get rid of novated leases, saving the tax payers about a billion dollars a year. The Abbott opposition went into meltdown, arguing it would hurt the vehicle manufacturing industry. Rudd’s plan was eventually shelved, and we all know how much the incoming Abbott Government really cared about the industry.

  20. jimhaz

    [Businesses insist that they must import 457 visa workers and the government obliges despite the many examples of exploitation both of the rules and of the workers]

    They also fail to train employees to anywhere near the degree they did a decade or so ago, so they save from two sides. I mean the idea of internships promoted by Turnbull was a clear case of an absolute level of arrogant business entitlement.

  21. jimhaz

    The novated leases scam is a very clear sign that lobbyists actually rule the LNP government.

  22. Kaye Lee

    Good point jimhaz. I had forgotten about the free labour internships that would inevitably replace paid jobs.

    And look at the move to self-serve or automation at so many businesses who cry out for concessions because of the “jobs they create” – banks, mines, supermarkets, ports…

  23. astra5

    Thank you for yet another perspicacious article. You have again hit the nail on the head.

    If only the Turnbull/Morrison/Cormann triad could see the injustice you describe! I wonder if it would make them think again?

  24. Kaye Lee

    Another example of how business lies and politicians like George Christensen swallow it without question….

    Christensen was campaigning hard about jobs, promising the Abbott Point expansion would solve all their woes. When I quoted to him (with link) the Queensland government report saying it would only create “between 82 and 164 FTE positions, comprising 39 to 78 direct FTEs and 43 to 86 indirect FTEs, during the less than one year construction phase” (mainly going to construction workers who were already employed and finishing current projects) and that “After the construction phase, operational employment benefits would manifest for approximately five years in the order of one FTE,” he replied “you are a liar or uninformed. Take your pick.” How do you argue with blind ignorance?

  25. Jaquix

    Neil, like so many, doesnt seem able to comprehend that tax breaks are actually a form of spending. Its a gift to the recipient, therefore the cost of the gift is spending. So basically the election was about whether to SPEND $50 billion on business owners, or SPEND it by investing in the people.

  26. Kaye Lee


    You just made me chuckle. My cousin and I are the youngest of our generation and her older sister always said to us, very haughtily, “You are children of little perspicacity.” She taught us how to play on the piano, and sing, Gaudeamus Igitur when we were still in infants school (she was at university). She actually ended up being one of my lecturers at Teachers College. We are now dear friends 🙂

  27. jimhaz

    [So basically the election was about whether to SPEND $50 billion on business owners, or SPEND it by investing in the people]

    This would be OK if trickle down actually worked. I would think at times it does work – but has not for 15 years or so as the tax reductions for most have been very massive since the high top tax rates of the 70’s and 80’s – when society was flourishing.

  28. kerri

    Good article as usual Kaye Lee!
    As Noam Chomsky pointed out big business wants a nanny state so that when they fail the givernment (that’s a typo but I’m gonna leave it in this context) bails them out!

  29. Sam

    Congrats to Astra for the vocabulary!

  30. Kaye Lee

    The budget forecasts Federal Government tax revenue will be 22.3 per cent of GDP this financial year.

    The tax level in Norway has fluctuated between 40 and 45% of GDP since the 1970s. The relatively high tax level is a result of the large Norwegian welfare state. Most of the tax revenue is spent on public services such as health services, the operation of hospitals, education and transportation.

    According to the OECD, in Norway, the average household net-adjusted disposable income per capita is USD 33 393 a year. In Australia, the average household net adjusted disposable income per capita is USD 33 138 a year.

  31. Harquebus

    Why do we have a deficit?
    It’s called the law of diminishing energy returns. More and more energy invested for less and less returns and it is a one way street.
    Physics trumps political and economic ideology every time.

  32. jim

    I don’t know who said it ,”after the election we go back to the electioning,Why did the ABCs “unbiased news” anchor state, MT is elected and in the same breath say; “Labor has had the lowest vote EVER!” ok nothing to see here except this (bashing Labor by ABC staff is just outrageous IMO. ) they are supposed to stay neutral they it piss me off no end, a sit in at the ABC soon please.

    The Liberals and the IPA have been nibble and chewing at “our” ABC for the better part of a century. wiki; During the Second World War, the ABC continued to recruit staff, including a greater proportion of women to replace men who had joined the armed forces.[8] The organisation established reporting and recording facilities in a number of overseas locations, including the Middle East, Greece and around the Asia-Pacific region.[8] An early challenge to its independence came in June, 1940 when wartime censorship was imposed, meaning that the Department of Information (headed by Sir Keith Murdoch) took control of the ABC’s 7 p.m. nightly national news bulletin.[8] This lasted until September, or 4 months,when control of the news was returned to the ABC after listeners expressed a preference for independent news presented by the Commission.[8]
    What I don’t believe is that we’re a nation of tough occa rebels else we’d head to PH and stay there until we rewrote a few rules .
    The Liberal Party and many conservative commentators suggest that the size of government in Australia under the current Labor Government is too big.

    The Drum; Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has said the current government “is addicted to taxes” and that it “is spending like a drunken sailor… mortgaging our future”. In a similar vein, shadow treasurer Joe Hockey says “Labor has shown it is incapable of cutting spending”.

    Either these comments are deliberate mis-truths or reflect the lack of understanding of budget policy from people who, within a year, could well be prime minister and treasurer.

    The facts of the budget show that the current government’s budgetary footprint on the economy is small, running at the lowest level in 35 years. The current small government is made up of both low tax receipts and record cuts in government spending.
    The drum;

  33. Helen Holmes

    Kaye – an interesting point re George Christensen. I asked pretty much the same question, although the article I posted quoted Adani’s own estimate of about 1,600 jobs, yet still Christensen quoted 10,000 time and time again. For daring to point this out I got banned from his Facebook page, as did the other 250-odd posters who then made up the ‘Blocked by George’ Facebook group. This was a major issue in his electorate and yet he blocked his constituents rather than argue his case. THis is the modus operandi of the government – ignore the argument and hope it will go away. If forced to respond just tell lies.

  34. Kaye Lee


    That commentary has annoyed me too. The Coalition have lost 13 or 14 seats, Labor have gained 13 or 14.

  35. Kaye Lee


    I got blocked by George too. The facts aren’t on his side and he is incapable of rational debate. He just calls you a liar or a bastard and then blocks you so he can continue to spread his naive ill-informed populist crap unchallenged in his echo chamber.

  36. jimhaz

    Tax to GDP

    Look where we were even in 2010 when the rate was higher at 25.6% due to ongoing GFC protection.

    What we do have is a high Federal government tax collection % of total taxation, but not high tax overall. I’d say this reflects our high wage structure and non-EU community where due to ease of movement consumption taxes are more relevant (I suppose to avoid shifting to lower tax countries).

  37. mark

    Hahahha -funny article. You should try writing with both eyes open. Labor locked in money that was never there then blocked anything that the Libs tried to pass through parliament. The carbon tax was killing our manufacturing by imposing a cost that no other country was doing. Libs took it to an election and had a resounding win. Electricity prices are artificially high due to the green element we all have to pay to keep putting money back into the green industry. Keep trying , you will get there

  38. Neil of Sydney

    Labor locked in unsustainable spending is all that needs to be said.

  39. Kaye Lee

    Spending is not unsustainable if you have the revenue to pay for it (or the capacity to create/borrow funds but let’s not go there now).

    Nationally, electricity prices are up 120 per cent over 10 years. According to the Australian Energy Market Commission, your electricity bill is made up of three components:
    – Wholesale and retail prices, based on supply and demand;
    – The cost of poles and wires, and;
    – The cost of environmental policies.
    Nation-wide, these three components make up 39 per cent, 53 per cent and 8 per cent of the average bill, respectively.

  40. caroline

    Mark the money is NEVER there until they spend it. So they got rid of the carbon tax. Where is manufacturing now? In the toilet. I can’t even be bothered refuting your narrow view of things.

    Kaye Lee your dream is my dream but sadly can’t see it happening but that’s how it should be all sitting around a table. I know I must be a bad person because I get a physical reaction whenever Ms Carnell speaks.

    More people seem to be aware now that trickle down is bad for people but no-one mainstream has told them if the alternative yet. Still hoping.

  41. Neil of Sydney

    How so, Neil?

    As you know i think facts are irrelevant. I did a Google search and found this

    The common element is Labor’s determination to make itself the natural party of government by entrenching both social spending and union power.

    The previous Labor government committed more than $100 billion extra over the next decade to schools and public hospitals. Then there was another $100 billion extra for the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

    Some of it was justified and most of it was legislated but none of it was funded. That’s why the reforms of the 2014 budget were so necessary and why the Liberal National coalition’s continued commitment to savings is so important.

  42. Möbius Ecko

    NoS how about giving us a government finance source instead of the very biased Telegraph. From memory that bit of fluff was a furphy and nothing but a repeat of the Liberal’s talking point as they attempted to squirm their way out of their significant increased spending.

    And let’s not forget Howard’s ticking slow release time bomb, that went off whilst he was in power and we are still paying for now.

  43. Neil of Sydney


    No point in arguing or giving facts.

    Labor locked in unsustainable spending. End of story

  44. Kaye Lee

    “the costs as reported in Budget Paper No. 1 include full NDIA costs, which are funded jointly by the Commonwealth and the states and territories. Budget Paper No. 1 notes that ‘of the $37.0 billion in expenses over the forward estimates’, the Commonwealth will fund $18.9 billion, with the remainder from states and territories.”

    “Labor has announced it would commit to fully funding Gonski, with a reform package costing A$37.3 billion over the next decade.”

    “Labor will re-commit to funding 50 per cent of the efficient growth in hospital costs over the next four years and invest in reducing elective surgery and emergency department waiting times. Labor’s four-year commitment brings the total contribution of a Shorten Labor Government to $4.9 billion ”

    Get rid of Direct Action and introduce an ETS, crack down on tax avoidance, stop fossil fuel subsidies, rein in tax concessions for negative gearing, capital gains, superannuation and private health insurance, make churches pay tax on their business enterprises, cut back spending on war toys… get back to me about unsustainable spending.

    “It’s $250 billion on the table over the next 30 to 40 years on naval ships”

  45. Grace McCaughey

    Great article Kaye. Thank you. We need to never stop pushing the facts re tax avoidance . That money along with cuts to defence spending would pay for all the much needed services to health, Aborigines, the aged, education, etc.

  46. totaram

    As you might expect, NoS gives you an “opinion piece” to back up his claim. No information, no data, no facts – just opinion and that too in the Daily Telegraph, and guess who the author is: Tony Abbott!

    If you give him hard data that refutes his claim, he will ignore it. Standard MO of the hardened conservative like George Christiansen.

  47. Matters Not

    Wholesale and retail prices

    Recently a Sudanese family in my locality had their power cut off because they didn’t pay the bill on time. (In fact, they had paid the bill but there was a communication breakdown between the electricity ‘supplier’ and the ‘retailer’.) The father wanted my help to get his power restored. It was a bureaucratic nightmare. Took me some time because all I could talk to were robotic voices and then wait on hold.

    In my area there are something 25 companies that ‘sell’ electricity. They don’t generate any electricity (one does) all they do is explained in the attached article

    The electricity retailers are simply competing for the right to send you a bill, to package up a range of tariffs and lock you into a contract. They are the archetypal middle-man …

    their gross margin — the difference between the cost of electricity they pay the distributors and generators, and the cost of packaging up you bill and collecting money from customers — was between $150 to $200 per customer. The overall cost of retailers equates to about 15% of your electricity bill, or about $350 a year, depending were you live. That’s nearly half the cost of generation.

    A great example of inefficiency and waste.

    Electricity retailers: do we really need them?

  48. jimhaz

    Ignoring Neil’s grossly inflated figures.

    The problem with NIDS and Gonski was that the ALP relied on an extra 0.5% medicare tax to fund it, and clearly wildly excessive valuations on the tobacco tax. It would not surprise me if there was not an assumption they could also use bracket creep.

    While NIDS would allow them to cut disability commonwealth funds to states, the combination of both NIDS and Gonski on state budgets, and the difficulty states have in relation to income sources, I think has been underestimated. They’d do things like double the cost of public transport.

    They directed the taxes a bit too much at low/middle income earners rather than first and primarily tackling the business and wealth powerhouses scamming on tax.

  49. jimhaz

    Electricity retailers – one of the greatest scams performed by mainly state ALP’s on the public ever.
    I’d like to know just how many union bosses got 500k or more jobs as a result.

  50. Kaye Lee

    I wonder is this is a good way to go….

    THE Big Energy Switch is a campaign to unlock group-discounted electricity using the buying power of 40,000 households.

    How does it work?

    Step 1: You register. Registration is obligation-free and cost-free.

    Step 2: One Big Switch uses the bargaining power of 40,000 potential switchers to source group discounted electricity offers.

    Step 3: One Big Switch forwards to you any offers and you decide if the offer is right for you, and whether or not you want to switch.

    It is free to join, and free to take part.

    * Find out more information at

    WARNING: “One Big Switch is supported by News Corp Australia and Channel 7. One Big Switch earns a fee only when businesses win customers through our campaigns.”

  51. Florence nee Fedup

    We have massive trouble coming with high debt. No Neil, not government. We have the banks using overseas borrowing to fuel heat in the housing industry. Yes, Neil, private debt. Debt that is not investing in future infrastructure for future growth.

    The ratio is now higher than the time Keating said we were heading for a banana economy.

    On top of this is the structural imbalance that Howard tax cuts created still ongoing.

    This government solution of lowering company tax further will only add to any structural imbalance. Shorten’s plan to reform negative gearing and changes to super will be more productive.

    Out of pocket health costs are up more 60% since 2007, growing rapidly last few years.

    We are paying more when it comes to carbon emissions for less results. Same for government services in general.

    We see tens thousands taken of disability pensions, have they got work? or moved onto the dole?

    Standards living falling first time in generations.

    Neil, there is less being spent on people, not more.

  52. Gangey1959

    neil of sydney.
    F*ck up and die. You are a moron.
    Your bedmate, abbott, when he came to power in 2013 on the back of some of the most horrendous lies told in Australian political history removed some of the best income streams the government had at its disposal, and since then we have heard nothing but more bullshit about how “we can’t afford it”. (Unless it’s a french submarine that will never see a crew or a tax cut for those with too much money for common sense or funding for god lessons over real education)
    Every fool knows that the first thing you look at when working out a budget is how much is coming in before you decide where you can make some expenditure savings, but the dickhead you idolise did it the other way around, and now we as a nation are screwed. So before you shoot your mouth off any further, just close it, because those of us with a worse attitude than you have any hope of controlling might work out where you live. Remember rule 303.
    @ Totaram. nos IS the aforementioned mad monk in drag. (In case you were wondering)

  53. Michael Taylor

    I’m still waiting for an answer, Neil.

  54. Möbius Ecko

    NoS since you seem to be always seem to be so worried about where Labor spending is coming from, even when you are given the facts of where that funding is, how about telling us where the Liberals $50 billion in tax cuts is coming from?

    Of course since this is unspecified massive Liberal spending NoS has no problems with it.

    Another economic fact. Australia has always done better under a Labor government and gone backwards under a Liberal one.

  55. jimhaz

    In 1995 we had the 15th highest pricing in the OECD (or thereabouts)

    Post privatisation of the retail side


    In June, Victoria had the OECD’s highest pre-tax electricity prices, with both standing offers and discounted market offers out in front of other countries.


    QLD has seen the biggest increase in power prices over the past decade, with the ABS electricity price index rising by 151% since 2006.


    NSW standing offers (those with no discounts) are higher than any OECD country, and market (discounted) offers are only behind UK & Ireland.


    In June, SA had the OECD’s second-highest pre-tax electricity prices, with both standing offers and discounted market offers out in front. SA has since seen an average price rise of about 12%, putting it on top of the OECD.


    WA is behind only Portugal, Japan, Ireland and UK, and has seen electricity prices almost double since 2006. Consumers still have no choice of retailers.


    Tasmania is in the grip of a power supply crisis, with dams at record lows and a broken submarine cable. Consumers still have no choice of retailers.

  56. Florence nee Fedup

    Gillard spent years of fiscal consolidation with deficit trending albeit slowly downwards until Hockey took over.

    He manage to triple deficit and debt while cutting benefits and government services. Not bad effort.

  57. Neil of Sydney

    F*ck up and die. You are a moron.

    DV is a current issue. You should not make a comment like that

    Australia has always done better under a Labor government

    Adrian give it a miss. I was in Geelong when the Pyramid Building society went under and Victoria almost went bankrupt. I was around when Keating won govt in1993 when unemployment was at 11%

    Michael- i gave you mt answer at 1.37PM

  58. 2353NM

    NoS – stop changing the subject. You should have worked out by now the only time you should be reading the Daily Tele is on the toilet – prior to using the product for ablutions Some research might open your eyes (as well as avoiding comments such as the one you find so offensive).

  59. 2353NM

    NoS – You are probably not a moron. You are however displaying your complete lack of knowledge of current events and recent history.

    Pyramid Building Society went down because of malfeasance – the Victorian Government went down because it attempted to protect the investments of people like you that had their money in Pyramid at the time.

    Unemployment in a number of towns in Australia as this is being typed is far greater than 11% – Townsville is one of them -> (Townsville’s population is around 170,000 – about line ball with Geelong coincidentally).

    “As you know i think facts are irrelevant.” is not an answer to anything except demonstrating your level of ignorance.

  60. Neil of Sydney

    the Victorian Government went down because it attempted to protect the investments of people like you that had their money in Pyramid at the time.

    Get stuffed. Victoria went down because Cain/Kirner destroyed the budget. Why cannot you lefties condemn Cain/Kirner? As far as I know but could be wrong even Mobius will do that.

    Victoria almost went bankrupt under Labor

    Pyramid went down because Keating deregulated the banking industry

  61. Michael Taylor

    That wasn’t an answer, Neil. You simply linked to a discredited newspaper. I want an answer. You made a statement, now back it up.

  62. Neil of Sydney

    That wasn’t an answer, Neil

    It was an answer. It was a article written by Tony Abbott. Here is it again

    The common element is Labor’s determination to make itself the natural party of government by entrenching both social spending and union power.

    The previous Labor government committed more than $100 billion extra over the next decade to schools and public hospitals. Then there was another $100 billion extra for the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

    Some of it was justified and most of it was legislated but none of it was funded. That’s why the reforms of the 2014 budget were so necessary and why the Liberal National coalition’s continued commitment to savings is so important.

  63. Michael Taylor

    It wasn’t an answer to the question I asked. Come one, where is your answer? All I’m asking is for you to back up your claim. Quoting Tony Abbott is pathetic.

    I’m starting to think that you don’t even have an answer.

  64. Gangey1959

    Unemployment is going to be an interesting statistic in a couple of years time when we have no Car industry, nor any of the affiliated supplier side chains either.
    The 500 mil that GMH was asking for was not a hand out as far as I am concerned, it was just some ”protection” from the cheap crap that is being flooded onto our streets by the boatload that brings Australia absolutely NOTHING, and would have been quickly repaid in taxes, unneccessarily claimed unstart and other savings on government expenditure.
    The sooner thgat whatever flavour of government we get, but particularly the lnp kind, realise and UNDERSTAND that Australia’s population is our major ASSET the better off everyone will be, the ultra-megawealthy included. We are not a cost or expense that has to be juggled and minimised like operating a hospital. Roads, education, employment, health, defence, social safety and energy supply are our expectation and right.
    Politicians are the cost and expense. Far more can be achieved with far fewer of them. And as for their ongoing, post employment costs……. Don’t get me started. I work 2 days a week, health permitting, and this reflects on my newstart payments.
    Why do our politicians and top end pubic servants not have to go through the same processes?
    I mean, what is one p costello, EX federal treasurer, earning these days from his I think 4 current jobs, and why doesn’t this all reduce his parliamentary pension ? It’s not like he was brilliant at his job in Canberra. He was only smart enough to sell off about 1/3 of our National Gold Reserves, at nearly the BOTTOM of the gold price, but that’s ok pete, we know you meant well.

    And NoS. We’re not lefties. We’ve got our brains connected is all. You should try it some time. Or stay the f*ck quiet. Opening your mouth to hear your head roar via a keyboard just makes you look as dumb as your words prove you are.

  65. TuffGuy

    So NoS provides as his evidence an article by the Mad Monk himself??? The biggest liar and bully and homophobe and incompetent ever seen in government. He makes Howard look like an amateur. The same person who, when elected, declared a budget emergency with a deficit of around 19 billion. A budget emergency which has since disappeared now that the deficit is around 68 billion. Statistics also show this government to be the highest spending, much higher than previous Labour governments. Wages growth is the lowest in decades. Our credit rating is in danger. Abbott and Hockey were the worst PM and Treasurer in our history, Turnbull and Morrison are arguably even worse. Statistics show Gillard to be a far better PM than Abbott or Turnbull. We are all still waiting to see just what Turnbull’s “Jobs and Growth” actually means, other than being a meaningless slogan. Health and Education and climate change and foreign aid are going down the toilet. Don’t get me started on our stuffed digital economy of the future thanks to Turnbull’s bastardisation of the NBN.
    This will do for now because I could write another War and Peace on how bad this government is.

  66. guest

    Neil, you have already been directed to a site re Menzies and his approach to debt and deficit. You were asking why Menzies had no debt in 1972. I pointed you towards an article in The Conversation, Aug 29, 2014: “Menzies, a failure by today’s rules, ran a budget to build a nation.”

    Did you read it? Or do you rely only on The Daily Telegraph?

    There is much in that article which would surprise you.

    Menzies’ “biggest deficit of 3.3% of GDP in his final year in office was larger than the last Swan deficit, which the Abbott government has called a ‘disaster’ and a ‘budget crisis’.

    “Spending of GDP rose steadily and substantially under Menzies, from 19.4% of GDP to 24.5%”

    “Menzies had been paying off wartime debt early in his term, but debt increased to be at 41% of GDP when Menzies retired.”

    “Menzies was interested in nation building…he was willing to use long-term debt financing to fund long-term investments.”

    So one question is: Why was Menzies not concerned about debt?

    Another one is: Why is the current Coalition so concerned about debt and at the same time doubles the debt?

    And an addendum: What part does Howard’s legacy of a structural deficit play in all of this?

  67. jim

    Labor don’t waste precious time playing the blame game do they.

  68. jim

    Tony Abbott has said the current government “is addicted to taxes” and that it “is spending like a drunken sailor… mortgaging our future”. In a similar vein, shadow treasurer Joe Hockey says “Labor has shown it is incapable of cutting spending”.

    Either these comments are deliberate mis-truths or reflect the lack of understanding of budget policy from people who, within a year, could well be prime minister and treasurer.

    The facts of the budget show that the current government’s budgetary footprint on the economy is small, running at the lowest level in 35 years. The current small government is made up of both low tax receipts and record cuts in government spending.

    The tax to GDP ratio has averaged 21.1 per cent of GDP in the five years of the current Labor Government. The highest tax to GDP ratio in those years is for 2012-13 where it will reach 22.2 per cent. Under the Liberal Party-lead Coalition, the Howard government tax to GDP ratio averaged 23.4 per cent over its 12 years in office and never once did it fall below 22.2 per cent. In other words, the tax to GDP ratio under the current government is at a level last seen during the Keating government in the early 1990s and before that, we have to go back to the 1970s to see such a low-taxing government.

    The difference between the average tax level of the previous Coalition government and the current Labor Government is 2.3 per cent of GDP. In today’s dollar terms, that is around $35 billion per annum in less tax collected by the Labor Government compared with the previous Coalition government. That $35 billion lower tax take is equivalent to around $4,000 per year for every household in Australia.

    The budget papers also show that the Howard government was the highest taxing government in Australia’s history. In 2004-05 and 2005-06, the tax to GDP ratio reached a record high 24.2 per cent. In addition, there have been only seven occasions where the tax to GDP ratio has been in excess of 23.5 per cent of GDP and all seven were under the Howard government.

    In a similar vein, in the last 30 years, there have been 10 occasions when the tax to GDP ratio has been below 22.0 per cent of GDP and all 10 were under a Labor Government. To put simply, the Howard government was a high taxer, while the current Labor Government is a lower taxer.. link;

  69. Neil of Sydney

    Unemployment is going to be an interesting statistic in a couple of years time when we have no Car industry, nor any of the affiliated supplier side chains either.

    Why pick on the car industry? In the early 1980’s we used to make everything in Australia. Now most of our manufacturing industry is all gone. If it was not for mining/agriculture we would be cactus.

  70. totaram

    Gangney: as an aside, you need to keep up with changes. Rule 303 has been superseded to 7.62 and then 5.56mm X 45 mm (if you want the full spec of the round). However, invoking the rule in print can be misconstrued by some as a kind of threat.

    On a different note, Kaye has hit the nail on the head in the title. It really is a matter of fairness. However, what most people miss is that the budget deficit/surplus is actually out of the treasurer’s hands. After all the histrionics of the incoming Abbott govt. and Joe Hockey’s promise to have a budget surplus every year, and Wayne Swan’s failure to deliver his promised surplus, it should be clear to anyone who has even half a brain. As economists say, the final budget outcome is endogenous i.e. internally determined, and the final result is ex-post. The reason lies in the three sectors financial balance identity, which simply must hold. It tells us that the surplus/deficit of the govt. + the surplus/deficit of the domestic private sector + the surplus/deficit of our external trading partners must add to zero. Since the trading partners usually have a surplus, that leaves both the others or at least one of them to have a deficit. The private sector having a deficit means they have taken on more debt. Since they are already in debt up to the eyeballs (around 150% of GDP) they are trying very hard to pay this off. This means they would strive for a surplus. Under these conditions, a treasurer can only deliver surplus if he/she cuts almost all spending. Cutting all govt. spending is a sure recipe for tipping the economy into recession. Even though the current govt. only cut some expenditure, the effect is clear. The RBA is struggling to stimulate the economy with the lowest interest rates or record, but growth is still sluggish.

    The sad thing about all this is that “the budget” focusses entirely on finances. Finances do not reflect the entire economy. The real economy consists of goods, services, and jobs – in other words the things that real people care about. . Some of these are not even valued correctly by “financial markets”. What we need to do is to figure out what are the things we really need, in terms of infrastructure, education, health and other services, and then set about finding ways to get them. Starting with a “budget” ex-ante, is just putting the cart before the horse. And incidentally, once we fund our people properly, they are out asset and they will deliver the prosperity which will allow us to recoup any “debts” we might have incurred. (I won’t go into govt. “debts” – it is another topic).

    The article on Menzies pointed to by guest, should give us a clue that what I have written is not “impractical”. Indeed, given that he was operating in a very constrained environment without a fiat currency and free-floating dollar, it shows that now things should be even simpler.

  71. Neil of Sydney

    I gave you Abbotts answer. My answer is that Rudd/Gillard started a runaway debt truck which most probably is unstoppable.

    This is my opinion which hopefully i am allowed to publish.

    PS facts are irrelevant. people believe what they want to believe

  72. James

    Give up Michael Neil is Fanatic, Fundamentalist, like a Collingwood supporter or any Religious Nut. There is no hope.

  73. Florence nee Fedup

    I think Carr might have been about saving the industry that supplied the car makers. EXporting to other car making countries. Neil, that debt truck private debt. Never heard of again when Abbott took power.

  74. Neil of Sydney

    This is from several years ago Most probably worse by now

    TAXPAYERS were on track for a $667 billion debt bomb if Labor’s policies and spending was left unchecked over the next decade, budget papers reveal.

    Treasurer Joe Hockey today unveiled the state of the nation’s finances in Canberra, uncovering the massive debt legacy Labor was on track to deliver.

    The Midyear Economic and Fiscal Outlook showed without “remedial action” and significant savings debt would blow out by to close to $700 billion – or around 26 per cent of GDP – by 2022-23.

    We are in trouble thanks to Rudd/Gillard and the people who voted for them

    That quote was from 2013. We are cactus thanks to Rudd/Gillard

  75. Gangey1959

    @ Totaram.
    Thankyou for the information. I believe that there is also a subclause that covers railway sleepers too. It all depends on what it is that one is ”licensed to carry”.
    As far as any perception of a threat, that’s like me and golf. You are all safe until I pull a club from my bag.
    As long as nos stays off subjects he knows nothing about, (like life in general etc) any reference to rule 303 is just a conversational direction.
    At no stage is it a threat……………
    (What is the difference between a threat and a promise ?)

  76. Michael Taylor

    That doesn’t answer the question, Neil. That is nothing to do with the statement you made earlier. If there was any basis to your claim then surely you should be able to provide the evidence.

    Despite repeated requests, you’ve failed to answer the question. Your credibility is in tatters.

  77. Florence nee Fedup

    Yes Neil we did make everything in Australia. Worked in many of the factories. Know what. what we made was expensive, often to expensive for those who made them.

    We don’t make them today, but are much much cheaper to buy. We now work in different jobs.

  78. Kaye Lee

    “facts are irrelevant. people believe what they want to believe”

    I believe that explains why some people persist in voting for Coalition governments. They are too lazy or too stupid or too tired to find out and understand the truth. And the rest of us pay the price for their apathy as corporations pillage and plunder, cheered on by their paid for lackeys. Thanks for nothing.

  79. James

    Neil getting your information from only one source; Liberal Party Central, is a foolish thing to do.

  80. Neil of Sydney

    Despite repeated requests, you’ve failed to answer the question. Your credibility is in tatters.

    Good. If i had a good credibility on this blog i would be worried.

    If my credibility is in tatters on this blog i must be saying something right

    Fact is Rudd/Gillard locked in unsustainable spending

    We are about to lose our AAA credit rating. Do you lefties care?

  81. Florence nee Fedup

    the runaway private debt which threatens us now, which is at rate Keating said would lead us to a banana republic, was set in train by Howard. That is private debt, which banks are borrowing overseas, fueling the runaway housing bubble.

    Debt that Neil and many more choose to ignore.

  82. Kaye Lee

    “TAXPAYERS were on track for a $667 billion debt bomb if Labor’s policies and spending was left unchecked over the next decade, budget papers reveal.”

    That particular lie won Tony Abbott the ABC Fact check golden zombie award for the lie that would not die. For the 2013-14 year, PEFO forecast net debt of $184 billion. At the end of the forward estimates period in 2016-17, it projected net debt of $217 billion.

    Hockey came up with that $667 billion in his first MYEFO after he canned revenue from carbon and mining taxes etc and added his $8.8 billion gift and changed assumptions, multiplied by pi and added eleventy, to give him a guesstimate of the debt in ten years time.

    It was pathetic. Another example of facts not being important.

  83. Bacchus

    We are about to lose our AAA credit rating. Do you lefties care?

    No! 🙂

  84. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    No Neil,

    I don’t bloody well care if we lose our AAA credit rating. I don’t care about global conglomerate Standard and Poor either. Jumped up globalised robbers and pretend artists best describes them.

    As all knowledgeable people on this site have told you, Australia has its own sovereign currency and we don’t need to borrow anybody’s money, as we control our own. Hence, no need for a sucky good credit record. Get it???

  85. Möbius Ecko

    “Fact is Rudd/Gillard locked in unsustainable spending.”

    It’s not a fact just because you state it is. Here’s a verifiable fact. Howard left behind an international and domestic mess that both the world and Australia will be paying for a long time to come.

  86. Neil of Sydney

    It was pathetic. Another example of facts not being important.

    Do you want to bet that we don’t have $667B of gross debt by 2022? Put some money on it Kaye.

  87. Kaye Lee

    No Neil. I like to deal with facts.

  88. The AIM Network

    If i had a good credibility on this blog i would be worried.

    So would we.

  89. Neil of Sydney

    Fact is our gross debt will not be $667B in 2022 but it will be bigger because you voted for Rudd in 2007

  90. Michael Taylor

    You’re avoiding the question, Neil.

  91. Jan

    I think we need to stop this; Neil is getting off on this. I feel that Neil may getting hot sweaty crawling naked in his bathroom whilst whipping himself. Never has he had so much attention, His cup runeth over.

  92. Neil of Sydney

    If Swan did not lock in unsustainable spending why are our budgets still in deficit way after The GFC?

  93. Michael Taylor

    Neil, instead of trying to call the shots here all the time, how about letting me do it?

    I’m thinking of deleting every comment of yours from this point onwards until you answer the question.

  94. Freethinker

    Michael are you sure that Neil is not a robot, those that are in every forum ?

  95. Stephen Brailey

    As much as I’d love to get into the whole give it Neil scene. I think his refusal to see plain and simple facts is actually a lot more interesting than the drivel he is saying. I live in FNQ (far North Queensland) and people here read the Cairns Post (an appalling Murdoch paper) and many of them believe the same as Neil. Facts just bounce off them, international opinion is just jibber jabber and scientists are all involved in socialist plots to get funding and undermine democracy.
    So don’t blame Neil he’s just to old, to dumb or to lazy to change the opinion he’s been chugging down that evil old fascist for the last 40 years. It’s our fault for not defending our democracy because folk you have to fight for the rights we all take for granted. People died under batons and horses hooves for the rights we take for granted. The power mad and the power hungry will always try to take your wages and lifestyles to feed their insatiable greed and simpletons like Neil will always be there cheering for them. End or rant!

  96. totaram

    Michael: as I’ve said before, it is so important to have a “sparring partner”. Keeps you on your toes (quite literally)!

  97. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I agree with Stephen and totaram re Neil.

    I suggest we invite other RWNJ’s to stop on by to ‘exchange’ ideas. They might get an education from people who know what they’re talking about.

  98. Michael Taylor

    Gawd, nobody agrees with me anymore.

  99. Neil of Sydney

    I’m thinking of deleting every comment of yours from this point onwards until you answer the question.

    I did answer your question

    The common element is Labor’s determination to make itself the natural party of government by entrenching both social spending and union power.

    The previous Labor government committed more than $100 billion extra over the next decade to schools and public hospitals. Then there was another $100 billion extra for the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

    Some of it was justified and most of it was legislated but none of it was funded. That’s why the reforms of the 2014 budget were so necessary and why the Liberal National coalition’s continued commitment to savings is so important.

    Prove Tony Abbott wrong

  100. Florence nee Fedup

    Neil you do realise Coalition in power last three years. Will be worse luck for next three. How can is be anything now to do with Gillard?”

  101. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Neil just likes being contraversial and centre of attention hence the suggestion of inviting some other RWNJ’s to add their comments which will make Neil pale into insignificance again.

  102. Michael Taylor

    “Neil you do realise . . . ”

    No, Florence, he doesn’t.

  103. Dan Rowden

    It ought be a source of embarrassment for the lot of you just how completely Neil has you by the gonads. Thank God the football is on.

  104. Michael Taylor

    On the contrary, Dan, I’m having fun.

  105. Dan Rowden

    Oh, well, if that’s the case then by all means enjoy! 🙂

  106. Jan

    On the contrary, Dan, I’m having fun.

    Michael I think you and Neil need to get a motel room,

  107. Zhen Liu

    it is completely a matter of who should be taxed although with different tax title or name

  108. 2353NM

    NoS – sorry for the introduction of facts. Please refer to the graphs at the bottom of this link -> from the Australian Government and discuss how Australian Government debt (the only one the Government has control over) has reduced since 2013/4 (when Abbott/Turnbull) came to power.

    Regardless of the accuracy (or lack thereof) of articles written by Tony Abbott about his government or the Gillard/Rudd Government – he has an implied bias which means that there is a perception at least that he would say that his work was better than others.

    Like Michael says – demonstrate there is some evidence behind your argument. So far you have failed miserably.

  109. Neil of Sydney

    The budget papers show a huge increase in govt spending. Govt spending was 23.1% on GDP in 07-08. Rudd/Swan increased it to 25.2% of GDP a 12.7% increase in spending. In Labors last budget it was 25.6% of GDP. See Table 1

    and discuss how Australian Government debt (the only one the Government has control over) has reduced since 2013/4 (when Abbott/Turnbull) came to power.

    Not sure what you are talking about

  110. Michael Taylor

    2353NM, Neil fails to accept that there was a GFC. He has also been provided with a dozen links to where the OECD has said that Swan’s spending measures not only saved 230,000 jobs but steered Australia away from a recession. But it doesn’t matter either.

    Neil thinks like this: Let’s assume that Kevin Rudd (or Swan, Gillard, Keating, Hawke or Whitlam for that matter) was out on a walk one morning and he noticed a terrorist was about to throw a grenade into a crowded cafe. Thinking quickly, he knocks the terrorist on the head with his cricket bat (Kevin just happened to have his bat with him) and he picks up the grenade and throws it into an empty lane way where it quickly explodes. Unfortunately, a passerby is hit by the debris and dies in hospital. But his quick actions save 50 lives and he is hailed a hero.

    For the next ten years Neil harps on that Kevin Rudd set out to deliberately kill an innocent person.

    That’s how Neil thinks.

  111. Florence nee Fedup

    Are we sure Neil isn’t Barnaby Joyce, who was on RN this morning ranting on in similar manner. All fault Labor’s $900 cheques.

  112. Florence nee Fedup

    Not too sure the employers, who courts found guilty for the deaths cared whether they killed anyone or not.

  113. cornlegend

    Michael Taylor,
    I’ll continue, you started it 😀
    Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, and Tony Abbott were set to face a firing squad in a small Central Queensland town {Vlad Laws got em}. Kevin Rudd was the first one placed against the wall and just before the order was given he yelled out, “Cyclone” The firing squad fell into a panic and Kev jumped over the wall and escaped in the confusion.

    Julia Gillard was the second one placed against the wall. The squad was reassembled and Julia Gillard pondered what she had just witnessed. Again before the order was given Julia yelled out, “Flood waters!” Again the squad fell apart and Julia slipped over the wall.

    The last person, Tony Abbott, was placed against the wall. He was thinking, “I see the pattern here, just scream out something about a disaster and hop over the wall.” He confidently refused the blindfold,fiddled with his surf club cap as the firing squad was reassembled. As the rifles were raised in his direction he grinned from ear to ear and yelled, “Fire!”

  114. cornlegend

    A man wandered into the pub,sat down at a bar, looked into his shirt pocket and ordered a double scotch.

    A few minutes later, the man again peeked into his pocket and ordered another double. This routine was followed for some time, until after looking into his pocket, the man told the bartender he’d had enough.

    The bartender said, “I’ve got to ask you. What’s with the pocket business?”

    “Oh,” said the man, “I have Malcolm Turnbulls picture in there, and when he starts to look honest, I know I’ve had enough.”

  115. cornlegend

    Tony Abbott was visiting a Sydney primary school and the class was in the
    middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings.

    The teacher asked Mr Abbott if he would like to lead the discussion on the word ‘Tragedy’.

    So our illustrious leader asked the class for an example of a ‘Tragedy’.

    A little boy stood up and offered: ‘If my best friend, who lives on a
    farm, is playin’ in the field and a tractor runs over him and kills him,
    that would be a tragedy.’

    ‘Incorrect,’ said Abbott. ‘That would be an accident.’

    A little girl raised her hand: ‘If a school bus carrying fifty children
    drove over a cliff, killing everybody inside, that would be a tragedy.’

    ‘I’m afraid not’ explained Abbott, ‘that’s what we would refer to as a great loss’.

    The room went silent. No other children volunteered. Abbott searched the room.

    ‘Isn’t there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?’

    Finally, at the back of the room, little Johnny raised his hand and said:

    ‘If a plane carrying you and Mr Turnbull, Mr Pyne and Mrs Bishop was struck
    by a ‘friendly fire’ missile & blown to smithereens, that would be a

    ‘Fantastic’ exclaimed Abbott, ‘and can you tell me why that would be a tragedy?’

    ‘Well’ said Johnny, ‘it has to be a tragedy, because it certainly wouldn’t be a
    great loss, and it probably wouldn’t be a bloody accident either!

  116. cornlegend

    A little boy goes to his dad and asks what is politics?

    Dad says well son let me try to explain it this way. I’m the Prime Minister of the family so let’s call me capitalism.
    Your Mum she’s the administrator of the money so we’ll call her the government.
    We’re here to take care of your needs so we’ll call you the people.
    The nanny we’ll consider her the working class.
    And your baby brother we’ll call him the future. Now think about that and see if that makes sense.

    So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what dad had said.

    Later that night he hears his baby brother crying so he gets up to check on him. He finds that the baby has severely soiled his nappy. So the little boy goes to his parents room and finds his mother sound asleep. Not wanting to wake her he goes to the nanny’s room. Finding the door locked he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny.
    He gives up and goes back to bed
    The next morning the little boy says to his father “Dad I think I understand the concept of politics now.”

    The father says “Good son tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about.”

    The little boy replies “Well while the Prime Minister is screwing the Working Class the Government is sound asleep the People are being ignored and the Future is in deep shit.”

  117. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Not only are cornlegend’s jokes good, he can type fast too. 😀

  118. Kaye Lee

    Exactly Michael. But there is no GFC now so what’s going on Neil?

    “Australian Government general government sector (GGS) accrual expenses are expected to increase by 0.9 per cent in real terms in 2015‑16, with the growth rate increasing to 3.3 per cent in 2018‑19…. Total expenses are expected to decline as a percentage of GDP from 26.2 per cent in 2015‑16 to 25.8 per cent over the forward estimates.”

    How can expenses be growing faster than the economy yet declining as a percentage of GDP Neil?

  119. Jaquix

    Neil of Sydney is just a nark – which is a four letter word for troll.

  120. cornlegend

    Jennifer Meyer-Smith
    Here’s one for you
    The Pope is visiting Sydney and Prime Minister Julia Gillard takes him out for an afternoon on Sydney Harbour cruising and,of course accompanied by a dozen Murdoch Media lackeys
    They’re admiring the sights when, all of a sudden, the Pope’s hat (zucchetto) blows off his head and out into the water.

    Secret Service guys start to launch a boat, but Julia waves them off, saying, “Wait, wait. I’ll take care of this. Don’t worry.”

    She then steps off the yacht onto the surface of the water and walks out to the Holy Father’s little hat, bends over, picks it up, and then walks back to the yacht and climbs aboard.

    She hands the hat to the Pope amid stunned silence.

    The next morning, the Murdoch Media all proclaim:

    “Gillard Can’t Swim!”

  121. cornlegend

    Jennifer, and this
    Barnaby Joyce is giving the PM his daily briefing. He concludes by saying: ‘Yesterday, 3 Brazilian soldiers were killed’. ‘OH NO!’ Malcolm exclaims. ‘That’s terrible!’
    His staff are stunned at this display of emotion, they watch nervously as the PM sits, head in hands.
    Finally, the PM looks up and asks, ‘How many is a brazillion?

  122. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


  123. cornlegend

    The Royal College of Nursing has weighed in on Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbulls attacks on health care and the Medicare levy
    The Allergists voted to scratch it; but the
    Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.
    The Gastroenterologists had a sort of a gut feeling about it, but the Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.
    The Obstetricians felt they were all labouring under a misconception.Ophthalmologists considered the idea short-sighted.
    Pathologists yelled, “Over my dead body!” while the Paediatricians said, “Oh, Grow up.”
    The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the Radiologists could see right through it.
    The Surgeons were fed up with the cuts and decided to wash their hands of the whole thing.The Ear Nose and Throat specialists didn’t swallow it, and just wouldn’t hear of it.
    The Pharmacists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the Plastic Surgeons said, “This puts a whole new face on the matter….”
    The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea.
    The Anaesthetists thought the whole idea was a gas, but the Cardiologists didn’t have the heart to say no.
    In the end, the Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the arseholes in the LNP partyroom

  124. cornlegend

    you are all safe now, I’m going out 😀

  125. Florence nee Fedup

    Those who condemn Rudd/Gillard for present mess need to explain how Abbott saying no to every attempt by them to rein in expenditure made things better. #auspol

  126. 2353NM

    Michael Taylor @9.24 – I know but I love playing with them.

    Cornlegend – Thank you, you’re here until Sunday and recommend the veal? Love the one about the friendly fire.

  127. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Yes Kaye,

    I read that on Twitter and ROBBer should be at the head of the line holding hands with Sinodinos for the first to be investigated and cross-examined in the upcoming Federal ICAC.

    ROBBer’s crime is Insiding Trading whilst Minister for Trade when he sold out Australia’s interests to China while making the ChAFTA deal. He scratched their backs; now they’re scratching his back.

    First penalty for ROBBer is total loss of parliamentary pension. I invite others to add to the list of his punishments.

  128. Möbius Ecko

    Well this is something you wont see NoS address.

    Debt up.
    Unemployment up.
    Bankruptcies up.
    Debt agreements up.
    …sharpest rises in 7 years.

    Business confidence down.
    Economy slowing at increased rate.

    All since the Liberals got into power. And Turnbull’s plan is to take more money out of the economy.

  129. Neil of Sydney

    Exactly Michael. But there is no GFC now so what’s going on Neil?

    Exactly, the GFC finished a while ago. The Coalition tried to cut spending in their first 2014 budget but were called mean and nasty. It just shows how amazing Costello was. He could fund everything at good levels and still run a surplus budget. Sadly those days are over. The days of greed are back. People want this, that, whatever and refuse cuts to anything

  130. Kaye Lee

    I am happy to cut things Neil. I would start by halving the defence materiel spend over the next two decades. There’s $200 billion. I would cut the loopholes that companies use to avoid paying tax. There’s $50 billion a year. I would cut fossil fuel subdsidies and rein in tax concessions for capital gains, negative gearing, superannuation and private health insurance. That should cover it don’t you think? Who are the greedy ones Neil?

  131. Dan Rowden

    We could also likely save a quid by not farming out our humanitarian programs to mercenary companies like Broadspectrum.

  132. Möbius Ecko

    Let’s also remember the Rudd/Gillard governments, and indeed the Hawke/Keating ones, were smaller and lower spending than the Howard and Abbott/Turnbull ones.

    Indeed Abbott attempted to and actually blocked many of Rudd/Gillard’s savings and revenue measures whilst running campaigns in populist areas to get their governments to spend more. Then hypocritically cut or proposed cuts to those areas he insisted Rudd/Gillard spend more on.

    This is typical of the morally corrupt and deceitful Liberals.

    We are now seeing this with their sponsor donations corruptions, the latest being NSW sponsors donating to the ACT Liberals and the illegal money finding it’s way to the NSW Libs.

    And they are running another Parakeelia in giving money to a careers management firm and that firm donating excess money to the Liberal Party.

  133. Neil of Sydney

    That should cover it don’t you think?

    Costello ran surplus budgets without doing any of the things you suggested. I think so-called tax avoidance by multi-nationals does not occur. It may happen overseas but not here because they are not based here.

    We could also likely save a quid by not farming out our humanitarian programs

    I estimate we have spent $15B-$20B on asylum seekers since 2007 because Rudd/Gillard abolished the Pacific Solution. Perhaps one of the biggest govt mistakes in our history. Who could forget the moral posturing of the ALP. Look how moral we are, look how decent we are, look how caring we are proclaims the ALP. We will be super moral and abolish the Pacific Solution and look at the trouble you people caused.

    Not once have you people or the ALP apologised for the cost you caused Australia.

  134. Kevin R

    If I say sorry will you shut up Neil? Sorry

  135. Jaquix

    For Neil of Sydney, Mark and other narky types, here is a link supporting Kaye Lee’s 50 billion tax savings in Australia. Note the figures are “considered conservative, could well be a lot more”. Savings Neil, savings to the people of Australia. People. And dont think those businesses would pull out of Australia, of course they wont. Even if they paid the appropriate amount of tax, they are still very profitable businesses. In any case, we dont want these robber companies here draining the lifestyle of Australians.

  136. helvityni

    Someone could easily believe that this article was about Neil. I hear he has been blogging here for years, yet you have not been able to convince him about anything, so why all this attention to his posts, or for that matter to any other ‘narky’ type here ( to borrow from Jaquix). 🙂

  137. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I’m with Kevin R and say sorry to Neil …

    … so he’ll stop badgering us with his ultra neoliberal delusions and go away.

  138. Kaye Lee

    Sorry Neil.

    And back to the topic at hand…..

    “I think so-called tax avoidance by multi-nationals does not occur”

    The Tax Office has warned 60 multinational companies to “stop gaming the system” and start paying their tax.

    And another five companies with revenues of more than $5 billion have been placed on the ATO’s “high-risk” watch list. Previously only News Corp was in the high-risk category.

    In his most strident comments to date on the festering issue of multinational tax avoidance, Australian Tax Commissioner Chris Jordan said he had run out of patience with slick global companies that refuse to produce even the most “basic reports” on their profits and tax liabilities in Australia.

    Apple, for example, came under fire in January when it was revealed the tech giant paid taxes of just $85 million in Australia last year on sales of $7.9 billion.

    In the past year, the ATO has received court decisions against gas giant Chevron over a tax issue dating back to 2004 and chemicals company Orica, which was ordered to pay $40 million and interest.

    Mr Jordan said 50 audits and 350 reviews of large public groups conducted last financial year delivered $1.6 billion in cash to the ATO.

  139. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    I hope you realise you sound like a traitor for saying, “I think so-called tax avoidance by multi-nationals does not occur.” :((

  140. Kaye Lee

    The ATO published a report today showing more than a third of all large public and foreign companies in Australia paid no tax last year.

    Of 1539 corporate entities operating in Australia, 38 per cent did not pay tax.

    Top ten not paying tax
    Qantas Airways, earned $14.9 billion
    GHP 104 160 689 Pty Ltd, earned $11.731 billion
    ExxonMobil Australia, earned $9.617 billion
    Lend Lease Corporation, earned $7.683 billion
    Citic Resources, earned $5.051 billion
    Mitsubishi Development, earned $4.615 billion
    Glencore Investment, earned $4.612 billion
    Hope Downs Marketing, earned $4.445 billion
    Virgin Australia, earned $4.3 billion
    General Motors Australia, earned $4.138 billion

    A report by the Tax Justice Network – an international group focused on investigating tax avoidance – and the United Voice union says almost a third of companies listed on the ASX 200 pay 10 per cent or less in corporate tax.

    The report says the government is losing out on at least $8.4 billion in tax each year, which is substantial but may be the tip of the iceberg.

    According to the research, 57 per cent of all ASX 200 companies have subsidiaries in tax havens.

  141. Neil of Sydney

    here is a link supporting Kaye Lee’s 50 billion tax savings in Australia.

    Even if true Costello did not need this money to run his surplus budgets. But this particular example annoys me

    Apple, for example, came under fire in January when it was revealed the tech giant paid taxes of just $85 million in Australia last year on sales of $7.9 billion.

    Apple Computers are designed built and packaged overseas. You can only tax Apple on the markup they put on their computers. Same goes for most manufactured products imported into Australia. I don’t think Apple is avoiding tax at all.

    And how come all this tax avoidance stuff gets front page news when the Coalition is in power? I did not here much about this from 2008-2013.

    I hope you realise you sound like a traitor for saying, “I think so-called tax avoidance by multi-nationals does not occur.”

    I am being realistic. WE don’t make anything here anymore.Most manufactured products are fully imported. I am sure tax avoidance is going on but it is the Americans and Europeans who are losing the tax money. If we want the multi-nationals to pay more tax we have to get them to do something here rather than import stuff all the time

  142. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Nobody disagrees with you, Neil, that we need to make ‘stuff’ here and not import it all the time. Making the tax avoiders pay for what they sell here will be a good start.

    Also, Kaye’s point that many of these poxy tax avoiders have subsidiaries in tax havens, is an area for attention. Any company that has a subsidiary in any such place must pay upfront hefty fees in the multiple billions for operating licences if they want to do business on Australian soil.

  143. Royce Arriso

    How many times must it be said?
    NeilofSydney’s ‘grasp’ of macroeconomics is based on a string of premises, hilariously wrong. Note that each is a ‘belief’, rather than an ‘understanding’. When referred to simple material which outlines how modern sovereign currency economies actually worked, as distinct from the kindergarten-level stuff he pushes, NoS wailed:
    “I read it. But you can’t force me to believe something I can’t understand…”
    What rich material for satirists conservative might provide, if it weren’t for their lunatic assertions being beyond parody.
    Anyway, Al Gore drives a limo.
    So climate change is a hoax.

  144. Neil of Sydney

    I am fairly certain that the ATO knows the taxation laws better than you

    I see from your link that Apple is being audited by the ATO. Bet you they find nothing wrong.

    After reading blogs for years i notice that lefties like to send signals that they are trying to do something but it is just an appearance. Nothing ever happens.

    Now Apple may be avoiding USA tax by doing things in Ireland but i would be surprised if they are avoiding Australian tax

  145. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Neil, the traitor.

  146. Michael Taylor

    Neil, I earned $12,432,986 in the 2014/15 financial year but paid only $1.75 in tax. What do you think of that?

  147. Neil of Sydney

    You people are arguing for something that is unethical.

    Like most Australians i buy lots of things online from Dealsdirect, Ebay Onlyonline.

    I purchased a battery powered grandfather clock from Dealsdirect. It was made in China. Dealsdirect imports this clock from China for say $150 and sells it to me for say $200. That is $50 profit but then you have expenses like rent electricty so net profit may be $5. Dealsdirect would then pay tax on the $5 profit.

    But you people want the Chinese company who sold the clock for $150 to pay tax in Australia.That is wrong.

  148. Neil of Sydney

    Have you ever purchased anything made in China? Should the Chinese company who made the fridge, washing machine, dishwasher be paying tax in Australia?

  149. Michael Taylor

    Neil, I’ve asked you about 500 questions over the last ten years and you haven’t bothered to answer one of them. Not one. So if I were you I wouldn’t bother asking me any.

  150. Bacchus

    It costs Apple about $300 to make an iPhone 6 – add a little for marketing & distribution costs, say $200 (being generous to Apple). The list price is $1079, a profit of $579. So how can they reduce this taxable profit? How about they get their Irish subsidiary to charge a $500 licensing fee per phone to the Apple Australia distributor? Taxable profit is now only $79 per phone… It may presently be legal, but it’s certainly not ethical – these are the types of loopholes that need to be closed. ***I have no idea if Apple use this particular loophole – it’s just an example of how they could get away with tax avoidance.

    Remember the G20 in Brisbane? – it was supposed to be all about international co-operation to close down these scams, but with a coalition government here, there is no will to do so…

  151. Neil of Sydney

    and you haven’t bothered to answer one of them.

    I gave an answer to Labors reckless spending by giving the large increase in spending as a function of GDP the other day.

    Fact is i think you people are too stupid to understand what you are saying. I gave an example of the grandfather clock made in China. Most of our manufactured stuff comes from China and Japan. You cannot expect Chinese and Japanese companies to be paying tax in Australia

    It may presently be legal, but it’s certainly not ethical

    Well according to Kayes earlier link the ATO is auditing Apple. Bet you they find nothing wrong. I notice after giving an example you then say you have no idea if it is true.

    I remember in the 1990’s a pair of Reeboks cost $250 in Australia but only $50 in the USA and both countries imported them from China. Our costs are much higher in Australia- wages, rent etc. But even so it is hard to work out why things imported from China cost so much more here than in the USA.

    But i still think if tax avoidance is going on it is the Americans and Europeans who are being screwed for the simple reason we do not make anything here.

  152. Matters Not

    helvityni July 14, 2016 at 4:33 pm

    hear he has been blogging here for years, yet you have not been able to convince him about anything, so why all this attention to his posts

    Indeed he has been posting on various sites for years. Adds nothing. Responds to nothing. Provides no insights. As for: so why all this attention to his posts . helvityni, there’s ‘stupidity’ there somewhere I suspect. And it’s not completely with NoS.

    Last time I alluded to that ‘truism’ of the journey down the ‘stupidity’ track, there were two broad responses. The first was along the line that I was advocating ‘censorship’, by urging people not to respond. I wasn’t. Not responding is not really censorship. It’s what lots of parents do when a child throws a ‘tantrum’. It’s what teachers sometimes do with (potentially) disruptive students The planned, disciplined ‘ignore’ often brings children back to earth. When no-one takes any notice, embarrassment sets in. It’s a technique never used in the case of NoS for a few reasons. There’s always any number of contributors who hope to point him in the right direction. Missionaries one and all. (Hilarious). While they have been trying for more than a decade, there is absolutely no ‘learning’ by NoS nor the aspirant ‘teachers’. But never mind.

    Truth is, he’s not for the turning.

    The second ‘advice’ to me was that NoS provided an opportunity to ‘debate’, (not with NoS that would be too much of a stretch), but with his ‘assertions’. And in so doing other readers would be ‘enlightened’ by the shallowness of his arguments or by the brilliance of their own. While that claim has possibilities, I’ve found over the years that the ‘ideas’, ‘concepts’ and the like he raises soon submerge and the potential discussion of the higher ‘order’ soon switches to NoS himself.

    Then again while he’s here, he isn’t on the street. NoS, in my humble opinion, while being the one-dimensional idiot every village must have, is also the star. (I’ll say no more.)

  153. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    who made you the grand arbitrator?

  154. Matters Not

    helvityni, see what I am saying?

    No doubt, JMS will respond to your question. Or maybe not.

  155. Michael Taylor

    Jennifer, MN has been engaging with Neil for ten years. He probably knows Neil better than anyone here. What he said was spot on.

  156. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Thankyou MT,

    perhaps MN should say that instead of sounding like grand master.

  157. Matters Not

    JMS please respond to helvityni. I did. I told of my experiences and provided my ‘insights’. It’s now over to you.

    I await your response to her.

    As for ‘sounding like grand master’, I have said repeatedly I have absolutely no control over the ‘meanings’ given to the words I choose to write. (Grand Master are not my words, they are your creation). And I have even less control over ‘meanings’ given to ‘words’ you somehow imagine I implied. (If that’s possible.)

  158. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    I would like to bow to your great wisdom, MT, which I witness intermittently,

    but unfortunately you reduce yourself to too much sarcasm and intellectual elitism too often for me to accept.

  159. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Helvi knows me already and what she said makes sense to me.

  160. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    oops MN!

    Sorry MT … 🙁

  161. Neil of Sydney

    Jennifer, MN has been engaging with Neil for ten years

    Really? News to me.

    And i think it needs to be stated again. You cannot expect Chinese, Japanese, American companies to be paying tax in Australia just because we chose to buy products from these companies.

    I am sure some of these companies are avoiding tax but it is the Americans and Europeans who are being ripped off. I would doubt there is much tax avoidance going on in Australia for the simple reason there is no tax to avoid since they do not make anything here

  162. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    you are wrong. If they do business by selling their products on our soil or via our communication services, then they owe us taxes for using our facilities to make their money. What planet do you come from?

  163. Florence nee Fedup

    Neil you pay tax on all income, money earned. One doesn’t have to make anything. Of course not even you could be that thick

  164. Neil of Sydney

    i have purchased lots of things for my bicycle on Ebay. Lights, reflectors, tubes etc. They all come from China. Why should that Chinese company pay tax in Australia?

    Fact is most of our manufactured stuff is fully imported. Have you ever purchased anything using Dealsdirect? Most of their stuff comes from China. If we want overseas companies to pay more tax in Australia we have to get them to make stuff here.

  165. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    the ebay sellers are making their money via a communication service that Australia provides, thus they owe Australia, if you buy their bike parts from Australia.

    Same applies for any other transaction that happens under Australian conditions.

  166. Neil of Sydney

    OK for the communication service. But the Chinese company that makes the bike parts doesn’t. But that is what you people are saying. Chinese companies who make stuff we buy should be paying tax in Australia. They shouldn’t

  167. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    if those Chinese companies make the stuff overseas and sell it away from Australian conditions, then I suppose you’re right.

    But if they make it on Australian soil, then they owe us. If they sell it on Australian soil, they owe us.

    This is the part of the equation everybody here is saying is being outrageously abused by any foreign companies, including your Chinese examples, Apple, Virgin and others on the lists above.

  168. Neil of Sydney

    if those Chinese companies make the stuff overseas and sell it away from Australian conditions, then I suppose you’re right.

    Of course i am right

    But if they make it on Australian soil, then they owe us.


    If they sell it on Australian soil, they owe us.

    Don’t agree nor would anybody else except lefties. Just imagine if it was the other way around. Say you were making hats in your garage and selling them to Canadians. I am sure you would be upset if you had to pay tax on any profit you made to the Canadian Tax Office. Tax on profit making hats in your garage should be paid to the ATO.

    I don’t think you lefties know what you are asking. I think even Bacchus may agree with me. If we want companies to pay more tax in Australia we have to make more stuff here. I see some company making fridges in Lithgow has just closed down. WE now import the vast bulk of our manufactured stuff and it is not good.Greens will be happy because factories produce CO2.

  169. Möbius Ecko

    so nobody selling anything in Australia should pay tax on the goods transport, handling, sales and profits they make?

  170. Wayne Turner

    Well written and all true points.

    Yet again,enough gullible and ignorant people voted this mob back in.No cure for stupid.

  171. Kaye Lee

    If you are from a treaty country and have a permanent establishment in Australia, the income from your business operations carried on through your Australian permanent establishment is subject to Australian income tax. Any assets you own as part of the permanent establishment will generally be subject to Australian CGT when you sell or otherwise dispose of them.

    If you are exporting goods to Australia by selling to an Australian resident entity on a free on board (FOB) basis, this may be considered an importation by the Australian entity. This means you may not have Australian tax obligations, but your Australian customer will have tax obligations relating to the importation.

    If you are from a country that does not have a tax treaty with Australia, income from an Australian source is generally taxable in Australia. This includes income from:

    business operations in Australia
    Australian contracts, such as export contracts made in Australia
    services performed in Australia
    personal activities exercised in Australia.

    If you are a foreign-resident entity that earns income with an Australian source, you must lodge an Australian tax return and pay tax on that income.

    A subsidiary that is incorporated in Australia is an Australian resident for tax purposes.

    Generally, a subsidiary will be taxable in Australia on its worldwide income and capital gains, subject to specific exceptions, such as the exemption of income from business operations carried on through an overseas branch in certain circumstances.

    Or perhaps you want to argue with the ATO Neil?

  172. Neil of Sydney

    Or perhaps you want to argue with the ATO Neil?

    Well your quote was long and boring. But you people are wrong about most things so i would put money on companies like Apple are not avoiding tax in Australia. See my post at 11.38AM to see why you are wrong. And i bet the ATO who is now auditing Apple finds no tax avoidance.

    This whole topic which for some reason mainly appears when the Coalition is in power but would not be an issue if the ALP was in power is just the politic is of envy. Some poor bugger has got off his butt, designed and made something overseas and just because you bought the product you want some of his profits.

  173. Michael Taylor

    You have seriously lost the plot, Neil.

  174. Neil of Sydney

    Lost the plot? If you were making something in your garage and someone from Canada wanted to buy it and you then sold it to them should you be paying tax on your profit to the Canadian tax office?

    As far as I know this is the general principle. You pay tax where you make the stuff. So if you made a profit on the stuff you made in your garage you pay tax to the ATO. Nowhere else.

  175. Michael Taylor

    Neil, I’m not talking about cuckoo clocks or whatever made in China or wherever that you bought on eBay and who should pay tax blah blah. I don’t give a shit about it. I was talking about you. You have seriously lost the plot.

  176. Neil of Sydney

    Well i thought you were talking about my comments. To my surprise you now say you are concerned about my mental health.

    But back on topic. The rule is you pay tax where you make the stuff. Since no stuff is made here anymore we should not expect foreign companies to be paying tax in Australia.

  177. Möbius Ecko

    That’s not the rule NoS, and isn’t for just about every country in the world. Can you show us where that rule is written?

    Kaye Lee posted the rules so why are you ignoring them.

  178. Neil of Sydney

    That’s not the rule

    Well if it is not it should be. But as far as i know that is the rule. You pay tax where you make the stuff. And in my opinion it is right and just.

    If we want people to pay more tax in Australia we have to get off our butts and start making stuff here. But that means more CO2 production so the Greens will not be happy

  179. Florence nee Fedup

    Neil one pays GST on all above certain amount that is imported into this country, This mob wants to lower that to include all one buys on the net. You will have pay GST on all your bike parts.

    If the Chinese set up here, they will or should pay tax on all profits made here. Neil, you are playing semantics with word profit.

  180. Florence nee Fedup

    Neil how do you explain the fact that we and most countries have import duties on goods that enter the country?

  181. Neil of Sydney

    If the Chinese set up here,

    But the Chinese don’t set up here. Harvey Norman buys their stuff and sells it here. If HN makes a profit the company pays tax in Australia. But the Chinese company who HN buys the stuff from doesn’t.

    As far as i know the rule is you pay tax where you make the stuff. If Harvey Norman buys a coffee machine from China he pays tax on the mark up but the Chinese company who made the coffee machine pays no tax in Australia.

  182. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Therefore Neil,

    Harvey Norman is responsible for paying the tax here, if they buy the goods from the Chinese maker.

  183. Kaye Lee

    “As far as i know the rule is you pay tax where you make the stuff.”

    Then you need to learn more rather than just relying on what you think Neil.

  184. Michael Taylor

    So you’re saying that Apple, who own stores in Australia and sell goods in those stores for a profit, should not be paying any tax?

  185. Neil of Sydney

    Harvey Norman is responsible for paying the tax here, if they buy the goods from the Chinese maker.

    That is how i understand it but am willing to be corrected. If HN sells coffee machines chances are they come from China. If they buy a coffee machine from China for $100 and sell it for $150, HN makes $50 profit and would pay tax on the profit. The Chinese company pays no tax in Australia on the profit they make selling the coffee machine to HN.

    So you’re saying that Apple, who own stores in Australia and sell goods in those stores for a profit, should not be paying any tax?

    They pay tax on the mark up. If they import a computer for $1000 and sell it for $1,200 they pay tax on the mark up.

    Is it really that difficult to understand? The reason Apple pays so little tax it that most money is made manufacturing the product but that is done overseas. Companies that import stuff only pay tax on the mark up.

  186. Kaye Lee

    “They pay tax on the mark up. Is it really that difficult to understand?”

    Neil, companies are supposed to pay tax on the profit they make where they make it. Is that so hard to understand?

  187. Neil of Sydney

    Neil, companies are supposed to pay tax on the profit they make where they make it. Is that so hard to understand?

    That is what i have been saying. You pay tax where the stuff is made. Since we don’t make anything in Australia anymore we can only tax on what mark up a company like Harvey Norman puts of the stuff it imports from China.

    Apple makes nothing in Australia. So the tax is paid where the stuff is made. That is why Apple pays so little tax. If we want more tax we need to convince Apple to make their computers in Australia.

  188. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Tax is also paid on where stuff is sold so Apple owes Australia BIG time.

  189. Neil of Sydney

    Why? Apple makes nothing in Australia.

  190. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    Apples SELLS in Australia.

  191. Kaye Lee

    Neil, you are worse than water torture. As so many people advise, and as I already know myself, ignoring you is the only sensible thing to do. The teacher in me finds it hard to do, just like some people can’t ignore a ringing phone, but after due consideration I can only concur. Paying attention to silliness only encourages it.

  192. The AIM Network

    They make money in Australia, Neil.

    I bet they pay tax in the USA even though their products are made in Asia.

  193. The AIM Network

    Kaye, he is doing this deliberately. He knows he’s talking sh*t but he saying it for a laugh.

  194. Carol Taylor

    Neil, here is what they do and this is from a Senate enquiry in December ’15 and so was initiated under Tony Abbott’s watch.

    Quote: The inquiry came after the Australian Financial Review reported Apple had shifted an estimated $8.9 billion in untaxed profits over the last decade from its Australian operations to a tax haven structure in Ireland.

  195. Neil of Sydney

    Apples SELLS in Australia.

    Yes and they pay tax on the mark up. There are profits to be made at every step in making a computer.

    A factory assembles the computer. This factory buys a mouse from a company that make them and that company makes a profit. The factory also buys a keyboard, a computer chip from intel, a screen from another company etc etc. And the companies that make the components all make profits. Then the factory assembles the computer. This all happens overseas. Australia then fully imports the computer.

    And that is the problem for us. We come in at the end and import a fully assembled product. There is nothing left to tax. I really think you people are just plain stupid.


    I bet they pay tax in the USA even though their products are made in Asia.

    Now we are getting somewhere. You are starting to get what i am saying.

  196. Matters Not

    No wonder the LNP are running the show.

    So many, so easily distracted. ? ? ? ?

  197. The AIM Network

    Neil, it is obvious you’re only playing around with us. I mean, seriously, no-one could be that stupid and still know how to use a computer.

    I bet that if you were providing us with your full name you wouldn’t be carrying on like this.

  198. Carol Taylor

    Neil, so you are saying that organisations such as Harvey Normans should likewise pay no tax because almost everything they sell is made overseas? I think that our AAA rating is in very big trouble if the government stops collecting revenue from everyone who sells anything/everything made overseas – I foresee Australia’s return to a hunter/gatherer culture.

  199. The AIM Network

    By the way, you do realise that in your last comment who contradicted everything you’ve been arguing.

    But of course you know that. You’re doing this for fun.

  200. Bacchus

    To be fair MN – the topic of the thread is multinationals paying their “fair share” 😉

    Yes, Neil is being the “pretend” idiot as always, but overall, his baiting has elicited reasoned responses for the (guesstimated 100) readers of threads who don’t comment 😉


    No – tax is paid where the profit (not the “stuff’) is made. Some jurisdictions (the US for example) also levy tax at a rate above what has been paid elsewhere. For example, a US company operating in Australia pays company tax at 30% here, but the US company tax rate is 35%, so they pay the difference to the IRS.

    The problem with international tax avoidance is in artificially shifting where the profit “seems” to be made…

  201. Helen Holmes

    An example for Neil: 1,000 coffee machines are made in China – all are exported to Australia and sold there. How ON EARTH can they pay tax where they are made if none are sold there? None are sold in China there is no Chinese profit therefore no tax! However all are sold in Australia to Australians – therefore that is where the profit is made and where the tax is payable.

  202. Matters Not

    Bacchus, yes he does well out of the ‘pretend’ idiot pose in the sense that he sucks people in and has a really good belly ‘laugh’. But rather than respond to nonsense, people might do a ‘Google’ and come up with nigh on 100 articles which define the intricacies of the ‘tax shifting’ problem. Here’s a link to many:

    And here’s an interview that every citizen should watch.

  203. Bacchus

    To extrapolate your example out Helen, let’s play hypotheticals:

    Say the Chinese company make the coffee machines at a cost of $100 (we’ll assume all $AUD for simplicity). They sell them to an Australian importer for $200. They have made a profit of $100 per machine (total profit of $100 x 1000 machines = $100,000) on which whatever tax the Chinese government levies their tax.

    Assume the cost of landing the machines in Australia, warehousing, marketing and distribution is $300 per machine. Cost to the Australian importer is $500 per machine ($500,000 for all 100 of the machines).

    They sell the coffee machine for $1000 per unit – a profit of $500 per machine ($500,000 total profit). That profit is taxable by the ATO at the Australian company tax rate.

    Let’s introduce one of the big 4 scammers (oops, I really meant tax dodging experts) PwC, Deloitte, KPMG and Ernst & Young. They advise the importer that they can save the company paying so much tax in Australia by setting up a subsidiary company in Ireland which will collect a “licensing” fee on each coffee machine sold. The subsidiary company charges a “licensing fee” of $480 per machine to the importer.

    Oops, suddenly the “profit” from each machine is now $20, not $500 and the taxable “profit” in Australia is now $20,000, not $500,000.

    GET IT Neil???

  204. Bacchus

    But rather than respond to nonsense, people might do a ‘Google’ and come up with nigh on 100 articles which define the intricacies of the ‘tax shifting’ problem.

    I agree 100% with that MN, but many “readers” of blogs are time-poor (and possibly a bit disconnected, and perhaps not “quite” interested enough). They are aware enough that what they’re being told doesn’t quite add up, but they don’t do that search to find the facts – they blindly accept what’s presented to them. IF all they’re seeing is the POV of the Neil’s of the world presented in the MSM, it’s not surprising that they’re not aware of ‘the intricacies of the ‘tax shifting’ problem.’

    I see your point about giving Neil too much oxygen, but for many of the more articulate writers here, the wider information they get to disseminate because of Neil can be a positive. I note even Kaye Lee is starting to experience the “weariness” that comes with putting up with Neil, but in your case, it’s been for nearly a decade… 🙂

  205. Matters Not

    Shit Bacchus, I just wasted a ‘potential’ post based on ‘tap’ production and sales (something I know a little about) because you said it so much better than me re the ‘truth’. What actually happens and all that.

    I am in awe. ☝️ ? ☝️ ?

    But then again I am a slow thinker and an even slower typist.

  206. Bacchus

    Thanks MN! 😳

  207. Winston

    Neil is just an Extreme Capitalist nut job.

    Like all fundamentalist Ideologist’s their idea’s are not their own.

    Their beliefs are bought and sold to them in their impressionable years.

    If Neil spoke/wrote an original thought he would shit his pants…..!

  208. Jennifer Meyer-Smith

    MN @ 11.04 pm last night,

    yes Michael West’s interview with Rozvany is very interesting. The Big 4 Accounting Firms should be broken up and Rozvany gives good reasons why that will make our tax structures more equitable for the 99%

  209. Neil of Sydney


    I get it. I think your post at 11.20PM is correct but i suspect the people on this blog wont understand. But take this comment

    Say the Chinese company make the coffee machines at a cost of $100 (we’ll assume all $AUD for simplicity). They sell them to an Australian importer for $200. They have made a profit of $100 per machine (total profit of $100 x 1000 machines = $100,000) on which whatever tax the Chinese government levies their tax.

    This is correct. But i think the lefties are saying that the profit/tax should be paid to the ATO not the Chinese govt.

    I don’t think Harvey Norman/Apple et al is avoiding tax at all. They buy the stuff from China, increase the price to cover their costs and to make a small profit and then pay tax to the ATO.

    No – tax is paid where the profit (not the “stuff’) is made.

    Agreed. And when Harvey Norman buys a coffee machine from China the profit the Chinese company makes stays in China. Lefties want the profit the Chinese company makes to be paid to the ATO.

    I don’t think lefties realise we don’t make anything here anymore so we can only tax the markup.

  210. Jennifer Meyer-Smith


    I’m a proud leftie, and I get it too, so don’t denigrate me or my peers.

    If the tax is owed to the People of China or the American people or whoever, fine.

    The main thing is that grassroots people somewhere get the tax benefits of these global corporations, who reap the benefits of societal structures without paying their way.

  211. Neil of Sydney

    I think lefties are greedy.They see somebody get off his butt and make/design something and want some of the profits.

    The reason Apple only pays $85M in tax on billions of dollars in sales in Australia is because all the profit making stuff happens overseas. Someone makes a mouse and make a profit, someone makes a keyboard and makes a profit someone makes a computer screen and makes a profit etc etc and then someone assembles all these things and makes a profit. This all happens overseas and you pay tax where you make the profit.

    If we want more tax we need to make the keyboard, computer screen, mouse etc etc in Australia.

    No, i think lefties are greedy, covetous people. They want the benefit of someone elses hard work.

    But Greens should be happy. Our manufacturing has gone so no more dirty factories producing CO2.

  212. The AIM Network

    I think lefties are greedy.

    At least they don’t mind paying tax.

    But on a serious note, you only posted your comment to try and get under people’s skin. That is your only intention. If you want to write crap like that then you can expect to see your comment promptly deleted. Enough is enough.

  213. Jaquix

    Micheal, yes please do block Neil of Sydney. He adds nothing, we certainly learn nothing, and he is taking up valuable space on this refreshing site. We can all read The Australian and multiple other Murdoch publications to read his sort of tripe if we want to, we dont need it here.

  214. Michael Taylor

    Jaquix, it is a real dilemma. Every time we suggest that he be moderated there are always a number of people who will rush in to his defence. “What’s happened to free speech?” “Since when has censorship been the norm here?” “How come you’re happy to censor Neil and not everybody else?” “He deserves the right to express his opinion”. And so on and so on.

    But I see it your way. He adds nothing and he only comes here to deliberately disrupt the discussion. He’s been saying the same rubbish for the ten years I’ve known him.

    We actually receive a lot of complaints about him in our ‘inbox’. People are leaving the site because they’ve had enough of him and they say that his presence diminishes our credibility. That’s his aim, I’m afraid.

    We have to work out what’s most important: his right to free speech or our right to get rid of him to bring back the readers who have left because of him.

    I think that the latter is more important.

  215. Kaye Lee

    I would normally argue that all opinions should be heard but Neil has bludgeoned me into submission because he is endlessly repetitive and completely ignores the other side of the debate. He doesn’t care what the topic of the thread is – he just inserts one of his limited repertoire of comments and sticks to it like a dog with a bone. There is no discussion, just NoS saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over…

    It is the discussions after the articles here that are so important, so informative. Neil adds nothing.

    He has been allowed to express his opinion for years. I would suggest he be put in moderation and if he ever says something pertinent to the current situation then let it through.

  216. Florence nee Fedup

    I wonder if Neil realises that most of the big companies that make the biggest profits make absolutely nothing, deal in nothing but money. Same goes for likes of Apple, they sell ideas, aps etc where I suspect they make most of their money.

    Yes Neil, the factories disappeared, companies still make profits.

    Niel most expect companies to pay tax on the profits they make. They might makes the goods in China but their profits are made in this country. Yes, I expect then to pay.

    Neil, most of this site are capable of understanding much more than you seem to believe. Most see through you.

  217. Florence nee Fedup

    When talking fair is fair we need to look closely at what those on the right when they use words innovation & creative. Not what we mean I suspect. Listen interview Radio RN * repeated on RN.

    Innovation it seems, when used by the right, is about screwing the worker more, pushing wages and workers rights down. Paying less tax. Being creative is not inventing or making things, it is about more for nothing from worker and consumer. Another phrase that has become toxic, is education is the solution. In the US compounds, areas have arisen where all are educated, superior to all. Only thing that counts is the name of the College you and your kids attend. What has followed, if you don’t make it in life, remain poor, is your own fault. Went wrong uni, did wrong course.

    Will try and find name of professor and his book.

    The right speak an entirely different English to us normal beings. Most words carry different meaning,

    Like that grotesque Medicare scare, claiming Labor said they were selling it off. never ever said by Labor. They said Medicare was being privatised by stealth, knowing there is nothing in Medicare that can be sold. Handing over cost to private funds. Same as they claimed Gillard said there would never be a carbon tax, when answering Abbott’s demand why not carbon tax instead market based price on carbon emissions. Which by the was was what CEF suite of bills is about. Not a tax.

    PS Paying less company tax is a part of Turnbull’s innovation along with eliminating unions. No regulation, open go in all spheres back to buyer beware. What they mean by being creative.

  218. Michael Taylor

    Neil, regarding your deleted comment, Kaye did not delete it. I did. And it wasn’t on topic: it was on YOUR topic, the one you want to set.

  219. Jaquix

    Michael, dont be concerned about Neil’s freedom of speech. He is free to take it elsewhere. Freedom to annoy is what he is indulging in. Especially if you are losing readers and getting complaints about him, you need to consider “the common good” for your readers who rely on TheAIM for free expressions of independent ideas and opinion, and learning from one another free of “neil nonsense”. Thanking you !!!

  220. Florence nee Fedup

    Michael you aren’t denying Neil free speech by blocking him on this site. He has plenty other options where I am sure he will be welcome.

    He is free to set up his own site anytime he wishes.

  221. Pingback: Off-shore cCorporate tax avoidance - Rort of the 21st Century? | Aussie Watchdogs' "rort or run-around" fightback chronicles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: