Mining Super Tax

Yes you can make a big list about the differences between each state. Just start with rule of the road.
Qualification matters such as nursing is a significant one but so is teaching in schools. Many states do have cross border agreements of qualification recognition.

the reality is even if you want to get rid of the states you will still end up witha central government and lost of regional boards. Reality is these regional boards will be not much different to the 'wow' local councils we already have.

Face it you get the federal and state government you vote in. You also get the political numnuts in your electorate you vote for in our so called democratic system. perhaps if the standard of politician and the level of political intelligence in each party was a big higher, (lots higher) the matter may not arise for discussion.

the SPRT is just a case of the federal government trying to make states irrelevant but perhaps it is a case that taxes should be limited to states and few actually passed to the federal government.
federal government over the years have taken over the funding of universities, TAFE and now moving into secondary and primary schools. Sorry but with all this I have not seen any real improvement in any of these areas since the federal government moved in.

ANyway this thread was about the mining tax I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnc

There is a certain level of respect that should be shown to the nations office holders and each other and we should never play the man, especially using cheap insults.

---

I agree.

I have had the misfortune to view the latest Liberal advertisement and must say I am extremely disheartened by it. It highlights either an inability to debate the issues or total lack of suitable alternative policies or both.

While I am conservative my current view is the Libs do not deserve government and whoever authorised this latest ad....... well someone should tell them it is very likely to have the reverse of it's intent.:((

Politics in Oz has sunk to a new low.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hughie

It makes sense both financially and logically. But and its a major but, do we trust the federal government with this sort of power increase?
Given various track records of the labour govt for instance... Whitlam and now Rudd I am not sure I want to go that way just yet.

---

At least we'll only have one place to go to ask questions about progress or otherwise and it will remove the finger pointing and need for inter state agreements on anything saving us the time and money it costs to set them up and maintain them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m2c1Iw

I have had the misfortune to view the latest Liberal advertisement and must say I am extremely disheartened by it. It highlights either an inability to debate the issues or total lack of suitable alternative policies or both.

---

I agree this is an insult to voters, it suggests voters are of low intelligence and their vote will be swayed by infantile advertising.

HH.

I have had the misfortune to view the latest Liberal advertisement and must say I am extremely disheartened by it.

And what do you expect Labor will be also doing? They never throw mud do they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

And what do you expect Labor will be also doing? They never throw mud do they?

---

You're right Waldo they are as bad as each other, but this latest one probably crosses the line.

Did anyone see QandA last night on the ABC? Malcolm Turnbull made some interesting points, I think Tony Abbot will be concerned that Malcolm is back in politics.

Also the greens representative on the panel was reemed by both sides for helping the Liberals vote down the ETS.

HH.

Yes I watched Q&A. Turnball surprised me as did Richo, the policy advisor had some great points which the Labor bloke wouldn't respond to. While I agree with your point concerning the Greens woman I think she showed herself to be an absolute nutter, as was evident in some of the viewer comments via Twitter.

Your post and my subsequent reply is as a bit of de ja' vue to me. :?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waldo

Your post and my subsequent reply is as a bit of de ja' vue to me. :?

---

From recent experience or from the distant past when we used to exchange views on the forum?:;

HH.

Something like that. :2tsup:

At the risk of addressing the topic of this thread, I find one thing in this whole debate (the Mining Super Profits Tax that is) particularly concerning and that is the behaviour of one of the nation's most senior public servants and architect of this tax, Ken Henry.

I was always under the impression that public servants at that level were supposed to be non-political in their public utterances, Ken Henry is sounding more like a (labor) politician every day

Back the tax, Henry tells economists | RSPT

Looks like Julia's gonna buckle and give in to the mine owners.:~

HH.

:brava: Sanity prevails.

Any link to a news report of it somewhere?

Or is Henry just backing his baby?

The pity still is that one item has been cherry picked, and that doesn't amount to reform. It is just another example of gutless fiddling around the edges.

As for the Ginger ninja, I suspect she is taking a softer approach ( for the moment? ) to shore up Labor's chances at the next election.

It is interesting to note that negotiations between the miners and the gov. were well under way when the coup was launched. Makes you wonder.

I just found out this super profits tax will apply to any business that digs stuff out of the ground, not just minerals but gravel pits, limestone(cement) etc.

This will push up the price of everything, things like council rates will have to go up as road materials increase in price.. In fact any construction will now increase in price...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...01/2942561.htm

"Some lower value resources, especially sand and gravel, have been arguing they should be excluded from the deal, but it is not clear if any compromise would grant their wish."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by .RC.

This will push up the price of everything, things like council rates will have to go up as road materials increase in price.. In fact any construction will now increase in price...

---

Now I would have thought that increasing the cost of materials would decrease sales (thus profits) so the tax wouldn't apply. Or they can drop the price of materials and (again thus profits) and the tax wont apply.
We seem to be forgetting that this is a tax on profits only above a certain threshold.

Inside business (sunday abc TV) used just such a business as it's example a few weeks back. A small family owned quarry in victoria that barely makes a profit. They said they'd basically shut down, sack their handfull of workers and sell or farm the land. I think the podcast is available at the abc site.

Go labor.