The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Inequality and poverty > Comments

Inequality and poverty : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 22/5/2014

Humans themselves are not equal in any way: height, weight, beauty, talent, parents, circumstances when growing up, character, style, moral fibre, and so on. We are all unequal in every respect. That's not unfair - it's just the way it is.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Well, while there's an element of truth in the assertions, it misses the most important elements!
One has to be underutilized potential, and huge disadvantage by being born in post code poverty traps, or in homes where no adult works, in a a nation as blessed and as well resourced as Australia!
And where our so called Leaders, worry about a tiny public debt level, while ignoring tens of trillions of private debt, particularly if you also include derivatives and rising record foreign debt!
And compound that problem, with asinine governments, selling the family farm, the family silver, and our economic sovereignty, all while locking up our most promising assets!
None of which ought to be down played or somehow justified, as being somehow normal, or just the way it is! Bah humbug sir!
This sort of (tea party) constipated thinking results in outcomes, where the man with the highest IQ in the nation, rises as far as a worker manning the rear end of a garbage truck, and we slip down the list of the most productive nation, to be now number seventeen!
Thinking within limited ridged circles, limits the questions, and so also the answers, and by implication, all the available solutions!
We simply can't continue to defend a system that simply prospers the most advantaged, while simply discarding the best and brightest.
We can talk about scholarships and all that, but if you or your vastly less able parents have to jump through hoops or cease following very seasonal work opportunities; much of these still very limited opportunities, when measured against actual need, condemn the disadvantaged, to more of the same, or worse!
Hence we wind up with our most able minds, on the back of garbage trucks etc!
And with all due respect sir, much less able minds, arguing for the status quo, or advantage!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 22 May 2014 10:00:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don,

This is a really good post. Thank you. I strongly agree with all you said. I have lots of thoughts on this, and here is a jumbled dump of a few of them.

1. From a world perspective the best we can do to lift the poorest people out of poverty and to reduce inequity is to encourage capitalism, lightly-regulated free-ish markets, free trade, multi-national corporations, and all those things that create wealth. It is these that spread the wealth from the wealthy countries to the poorer countries. So we shouldn’t belt up on Nike and other multi-national corporations that are employing people in cheap labour countries to make shoes and shirts for people in the wealthy countries. It’s all part of spreading the wealth and lifting them out of poverty. To see where the world is heading on lifting the poor out of poverty look back at how Japan has progressed since the second world war, South Korea since the 1950s, China, Indonesia, Thailand are progressing and lifting their people out of poverty.

2. We should be very pleased to have the very rich in our country. We shouldn’t abuse them and make them unwelcome so they leave and move to more welcoming regimes.

3. We need inequality in income and wealth. It gives people something to strive for. I believe we’ve gone too far raising taxes on the rich and on companies. I believe we need to reduce the progressive nature of our tax system. It’s become too progressive.

4. Even though it would hit me, as a self-funded retiree, I’d support raising the GST, reducing the inefficient state taxes, reducing company tax and the marginal tax rates for high income earners, reducing middle class welfare, allowing the states to get a share of income tax at a rate they each nominate and have to justify to their electors at state elections (as the Canadian provinces do). I’d support the states dumping their stamp duties and rates and changing to land taxes based on land value.

Exceeded my word limit :(
Posted by Peter Lang, Thursday, 22 May 2014 11:06:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a historian its always curious to see uncaring, unreconstructed economic and social views in a modern author.

The very simplicity of the author's 19th century thrift makes good beliefs defies the economic and humanitarian arguments of his intellectual betters.
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 22 May 2014 11:38:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don Aitken's Fallacy on Discrimination & Inequity.

Facts available on the Dept of Tax / Stats and Parliamentary websites:

Bureau Stats: Average wage for 2013 was around $60,000 per annum.

Most recent available stats from Tax 2010 - 2011:

Individuals - Around 12.5 million = $660 billion revenue
Taxable income = $631 billion
Tax = $133 billion

Companies - Around 790,000 companies = $2,450 billion revenue
Company liabilities = $2,200 billion (That can't be right? Yes. It is!)
Tax = $62 billion

Vice Chancellors - Average annual income in Oz = above $700,000 per annum. Way 'over the top' even in comparison to international or Federal politicians.

Base salary for Federal politicians = $191,000 + electoral expenses = between 32,000 to 46,000 = gold card, free accommodation, 10% super on all entitlements. PM gets above + 165%. Etcetera. PM around $500,000

Perhaps it is wise to consider how a sole Mum on $30,000 per annum with three kids, (or a family with a disabled child), hope to survive if this fabricated budget crisis ever kicks in.

I am all for everyone carrying a fair share. I reckon Vice Chancellors should go down to around $400,000 per annum, they can contribute the rest to kids who are bright, but can't get into university because they can't afford to survive away from home. Politicians of all varieties should contribute 30% of their salaries to sole mums and families with disabled kids. Business should actually pay a fair percentage of tax - relative to individuals. I reckon that say around 10% of total gross revenue seems a good start to address the legal scam currently happening.

It is regrettable that academics seems to have forgotten what real life is like in the land of Oz these days. Don, your comments remind me of Durkheim's research on the pin factory ...

Poor old Ab Lincoln got it wrong. You can fool all of the people some of the time, and enough of the rest of them, for everyone else not to matter.
Posted by Fallacious Reasoning, Thursday, 22 May 2014 12:22:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Don,
You say "I like to avoid it if I can." I wish you had. Specious argumentation from one whom I admire for clear and independent thinking.
Posted by richierhys, Thursday, 22 May 2014 1:01:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don another great article. I don't expect such worldly sense from academics, more the arrogance of the educated dill, that we see in Plantagenet's bit of self promotion. You continually cause me to reevaluate my thinking.

I really am getting sick to death of the parade of leeches, making very good incomes off the backs of the poor, & their complaining articles on here. I wonder if any of them passed primary school math. Perhaps if they had they would better understand the facts of life. I believe history is a subject for the math challenged isn't it?

Rhrosty what utter bullsh1t, there is no other word for that crap.

I came from a pretty low socioeconomic background, we got our first car when I was 14, a 25 year old bomb but a car.

In a country town I achieved 3 honors at matriculation, was invited to attend Duntroon, but took up a GMH cadetship, including a fully funded engineering degree instead. We were given all the support & encouragement we could ask for at our 300 pupil high school, with only 12 students in 5Th year.

I might mention the most brilliant pupil at that school, & in the state that year, who could read Greek mythology during a math 2 honors course, & still flog the rest of us, ended up playing the Sydney town hall organ, & flogging CDs of that for a living. IQ has no bearing on desire.

It is attitude not background that may limit the success of some high IQ people, as it damn well aught. In fact some high IQ people are not fit to share the back of a garbage truck with their lower IQ betters. I would hate to have to share the back of a truck, or an office with someone with Plantagenet's attitude.

Keep them coming Don, you must be getting through to a few, & I enjoy the challenge you often present.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 22 May 2014 1:15:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There was virtually no economic growth around the world for about 2000 years before the start of the industrial revolution in England in the 18th C. The growth since then, and for most people particularly in the last 70 years, has been phenomenal. Most people today have goods, education, healthcare and longevity which even the richest could not imagine 150 years ago. This has been brought about by capitalism, free trade, free markets and the institutional framework developed in the Anglosphere, including personal freedom, property rights, rule of law etc. It depended on effort, innovation and entrepreneurship, as economic growth still does. If the equality advocates had prevailed over the last 200 years, we would all be at a level of poverty which few today experience. And the world’s population would be far smaller. What’s not to like?

For the record, I grew up in a poor, fatherless family with an uneducated mother. The poverty which some in Australia experience today would be luxury compared to what I experienced in post-war England as a child. The prevailing system allowed me to transcend my origins, as it still does.

From 1972-79, I travelled, did extensive voluntary work and lived frugally. In 1979, my girlfriend and I decided one Friday to travel to London and start work on Tuesday, to raise money to travel to Australia . There were 1.75 million unemployed in the UK, I found a well-paid job for which I had no experience but was the only applicant. We both started work on the Tuesday. Let’s focus on why people lack initiative rather than inequality in other terms.
Posted by Faustino, Thursday, 22 May 2014 3:05:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Are Hasbeen

When you say about yourself:

"In a country town I achieved 3 honors at matriculation, was invited to attend Duntroon, but took up a GMH cadetship, including a fully funded engineering degree instead."

..isn't that a piece of conceited self-promotion?

Admit it. You are only a has-been mate.
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 22 May 2014 3:10:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen:
Here are a couple of facts to cogitate on:
Every one job created in high tech manufacture, creates five others in associated allied service industries, not unlike the car industry, I suspect?
And for every dollar invested by government,(USA figures, Actual)in R+D, thirty dollars flows back as tax!
I also was raised in very poor circumstances, but was raised to believe that common courtesy and civility costs nothing!
I don't mind robust but reasoned debate, and expected better from you, than just to label my piece, BS.
I agree that attitude is a central component of reasonable success, so also is serendipity, and most importantly, a stable upbringing!
Statistically, the children of single parent families just don't do as well, given they just don't have the right sort of discipline and example to emulate, nor do those that come from abusive backgrounds, regardless of IQ levels.
And the final element is interest.
A very wise man once told me, look at what interests you as a hobby, and then look around and see if you can get someone to pay you to do it!
And there are any number of very successful examples of people who would have paid to do their intellectually stimulating and interesting jobs, with dropout Bill Gates coming to the forefront of the mind!
I bet you just loved driving?
For me, it was finding out how things worked!
You have a very nice day now, y'hear.
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Thursday, 22 May 2014 3:57:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PS: a point I made in The Australian during the Rudd-Gillard debacle is worth repeating. If you believe that resources should be transferred to help the disadvantaged, however defined, then you also need to foster growth of the wealth from which those transfers derive. Marginal income tax rates of 49%, corporation tax of 30% plus carbon tax, "penalty" rates and heavy-handed regulation are not conducive to wealth-creation. Those seeking even higher imposts on "the rich" should be careful of what they wish for. In several countries, punitive taxes and conditions have led to the rich decamping, to investors going elsewhere. "Killing the goose which lays the golden eggs" comes to mind.

I'm not one of the rich, I live in a modest house, on a pension, have a 12-year-old car, my wife earns a modest wage working with disadvantaged children.
Posted by Faustino, Thursday, 22 May 2014 4:06:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen

So GMH ‘fully funded' your engineering degree, huh? AND no doubt paid you a salary while you were studying.

There you have it, folks! Hasbeen got his degree for FREE! And was PAID to do it!

And that ‘300 pupil high school’ you attended … Now I’m assuming that was a state high school. So who paid for that, huh, Hazza? Yep, your dear old taxpayer.

Admit it, Hasbeen, you accept handouts and entitlements just like the rest of us.

Faustino

‘I grew up in a poor, fatherless family with an uneducated mother’

Yep. And why was your family poor? It was a single parent household headed by a woman, who was uneducated and had lost her breadwinner.

Standard Poverty Factors 1, 2 and 3. Sure, you got yourself out of poverty, but hundreds of millions of women like your mother are trapped in it through no fault of their own. Many similar scenarios exist for men.

Don

So the rich do the 'heavy lifting' when it comes to tax, do they?

Most people on high six-figure salaries paying on average 30-40 per cent tax (not counting all the tax-breaks they are given) still have six-figure net incomes to finance their lifestyles and to save for the future.

However, people on low five-figure salaries paying on average 20-30 per cent tax have vastly smaller net incomes to finance their much more meagre lifestyles (i.e paying the bills and putting food on the table) and not much left over to save for their futures.

In terms of tax as a proportion to income, it’s the low- to middle-income workers who are doing the 'heavy lifting', not the rich.

And tell me, Don. As an ex-academic and vice chancellor, no doubt earning a salary in the upper six figures over many years, how much do you think the taxpayer contributed to YOUR superannuation?
Posted by Killarney, Thursday, 22 May 2014 4:12:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PPS: Few argue that there should be no government, the arguments tend to be about the size and reach of it. In the 1980s, when I was writing economic policy papers for a body chaired by PM Bob Hawke, I read a lot of economic studies covering many countries about the relationship between economic growth and the size of the government. They all found that growth was optimised with government's share of GDP around 22%, much less than it is now (adding Federal and State governments together). These macroeconomic studies were consistent with microeconomic studies which found that delivering $1 of benefit through a government programme tended to require $1.20-$1.25 of taxpayer funding. That is, the government intervention burned up about 20% of the funds involved. I recall several studies of industry assistance, including R&D schemes, where 45-50% of funds went in administration. For the schemes to have been worthwhile, they would have needed returns to R&D about twice those obtained in commercially-backed schemes.
Posted by Faustino, Thursday, 22 May 2014 4:19:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
don/quote..<<..It's easy to see..that the top 25 per cent of taxpayers..>>

ie you have a graph..of tax payers
[some seems to be paying..60 percent income tax
[i thought that height of tax went away long ago''[or are you saying the top quarter pay 60%/well so they should/that seems fair/considering their mostly/the fruit..of private/higher education/privledge..[what actually peeves me..is multinationals/getting all that aussies are supposed to get.

<<in terms of their taxable income;..contribute about two thirds of all the income taxation revenue..>>

funny..two thirds to me =66..but so what?
fair is fair[i recall another link/said top tax payers get back..1.point six dollars/for every dollar/taxed..[middle class 10$..for/thier dollar..and the bludgers..300/for their dollar

i just hate how smokers pay 3000 to get zip/representation/yet the sin tax punitive taxation/no one cares its indexed at 3000 extra each year-

<<..and that in general their share has been rising over time,>>

ohhh you did notice don
well not really..ok poor you..us smokers spend 25%/on our smokes

<<>. while the poor pay very little.>>
vulldust..[poor smokers out pay what you are paying don

<<. Sure, you say, but that is because ..we have a progressive income taxation system.>>

no its because sin taxation/is too clever[induce guilt/then say carbon credits will save you]

<<.. As it happens, I agree...>>..[progressive/taxation]..*[but note..<<<..But surely the better off..are already doing a lot of heavy lifting, aren't they?>>

yeah...lets tax wine/diesal/and luxuries tax/tramnsaction tax..and undo the debasement..of the queens coin.

<<..There's some real inequality here.>>

because once/the rich/payed..for everything when they spent
[i recall paying two grand for a vidio recpording device/but know 1000 of that went.to making the luckey cuntry.

<<>.As I said, talking about inequality gets you into a semantic swamp very quickly...I try to avoid it if I can.>>

think/about the poor smokers
justice will demand/we do the same..for cell phones causing brain tumours/for booze hounds and lolly eaters/a suger sin tax//a sin tax on booze[tripple the cost of the tipple..

done/index it..and watch the sin taxes roll in
and if they complain/make them put evil pictures on their lollies.
Posted by one under god, Thursday, 22 May 2014 5:08:41 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trolls eventually are caught out as they really are "Bulldusters".
They may enjoy a free start and put down others, with the assumption they had some sort of "False" talent.
Hasbeen mate you appear to live in a sense of delusions of grandeur, that indicate that you never had a proper job in your life !!
Posted by Kipp, Thursday, 22 May 2014 6:51:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don, this is not my area, but there are three things that struck me about your article.

1. The first was that figure from Davidson I wondered whether the reason that the share of total tax paid by the rich was going up was because the rich were in fact getting richer at a faster rate than everyone else. So I went to the RBA Hilda survey to check http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2012/mar/3.html and lo and behold, the top quintile of richest people had their net wealth increase by almost $500,000 between 2002 and 2010, while the net wealth of the second lowest quintile had barely moved.

In addition income data from the ABS supports the idea that the income of the rich has increased far more than that of the poor http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6523.0Main%20Features62011-12?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6523.0&issue=2011-12&num=&view=

If it is in fact the case that the rich are paying a higher share of total tax simply because they have got richer, then I don’t see a real problem. Your argument seems to be that they should get a break because they have got richer.

2. I agree with you that people are born unequal and have unequal access to opportunity. Where I differ from the argument you are making is that I don’t see how that then becomes an argument that greater inequality is better. Surely to be a useful functioning society we should seek to minimise inequality of opportunity where we can?

One of the issues I see with American society is that it is becoming so unequal that it has become unstable. This is when revolutions occur.

3. Lastly, I take issue with your argument about the relative fairness of the recent Australian budget. From what I have read in the papers, the problem seems to be that while the extra rich are being asked to contribute 2% more, which they will hardly notice from their large disposable incomes, the poor in contrast are asked to contribute a lot in the way of both costs and reductions in benefits, that they cannot really afford. There is your fairness problem.
Posted by Agronomist, Thursday, 22 May 2014 10:08:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yep its a shame that the author isn't doing the job of a scholar - that is raising inconvenient questions for the government of the day.

Instead he appears to be an advertising mouth-piece for Abbott's conservative mantras.
Posted by plantagenet, Thursday, 22 May 2014 10:30:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Killarney says,

So GMH ‘fully funded' your engineering degree, huh? AND no doubt paid you a salary while you were studying.

There you have it, folks! Hasbeen got his degree for FREE! And was PAID to do it!

No Killarney, I got sick of it in less than a year. A GM role I quickly found was not for me. However I was awarded that cadetship because my results meant GM wanted to employ me. Any reasonably smart person who worked as hard as I did would have had the same opportunity.

In those days, if not wealthy, you could take a teachers scholarship, or win one from business who wanted the top graduates. Oh, & schooling was compulsory to 15, then available to all.

My mother relented & signed my navy application, & I became a navy fighter pilot, all set to defend people like you, although I'm not sure I'd do it again.

When I came out I returned to uni & paid for my tuition from my savings.

However, I am not a fool. If we are offering handouts to all, I see no reason to pay for them, & not collect them. I currently collect our quite handsome age pension, & as I was a contributor when we actually had a levy, I believe I am entitled to it.

I do get very sick of the wingers who reckon it is not enough. If one made even a mild effort towards their mature wellbeing they can live very well on our pension. Those who did not make this effort have no one but themselves to blame.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 23 May 2014 12:15:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Where I live, the ones who don't work are the ones with the money & those who work are considered as the discriminated against. This is a legacy of Labor & hopefully this situation will be looked at by Premier Newman's successor.
Posted by individual, Friday, 23 May 2014 6:41:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
might makes right
prepare..for martial law

http://investmentwatchblog.com/america-u-s-special-forces-foreign-troops-practice-martial-law-invasion-in-florida-may222014/

RELEASE US:
a short film on police brutality by Charles Shaw
http://xrepublic.tv/node/9037

Cop Assaults Air Force Capt..for Not Knowing Neighbor,
Says He Could Have Tased or Shot Him Instead
http://xrepublic.tv/node/9036

clearly..no-one..is safe/when public servants need guns and goons to protect them>

signs of impoverishment..are reflected..in the policeing forces numbers..[more cops=more resistance.keep the mongrels honest/busy.

but still..its a nice job..jobs jobs jobs/was how they built this survelance system..kits fed by money made from illegal drugs/thugs thugs thugs

follow the money/the opinum war was the prototype/make people understand/we must stand[stop paying the fees service charges and iinvestment banker set demands[the beast feeds on our woork/giving us paper/stop spending the paper/much of the debt burden you pay=odious debt..[odious debt=criminal..and a criminal cannot gain from his crime

but the criminals run the roost/there must be a way..to shut the meltdown/down..this sun day//the pope prayes..then on monday/the prayer is replied..in the very place..last supper decried.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/japan-begins-purposely-dumping-100s-of-tons-of-radioactive-water-from-fukushima-into-the-pacific/
Posted by one under god, Friday, 23 May 2014 9:05:50 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Opinion seems sharply divided on this post. I must say that running through the hostile comments is the theme of envy: 'some people have much more than others, and that's wrong, because [I'm] one of the others'. No matter what society you look at there are some who have more than others. Yes, there are very rich people who don't pay income tax, because they've organised their affairs to avoid it. The only way to deal with them is to get rid of income taxation altogether and tax everything that is purchased, and have really high scales of taxation on expensive houses, cars, boats, planes, and so on. I don't think many people would enjoy such a state of affairs, and the very rich would still be very rich. Some will have moved to somewhere else, taking their wealth and initiative with them.

The capitalist system enables high rates of economic growth, and encourages the acquisition of property, and thus personal wealth. On the whole, I think it's better for most people most of the time. The alternatives didn't work in the Soviet Union or in China.
Posted by Don Aitkin, Friday, 23 May 2014 5:03:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The whingers complain about inequity but they are not prepared to take the risks the wealthy take to get where they are. Also the whingers don't have the skills, foresight or anything else needed to get wealthy. We need the wealthy because they make us all better off. They make the country better off. If we over-tax the high income earners they'll move elsewhere and take their entrepreneurial skills and business acumen elsewhere. And the up and coming will prefer to be employees rather than employers. Why would they take the risk of starting a business if you do as well by being an employee?

An article by Grace Collier in the Australian a week ago “How to get ahead by trying” is applicable. Excerpt:

“We need an attitude realignment and government should use taxation policy to realign us; hard work, entrepreneurism and success; these are not attributes we admire enough. In this country, we want everyone to be the same, even if it means none of us progress. We have a bizarre focus on jobs, as though the only way to earn a living is to be a wage slave. We obsess about sending everyone to university, as though there is no other way to be a success.

High-income earners are seen as lucky people who can always “afford to pay more” and business people are seen as greedy crooks.

These ignorant, backward views are a great shame because the people they hurt the most are the ones holding them the closest. Look into the faces of the fearful, suspicious audience members on the ABC1 program Q&A. What is likelier to make the lives of these people better: encouraging them to hate the rich and not want to be like them or encouraging them to admire the rich and consider trying to copy them?

cont...
Posted by Peter Lang, Friday, 23 May 2014 5:49:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What if inside every low-income earner there is a high-income earner just screaming to get out? I like to think there may be. However, the societal permission, incentive and teaching to make them emerge is sorely lacking. This is where very high personal tax rates are a killer; they convey societal disapproval of wealth. And, sure, wealth is no guarantee to happiness but people are better off miserable and rich than miserable and poor.

The romantic admiration of the poor Aussie worker needs a reality check. Does this person even exist any more or are they sitting at home jobless, wearing a sulky expression, blue hair and an eyebrow ring? Look into the faces of the people doing the low status, minimum-wage jobs. Taxi drivers, cleaners, security guards, the girls in those dreadful sweatshop nail salons; these are migrants, new Australians, doing the jobs existing Australians don’t want to do because as Sach, the man who drove me home the other night, so aptly said: “Australia, too easy, sit home and get the money.”

Sach came here from India nine years ago as a student to become a chef. During his studies he worked security shifts. Within five years he married and saved $20,000. With the money, he imported a container of chairs.

While Sach waited for that container he stressed himself half to death. What if the chairs didn’t arrive, what if his money was lost, what if nobody bought his chairs.

He drove from town to town, visiting shops, with pictures of his chairs, asking for orders. When the container arrived, the chairs all sold. Sach put the earnings back into another container and repeated the process.

Four years later business is good, the profits are always reinvested, so in his spare time Sach drives people around so he can buy a house. Sach says “work is everywhere” and cannot speak highly enough of the opportunities he sees in Australia.

cont ...
Posted by Peter Lang, Friday, 23 May 2014 5:52:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In India he could never be a success, he says, because “everyone else trying just as hard as me. Here, not many people trying, easier for me.”

Sach and I agree; overall the government is taking our country in the right direction, but income tax was already too high and now it is even higher. Putting a tax on success sends the wrong message.

A personal tax cut, even a small one, would send the message that earning lots of money is a desirable activity. The way for low and middle-income earners to react to budget cuts is to be inspired, like Sach, to find ways to earn more.

END
Posted by Peter Lang, Friday, 23 May 2014 5:52:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good piece, Peter — and Sach's is a good story, too. I could match his account of things with others, and I guess many of us could. The young people least likely to go to university, when I was deeply involved in it, were the children of British migrants. The next group, the biggest, were the Australian-born of Australian-born. All other groups, all children of migrants, had higher proportions, Indians, Chinese and Vietnamese the highest of all. And they were in the faculties whose graduates go to high-paying professional careers. Tells you something.
Posted by Don Aitkin, Friday, 23 May 2014 7:19:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
peter lang

‘hard work, entrepreneurism and success’

What rot! That is Bunkum Success Mythology 101.

Most of the people I've known or encountered who are poor are the very people who made the ‘mistake’ of following the first two pearls of wisdom on your list – i.e. hard work and entrepreneurism.

They comprise the sad and sorry ‘8’ in that old standard reality statistic that goes: 8 OUT OF EVERY 10 BUSINESSES FAIL.

Behind every ‘Closing down sale’, there is more than likely a bankrupt and broken family and often a bitter divorce as well. Behind every ‘mortgagee sale’, there is more than likely a failed business. And all the hard work in the world counts for nothing when a supermarket chain moves into town and drives Main Street out of business or a technological innovation comes out of nowhere and makes the business you built up over 20 years obsolete overnight.

We only hear about the entrepreneurial success stories, because they are the poster children for capitalism. The infinitely more numerous entrepreneurial failures are often too ashamed and guilt-ridden to speak of their experiences. As with the rest of the culture, they blame it all on themselves.

The people I know and have known who are wealthy are NOT, and have never been, entrepreneurs – hard working or otherwise. They belong to one or more of the following categories:

• They were born into wealth (or the comfortably well-off) – and all the education advantages, good connections and family capital support that goes with it.
• They are high salary earners – especially the traditional professions like law, medicine, architecture and engineering.
• They inherited wealth, especially as they got older.
• They worked a long time for employers that looked after them well.
• They married into wealth.
• They won a Lottery.
Posted by Killarney, Saturday, 24 May 2014 4:40:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Don Argus is a member of the Bank of America Global Advisory Council, chairman of the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Australia advisory board and director of the Australian Foundation Investment Company. He is the former chairman of BHP Billiton and Brambles, and a former chief executive of National Australia Bank."

Now that's a CV!.

Furthermore, read this and appreciate the value of his advice compared with the sort of advice Labor and the Greens seek and accept (mostly from the unions and single issue groups.)

"Debt of a thousand cuts to stifle growth"
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/debt-of-a-thousand-cuts-to-stifle-growth/story-fnmgoavr-1226929204257

Excerpt:

"... how do we minimise distortions from tax? Tax systems are important in how capital is allocated in an economy, and for too long we have had a piecemeal approach to tax reform. I am cognisant of the political challenges but, equally, the necessity of recalibrating tax systems to be more efficient and effective, and therefore supportive of growth, should be a priority.

Compared with other developed economies, Australia’s tax burden falls disproportionately on high-income individuals and corporations.

This may seem ideal for a progressive nation, or ideal if Australia were the only country in the world. However, it is not, and the high-income individuals, including senior managers, leading professionals and business owners and corporations may well consider moving to other locations that have a much lower personal and corporate tax rate if we do not make this issue a comparative advantage at least."
Posted by Peter Lang, Saturday, 24 May 2014 11:51:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I AGREE/WITH KILERBLARNEY[damm caps]

dons/quote.<<..I could match his account..of things with others,..and I guess many of us could.>>

YES/THE SUM/TOTAL/OF\..ALL OUR LIVE/IS ONLY KNOWN...BY GOD

<<..The young people.*least likely..>>

i missed that..LEAST/LIKELY..BIT..mainly cause i never heard of a thing called uni..

anyhow/'*least*/ikely..<<>.to go to university,..<<..are?..>>..were the children of British migrants...>>

yeah/they did the portering/uNION STuff..PLUMBERS/ELECTITIONS
RESPECTABLE JOBS... even bult power/water/road/port systems/but never heard of univbersities/they lived in slums[on the other side of the tracks...in bif city slums/NOW IN INers-city sunerbia..[deserts of suberbia..[often called small rown rural..

<<>The next group, the biggest, w..ere the Australian-born of Australian-born...>>

in the armed forces..amd in commerce
publiC-SERVANTS DOctors/accountants

<<>>All other groups, all children of migrants, had higher proportions, Indians, Chinese and Vietnamese the highest of all.>>

DIPLOMATS/DUEL PASSORTT HODERS SEATS FORMING peerr groups law/banking public trough licking

<<..And they were in the faculties..whose graduates go to high-paying professional careers....Tells you something.>>

it all does don..but the rich earned the kids they get/got
most as useless as snot..[only valued by the ton.]

but there are those/WHO WILL ONLY BE ABLE TO LEARN/LIMITED USE
these need be entertained cheaply/but effectively..not savagely.not by patriarchal threat/enforcement/rule regulation/blind obedience/govt should be the mother we all deserve//but few got.

hence the karma
a world full of faulse gods up to our knees in their snot.
Posted by one under god, Saturday, 24 May 2014 12:48:24 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Southern man better keep your head
Don't forget what your good book said
Southern change gonna come at last
Now your crosses are burning fast

I saw cotton and I saw black
Tall white mansions and little shacks.
Southern man when will you pay them back?
I heard screamin' and bullwhips cracking
How long? How long?

These are the words to the first two verses of Neil Young’s song “Southern Man” referring to slavery in the cotton fields of what now is the USA. Although the context is different I believe the same situation exist globally and in this country.

The reality still exists where the wealth makers are relegated to little shacks and the wealth takers live in tall white mansions. Instead of whips, debt is used.

You might want to listen to the song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVRxdPWV3RM&feature=k
Posted by Producer, Saturday, 24 May 2014 3:48:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
oh/dearproducer..a/pro=duction..indeed

introducing..THE.COMPANY MAN..
works for/the..company
shops..in the company store/
..lives out..his life on..corporate-tic.

o prefer/
the chanty/working..for the grand man

Lyrics/to\..Working..For The Man

*(Hey,..now]..,

you better listen..to me..now..everyone\of you
We got...a lotta,..lotta,..lotta,..lotta..[unpaid]-work..to do.

Forget about..your woe*0'men..and..that/watering-can
Today..dear laddy/and ladies..were working..[24/7]..for..the man

Well,..pick up/your feet,..we've got..a deadline to meet
I'm gonna see..you make it..on time..[THIS TIME]..
Oh,..don't..YOU/relax,...I want elbows..and backs
CARRYING SACKS../,/..MOREOVER..I wanna see..everybody..from behind

Cause..NOW/..DEAR VERMIN..your working..for the man,
a'working..WORKING..JERKIN..YA SOUR GER*KING..for the man

You gotta make him...TAKE/HIM/BREAK HIM..
WITH..a hand..[when..you're working/jerking..for the man]

Oh,well,..WERE-IN/HELL..I'm picking..em up..and
..I'm laying em down..I believe..he's gonna work me...into the ground
I BOB..to the left,..I Weave..to the right
I THROW OUT..THE LEFT/
AS RE CHUCKS OUT..THE RIGHT
I oughta..kill him..but it wouldn't..*be right

SAD/CLAUSE...Cause..Im working..for..the man,
[WHO/HIDES HIS GOLD..IN THE COMPANY..TRUST FUND..HOW..DO I KNOW..CAUSE ME..MAN..

IM WORKIN..jerking-gherkin
just working..for..the man

Gotta make him..a grand,[understand]
cause..i got no say..in it..and hes not..paying for me..cause..a'rr yeah..i,..indentured/enslaved/by debt..dont let/me forget..im working for the man..making real..his plan-man..understand?

Well,..the boss man's..daughter..sneaks me..her-water
Everytime her..daddy's...down the line
She says,..meet me tonight,\..love a'me right
And everything..is gonna be fine...[but what..to tell her....mum..happy Valentine..mum?]

So I slave..all day..without much pay
Cause..I'm just...abiding my time
Cause the company/trust..and the daughter..you see
Their both gonna be..all mine...[not hers..not yours..now im the new master/get-back..to your chores...its/mine\now..not yours.

Yeah,..[im..a dreamer]..dreaming..I'm gonna/be the man,
self hypnosis..fructosis..[a delusion]..understand?

yeah yeah yeah..I'm gonna..be the man
she loves..you..yeah yea yea..eh

but for..now i..gotta stop dreaming
get back to screaming and scheming..as Gotta make..him a hand..if I'm gonna be..his little- man

yep/yes'em..sa..yeahhh//im big john//big bad john
Working for the man,..a'working..for the man..now tote that bail
pull..that barge..or we run..ya out on/a short rail.or bond-you/under..terms/bail.

i can..do that dude//why..cause im..walking yes indeed and talking
like..you and me..hoping the job..comes back to me..just put his member..into my hand/..under stand

Gotta make..him a hand
cause im your..daddies..handy cany
dandy candy..man..just a..'working..for the man

[These are Working..For The..neo-Man Lyrics]
http://www.lyricsmania.com/

addition/by johans guides.
copy write..2 olo..unless removed..[improved]
Posted by one under god, Saturday, 24 May 2014 4:32:13 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nothing but self serving tripe from a rich parasite.
They all say they "work" so hard and "take risks" but what a load of BS.
It is the bloke down the mine or cleaning the dunny or running a few sheep who works hard. They are the ones taking risks. Risks with their health, their families, their life.

The reason the filthy rich pay the majority of tax is that they have the majority of wealth. Wealth stolen from those who did the real work digging or building or just slaving for these greedmongers that dont pay anywhere near the same percentage of their income as normal people do. Billionare miner pays 2% struggling baker pays 25%. Strange definition of equal you richers have.

The difference between a newborn packer or murdick and a newborn runner or hasbeen is what we are talking about when we speak of inequality. No one can tell me that they are going to have the same chances in life and the same opportunities to succeed. This is the nub of what inequality is about not some fairy story about AFL teams and blokes with containers of chairs.

continued
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 25 May 2014 8:25:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
continued

The author also rabbits on about "natural" human differences. He is mistaken in calling these things "inequalities" when they are actually diversities and one of humankinds most valuable and wonderful attributes.

"Equality does not mean an equal amount but equal opportunity. . . Do not make the mistake of identifying equality in liberty with the forced equality of the convict camp. True equality implies freedom, not quantity. It does not mean that every one must eat, drink, or wear the same things, do the same work, or live in the same manner. Far from it: the very reverse in fact. Individual needs and tastes differ, as appetites differ. It is equal opportunity to satisfy them that constitutes true equality. . . Free opportunity of expressing and acting out your individuality means development of natural dissimilarities and variations." -- Alexander Berkman

This is just another attempt to justify abbotts LIES and take the spotlight off the lieberal party and its cruel and heartless attack on the poorest, defenseless Australians.
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 25 May 2014 8:25:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mikk – You make some very good points that I strongly agree with. You do leave out one very critical component which is not exclusive to you or your ilk.

What is your solution that can be articulated to, accepted and understood by the great unwashed?
Posted by Producer, Sunday, 25 May 2014 10:17:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
how to \fix..it all..is the queen orders the seizure of her mints and treasuries[that she adminester/her own exchequer/she herself will miont the coin/the budget budgets for/providing the govt stops taxing her people [her commoner weakth]..into peonhood [servitude/to dead corperated mulktiunationals..run by dule passport holding outcasts...and exiles.

that her highness coin be reassayed to reflect the more traditional values[if scum hadnt debvassed the queens coins gold/and silver[ie onc xent coin[will have a face 'valuation'..of 1 dollar[let 5 cent coin=5 dollars/10 cent cpoin=10$....ip to any queens head 2 dollar coin[now rassieged as 200 dollars[the poor now have been re empowerd/let the ritch try to earn their spend.

the crime of debaseement/stealing the fed and privatiosation of the [eoples systems/all privatised asset..is re claimed back to the state[the income however/will remain]..

govt will run out of schools[easch will get their budget in minted coin[the only lawfull tender]..coin cannot be taxes/nor cash[any ammount lawfully accounted for]

anyhow reflate the histoiric values back into he queens coin
or begin usigh gods money[rev22;2]..leaves for the healing of the bations[except you can grow your own..'leaves'..our money is the living seed..spend in seed values[one seed-a copper cent[ie one dollar sp[end].

wikiseed/wikigeld..s.u.n treaty
just removed the deflation impreswed upon the queens coin/by debasement..of its silver/gold...anyhow in gods land the base of the money is a seed to grow thyne own..god-given-geld...[bronze seed].for making 144,000..product and uses/excuses..truely..the tree of good/bad..as well as the burning bush..upon the mount.

truelly the money tree/sets us children[mortal children of the immortal father life spiritand mother sun..by christs love of neihghbour..and payment of debt in ful/was peace won/then we repaired the p[ieces/rebuilt the best of our past/into a living serphant rainbow path..spreading peace throughout the land.[homelands of gods living hood..one huge neighbourhood...whre love of other is understood..as our paths cross..
will set you free/if the queen dont fix her debased coin-face*..[in nickle disgrace.[ditto the wikiseed buys the freedom of the city/state..paying the rent..its great mate.
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 25 May 2014 10:49:49 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For god's sake mikk, what on earth do you need to be happy.

We are born in a hospital paid for by the taxpayer. Treated by doctors mostly paid for by taxpayer, mostly the "filthy" rich.

Educated by the taxpayer if your parents so chose.

With just a little effort you can have a university education, again paid 70% by the taxpayer.

That same taxpayer will then give us a nice job in the public service, so you never have to work again. How much do you need to stop you being envious?

Alternatively, you could have studied geology, again paid for by that rich taxpayer, discovered the mother load somewhere, established your own mining company, & now be richer than Packer or Murdock.

Hell you could even be as rich as me. Not much money, but the most fantastic memories of a fantastic life, & best of all, I don't envy anyone. What more could one ask for.
Posted by Hasbeen, Sunday, 25 May 2014 11:50:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here's a great little animated short narrated by Ed Asner - It deals with the US, but is pertinent to Australia as well.

http://www.moveon.org/share/72e232/hollywood-legend-ed-asner-has-outraged-republicans?rc=share-5393dd

If you want a healthy industrious society, the worst thing you can do is polarise it and target those least able to pay.
Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 25 May 2014 4:41:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen wrote

"For god's sake mikk, what on earth do you need to be happy."

No more poor people suffering under tony abbotts boot heel for starters.
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 25 May 2014 6:37:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Producer

See this post http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16332#284709
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 25 May 2014 6:40:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alas, the envy still shows through.
Posted by Don Aitkin, Monday, 26 May 2014 9:01:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Alas, the envy still shows through."

What an arrogant comment.
Posted by mikk, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 5:43:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don Aitkin,

"Alas, the envy still shows through."

Pray tell?

How so?....
Posted by Poirot, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 6:23:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy