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 > Power and money to thwart the democratic process > Comments

Power and money to thwart the democratic process : Comments

By Gavin Mooney and Colin Penter, published 11/6/2010

In the debate on the mining super tax, whither goes our democracy?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Rudd is at fault.

If we were a healthy democracy not only would this tax been open to the checks and balances of the opposition, but also public debate and consultation with the miners before it was announced as a finsihed product that was not negotiable.

This talk that the poor have no voice is a load of hogwash as well.

The tax cuts for the big banks are being paid for by this tax. Poor, do not lie. Infrastructure promises which would be the only return to the people so to speak is very small amount and could be paid for from natural increases in government revenue from mining sector.

So the poor will not benefit. The main rationale behind the tax is to reduce corporate tax (read corporate, not business)as a measure to stimulate foreign investment in the non mining sector and make it more competitive internationally in attracting such investment.

Also to cover up gross and negligent over spending.

Small business gets a write off allowance up to $5,000 on capital expenditure.

Poor get some compensation to super because the 15% flat tax was wrongly applied to those that did not earn a taxable income. That is very minor though and more a correction to past error than a redistribution of the rspt.

So why the poor need a voice against the miners? The miners are greedy and self serving but efficient private sector investment would do more good for the poor than government giving away tax cuts to rich banks.
Posted by TheMissus, Friday, 11 June 2010 9:28:23 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
Also if Rudd had been democratic the public would have been able to debate how the RSPT is spent. Most nations use a future fund known as sovereign wealth fund. The government is not allowed access to this money because it belongs to the people. So he using that language but not actually providing for the people, rather for government vote buying as we see already in many examples.

So the lack of democracy is due to the dicatorial culture Rudd has built and the miners response because of that.

Power and money can be overcome with common sense and you do not need to have power and money to have that
Posted by TheMissus, Friday, 11 June 2010 9:36:48 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
This morning Anthony Albanezi was asked about the consultation process for the mining tax.

In the course of that interview, the issue of 'CLIMATE CHANGE' came up..and in that..he said he did NOT agree with a 'Carbon Tax' but wanted a 'private trading' based solution...

WOOOOO...... hmmmm *scratches head*...... *more scratching*.....

Oh..wait.. Let's look up who might be a "Commercial Carbon Trader" in Sydney! yep.. click click.......scroll scroll...

aaah THERE it is. "ENVEX"... oh.. looks interesting..
Yep..they do it all..and are affiliated with that model of honesty and purity the..CHICAGO CLIMATE EXCHANGE...

Let's see who is the BOSS of ENVEX....

Well looky there..it's... it's..BOB CARR ! ex Labour Premier of NSW.

Ah Hah! the *Labour Connection*.....

of course there could be no link whatsoever between Albanesi's position and this blatant connection....

Power and Money are flowing in many directions and not only in regard to the mining tax.
Mining Tax= Income Re-distrubution. "From each..according to his ability..to each according to his need."

Now..where have I read that before?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_ability,_to_each_according_to_his_need
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Friday, 11 June 2010 9:58:27 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
The author mentions the money the previous government spent on advertising work choices (a policy which was not put to the electorate and which many would agree contributed to the demise of that government). It occurs to me that the union movement spend considerable amounts of money opposing that government policy.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 11 June 2010 10:03:38 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
The difference is the union movement is made up of Australian citizens exercising their democratic right to organise and bargain collectively.

These miners are largely multi-national corporations who expatriate the vast bulk of their profits earned on exploiting a publicly owned and finite resource.

The government, on behalf of the Australian people, is seeking a greater share of those super profits to ensure a more balanced economy and to avoid Australia succumbing to "Dutch Disease" - where a booming resource sector sucks capital and labour from elsewhere and raises interest rates and the currency to punitive levels.

I totally agree with the writers that while the mining industry is perfectly entitled to argue its case, many of their claims are hysterical and self-serving. That they might influence the election outcome is extremely disturbing.
Posted by Mr Denmore, Friday, 11 June 2010 10:29:18 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
Mr Denmore
Dr Ken Henry discounted comprehensively any notion we have or will ever get Dutch Disease. Our economy is well balanced with mining only 7% GDP. This is the reason he gave for not using the tax to be paid to a sovereign wealth fund. That plus we do not have finite resources like Norway clearly does....meaning ours will outlast more than few generations.

One good reason this tax should be dumped is that nobdoy seems to understand it.!

I see greedy city folk once again stealing from regional Australia. For example the big bank does not have to build railways, roads, electrical generators to do business. Miners do. Because this they get rebates, makes sense to me. But now they are called greedy because they get these rebates? It is only because the greedy self centred south east want all the roads, all the railways, all the shipping. They DEMAND regional Australian gets nothing but DEMAND they give everything.

The in ground value of minerals is very low because it requires massive amount of capital. years of hard work to start mining it. What have you contributed to this Mr Denmore?, are you not the one that is greedy now wanting to profit from the labour and investment of others?

Some mines would owe us but many owe us nothing. Not as simplistic and nonsensical as hysterical greedy miners stealing our resources rant, that is so ignorant I am not even sure why I reply.

Meanwhile regional Australia starts to hurt already but the greedy city folk do not care as long as they can sell their house for 20 times more than they paid for it.

Mining giant crushes Dawson spirit
http://www.centraltelegraph.com.au/story/2010/06/11/mining-giant-crushes-town-spirit-future-unclear-af/

Who is NOT greedy, pray tell!
Posted by TheMissus, Friday, 11 June 2010 10:57:02 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
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

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