It is only an idea cuphandle/crackup.
Not one the PM is likely to run with but an understanding of it and its intentions may be worthwhile, so too could it be.
Just as some want the GST raised, an idea Rudd has no intention of following.
We do need to revamp our taxation system.
We like the world have bills to pay.
And much like events like the recent bush fires and northern floods it is more often than not the battlers pay most.
Any reform that stops rich tax avoidance is worth a try.
We however are building ants nests into mountains here, no plan to put the idea to work exists, and all ideas need airing ,should be considered.

Belly I don't think you understand.The corporates want to halve their company taxes on profit and put that liability on the consumer.The GST does not tax corporate profit nor does it tax shareholder profit.It is a consumption tax and the poor proportionately spend more on consumption.

Well Guys! Maybe the 10% Flat Tax Rate right across the board is not such a bad idea after all!

Y'know Arjay, it occurs to me that forums like this are the only places where you can say the stuff you do without everybody around you choking in their beer and falling about laughing.

>>Well if we have a National Monetary Fund as I've suggested,we don't need to borrow from foreign banks who just create money from nothing anyway. We would not then have a private debt of $650 billion nor Kevin's debt soon to be $300 billion.We can finance our own future without their inflation or debt slavery<<

Mind you, it doesn't stop the people who read it from falling about laughing, but fortunately you can't see them, so you can pretend they aren't there.

But as we have discussed many times on other threads, i) you don't understand what you are talking about and ii) until you do, you will be unable to see how impractically fanciful your (borrowed) ideas are.

Enjoy your day.

Before Pericles falls to the floor laughing, he may want to check these out

Banks create money out of thin air
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIo7IYVCIXM

The Federal Reserve Fraud in 5 parts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEZfMruLMSI&NR=1

One US senator was murdered by the bankers before he could impeach them.

I owe you a debt of gratitude, Philip Tang.

I had been wondering for some time how this mantra "Banks create money out of thin air" came from. That YouTube video explains everything.

But...

The very nicely-spoken lady missed one vital step in the sequence.

She perfectly correctly shows how Banks are allowed to make $250,000 (and more) in loans, against assets of $100,000.

But she omitted to mention where the money contained in those loans actually comes from.

A simple exercise in double-entry bookkeeping will explain the mechanics.

The $100,000 CD is issued. It is a liability, balanced against the asset (Cash). During the year, $5,000 in interest will be added to the liability.

The Bank makes a loan of $90,000. The $90,000 appears as an asset, but $90,000 walks out of the door at the same time. The Asset side of the balance sheet now shows $10,000 in cash, and an asset (loan) of $90,000.

The total is still $100,000.

So until and unless the Bank earns interest on its loan - which hopefully is at a higher rate than the 5% it is borrowing at - it has nothing left in the till to lend.

However, it does have security on the loan, and a reliable income stream from that loan, so it is in a good position to raise more money on the money market, or issue more shares in return for an increase in its capital base and so on.

But the fallacy in the video is that the money is actually available to lend, from that original deposit.

On the one hand, it is true that they can lend a multiple of their asset base.

On the other, it is not true that this money magically appears in their vaults to enable them to do so.

They borrow it.

Ultimately, the Treasury (or Fed, or whoever) has to make that money available to the economy as a whole.

Or alternatively, withhold it. Which is known as a "credit crunch".

Hope this helps.