Multinational Mining Giants threatening to leave Australia for greener pastures because of taxes on their super-profits, is the worst sort of misleading tripe and scare-mongering possible.

If thats what they want to do let them. It will simply increase the value of our resources and strengthen our bargaining position when they come back cap in hand after pillaging someone else's country. They wont and they're bluffing ! .

To suggest that places like Africa will be more attractive than Australia (if we impose a resources rent tax) implies that currently, we are more attractive than Africa in tax terms. Meaning we are currently not imposing enough tax on miners anyway.

The resources that we lease/rent to these multinational corporations belong to us: not them, ultimately and actually.

It is also not clear that after they move to this country where they perceive exploitation easier, (albeit Canada or Brazil even) that the Govt there seeks to impose similar or equivalent tax regimes.

It's tripe, all of it. Instead we should installing certainty for our economy and getting on with reality and coming to agreement on this.

The Henry Tax review begat this idea not Rudd and this change is a taxation change.
Abbott claims "that this is a tax on the 500,000 thousand people that work in the mining industry". It's tripe because "none of these people will pay this tax". Their Multinational Corporate Employer will instead.

Big money will bombard us with media propaganda no doubt from here to the election but hopefully common sense will prevail and the electors will vote for the Resources Rent Tax.

It will go along way in paying for a future ETS.

thinker 2,

>>If thats what they want to do let them.

And then what?

Who pays for our future?

Where will the dollars come from?

They are the driving force of our economy and, if you can't see that then you are blind!

>>>It is also not clear that after they move to this country where they perceive exploitation easier

This is what is at greatest risk, exploitation as, if the rewards are not there, why would/should they risk billions searching when it has been suggested they stand to return around 6% on investment?

Better off putting the money in the bank and sitting one thier hands, don't you think?

>>>It's tripe, all of it. Instead we should installing certainty for our economy and getting on with reality and coming to agreement on this.

So if you were offered overtime at say 'tripple time' and were taxed 70c in the dollar, would you do the hours? That is of cause only to be paid if the business you work for makes a profit, otherwise you will have worked for nothing.

Would you work under those conditions? Be honnest now!

>>>"none of these people will pay this tax".

It will impact on thier jobs, thier futures, thier families. The possible consequesnses are huge and have the potential to cripple our economy.

>>>Big money will bombard us with media propaganda no doubt from here to the election

There you go, you're a 'dud' supporter, hey!

Maybe it will be simmilar to the scare camp run by the unions last election, hey!

No worker will be worse off, hey!

Finnally, why not tax the banks.

They don't invest in exploration.

They have afee for everything.

They only rent commercial space.

They employ 'off shore' tele-marketers.

They make billions, as well.

They take houses off honnest, hard working families.

Once upon a time a bank was somewhere you held your money.

Now, it is somewhere that charges you to hold your money and makes 'billions' in the process and, as they are not 'privately owned', the CEO's risk NOTHING!

Send the beggars to Canada rechtub.
May not find as much coal.
Iron may be less quality.
Uranium not found in big lots.
But mining in the snow will be fun.
Come to think of it why are they not there now?
Hide of Rudd, thinking we have ca right to some return for the empty holes in the ground that we will have left.
Sleep well rechtub the sky will not fall.

Belly, Thinker2
IMO you are right on the *money* for me.
The tragedy is that the likes of Shadow minister, Yabby, Hasbeen et al
and the great unwashed will be taken in.

I find it astonishing that given the endless lest of 'Cock ups' (archery term for firing short) by resource companies are allowed to get away cheap.
-The coal tanker on the coast recently,
- the polluting of the river in PNG,
- the Aussie miner that polluted the Danube.
- the Uranium miner that had a tailings dam pollute the river in the Arnhem land.
- how about the spill off the coast of WA
- Did I mention the oil spill in the Mexican gulf. Are you seeing a common thread? I am.
They have gotten away with the minimum for the maximum profit.
The common link they play risk games at our expense. They never have the right equipment/adequate back up systems for the OOPS's.
Can you imagine he stink that would go up if a govt department or a small business made the same short term focus decisions?

I have no problem with profits but profit without responsibility ....this 2010 not 1860.
I agree that miners any corporation should make profits but not at the cost of the country where the resources are that included a fair tax to enable the government to fund the future.
The level of the tax maybe can be adjusted

"Posted by thinker 2, Friday, 7 May 2010 5:01:26 PM
Big money will bombard us with media propaganda no doubt from here to the election but hopefully common sense will prevail and the electors will vote for the Resources Rent Tax".
"It will go along way in paying for a future ETS".

Bring in a tax to cover an ETS that the world’s largest carbon emitting nations are nowhere near agreeing to.
Why don't we give the tax funds direct to the states, I know my lot are broke. Why does this Labor govt keep giving to the rich, in this instance brokerage houses and stock exchanges, and who pays for it, us , the consumer. Why is "little emission" Australia leading the pack. Because Kev wants a U.N. job after he has screwed us. We will be in Boorawa too frightened to consume electricity and he will be in Brussels frightfully consuming all that life has to offer the self serving.
Re the ETS
Climate change, a cycle.
Environment issues, a must.
Nuclear, the logical option.
Carbons detrimental effect, unproven.

Posted by examinator, Saturday, 8 May 2010 9:30:27 AM
The level of the tax maybe can be adjusted.

I agree with your sentiments. But let’s look at what has instigated the miner’s tax, as it wasn't on the radar last week. The answer is that our government needs money. They did not need it when Labor came to power, but they went from a surplus to $180 billion gross debt in a couple of years. They are inept, as shown by the ridiculous 40% grab right of the mark.