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 > General Discussion > Miners and big money spin

Miners and big money spin

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. 12
  12. 13
  13. 14
  14. 15
  15. All
Yabby you draw on many salient facts in regard to finding a cheaper house, cheaper car, etc.
The information I submitted is drawn from stats, both government and commercial. The costs are a mean of sales data from the relative year in Australia; they are the average and governed by the market. Simply put we were better off in 1975 no matter how we try to trade off our myriad of "creature comforts" now, against financial security of then.

But I do join you my friend in wanting the best for our minnow of a country. I appreciate what we have got, everyday.
Posted by sonofgloin, Thursday, 27 May 2010 7:36:03 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
TheMissus;
>>I actually see this as raping regional Australian (AGAIN) to give money to the big cities. Iam sorry but I am damn sick of this. Perhaps Australia should split up.<<

Besides the splitting up part, exactly so.
In regard to natural resources, the company that reaps the benefit of the resource, after reaching a predetermined EBIT figure should directly input funds for infrastructure projects in that community and district. That would be of direct benefit to we Australians rather than it going into consolidated revenue, and it would further stimulate local employment.
Posted by sonofgloin, Thursday, 27 May 2010 7:55:59 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
*Simply put we were better off in 1975 no matter how we try to trade off our myriad of "creature comforts" now, against financial security of then.*

Sonofgloin, your dream of financial security then died, the day
that nylon was invented. Then a host of other materials. Australia
paid its bills by riding on the sheep's back, because the world had
little but cotton or wool to choose from, for decade after decade.
All that changed with the invention of synthetics.

Today the wool industry is little but a niche industry, the merino
has basically died.

If you check out the RBA reasoning, you soon see why the median
house price is what it is. Its not the poorest, borrowing all that
money to buy a house. Its double income professionals, many without
kids, uptrading to ever more fashionable, ever closer to the CBD,
flash houses and units.

They buy because they can, because they earn incomes in jobs that
simply did not exist in the 70s. The finance industry is a prime
example. Thousands of people work for places like Maquarie Bank
and they don't work for peanuts either. Those sorts of incomes
drive up house prices, close to city centres.

In my town you can still buy a reasonable home for 200k$-250k$.

In fact, around here you can buy 100 acres for 150K$. Add a home
for 150k$ building cost and for 300k$ you won't have a neighbour
anywhere near you!

Yet alot of these people here are doing just that, then going to
work in the mines, fly in fly out. Rio pays their train drivers
around 200k$ a year. They are creaming it all the way.
Posted by Yabby, Thursday, 27 May 2010 8:13:46 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
Regardless of all this then and now stuff, It's fair to say that subject of the day Is Big Money Spin.

It now appears that both sides of Politics see the electorate as gullible : in that, both sides feel a need to advertise their point.

The Gov't may be even making a point frankly, when it elects to advertise it's perspective re Resource Rent tax, if that perspective reflects the true, accurate, quantifiable truth. It could be considered in the national interest to counter any avalanche of spin from vested interests, who may be able and willing to use their position and sheer financial grunt to swing results in their direction.

The Mining Industry's current diatribe seems to consist of talking the Australian economy down out of their own perceived self interest. If this is in fact what they are doing? then I would like to be aware of this in fact.
Posted by thinker 2, Friday, 28 May 2010 5:30:31 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
*if that perspective reflects the true, accurate, quantifiable truth.*

We now know exactly where the integrity lies, Thinker 2, and its
not with the Govt. But I guess they will use taxpayers money
to feed out their spin, to suck in people like yourself.

Just look at the tax figures. When BHP confronts treasury, they
admit that BHP now pays tax at around 43% of net income, yet the
Govt tries to spin that out as not being so, because miners are
entitled to deductions for depreciating plant etc. Well I would
frigging hope so, the plant wears out and depreciates, its a valid
business deduction.

Tax rates are documented and known, deductions for business
expenditure are documented and known. To now try and spin the
figures, that even though say company tax is legislated at 30%
of net income, miners never actually paid 30% of net income,
is a bit of a joke and makes their tax office look like fools.

Either companies pay 30% company tax or they don't. If they don't
why doesen't the tax office haul them before the courts? Reason
being, because they do. That's why BHP coughed up 6.3 billion $
last year.
Posted by Yabby, Friday, 28 May 2010 8:51:16 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
Australia needs to learn not to rely on a one-company policy (resources) to ensure the economy of the country.
This has led Governments to compromise the future of Australia. Also, by allowing international companies to buy up profitable Australian companies, asset strip them and close them down as no longer profitable. Gutting a business and getting rid of staff will undoubtedly make them unprofitable. It is just a way of getting rid of competition.
I saw a textile company bought by an overseas company then shortly after, sack the employees and remove all of the plant and equipment, to be smashed so no one else could buy and start up in competition. This is not an isolated instance. In other industries you will find other examples, hence we now have little industrial base left.
The present PR exercise to people urgently seeking a future is to claim the electronics industry and information is the future.
For Whom? Well that is a big maybe! When companies are outsourcing overseas there is little future to Australia citizens.
Look at the communication system, gas, electricity and water Try and get service and you will be directed to someone overseas who does not speak English and you will waste a long time waiting to be contacted (if) by someone who can help.
Even government departments are out sourcing supplies or employing consultants from outside of the country or areas where they are operating. Australian citizens are not being employed.
continued.
Posted by professor-au, Friday, 28 May 2010 11:08:01 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 7
  7. 8
  8. 9
  9. Page 10
  10. 11
  11. 12
  12. 13
  13. 14
  14. 15
  15. All

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