rechtub asks "What is the point of collecting tax from some, then giving it back to others, simply to pay for the increases generated by the tax in the first place."

The answer is to shift the entire tax base to encourage tax avoidance by more efficient use of fossil fuels and/or by the use of alternative energies.

Neither a carbon tax nor a mining tax will cause the sky to fall in despite the powerful with vested interests telling us so.

Luciferase, if it's not a tax on the minerals, but on profits, as you say, then why not on all Super profits?

The banks make a killing, fail to pass on rate cuts, and get propped up by the tax payer.

Why are they not on the super profits target list.

Furthermore, what is a 'super profit', as I know people who have started a business on less than ten grand, yet make $200 K per year.

Why is that not a super profit?

' The majority of Australians support this because they do not live in mining states

And for the past 90 odd years, they have not wanted anything to do with them.

Now as for avoiding tax, there is a solution, it's called a transaction tax, whereby money is taxed, not workers, not companies, just money.

Just I imagine to boost to our economy if all we ever paid was 1 or 2 % tax.

It has been said that this tax would eliminate EVERY OTHER FORM OF TAX, yet the powers to be won't go there.

*The banks make a killing, fail to pass on rate cuts, and get propped up by the tax payer*

You keep harping on about this Rehctub, but you remain confused.

The texpayer never propped up banks. In fact the taxpayer earned
an extra 1.5 billion from banks, without spending a cent. Had
the Govt not gone guarantor during the GFC, given the extra overseas
loan costs, business loans and home loans would have gone through
the roof. So it was a win-win for both the taxpayer and the consumer.

Banks return on equity is no more then well run butcher shops. So
do we put a super profits tax on those too?

When the RBA drops the loan rate, that does not mean that the banks
cost of funds drops by the same amount. It depends on their overseas
cost of funds. Like any business, they try to pass on costs. Just
like you did, in your butcher shop.

Another 118,000 retail jobs to go according to ABC24 ticket tape this morning.

..

*RehTub* I believe from has from his hands on experience in small business has an awareness that there are issues in the smooth flow and profitability of his business.

As to what they are in reality and what may be potential solutions for them remains a matter to be succinctly articulated, though I note there have been plenty of refutations as to what the underlying causes are not.

..

Well *Yabby*, if not a *CooNack,* what about a *Jilgy?*

Dream on, the main problem with retail, should I say, small Retsil businesses, is that in most cases they net less today than they did ten years ago.

This is due to the costs associated with running a business.

My business alone, has about $100,000 more in annual expenses than it did 20 years ago.

In fact, 20 years ago, a butcher turning over $8000 per week with a GP of 30% made more than that same business today (net) with a 50% GP.
G
That simply means the consumer has paid the difference.

Yabby, banks make a fortune, the borrow our money at say 5%, then lend it out at 7.5%, that's a 50% mark up, not bad when billions are involved.

As for OS borrowings, I would suggest the exchange rate works in their favor as well.

I will admit though, I am a bit out of my depth when it comes to banking.

BTW, there is a fair chance Clive Palmer will win his case if so it will be back to the drawing board for madam PM with yet another failed policy.

Now if this is the case, just how much of this incompetence do we have to endure.

I will admit though, I am a bit out of my depth when it comes to banking.*

Fair enough Rehctub, thanks for your honesty.

As to foreign borrowings, no bank would risk foreign exchange losses,
so all borrowing are hedged. I remind you of some 20 year or so ago,
when all those people, lots of farmers too, borrowed cheaply in
Swiss Francs. Next thing the Australian Dollar dropped and people
suddenly owed 40% more then they started with.

Our banks try to maintain a spread of around 2.2%, but are struggling
to do that. Yes its a huge business, as there are huge amounts of
loan involved. Also lots of risk. If those property developers go
broke, somebody wears the loss. If businesses go broke, somebody pays.
All banks lose money on bad loans, every year.

I remind you that European shareholders have just lost their shirts,
because banks lent to Govts like Greece! If people want to borrow
money from banks, bank shareholders will not put up the risk capital
involved, unless it justifies the risk.

If you think that bank shareholders are making far too much money,
why don't you buy some bank shares?

DreamOn, yabbies, koonaks and gilgies are all various species of
freshwater crustaceans. The WA yabby came here in the 1930s from
Miram Swamp near Nihl in Victoria. It is now the most common species
of crustacean in WA. Koonaks and Gilgies are in fact quite rare