Flood Levy - Do you agree?

[Julia]

Every time Abbott criticises the flood levy he opens himself to charges of hypocrisy. He lost any credibility he had with me with his proposal to put a levy on business firms to pay for well paid women to retain their salaries during pregnancy leave. He didn't even bother to consult the party on this.

I have doubts on whether his mouth is wired to his brain.

Agree absolutely on both counts.
Just watching him on the 7.30 Report last night, I felt quite sick thinking this is the best the Libs have to offer. He's just abysmally devoid of any leadership quality.

 

[IFocus]

Annual tax revenues project $348 billion for next year

Rebuilding task is estimated at $5.6 billion

Levy is $1.8 billion

The response still baffles me

 

[IFocus]

Michael Pascoe has a good summery

"Gillard's weak politics let canards fly "

On one hand, the levy itself is painted by some as an economic disaster – by implication, middle-and-above Australians must still “be doing it tough”. On the other, it raises so little in the general scheme of revenue, you might wonder what the screaming is about.

Gillard needs to start kicking heads

This damage though is only political and self-inflicted, Julia Gillard shooting the government in the foot through weak politics when presented with an opportunity to be strong. Contrary to some of the scare mongering, it's hard to find any other victim.

 

[sinner]

Annual tax revenues project $348 billion for next year

Rebuilding task is estimated at $5.6 billion

Levy is $1.8 billion

The response still baffles me

Really? Baffles you? Easily baffled you are.

I am baffled that you are willing to front money that Govt could probably shake loose from it's pocket simply by cancelling all propaganda spending for 1 month.

The attitude of some seems to be "Just lie down and accept it, because after all it's only a pound of flesh, who cares, right?".

Fact is we already have politicians (Dubbo, this morning?) saying they want the levy to be permanent.

Fact is Govt is saying today that rather than tighten their own belts they would rather hit the most fragile and overleveraged section of the Australian economy (household spending) with a tax slug on precisely those with the disposable income required to restart domestic consumption demand!

Fact is, it rained and Govt doesn't even have a measly 0.5% of tax revenues from last year to pay for umbrellas.

EDIT: IFocus selectively quoting Michael Pascoe, why don't you link the article so readers can make up their own minds and read the links that Michael has provided to Jessica Irvines article?
http://www.smh.com.au/business/gillards-weak-politics-let-canards-fly-20110128-1a7g5.html
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...e-come-hell-or-high-water-20110127-1a6s4.html

 

[OzWaveGuy]

Why make a vague post like this with no clarification.

The levy is optional requiring consent of the governed? But the governed don't know this and if they sign their tax return (which is mandatory) then they have given consent to be levied?

Hogwash, demand a link or retraction.

It was plenty clarified on this thread --> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21087&pagenumber=

Australia is a Common Law country. Statutes and Acts are not laws, but are simply "company" rules and are given the force of law - provided you have consented. Consent is usually automatically obtained (without your knowledge in most cases) in many unique and colourful ways.

Sinner, it's interesting that you screamed "hogwash" without the slightest investigation yourself - sorry that this knowledge isn't front page to make it more obvious for people like yourself.

So I'll re-state what I said before, for those who do not wish to pay the levy you don't have to.

 

[prawn_86]

So I'll re-state what I said before, for those who do not wish to pay the levy you don't have to.

So hypothetically, how does one not pay for it if they wish to receive the rest of their tax refund? Or should we just ask our employer to not tax us and then not submit a return?

I am actually interested in this side of things, because apparently it is similar in the USA although of course the govs wont acknowledge it

 

[sinner]

It was plenty clarified on this thread --> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21087&pagenumber=

Australia is a Common Law country. Statutes and Acts are not laws, but are simply "company" rules and are given the force of law - provided you have consented. Consent is usually automatically obtained (without your knowledge in most cases) in many unique and colourful ways.

Sinner, it's interesting that you screamed "hogwash" without the slightest investigation yourself - sorry that this knowledge isn't front page to make it more obvious for people like yourself.

So I'll re-state what I said before, for those who do not wish to pay the levy you don't have to.

Of course why I examined your totally unrelated thread from 2 months ago in depth before claiming your statement was hogwash.

Didn't scream, saw an unfounded statement and challenged it.

Well aware of the bunch of kooks all over the Anglo world who think they can use Common Law to circumvent a system that has been set to break people of exactly that ilk.

Having been involved in multiple actual actions in actual courtrooms of attempted use of Common Law in relation to Australian and International Law across a variety of issues and jurisdictions, I am happy to ignore blather from those without evidence.

Wake me up when you have proof that you avoided paying the levy by withholding consent. I bet you don't pay GST either.

Hell I would be interested to see any proof you have of any successful personal application of Common Law.

 

[IFocus]

Really? Baffles you? Easily baffled you are.

I am baffled that you are willing to front money that Govt could probably shake loose from it's pocket simply by cancelling all propaganda spending for 1 month.

The attitude of some seems to be "Just lie down and accept it, because after all it's only a pound of flesh, who cares, right?".

Fact is we already have politicians (Dubbo, this morning?) saying they want the levy to be permanent.

Fact is Govt is saying today that rather than tighten their own belts they would rather hit the most fragile and overleveraged section of the Australian economy (household spending) with a tax slug on precisely those with the disposable income required to restart domestic consumption demand!

Fact is, it rained and Govt doesn't even have a measly 0.5% of tax revenues from last year to pay for umbrellas.

EDIT: IFocus selectively quoting Michael Pascoe, why don't you link the article so readers can make up their own minds and read the links that Michael has provided to Jessica Irvines article?
http://www.smh.com.au/business/gillards-weak-politics-let-canards-fly-20110128-1a7g5.html
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...e-come-hell-or-high-water-20110127-1a6s4.html

Oversight on my part about the link

I thought the whole lot was very good as it covered all the points from most angles.........still baffled about the squealing.

Fact is the levy approach is conservative.


Any way need to start talking about the second levy.............LOLROTF


.

 

[Happy]

If flood levy was collected to increase dam size to prevent future floods or to fund re-location of possible future victims it is not bad.

But giving handout to those affected will do few bad things:

1. Less and less possible that future victims will decide to insure their property. (Why bother if will be helped anyway?)
2. Many people will take this as incentive to stay where they are.
3. Government might “forget” what the levy was introduced for and play silly buggers for yonks and use funds for whatever.

I think petrol 3+3 levy is one on-going example.

 

[sinner]

Oversight on my part about the link

I thought the whole lot was very good as it covered all the points from most angles.........still baffled about the squealing.

Fact is the levy approach is conservative.

Conservative compared to what? Just printing the money out of thin air and spending it? After all, it's only 1.8bio like you said!

Any way need to start talking about the second levy.............LOLROTF


.

That is the point, exactly 100%!

Can we expect a new levy every disaster now? What happened to the money I pay in taxes which is supposed to be put aside for rainy days? Or don't we have that anymore? Do we really as a country with 1 trillion a year GDP have not a single dollar saved up for national emergency? Need to cut spending and increase taxes every time?

Fine, let's streamline the whole process and have "just in time taxing" where the Government taxes you right when they need to pay a bill.

How come they don't decrease taxes when times are good then?

 

[IFocus]

Can we expect a new levy every disaster now? What happened to the money I pay in taxes which is supposed to be put aside for rainy days? Or don't we have that anymore? Do we really as a country with 1 trillion a year GDP have not a single dollar saved up for national emergency? Need to cut spending and increase taxes every time?

Fine, let's streamline the whole process and have "just in time taxing" where the Government taxes you right when they need to pay a bill.

How come they don't decrease taxes when times are good then?

You may have missed this bit from Michael Pascoe talking about taxes

Much of the commentary (and certainly reader comments) are symptomatic of another canard constantly in the air, that Australians are heavily taxed. We're not – we consistently score in the lower third of the OECD when it comes to the tax burden. And those paying less than us to their government also tend to get a lot less.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/gillards-weak-politics-let-canards-fly-20110128-1a7g5.html


The rainy day thing a number of people raise where in the budget papers is this?

 

[Happy]

... Do we really as a country with 1 trillion a year GDP have not a single dollar saved up for national emergency? ....

Good start would be single Government for whole Australia.

No 7 Governors, 7 Premiers and 7 sizeable State Parliaments

 

[prawn_86]

Good start would be single Government for whole Australia.

Only way this would work imo is with "weighted votes" otherwise smaller country and rural areas would be totally forgotten about to grab city votes. Unless government is still formed on the basis of certain seats in each area of course but then areas may need to be re-adjusted to include similar populations.

 

[Calliope]

Ms Gillard says that a soldier called Mick Slater will chair a committee that decides how to spend the levy. Slater seems like a nice little fellow and says all the right things, but no matter what the committee decides it will be bureaucrats who decide how the money is allocated.

Labor bureaucrats have a shocking history of project management. They should co-opt someone from the waste management business.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Ms Gillard says that a soldier called Mick Slater will chair a committee that decides how to spend the levy. Slater seems like a nice little fellow and says all the right things, but no matter what the committee decides it will be bureaucrats who decide how the money is allocated.

Labor bureaucrats have a shocking history of project management. They should co-opt someone from the waste management business.

I'd agree with you on most of the above, C, however Mick Slater served some years in Townsville and I know for a fact he does not suffer fools gladly, an example being how he flagged to the media, a hands off approach to the Floods.

Let us see which Labor flunkie is appointed to "deliver" all the tax revenue. Probably someone who has resigned from the NSW Parliament.

gg

gg

 

[Market Depth]

I disagree with the levy, because the floods in QLD is a State Matter. Julia is just playing politics.

 

[Calliope]

I'd agree with you on most of the above, C, however Mick Slater served some years in Townsville and I know for a fact he does not suffer fools gladly, an example being how he flagged to the media, a hands off approach to the Floods.

Let us see which Labor flunkie is appointed to "deliver" all the tax revenue. Probably someone who has resigned from the NSW Parliament.

He is punching way above his weight . Afghanistan would be a cake walk compared to the political minefield he has been thrown into.

I noticed on the ABC news that Gillard has included an uncomfortable looking Mick Slater in her travelling entourage to sell the levy.

 

[Wysiwyg]

How big is the tribe?

Our family including relations, our suburb, our town, our state, our country or the worldly population? Usually human tribe members help each other out in times of distress as do other herding animals. However, when the floods in Brazil struck recently did Australians care? When the Victorian fires destroyed property and took lives did everyone care beyond feeling a passing sad thought for that event? Did anyone have a passing thought for the Carnarvon victims of flooding?

To me, if a cyclone, fire or flood directly affects my family or town I would give freely but the further away emotionally or geographically these events happen then I feel less affinity to those "experiencing" them.

Does that make sense.

 

[Calliope]

How big is the tribe?
Does that make sense.

Yes it does. Last years's floods in Pakistan were so devastating as to dwarf the Qld floods in loss of life, and destruction of property and hope for the future. It was largely ignored by posters on this forum and Australians in general. Their Indian neighbours offered no help...different tribes I guess.

As I posted at the time;

The huge swing to the Greens in the election was supposed to show we are a caring nation. Sure, we care for a handful of boat people who are rich enough and lucky enough to become economic refugees. So we pat ourselves on the back.

But the enormity of the Pakistan tragedy is beyond our comprehension. Money is not the answer. Billions were poured into New Orleans with little noticeable effect.

I admit there is nothing we can do except apply small bandaids. We have to resign ourselves to the fact that the ultimate winners will be the Islamic radicals. Revolution thrives on despair. And they will have nuclear weapons.

 

[RandR]

Conservative compared to what? Just printing the money out of thin air and spending it? After all, it's only 1.8bio like you said!



That is the point, exactly 100%!

Can we expect a new levy every disaster now? What happened to the money I pay in taxes which is supposed to be put aside for rainy days? Or don't we have that anymore? Do we really as a country with 1 trillion a year GDP have not a single dollar saved up for national emergency? Need to cut spending and increase taxes every time?

Fine, let's streamline the whole process and have "just in time taxing" where the Government taxes you right when they need to pay a bill.

How come they don't decrease taxes when times are good then?

and for the latest figures on national debt ..

http://www.debtclock.com.au/index.html

It appears you are correct, Australia doesnt have a dollar to its name ... just a lot of debt.

There are arguments for and against the levy, myself, i think taxpayer money (our money) that is currently being used on other projects can be redirected for the rebuilding effort. I think rebalancing the budget for the flood rebuilding can surely be done without missing too much. For example: Maybe the military will just have to do without the F35's for awhile ........ what a pity that would be