Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Useless Labor Party

Jump to new
From Anatasia Palaszczuk own mouth before the last Queensland election,

"THERE WILL BE NO ASSET SALES UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"

Now where have I heard that saying before?

https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/32816487/qld-government-plans-land-sell-off/#page1

The Queensland Council of Unions (QCU), which repeatedly protested against the LNP's privatisation agenda, also backed the policy.

"As long as the monies from the sales goes back into infrastructure that generates jobs, the QCU is not opposed to the sale," General Secretary Ros McLennan said.


One can bet his boots that some of the fire sale will syphoned off to help bring down some of the Beattie/Bligh bad debt......
 
noco said:
From Anatasia Palaszczuk own mouth before the last Queensland election,

"THERE WILL BE NO ASSET SALES UNDER A GOVERNMENT I LEAD"

Now where have I heard that saying before?

https://au.news.yahoo.com/qld/a/32816487/qld-government-plans-land-sell-off/#page1
Click to expand...

I guess they are using the same weasel words Campbell Newman did, but avoiding the "sales" tag. Phrases like "privatisation of government assets" is much more palatable to the gullible.

Surprisingly the sky still hasn't fallen in after the dire predictions of the Murdoch Liberal Party since Bligh/Rudd/Gillard days. That must really grate the senses of the loyal readership and the eternal waiting to say "I told you so".:D
 
sptrawler said:
With the Labor Party resource rent tax, wasn't it all about making the miners paying a tax, on a resource that will eventually be depleted?
Well what the W.A Nationals are suggesting makes sense.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-...ed-why-are-rio-tinto-and-bhp-targeted/7908544

The last paragraph sums it up:

But that is subject to change based on production volumes. The companies argue higher costs would result in less mining activity, and the amount of money raised by the tax depends entirely on how much ore is being produced.

Well duh wasn't that what everyone was saying, pay on removal of the resource, unlike dumb Labor 'pay on what you sell it for'.:eek:

That leads to selling it offshore to a parent company, wow, who would have guessed that?

Why not charge them for what they extract, rather than for what they sell it for?

If the resource is easily extracted (which it is) why wouldn't you charge them on how much they extract?
When it is gone, do you think the mining companies will be hanging around, I think not.

The naysayers say the miners will source their ore from Brazil, so what, it is better to deplete their reserves than give away ours for nothing.IMO
Click to expand...
There has been 3 types of mineral resource taxes levied in recent times after taking into account Labor's brief MMRT.

First is the 25 cent/tonne rental lease for Iron Ore that Brendon Grylls wants to increase to $5 for BHP and RIO. This is a fixed price lease which by that nature is the least volatile. It's also the option that is most negative for resource development, as noted above.

Federal Labor's two profit based tax options (RSPT abandoned for the MRRT) are by that nature the most volatile, also as noted above.

The state based mining royalties fit in the middle. Being subject to the trading price of the underlying resource, it's less volatile than company profitability. It's also less subject to corporate profit shifting than the RSPT and MRRT above.

An option here could be to increase the fixed price lease payment in exchange for a reduction in the royalty. This would reduce resource revenue volatility to the state while at the same time limiting the impact of the rental lease on future development.

Increasing the overall state based resource rental lease/royalty take is another question that could be part of the above however that needs to be considered in the light that most of the gain is presently ultimately lost through GST redistribution (90% I think it is).

Colin Barnett is hoping for a buy out the 25 cent/tonne lease payment through agreement with the miners.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-...hp-billiton-rio-tinto-mining-tax-deal/7911290

This would provide a short term boost to the budget at the expense of longer term revenue. In the context of the current GST distribution method and WA's present share, it may be the most sensible option.
 
Wayne Swan is having a belated dummy spit over being outsmarted by BHP on the MRRT in 2010,

Mr Swan also said that when the mining tax debate was dominating politics in 2010, BHP Billiton had inflated the impact of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax on its business, while it channelled its profits through foreign tax havens.
Click to expand...

Who was it that rushed to agreement on the above prior to rushing to an election in 2010?

Labor's great negotiator IIRC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-13/bhp-billiton-slammed-for-tax-avoidance-by-wayne-swan/7928432
 
drsmith said:
Wayne Swan is having a belated dummy spit over being outsmarted by BHP on the MRRT in 2010,



Who was it that rushed to agreement on the above prior to rushing to an election in 2010?

Labor's great negotiator IIRC.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-13/bhp-billiton-slammed-for-tax-avoidance-by-wayne-swan/7928432
Click to expand...

Well, Wayne Swan the world's greatest treasurer, had never looked very smart and his brain suits his looks....Did he have a degree in economics?....I don't think so...Wayne Swan had a Bachelor of arts degree.

He promised surpluses 4 years in a row and never made it once.......The money he was supposed reap from the MRT cost more than to administer than what he collected......You remember the MRT was designed to finance NDIS and Gonski.

Now he is blaming BHP for not getting what he thought he could......Not a very smart fellow at all if he did not do his homework.
 
orr said:
Labor to sworn in next Federal Government now at $1.72 .... can only see those odds shortening.
Click to expand...

There is another 2.5 years to go before the next election.....I don't know how anyone can predict the outcome this early.
 
noco said:
There is another 2.5 years to go before the next election.....I don't know how anyone can predict the outcome this early.
Click to expand...

The Libs were on the downhill slope leading up to the last election. They lost a lot of seats so dont' you think that trend is not continuing and particularly with the continued ramps of

"jobs and growth, jobs and growth" :eek:

with no real substance of the how.
 
Ves said:
Can you name the last Federal treasurer who had a degree in economics?
Click to expand...

William McMahon was the first. Treasurer Scott Morrison has an honours degree in Applied Economic Geography.

Wayne Swan - BA (hons) - Bachelor of Arts :banghead:

miss.JPG
 
So now we are debating formal qualifications for pollies. Terrific, stack parliament with more disconnects from the constituency.

Joe Hockey Vs Paul Keating
 
trainspotter said:
William McMahon was the first. Treasurer Scott Morrison has an honours degree in Applied Economic Geography.

Wayne Swan - BA (hons) - Bachelor of Arts :banghead:

View attachment 68414
Click to expand...
The point was that historically in Australia very few Federal treasurers have actually had an economics degree.

And yep, some of them had Bachelor of Arts degrees. Certainly not limited to the bloke you mentioned.

There's an obvious reason why they don't need to have economics degrees too.
 
Whilst Richo has been highly critical of Mike Baird's back flip on grey hound racing, I cannot believe he (Richo), the past Labor numbers man, has been scathing with his attack on Bill Shorten and Jay Weatherill in regards to there policy of renewable energy.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...s/news-story/c12f322fd15a5d4ea6e0e7376402209d

I believe in climate change but I am not an extremist. I love the idea that sun, wind and water can keep the lights, the stove, the fridge and the airconditioner going. The problem is how long it will take to improve the technologies for clean energy sources to power our country. Labor needs to consider its position on this issue, and in particular Bill Shorten, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews and South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill need to watch videos of Baird over and over again. They need to back down on their renewable energy targets. It has nothing to do with electoral popularity. This is all about energy security. The prolonged statewide blackout across South Australia was the perfect reason to change tack. Closing coal-powered electricity plants that are reliable is dangerous when the energy to replace their output simply can’t hack it.

Weatherill has been a very, very successful political leader. He has won elections he was not supposed to win. He has defied the odds and consequently he became very popular. The halo is slipping now and threatens to disappear entirely. Watching him pretend that the closure of a coal-fired plant and too much reliance on wind farms were not among the causes of the blackout was as embarrassing as it was excruciating. When the lights go out, minds are concentrated on finding a reason.

The message here for Weatherill is that the mob, as they always do, have worked him out. When the wind disappears, the wind farms don’t work. When the wind blows too hard, the wind farms don’t work.

Given his history I am hopeful the Premier will redeem himself and make his energy targets realistic. His task will be made more difficult because of the role of federal Labor frontbencher Mark Butler, who continues to stick to Labor’s 50 per cent renewable energy target, which he seems to want in place within the week.

The farce of this policy has become obvious to all. The government has done little to expose the extraordinary hole in this stupid Labor policy. Labor has no plan on how this target would be reached. Australia must keep some of its reliance on coal until the renewable energy technologies are proven.

Again, this is not about electoral success. Yes, Labor may lose some votes to the Greens if it makes the necessary changes, but the great bulk of the electorate will respond positively. In Victoria, Andrews may well be going down this doomed path as well. Nobody can talk with certainty about our energy future.

Sadly, Labor is playing games with people’s lives. It is no good playing roulette and hoping your number comes up. The poor and pensioners particularly require certainty about lights and heat. Labor owes it to its base to modify its stance.

A complete backdown a la Baird is not necessary. An acknowledgment of a harsh reality is always superior to a Don Quixote notion of the impossible dream. The real test is whether you have the courage to take on a difficult task. Bill, it’s over to you.
 
A bit of history

PAUL KEATING'S SPEECH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME AUSTRALIA GRADUATION CEREMONY PERTH - TUESDAY, 8 MARCH 1994
"For me, being with you this evening is also a pleasure, because I missed my own graduation ceremony. Not that I didn't have a classical education but it was in the Australian Labor Party. Apart from a few degrees in economics, it afforded me a PhD in ‘Varieties of Human Behaviour’. In fact, of all the Prime Ministers since the 1940s, with the exception of John McEwen, who was in the job for just a few days, I am the only one not to have had a university
education. My academic education ended at the age of seventeen. I am quite sure that the great majority of people from my background in those years would not have expected to set foot in a university in their lifetimes. It was beyond reach - or at least seemed to be. It is true that with application and intelligence the sons and daughters of working people can get there. But not many of them. The majority simply couldn't afford it. And there were not many universities. However, the physical limits were not the only impediment, nor perhaps the most important one. There was a psychological obstacle. A university education was beyond the reach of our social expectations. It required young people to think beyond their circumstances, beyond the patterns of life in their families and communities. It meant very often leaving those families and communities. It required a leap of the imagination which most of us could not make. Most did not expect to go to university or even finish secondary school indeed, just a decade ago only three in ten Australians were finishing secondary school. That is in 1984.”
Click to expand...
 
More history and the calibre of the great Liberal Party of Australia and the ALP back then.

We can only hope there is a Keating coming through the ranks of either party. Someone who isn't paralysed by risk aversion and hurt feelings, but gets things done by either leading or dragging the country forward in real things that matter.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...e-was-lit-a-long-time-ago-20121005-274o5.html


But it was a memorable moment in modern Australian politics when a Liberal backbencher implied that Paul Keating had fathered an illegitimate child.

"Kristine had a little girl called Paul," Tuckey called out, as Paul Kelly recorded in The End of Certainty. It was part of "an aggressive parliamentary strategy [John] Howard had approved", wrote Kelly. While Kristine was real, the illegitimate child was not.

And, of course, Keating is famed for his flair with an insult. Wilson Tuckey was a "foul-mouthed grub", a "pig" and a "boxhead" who was "flat out counting past 10''.

Keating once silenced the House with bewilderment when he told Tuckey he had "a head like a swallow's nest". After pausing theatrically, Keating delivered the punchline: "All 54it and sticks!"
Click to expand...

:D
 
Top