Posts tagged ‘tax’

April 11, 2012

Carbon Price Not Evil, says Church

Despite misleading headlines in the Murdoch media (Dumping on charities – Salvation Army says the carbon tax will be a costly load of rubbish, story repeated in the daily newspapers in the capitals), it turns out this may not be the case after all.

Paul Bongiorno, a reporter on channel 10 tweeted: The Salvos tell me they have been misrepresented on the carbon tax in today’s News Ltd tabloids. They do not see the tax as evil.

Later on, in promo for his piece on the news tonight, Paul Bongiorno tweeted again: Australians dump thousands of tonnes of rubbish on charities and there is a carbon price link. Soon on Ten News

And, this time around, as pointed out by @GenGusface – Bongiorno called it by its correct name, Carbon Price, rather than its Murdoch name of Carbon Tax

Being misrepresented by the Murdoch media, who would have thought!

The Salvation Army issued a press release, clarifying their position and they way they were represented in the media: The Salvation Army Responds to Carbon Tax Reform (11 Apr 2012)

But the question is why are millions of tonnes of rubbish being dumped on charities, transferring cost of proper disposal to the charities?

text by @redglitterx
use of quotes and tweets is in no way intended to imply that the people quoted would in any way endorse the contents of this post or blog

Advertisements
April 9, 2012

Why are Zionists being consulted by the head of Business Council Of Australia about raising the level of Australian GST

In an Ayn Randian-style speech the head of the Business Council Of Australia, a corporate lobby group, wants pensioners and the unemployed to pay more tax, and also pay his tax too while they are at it – and who did he consult – the Australian Israel Chamber of Commerce.

Australian trade with Israel would be small, and yet they hold enormous sway over public policy in Australia, out of all proportion to any benefits they deliver to Australian industries or workers.

Lift GST to fund other tax cuts, business chief says

Tony Shepherd, new head of the Business Council of Australia, addressed the Australian Israel Chamber of Commerce, urging the Federal Government to remove barriers to competition. Barriers to competition usually means workers protections, environmental protections, health and safety, taxes on massive profit, anti-monopoly, minimum wage – those kinds of barriers.

Shepherd want to reduce business and income taxes, funded by raising GST. This would represent a massive transfer of wealth from the working poor, the unemployed and pensioners who pay little or no income tax or business tax, yet still pay 10% on everything they buy.

The tax system should be shifted from direct taxes to an increased reliance on indirect taxes like the GST.
We should be realistic that reconfiguring our tax system in this way can be done in a way that raises enough revenue, promotes growth and provides a fair go for people who are less well off,
he said.

Why is this man being called a business chief, like he is some kind of official? He is the head of a lobby group. That would be like calling a mobster a banking chief, or the head of the fast food lobby a nutrition chief

Slashing business taxes put an incredible burden on working poor and non-workers, who cannot avoid or minimise their taxes by opening a head office in Vanuatu or the Cook Islands. If – when – this happens, Australia would see the farcical situation we are currently seeing in US America where Right-Wing conservative governments try to portray Wisconsin public school teachers on $56,000 a year as over-paid while CEOs on $1.5 million are under-paid and over-taxed, even on a tax rate of 0% they still feel they are paying too much. Or we might see another Florida, which recently repealed laws that made wage-theft illegal, thus legalising bosses stealing their employees wages.

Is this the Australia we want? A country that worships the almighty dollar? This is what we get if we shrink the tax base to the poorest of the poor, while giving business everything they want in a race down to the bottom.

Why? Why is it necessary to consult Israel or its lobby group? Why does an Australian lobby group seek approval from an Israeli lobby group about the amount of GST Australian tax payers actually pay.

Anyway, how is a corporate lobby group any different from say a “bosses union”, in that they pay their dues and hope their collective bargaining power can gain their members benefits? Oh, right… it’s bad when workers do it, respectable when “rich” people do it.

*The origin of the term Zionism is the biblical word Zion, often used as a synonym for Jerusalem and the Land of Israel
Source: Palestine Facts – What is Zionism and who are the Zionists?


text and image by @redglitterx
image of the cross from wikipedia under creative commons that allows for remix and reuse, chrome rainbow dollar symbol added by redglitterx
use of the cross is in no way intended to imply that that wikipedia, or the church where the cross is located in anyway endorses this post or this blog
article: Lift GST to fund other tax cuts, business chief says – Leonie Lamont, April 4, 2012: Sydney Morning Herald

 

April 7, 2012

The Truth About Carbon Pricing (or carbon “Tax” if you read Murdoch papers)

There are many lies being spread about carbon pricing, usually by those with an agenda, either that or they can’t read.

First of all: it is not being applied yet – any business that claims it is sacking workers or raising prices now because of the carbon pricing, is blatantly lying and ripping off consumers. The pricing goes into affect from 1 July 2012.

Second: Unlike the GST which put a 10% tax on just about everything you buy, with little options for finding non-GST affected products; Carbon pricing will only be on the top 500 polluting companies. If you don’t want to pay for a product which has carbon pricing attached, simple… buy a product that is Less polluting.

If you don’t want to pay carbon pricing, choose products with less impact. Simple. Third: opponents of Carbon pricing say that it is unfair, unlike GST which is fair and balanced. No. The reverse is true. GST disproportionately affects those on lower incomes, who spend a larger proportion of their income on GST taxable products, while those that attract no-GST tend to be luxury items (which had other taxes removed in exchange for the GST). If you don’t want to pay carbon pricing, choose products with less impact. Simple. If you want to continue to screw-up the environment, that is your choice. But you pay for the privilege.

Our planet should belong to all of us, not just those who can afford to pollute it. As it is now, those who can afford to buy more things, are doing a greater proportion of damage to our air, our water, our limited resources, our planet, our life-support system. That would like saying: it is okay for a rich person to beat the stuffing out of you, because if you can afford to sue them, they have can afford the compensation. Ignoring the damage done in the meantime.

Fourth: But what about our pensioners? They worked hard all their lives and now they won’t be able to afford heating or food? WRONG. Those on low-incomes, including pensioners will be compensated. And like each and every one of us, as consumers they have a mighty power, it’s called the dollar vote – the power of choice, if they don’t want to pay for the carbon price, all they have to do is choose a different product.

Fifth: Prime Minister Gillard is not personally benefiting from this – We Are. Our children, our grandchildren, our nation, our Pacific neighbours whose countries are disappearing under water, even as I type.

Australia has about 0.3% of the world’s population, but contributes about 1.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions. This puts Australians among the highest per capita emitters (source: Australian Bureau of Statistics). We are the country that is creating the mess, it is our responsibility to clean it up.

For much more detailed – and legally accurate – information, see ACCC – Australian competition & Consumer Commission: Carbon price claims

And if you think you are getting balanced, accurate information from an unbiased media, because media is neutral – read this: How Murdoch’s Aussie Papers Cover Climate Change by NPR in US America
Here is just a taste of that article…

The Australian has aggressively opposed the Green Party’s agenda of addressing climate change through greater regulation and taxation of pollution. Two years ago, the paper vowed in an editorial that it would seek to destroy the party at the ballot box.

text by @redglitterx
use of Sir Henry Parkes image, or the coin, is in no way intended to imply that Parkes, or the treasury would in any way endorse the contents of this post or blog

April 3, 2012

Rob Oakeshott and Greg Hunt disagree about Carbon Pricing



text below if images don’t load


Greg Hunt (@GregHuntMP) is Shadow Minister for Climate Action

Robert Oakeshott (@OakeyMP) is Independent Federal MP for Lyne.

text of image:
@GregHuntMP Interesting to know whether PM agrees with Minister Combet re carbon tax that “It’s not a tax…” Keen to hear today

@OakeyMP @GregHuntMP Greg, please refer me to the Carbon Tax Bill to support your case.I can’t find it.What I can find is ETS Bills,but no CT bills.

@GregHuntMP @OakeyMP the PM conceded it is a tax, 2nd the def’n of such is a fixed price floating volume impost – 3rd changing name does not fool public

@OakeyMP @GregHuntMP ok-so can u actually show me a CT Bill?The only tax-related bill 2 do with carbon I voted for is lifting the tax-free threshold.

@GregHuntMP @OakeyMP if you didn’t realise that the Clean Energy Bill was a carbon tax at $23/tonne, are you willing to withdraw your vote? #itsataxrob

@OakeyMP @GregHuntMP and thanks for at least acknowledging they are not technically tax bills.

added by @redglitterx
additional text by @OakeyMP , @GregHuntMP
use of quotes, images on their tweets, their tweets, is not intended to imply that either endorse the contents of this post or this blog

April 2, 2012

Tony Abbott: If you want to put a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax (video)

Tony Abbott advocating putting a tax on … well, on carbon.

March 29, 2012

‘Freedom of choice does not equate to a right to a government subsidy’


Freedom of Choice is a mantra for the Right – freedom to choose private schools, private hospitals, private transport, and that often means paid for by someone else.

Those on the Right claim they are against socialism, but they are very much for socialism, when it comes to someone else paying their bills.

Them Right are just against socialism when it comes to helping the workers, the old, the sick, the disabled, the returned military, the single mothers – apparently, they don’t deserve government assistance.

And now Tony Abbott’s attempt to woo female voters with his Great Big New Nanny Give-Away is an appeal to the upper classes, because the middle-class and working poor will never be able to afford a nanny in the first place, never mind claiming the tax deduction.

Adele Horin writing in the Sydney Morning Herald (Experts warn of problems subsidising nanny care), looked at one real-life example of how nannies help the ordinary working woman. The example she used was a a group executive at Qantas who is also a non-executive director of Woolworths source here. That just about sums up who Tony Abbott’s target audience is for this policy. If you are not on a board of directors some place, do not think for one minute that Abbott cares for you or your children.

Chris Bowen, Federal ALP member for McMahon – Minister for Immigration and Citizenship has written his opinion on the Nanny-plan as:

The… argument that Mr Abbott puts forward for taxpayer subsidies of nannies is freedom of choice. Families, he says, should be able to choose to use a nanny as a right. We hear similar arguments used by the Liberals to justify their opposition to means testing the private health insurance rebate. But this is a muddled argument. Freedom of choice does not equate to a right to a government subsidy. Having the right to get a nanny is not the same as having the right to have taxpayers pay half the bill. I can’t recall John Stuart Mill arguing that freedom of choice leads to a right to a subsidy paid for by others.

Read more: Nanny state we cannot afford Chris Bowen posted Thursday, 29 March 2012 (emphasis added)

It is easy to see that when Abbott talks about Freedom of choice, he means his choice to lavish the wealth of this country, generated by workers and other taxpayers, upon the upper-classes, if we give him unfettered freedom of being Prime Minister.


image, digital manipulation by @redglitterx
text by @redglitterx
additional text by Chris Bowen: Labor Blog – Nanny state we cannot afford

March 23, 2012

Liberals will always side with vested interests against Working Australians

Bill Shorten MP, in a media release (22 Mar 2012: Liberals warming up for back flip on superannuation), sets out the benefits of the changes to superannuation for low paid Australian workers.

Given a choice between a massive tax cut for billionaire vested interests and a boost of $184 billion in savings for working Australians, the Liberals will always side with vested interests.
Liberals warming up for back flip on superannuation

Yet, this benefit to low-income, working Australians and retirees does not get as much media attention, as billionaires who own media empires and hold press conferences.

Shorten goes on to talk about key Liberals walking away from any changes that benefit low paid Australians.

Shadow Finance Minister Andrew Robb slammed the Liberal’s own policy on Sydney radio yesterday, calling their commitment to keep the Labor Government’s historic boost to superannuation a move which will ‘knock the stuffing’ out of employers.

Andrew Robb either supports his party’s policy, or he’s preparing the ground to scrap it – because he clearly can’t have it both ways, Mr Shorten said.
Liberals warming up for back flip on superannuation

The $70Billion budget blackhole of the Liberal Nationals budget will give large tax cuts to billionaires funded by slashing anything that will benefit working Australians, low-income Australians, and self-funded retirees.

text and opinions by @redglitterx
additional text: Bill Shorten from Liberals warming up for back flip on superannuation

March 20, 2012

Men and Women of Australia, we have a MRRT

Senate resumes at 11am today: watch here SENATE

how twitter announced the breaking news of MRRTax

compiled by @redglitterx

March 19, 2012

Penny Wong challenges Tony Abbott’s Budget Black Hole

In her blog on the ALP website, Labor Blog, Penny Wong, the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, questions the Oppositions budget commitments.

An Abbott government would deliver a $9 billion deficit.

Penny Wong writes:

It’s time for Tony Abbott to stop the slogans and the stunts and for the Opposition to be up front with Australians.

More information here: Pre-Budget Deficit – Tony Abbott and the Coalition
also here: Labor Blog: Opposition’s pre-Budget deficit – Penny Wong

image of Penny Wong via the ABC
composition by @redglitterx
text by @redglitterx

March 19, 2012

Ross Gittins, Economist: If you think life is tough now, it will only get worse under an Abbott Coalition

Ross Gittins, the Fairfox economics editor, talks about the effect of surplus-driven economic policies…

How both sides wrecked the tax base – Ross Gittins
19 March 2012

Although Gillard’s desire for a budget surplus in under threat from a wounded tax base…

Gillard’s problems pale in comparison to Tony Abbott’s, with his oddly ideological and populist commitment to rescind both Labor’s carbon tax and its mining tax without rescinding all the tax cuts and spending increases the taxes will pay for.

There seems little doubt Abbott’s term in office would either be marked by an orgy of broken promises or be consumed by agonising over what spending to cut, with eternal lobbying both before and after the fact.

Source: How both sides wrecked the tax base


text by @redglitterx
additional text, Ross Gittins used under Fair Use copywrite