freediver wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 12:53pm:


No - oh dense one. And have you already forgotten  I myself criticized CCP fiscal policy adhering to the PBofC/Treasury who follow current Western economic orthodoxy? 

So.... back to the topic:

Exactly who, and how much, do YOU think should  pay tax, in Oz?

freediver wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 11:18am:


MMm... yeeee-ussssh ... but cunning manipulation would ensure that your 'tax burden' for running this 'business' was minimal... and there's the rub...  it's like house hoarding and all the perks - the only business in town - apart from shareholding etc - that appears to run at a loss year after year and yet still provide a more than adequate income for splendour splashing around....

Mind you - shareholding is more RISKY than house hoarding - there is always the chance that your Gordon Gecko will crash the company into a wall and be forced to exit with only a few tens of millions or that over-stretching their imagination beyond their capabilities will get 'management' to spread too widely and in the wrong areas and undermine their central purpose ... now what kind of mo-ron thinks that investing in Palestinian war bonds will prop up their New York insurance company, for instance?   ... or that entering the same market, as I've seen companies do, where the exploiters of labour on 'contracts' undercut by up to 80%, and imagine that somehow your full paying group will compete???

House hoarding, on the other hand, is propped up by the banks and by governments who have a self-interest in it!!!  It will never fail! as long as politicians benefit from it as long as they permit banks to run rough-shod over normal home buyers (a 'business plan' doesn't suffer divorce, sickness, injury, downturn in income, job collapse, national economic collapse, half income vanishing to establish family, death and so forth... a 'business plan' lives like the cancer it is - FOREVER!).

Somebody mentioned contractors ... well - unless reinforced in the, for example, building industry by your despised Unions, most of them would be in a freefall free-for-all with 'management' intent on cutting costs before they cut investors' throats and 'go bust' right on 'end-of-construction', and leave town owing banks and other millions... and thus would be forever trying to squeeze more jobs in to make ends meet while effectively going out feet first...... more jobs at lower profitability does not equate to prosperity... tell it to the workers... the 'dumb cattle' so despised out there who prop up the country.....

What makes you imagine that any single word of that supports any single stance of Albo or his like, who benefit mightily from all those wrongs?

People's Rights Forever!  And Justice For All!!

** what part of 'for example' do you find difficult to swallow?  Some here and elsewhere must be twelve years old the way they think and assume they know everything.... for example - what kind of mo-ron would even suggest handing to the Victorian Abos the profits from renewable energy sources being set up?  WADR - some dopey overpaid Labor sheila with a foreign name and face.... FFS.  Re-open the asylums ............... ten seconds in the country and know it all.... Jesus...

John Smith wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 1:42pm:


Was it you who said they should be paying tax, even if that would mean their net income goes negative?

freediver wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 2:40pm:


Yes, they should pay more tax. And I say that as a small business owner and a beneficiary of the current system. 

freediver wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 3:32pm:


Are you incapable of commenting without pretending someone said something other than what they said? That must be the simpleton in you shining through.

John Smith wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 3:43pm:



John,
stop being a recalcitrant.   

There's a lot you don't notice Monk.

freediver wrote on Apr 27^th, 2024 at 5:24pm:



As opposed to you who sees comments that aren't there?