Twiggy sticks a great big log up Rudd

[GuruJane]

Politics is obviously a new concept to you...

Government Spokesman (eg Craig Emerson, Nick Sherry, Paul Howes):

Blah blah blah Clive Palmer blah blah blah lying blah blah blah 15 cents tax blah blah blah non renewable resoruces blah blah blah government blah blah right thing blah blah lying blah blah Clive Palmer

Opposition spokesperson (novice backbenchers up)

But why has the government declared war on the mining companies who underpin the prosperity of the country and saved us from the recession?

Govt spokesperson:

Blah blah blah, Clive Palmer blah blah lying blah blah non renewable blah blah belong to all Australians blah blah fair share ..

Opp spokesperson:

What about the fishing industry? What about old growth forests? Shouldn't they pay more?

Govt spokesperson:

Er... er ...er ... Clive Palmer blah blah blah lying blah blah blah ...

Opp spokesperson:

But why HAS the government gone to war with the miners?

etc etc

 

[King Elvis]

To be fair, that hasn't been Rudd's reponse in the last two days, he instead decided to bring up WorkChoices and claim that Abbott will re-implement it, close to a dozen times.

 

[GuruJane]

To be fair, that hasn't been Rudd's reponse in the last two days, he instead decided to bring up WorkChoices and claim that Abbott will re-implement it, close to a dozen times.

Except that in the strange logic of Lefty luvvies it will serve Labor right if Abbott gets in because they have all voted for the greens and wiped the Labor primary vote. That wot gives them the buzz.

Ergo, the more they hear the word Abbott the more they salivate over Labor's punishment.

Left luvvies get off on revenge not rational decision making
They also like self flagellation.

 

[medusala]

I see how this works, you make up stories and hope you don't get caught out-see your statements re GST spending and the projected net debt levels being $200 billion (here is a hint it is less than half that amount but you should have known that).

You accusing others of fabricating, how very amusing. You talking of forward estimates is also amusing given your absurd claims re Howard and mining revenue.

Net debt was projected at over $200bn

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&sid=aM7plM4yZBP4

Net debt will reach A$153.2 billion in fiscal 2013-14, which is less than the A$203.1 billion peak forecast in May.
...........

How about you stop derailing threads.

Defend this tax if you can.

 

[1jasonoz]

You accusing others of fabricating, how very amusing. You talking of forward estimates is also amusing given your absurd claims re Howard and mining revenue.

Net debt was projected at over $200bn

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&sid=aM7plM4yZBP4

Net debt will reach A$153.2 billion in fiscal 2013-14, which is less than the A$203.1 billion peak forecast in May.
...........

How about you stop derailing threads.

Defend this tax if you can.

You are using data that is also out of date-November 2009, why are you not using the latest data from May 2010-you know the May 2010 Budget??

Net debt was projected at over $200bn

Yes over 1 year ago, which has been updated twice-but certain liberal supporters who struggle with basic economics don't know what an economic update is it seems.

Defend this tax if you can

Defend this tax no thanks, this tax is a lemon and should as i have said since the first day it was proposed be changed to be more in line with the MCA proposal.

You talking of forward estimates is also amusing given your absurd claims re Howard and mining revenue.

Got a link to this claim of yours or will you refuse to provide a link as per your usual?

 

[medusala]

Got a link to this claim of yours or will you refuse to provide a link as per your usual?

Everyone on here is well aware of how you lied re the amount Howard received from the mining boom and how you absurdly used the forward estimated for years he wasnt in power (and the revenue in any event was not received). I linked to Treasury which specifically stated the figure was $80bn odd.

Morgs said the figure had been put at 200bn. He was correct. It had. Treasury changes estimates until the cash is actually received.

That is why they are called forward estimates.

Since you received such an utter towelling on the previous thread as per above I thought you may have grasped this by now.

Clearly I was wrong.

Now how about you stop derailing threads and stop stalking other posters who actually have a clue about economics.


http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/con...p1_bst5-02.htm

The terms of trade boom is estimated to generate $87 billion in tax revenue over the five years to the end of 2008‑09, with $33 billion of that in 2008‑09 alone (see Chart A). The terms of trade boom is estimated to contribute 11 per cent of tax revenue in 2008‑09.

 

[1jasonoz]

Everyone on here is well aware of how you lied re the amount Howard received from the mining boom and how you absurdly used the forward estimated for years he wasnt in power (and the revenue in any event was not received). I linked to Treasury which specifically stated the figure was $80bn odd.

Morgs said the figure had been put at 200bn. He was correct. It had. Treasury changes estimates until the cash is actually received.

That is why they are called forward estimates.

Since you received such an utter towelling on the previous thread as per above I thought you may have grasped this by now.

Clearly I was wrong.

Now how about you stop derailing threads and stop stalking other posters who actually have a clue about economics.

Everyone on here is well aware of how you lied re the amount Howard received from the mining boom and how you absurdly used the forward estimated for years he wasnt in power (and the revenue in any event was not received). I linked to Treasury which specifically stated the figure was $80bn odd.

Got a link to your claims that i used projected revenue from after 2007 in my figures as you are claiming-or will you once again refuse to supply links to your fabrications?

Morgs said the figure had been put at 200bn. He was correct. It had. Treasury changes estimates until the cash is actually received.

No Morgoth claimed the current projected net debt level was $200 billion, and has recently based the governemnts interest payments on this incorrect figure, i told him and you this figure is well over 12 months out of date, and has been updated not once but twice but that seems beyond you both.

The rest is your usual response when requested to provide links to your claims and you refuse to.

 

[medusala]

No Morgoth claimed the current projected net debt level was $200 billion,

No he didnt. See post #459. Where does it say current?

The rest is your usual response when requested to provide links to your claims and you refuse to.

You arent even fit to be the water carrier of any economics discussion. I provided (once again) the link from Treasury refuting your nonsense.

The others are all in the relevant threads. Use the search function.

Why do you feel the need to attempt to derail all these threads?

At least the other fanbois generally stick to the topic.

 

[1jasonoz]

No he didnt. See post #459. Where does it say current?



You arent even fit to be the water carrier of any economics discussion. I provided (once again) the link from Treasury refuting your nonsense.

The others are all in the relevant threads. Use the search function.

Why do you feel the need to attempt to derail all these threads?

At least the other fanbois generally stick to the topic.

No he didnt. See post #459. Where does it say current?

You mean post #459 in which he first posted net debt figures that i pointed out in my reply were 12 months out of date???

You arent even fit to be the water carrier of any economics discussion

. Interesting comments from someone who thinks 2 units of economics at uni makes him an economist!!

I provided (once again) the link from Treasury refuting your nonsense.

No you scutteled back in after i had answered and changed your post after i had responded to your orginal post!

The others are all in the relevant threads.

Like these??

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14064327&postcount=99
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14006797&postcount=91
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14007331&postcount=92

Use the search function.

Interesting remarks considering everytime i ask you to provide links to your claims you refuse to!

Why do you feel the need to attempt to derail all these threads?

I believe your the poster who has rushed into this thread with your balaclava on and are derailing the thread by having to fight for another poster as he can't!

At least the other fanbois generally stick to the topic

Yes those fanboys as you call yourself who comes into a thread on the Monoply Telstra is and then posts anti-union rubbish post after post to derail the thread-nothing unusual from you or you like.

 

[tandino]

The Feds current position (as budgeted) is only to cover royalties that existed at the time of the announcement (2 May) to the rate that existed at that date.

They further allow that proposed royalty changes already in the public arena (aimed at the changes likely in WA in particular) may be included in the government credit for royalties paid.

In other words, the answer is maybe or maybe not...

It's something that interests me.

You can imagine the states bumping up their royalty revenue intake knowing full well that the Commonwealth are going to cover a large portion of it.

And there's nothing stopping them doing it either.

 

[Eagle87]

It's something that interests me.

You can imagine the states bumping up their royalty revenue intake knowing full well that the Commonwealth are going to cover a large portion of it.

And there's nothing stopping them doing it either.

The Feds have made it pretty clear that the only royalties that will be credited are those in existence at the date of the announcement at the levels at that date. They will consider increases that have been in the public arena before that date (WA's long discussed removal of concessions on certain projects AND WA's proposed royalty increase would be the big issues there...

Future increases beyond those are outside the Feds royalty credit.

Nothing stops the States increasing the rates, but the Feds can (and will) restrict the credit.

 

[tandino]

The Feds have made it pretty clear that the only royalties that will be credited are those in existence at the date of the announcement at the levels at that date. They will consider increases that have been in the public arena before that date (WA's long discussed removal of concessions on certain projects AND WA's proposed royalty increase would be the big issues there...

Future increases beyond those are outside the Feds royalty credit.

Nothing stops the States increasing the rates, but the Feds can (and will) restrict the credit.

So the purpose of this rebate, offsetting royalties for a rent tax, can never be set in stone, because the states have the right (in the Constitution, no less) to charge royalties on resources owned by the states.

It will be interesting to see how this aspect plays out.

 

[morgoth]

You provided a link to an article from over 1 year ago that is out of date!!



You mean like providing you the link not once but twice to the up to date net debt figures???



You mean like pointing out to you that your figures are 12 months out of date, and have been updated not once but twice since your article-like that??



What it-providing links to the most up to date data to correct your mistake in publishing figures that are out of date by over 12 months??



You haven't doneanything-you won't answer questions when asked about how old are you if you have never lived under a ALP Budget surplus, or why you refuse to provide the latest net debt position rather than out of date data!



Once again i can show you lots of reports into the 3 stooges budget response.



What?



It is when you make a statement based upon your age!!



When have you asked me to provide you a link to a labor surplus where they have not taken over mid term (whatever that is meant to mean)?

Address the issues Jason or STFU.

1. Link and quotes re net debt. I know you have searched the net, you cant find it.

2. Just link labor budget surpluses where they have been in power for a full year of the budget period. Its a pretty short list, one they have hardly ever been in power and two they specialise in deficits. Once again, you can't find one or you would have used it by now

Your anal nature betrays you, you are very good with stats and linking in information, the fact you cannot find it and resort to Lenore Taylor articles says there is nothing out there re the Libs budget reply. The media were more interested in crying over being made to wait 30 mins v actually looking at the detail. Your bad luck I guess.

In the thread on the main board, minging tax theft, you told me that the RSPT does not apply to LNG.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=702912&page=5

LNG projects are already subjected to a 40% Resource rent tax, and have done so for the past 23years.

You were wrong, you did not understand this tax and made a lot of incorrect assumptions, you still do.

It clearly does which is why so many projects are now in question. WPL has stated Pluto would not have gone ahead under the RSPT.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-says-don-voelte/story-e6frg9ef-1225869700946

It is a crap tax, the sad part is the miners would have supported tax reform, would have been prepared to pay more, if consultation had occurred. Instead we stand here today with a key part of our economy in turmoil, our international reputation in decline and a PM who refuses to budge.

At least I can say I did not vote for this clown, this is all the ALP's doing, they have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[morgoth]

Hmm sounds like the Chinese might actually be doing what Rudd accused them of. But they are rat ****ing him in the key state of QLD.

Front page of the Fin Review today (can't link) reports that the Chinese are poised to walk away from a $3 billion bauxite mine. It clearly states that the Govts proposed tax has undermined the economics of the already troubled project.

Me thinks the Chinese are going to make Rudd pay.

 

[King Elvis]

So the purpose of this rebate, offsetting royalties for a rent tax, can never be set in stone, because the states have the right (in the Constitution, no less) to charge royalties on resources owned by the states.

It will be interesting to see how this aspect plays out.

Something that hasn't received enough attention yet; this new tax is technically unConstitutional, WA have already alluded to the fact that they will challenge it in the High Court if it goes ahead in it's current format.

 

[morgoth]

Rudd's latest **** up.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...towns-kevin-rudd/story-e6frg6n6-1225877412868

KEVIN Rudd has accused mining companies of abandoning their habit of previous decades of helping fund services in mining towns.

This is true, mining companies used to do this. But a Treasurer by the name of Paul Keating put an end to this when he introduced the FBT making this taxable. It then became cheaper to adopt the fly in fly out approach.

Who is advising this clown? Does he really think that the people he is arguing against have NFI? He is up against some of the most talented business people in Australia with an army of accountants, lawyers etc at their disposal.

What has he got a bunch of under 30 whizz kids who don't even know the history of mining. Nice one Kev, another day another example of just how dumb you are.

 

[The Punter]

Time for unions to be taxed.

Fairness can be achieved by simply banning organisations from contributing to political parties. This way, only natural persons (the legal term) would be able to legally donate to registered political parties.

 

[evo]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...towns-kevin-rudd/story-e6frg6n6-1225877412868

KEVIN Rudd has accused mining companies of abandoning their habit of previous decades of helping fund services in mining towns. .

errrr Kevin, I don't know how to break the news to you but this is what happens when democratic socialism is introduced. Your team strives to make this strictly the government's purvey, remember?. Maybe you should of thought of this before you wrote that woeful essay critiuquing Hayek.

Hehe, the man doesn't even understand the framework of his own Fabian ideology. Either that, or he is full of shit.

 

[King Elvis]

While Mr Rudd has previously justified the introduction of the tax on a fairness argument - that Australians deserve a greater share of the returns from the nation's mineral wealth - he argued today the new money was necessary because mining companies had reduced their own spending on infrastructure associated with their developments.

He's such a wimp.

Yet another ignorant liar below; this one a former Labor Minister.

Earlier this morning the West Australian MP Gary Gray dismissed a stinging attack on the Labor government by his father-in-law and former Hawke government Minister Peter Walsh over the tax.

The Australian reported today that Mr Walsh, a former resources minister, was unhappy with the policy development and level of consultation behind the Rudd government's 40 per cent profits tax on the resources sector.

Mr Walsh urged Mr Rudd to follow the example of the Labor government in 1984 when it introduced the petroleum resources rent tax after it held extensive consultation with industry leading to exemptions, cuts in proposed rates and a lifting of the threshold at which the tax took effect.

“They should have followed the same pattern,” Mr Walsh said.

“But there's an obstacle to that, and that obstacle is Kevin Rudd.”

 

[tandino]

errrr Kevin, I don't know how to break the news to you but this is what happens when democratic socialism is introduced. Your team strives to make this strictly the government's purvey, remember?. Maybe you should of thought of this before you wrote that woeful essay critiuquing Hayek.

Hehe, the man doesn't even understand the framework of his own Fabian ideology. Either that, or he is full of shit.

He's starting to lose sight of his own values and beliefs.

 

[medusala]

errrr Kevin, I don't know how to...want to part nationalise the mining industry.

 

[morgoth]

He does not get it, he offers $400m for infrastructure which will not be required if the mines are not there.

$400m v $6b plus in tax in perpertuity. Yeah good deal Kev, that will win them over. Once again, who is advising this idiot? He is not dealing with the Dr Jolly, Dawson's and Shism of this world who literally think his shit don't stink.

He is dealing with people who can think, do not like him or trust him and will not fall for spin and token efforts. His tax is an abomination.

 

[Freo Big Fella]

A couple of thousand out protesting Kev at the WA Press Club today. Not your usual rentacrowd either - plenty of business types came down from the resources quarter.

They're going to be wiped out over here, people just aren't interested in the usual excuses for leeching and cash grabbing anymore. The Luvvies will probably get Parke over the line in Freo, but Smith, Gray and Jackson should all be very worried.

 

[morgoth]

A couple of thousand out protesting Kev at the WA Press Club today. Not your usual rentacrowd either - plenty of business types came down from the resources quarter.

They're going to be wiped out over here, people just aren't interested in the usual excuses for leeching and cash grabbing anymore. The Luvvies will probably get Parke over the line in Freo, but Smith, Gray and Jackson should all be very worried.

QLD has been a bit behind but with projects starting to be postponed are getting very worried (massive LNG projects are in question and Bligh is trying to get them exempted) and the anger is starting to build. Rudd is toast, the ALP's only hope is to boot him, bring in a new leader who can say they never wanted it and hope that appeases the voters.

SA is also very worried re Olympic Dam expansion and it is literally a gun BHP can hold to Rudd's head. Without ODE, SA has no real growth.

 

[Grin]

A couple of thousand out protesting Kev at the WA Press Club today. Not your usual rentacrowd either - plenty of business types came down from the resources quarter.

They're going to be wiped out over here, people just aren't interested in the usual excuses for leeching and cash grabbing anymore. The Luvvies will probably get Parke over the line in Freo, but Smith, Gray and Jackson should all be very worried.

Yep.

Apparently Australia is a communist dictatorship.

Twiggy must think Liberal party fanboys are even dumber than Abbott does. And Abbott obviously thinks their pretty stupid and easily misled.

Unfortunately it looks like Twiggy's right