By Amy Coopes (AFP) – 1 hour ago

SYDNEY — Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard on Thursday introduced contentious legislation for a one-off tax to help pay for devastating floods which killed 35 people and swamped thousands of homes.

The flood levy, to apply to middle and higher income earners, is expected to raise some Aus$1.8 billion of the Aus$5.6 billion needed for reconstruction after record deluges engulfed vast parts of mining and farming state Queensland.

Roads, railways and bridges were destroyed by the torrent, which killed dozens of people and brought the coal mining industry to a standstill. It is expected to cut 0.5 percentage points off economic growth in the current fiscal year.

But Labor leader Gillard's one-seat majority may be tested by the legislation, as the conservative opposition favours budget cuts including slashing foreign aid to pay for the damage. Key independents have also raised objections.

Gillard told parliament rebuilding would be one of the largest peacetime infrastructure projects ever undertaken by an Australian government and the levy was "an expression of goodwill" to the victims.

"I understand that Australians are under cost of living pressure, I understand that," the prime minister said.

"But understanding those cost of living pressures we also believe it is right, at a time that the nation faces the kind of challenges we see from the summer of disaster that we've just lived through, to ask Australians to make a contribution too."

Out of six cross-benchers, only Queensland independent Bob Katter, who refused to support Gillard in forming a government after last year's election deadlock, said he would back the levy.

"They've got me boxed in, haven't they? I mean, we've had colossal losses," the colourful Katter said. "Our situation is depressing, dismal and disastrous at the present moment."

Australia has previously used one-off levies to fund a gun buyback after a 1996 massacre in Tasmania, to protect staff entitlements after the 2001 collapse of airline Ansett, and to support the dairy and sugar industries.

Flood victims and those hit by last week's monster cyclone which tore across the northeast coast are exempt from the flood tax, which will only apply in the 2011-12 year and will be voted on in a few weeks.

"The package that I have outlined as prime minister is the right package for this nation," said Gillard, urging the opposition to put aside "petty politicking".

"We are facing a national disaster, it's a national challenge and it's a national responsibility."

Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved. More »



http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5irfXM4kaLq8aP2RJYCF3454X8fCw?docId=CNG.273270170b9bb2d7b2be0a00f1d8156f.151

Why the bugger does this deserve its own thread when it could have easily been an update to the 2000 others on the same topic.

Purely lazy mellie, and its just spamming and trolling.  Show some courtsey for your fellow board members and post updates instead of multi-threads for which on the politics board you are a serial offender.

Verge wrote on Feb 10^th, 2011 at 4:34pm:

Why the bugger does this deserve its own thread when it could have easily been an update to the 2000 others on the same topic. Purely lazy mellie, and its just spamming and trolling.  Show some courtsey for your fellow board members and post updates instead of multi-threads for which on the politics board you are a serial offender.

well probably because it happened today and not last week..lol.

anyway I see on tonights news Alan Wilkie says the govt has unlimited funds it can draw on for the Qld flood..

so it strikes me as this levy is more about making Labor look good with a surplus..after all it was a knee jerk plot as per usual and then she brings in the big guns from the Libs to make sure none of those nasties that ripped off all their other programs come out and bite them again...

although isnt she still denying that happened?.. I dont know anymore.

more twists and turns than "Days of our Lives"

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/taxpayers-foot-the-bill-for-queenslands-incompetence/story-e6frezz0-1226000698050

THERE'S a rotting smell beginning to come out of Queensland, and it isn't from debris left by the floods or Cyclone Yasi.
It has more to do with the Queensland Labor Government's excuses for failing to take out insurance against natural disasters and the federal Labor Government's determination to impose a distorted tax on the nationto pay for Queensland's huge mistake.

On Thursday, Prime Minister Julia Gillard said Queensland's lack of insurance cover for its assets was "a matter for Queensland".

Bollocks to that idea, when she is also whacking a tax on Australians to pay for Queensland's failure to insure its own infrastructure.

It was the only major state not to have insured public assets with a comprehensive disaster cover obtained on the international re-insurance market.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/taxpayers-foot-the-bill-for-queenslands-incompetence/story-e6frezz0-1226000698050

Sources within the Queensland Government say the failure to take out insurance cover is symptomatic of its financial mismanagement.

They claim the Queensland Government arranges insurance for all infrastructure as it is being built, but ceases insuring it when construction is completed.

Treasurer Fraser offers the weak excuse that insurance would cost too much and is not necessary because of natural-disaster relief arrangements made with the Federal Government.

But there's nothing special about the disaster relief arrangements - they apply to every state, and every other state also takes out insurance.

Further, the arrangements are just that - arrangements, not agreements. They're ad hoc, and rely on the Federal Government to initiate them.

If the Queensland Government had managed its insurance program responsibly, it would gave been able to re-insure and aggregate its risk insurance, thus accessing lower-cost insurance.

Instead, it is relying on an arrangement that may or may not be agreed when it is needed.

Queensland's credit rating has been downgraded, and this financial mismanagement increases its fiscal volatility, thus increasing the financial risk and increasing the likelihood of a further review of Queensland's credit rating.

It is not in the Federal Government's interest to point this out, as Queensland Premier Anna Bligh has become the new Labor poster girl through her tireless appearances as the nation's newest emergency services and weather spokesperson.

Although her media performances have dazzled some star-struck commentators always on the hunt for the latest Labor messiah, the hard questions have not been asked.

Bligh or her Treasurer must tell the nation what quotes the Queensland Government has received from the insurance market, when they were received and whether the Government has reviewed them recently.

Australians also need to know how much more they will be paying to meet the costs associated with damaged, uninsured government infrastructure in Queensland, as compared with the costs of damaged but insured government infrastructure in Victoria.

It is ridiculously arrogant for federal Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese to declare that it is none of our business when he and his leader have been so quick to publicly display their generosity towards Queensland with our money without these basic questions being answered.

The admirable speed with which Gillard assured Queenslanders that their damage costs would be met reeks of political opportunism.

I think that the above article sums it up.........

We don't want to pay more money to QLD to rebuild it. WQe have already done that once........

You pay if you want too.......

beware wrote on Feb 10^th, 2011 at 6:27pm:

I think that the above article sums it up......... We don't want to pay more money to QLD to rebuild it. WQe have already done that once........ You pay if you want too.......

precisely even the fund raised money is going to those who didnt insure first... seems to me its all wrong and one sided...

I dont begrudge anyone anything but really to punish those that insure and bend over backwards and then make them pay a second time with a levy.. plus when they get their new insurance forms it will have an added cost to it.. isnt in my book.. FAIR..

and as for making the public only the selected few pay for something that the Qld govt is responsible for through sheer bloody bad management stinks..

and most Qldrs wont be asked to contribute... what the hell is going on.

I am a pensioner and struggle to pay bills and eat.. yet I insure my own property I go without other things to do so... whats with a GOVT that doesnt see fit to so the same.

cods wrote on Feb 10^th, 2011 at 7:02pm:

beware wrote on Feb 10th, 2011 at 6:27pm: I think that the above article sums it up......... We don't want to pay more money to QLD to rebuild it. WQe have already done that once........ You pay if you want too....... precisely even the fund raised money is going to those who didnt insure first... seems to me its all wrong and one sided... I dont begrudge anyone anything but really to punish those that insure and bend over backwards and then make them pay a second time with a levy.. plus when they get their new insurance forms it will have an added cost to it.. isnt in my book.. FAIR.. and as for making the public only the selected few pay for something that the Qld govt is responsible for through sheer bloody bad management stinks.. and most Qldrs wont be asked to contribute... what the hell is going on. I am a pensioner and struggle to pay bills and eat.. yet I insure my own property I go without other things to do so... whats with a GOVT that doesnt see fit to so the same.

Cods, I think you will find that many of these flood-affected people did have house and/or contents insurance - it's just that most insurers either didn't offer flood insurance at all or the flood insurance component offered was limited to a token amount (one only covers a limit of $15,000 with a $500 excess) or that definitions were ambiguously worded so that insurers could find a convenient way of avoiding claims...

I'm not sure about the accuracy of this, but I heard that only about 20% of those people whose homes and/or contents were insured will be covered for the damage caused by these floods - so the vast majority of the flood victims will not be covered by insurance...

By my reckoning, when 4/5 insured households don't have flood coverage - then the main problem is most likely at the level of the insurers and not the householders...

As for the cost that the QLD Govt would have incurred each year to obtain natural disaster insurance: does anyone have any relevant figures from QLD or other states?

Also, what excesses typically apply to such insurance cover?

Seeing that many suburbs flooded in Brisbane would have been below the 100 year flood level I doubt that they would have been offered insurance or if they were it would have come at a high price.

However.....they would have known that it was below the 100 year flood and were therefore NOT protected by their Government and building rules or they were just outrightly dumb and believed that it could not flood again!!

Surely a Queenslander knows that parts of Brisbane and  the state have always flooded....SURELY THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THE GREENS AND SUCH that it would never happen again!!

beware wrote on Feb 10^th, 2011 at 7:58pm:

Seeing that many suburbs flooded in Brisbane would have been below the 100 year flood level I doubt that they would have been offered insurance or if they were it would have come at a high price. However.....they would have known that it was below the 100 year flood and were therefore NOT protected by their Government and building rules or they were just outrightly dumb and believed that it could not flood again!! Surely a Queenslander knows that parts of Brisbane and  the state have always flooded....SURELY THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THE GREENS AND SUCH that it would never happen again!!

I think you will find that many people genuinely believed that the relatively-new Wivenhoe Dam would protect them better than it did...

What worries me is that where I live the river has not flooded since  about 1990. In that year we had 3/4 massive floods because they had to let water out of Warragamba Dam .

So what if we have to pay for the cost of QLD...... will we have to pay again and again!!

And by the way...you cannot get finance in NSW on properties below the 100 year flood level and you are NOT allowed to build below this level!!

Did I see a QLD registration plate called ....

    THE SMART STATE


Surely I did not read that!!LOL

beware wrote on Feb 10^th, 2011 at 8:06pm:

Did I see a QLD registration plate called ....     THE SMART STATE Surely I did not read that!!LOL

Friday, February 11, 2011 » 06:50am


LIVE News: Watch Now    
Share|

Flood levy goodwill by Aussies -
It could be a month before a decision is made over the government's flood levy after the Opposition referred it to a parliamentary committee for scrutiny.

The coalition has accused the federal government of using the proposed flood levy to unfairly tax superannuation payouts.

New South Wales Liberal MP Russell Matheson says he's been contacted by a police officer who's due to retire next financial year with a lump sum superannuation payout.

Mr Matheson says the man faces a six-thousand-500 dollar flood levy bill.

Opposition leader Tony Abbot says Julia Gillard had compared the cost of the levy to a cup of coffee a week for most people, but says the PM's misleading taxpayers and what's supposed to be a cup of coffee becomes a coffee machine in the case of some taxpayers.

Ms Gillard introduced to parliament yesterday, draft laws establishing a flood reconstruction levy, describing it as an expression of goodwill between Australians.

Taxpayers earning more than $50,000 will pay a progressive levy during 2011/12 and the government estimates will raise $1.8 billion to help the commonwealth pay its $5.6 billion share of the repair bill.
;) ;)

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/8816234/flash-flood-hits-warburton/

http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/110211/mike_1_16l8otc-16l8ote.jpg

An inland wave hit the remote community of Warburton yesterday, damaging about 15 homes.
Heavy rain caused a flash flood that forced authorities to evacuate 60 residents from their homes in the town, 920km north east of Kalgoorlie.
Two people were rescued from a four-wheel-drive vehicle stranded in water up to its windows in the main street, as water up to 2m deep flowed through town.
There were no reports of major injuries.
Local worker Mike Harper said the main road past the town had turned into a river.
"The water was so strong, it came out of nowhere," he said. "I spoke to one bloke in town who said about two feet of water had flowed through his home."
The Weather Bureau said 88mm of rain fell in the town in 11 hours from 9am yesterday.
Warburton has a population of about 500.

Flash flood hits WarburtonNICK SAS, The West Australian
February 11, 2011, 5:32 am
Thats YESTERDAY as in YESTERDAY

Maybe IF we had a mining tax you could have save ink mellie....

Have you seen todays news;
Rio Tinto today announced a 122% increase in its profit to $14,300,000,000. Which is more than many countrys total GDP.


'I am sorry but I consider a 122% increase in profit to $14.3 Billion Dollars nothing short of obscene and a major con of the Australian People.

So, who will share in this astronomical profit ?. Shareholders only. The country of which they mine a non renewable resource has been well and truly taken for a ride by Mining Conglomerates and their mega wealthy owners.

Obviously the mining industry knew full well that their profits were going to be Super Obscene and as a result spending a few hundred million to stop tax being imposed on many billions was good management on their behalf.

After release of these results, I would like the coalition and the mining industry, to please put forward their argument, once again, '


~quoted from  cafewhispers

cool more taxes

The Prime Minister should be indicted at the international court for imposing this Tax on Aussie disaster victims :)

Prevailing wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

The Prime Minister should be indicted at the international court for imposing this Tax on Aussie disaster victims :)

I  quite agree, particularly when we have other avenues available to us...it's a pittance of a tax, but it's a tax none the less, and just her way of asserting her authority, without having to dip into funds elsewhere that have probably already been squandered.

Ie... The Terrorist tax Howard imposed in the event tragedy struck which it hasn't.  
Canberra have quite a few hollow logs they could tap, if they really wanted to without raising tension in the community, the question is....who on earth would impose a tax like this after a 'natural disaster' and why, if there was a way of avoiding it?

I agree with Tony Abbott, charity begins at home, and whilst it was a lovely gesture of Gillard having promised Indonesia $5 million for their Muslim schools, what about our own schools who are still waiting completion of the school building program she started, though failed to complete?


Like everything else this government have started, though failed to complete, it too is on the back burner.

::)

And under a Labor government we can all agree... Another day another tax!

::)

_________________

I have been monitoring call-back radio,(various stations all over Australia) and can assure you, this is the general consensus among the Australian public,their horrified to have learned she's covertly allocated $5 million for Indonesia's schools, this and has chosen to burden Australian victims of natural disaster with a tax instead of doing what Howard did and foot the bill under a more socially responsible government.

I guess, we can expect another new tax, whenever disaster strikes?

The Commonwealth bank donated $100 million towards Cyclone Larry when Howard was in, what have they donated this time?

:) Why are our corps getting greedier under a Labor government?

Let's be HONEST, here ...

The pros and cons of this levy have BUGGER ALL to do with AFFORDABILITY to pay - but based on "principle and POLITICAL IDEOLOGY

Up to 50K pa you pay NOTHING
The AVERAGE income of 65K pa, you pay under 21 CENTS a day

http://resources.news.com.au/files/2011/01/29/1225996/731328-floods-document.pdf


I would challenge ANYONE to declare this levy will affect their finances ?




It should ALSO be noted ...

This TWENTY ONE cents a day is 7% of the value of the last range of tax CUTS under this government

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 3:16pm:

Let's be HONEST, here ... The pros and cons of this levy have BUGGER ALL to do with AFFORDABILITY to pay - but based on "principle and POLITICAL IDEOLOGY Up to 50K pa you pay NOTHING The AVERAGE income of 65K pa, you pay under 21 CENTS a day http://resources.news.com.au/files/2011/01/29/1225996/731328-floods-document.pdf I would challenge ANYONE to declare this levy will affect their finances ? It should ALSO be noted ... This TWENTY ONE cents a day is 7% of the value of the last range of tax CUTS under this government

So I take it you will be making voluntary payments throughout the year then to prove it makes not difference.

wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 10:27am:

Maybe IF we had a mining tax you could have save ink mellie.... Have you seen todays news; Rio Tinto today announced a 122% increase in its profit to $14,300,000,000. Which is more than many countrys total GDP. 'I am sorry but I consider a 122% increase in profit to $14.3 Billion Dollars nothing short of obscene and a major con of the Australian People. So, who will share in this astronomical profit ?. Shareholders only. The country of which they mine a non renewable resource has been well and truly taken for a ride by Mining Conglomerates and their mega wealthy owners. Obviously the mining industry knew full well that their profits were going to be Super Obscene and as a result spending a few hundred million to stop tax being imposed on many billions was good management on their behalf. After release of these results, I would like the coalition and the mining industry, to please put forward their argument, once again, ' ~quoted from  cafewhispers

Im more interested to see if the ALP has the balls to put it to the floor.  Afterall its not about the Coaltions objections if the ALP wont even put it to a vote is it.

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/3865/vzh9ld1297416000.jpg

Here, watch the UK edit...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12391827

The flag was a nice touch  wasn't it...

;)
...........

Or compare with this... the Australian edit,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqgcmG0BAjI


Did any of you spot the difference between the above 2 clips?


8-)

Quivering fragile voice, but not a tear in sight!

8-)...  Have any of you ever tried to hold back a cry?

When your throat tightens, starts to hurt, and the tears start flooding before you can even think about blinking?


I will conclude....Labors leaders must have all had tear duct surgery, like Rudd, there were no tears, just the illusion there might have been,
if only, the tears followed through after the quivering voice.

In the footage that Australians were shown on TV, and even on youtube re-play ....  was there any hint of the Australian flag?

Now compare this to the footage that was sent and shown to the UK, ...

Ooops!

8-) That was a rather long, and extended 'quiver', one patriotically clutching the Australian flag, the other without.

Powerful symbolism indeed...

To cry, is to be human.
To clutch ones national flag is to be patriotic.

To clutch the flag and cry at the same time is to be passionate about ones nation of people, when we all know she has her black-heart set on our becoming a socialist republic, complete with new flag and president Shorten, minus the Union Jack.



...........

Sorry, I just couldn't help but marvel at the irony of the TV footage I saw on several channels here in Australia, where there be not a flag in sight.

What are they/she saying?

Is a Gillard-Labor government gradually trying to distance themselves even further from the Australian flag, after already having changed their party logo?

I will just add, GG Quentin Bryce, her Husband Michael Bryce Ausflag director and judge,tried to pull this once before...

http://www.ausflag.com.au/launch_at_brisbane_town_hall.asp

If we become a republic, especially under a Labor government, there will be no turning back the clock, and constitutionally speaking we will be royally F&&ed, given all that protects us and stops the rest of this country being sold off at the speed of sound to foreign investors is our protective constitution, Labors ministers have tweaked this many times however, slowly creeping in their desired republic.

Becoming a republic isn't about independence or our having "grown up" as Labor would have us believe, it's about their own corporate autonomy and dictatorship, ...they have achieved this with the state of WA, and have intentions of doing the same to NT more recently.

Yes, we do live under the Southern Cross, and like it or not the British did have a lot to do with founding this great nation of ours, so why remove the Union Jack form the Australian flag, this or go so far as to edit parliamentary footage for Australian viewers only as though being seen crying with it were something to be ashamed of?

Is it?

Was Gillard concerned about offending pro-republican minority voters?

Was she afraid of appearing tokenistic?

My concern is that the footage was edited for Australian viewers, whereas it was delivered to the UK in all it's patriotic 'Union Jack' glory.

She's shallow,two-faced and false.

One parliament for us, another for our commonwealth friends and the mother country it would seem.

Some of you may find this remarkably inconsequential, but for me, it's the little symbolic things like this that lend to our nations overall character.. make us who we are.

Why should we be seen by ourselves as being one thing, yet to others as something different again?

Either we are patriotic and proud of our flag or not.

Time to get real!

The Commonwealth bank donated $1 million under a Howard government towards cyclone Larry, 2005-2006, and despite many large corps having turned over massive profits this year...why have they not helped out?


http://www.commbank.com.au/about-us/news/media-releases/2006/220306-news-cyclonelarry.aspx
Newcrest's profits are up 148pc, but what have they donated?

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/newcrest-half-year-profit-up-148pc/story-e6frea6u-1226004480552?from=public_rss

8-)

So, the rich get richer, while the middle class get taxed?

And Gillard has the hide to boast a socialist-left background?


ahahahaha


;D

Or have they donated, and it's just we haven't been told about it?

8-) Give it some thought guys...

So despite all these corps having turned over massive profits this year, I ask you, what have they donated to the flood appeal, why is the pressure on the public, and the middle class to dig-deep more so than the corps who under a Liberal government were only too happy to donate during hard times before?

;D ...  It's not like they are doing it tough...so what's the problem?

OMG...it just gets better and better....check this out.

The Commonwealth bank donated $1 million towards Cyclone Larry back in 2005/2006, but look how generous "NOT" they have been with the recent events.


Cyclone Larry

http://www.commbank.com.au/about-us/news/media-releases/2006/220306-news-cyclonelarry.aspx

-Vrs-

Recent flood & cyclone disaster...
http://www.commbank.com.au/about-us/news/media-releases/2011/040211-commonwealth-bank-extends-a-billion-flood-assistance-loan-package-to-small-business-fnq.aspx

Lol...they have inadvertently attempted to churn a profit from the disaster, not donate towards it...

;D

I  think you will find that quite a lot have donated

thepremier.qld.gov.au/initiatives/disaster_recovery/donations.aspx

I reckon Com bamk has donated at least $1.35 mill.
Or is that just not enough to stop the bank bashing

Cyclone Larry relief fund.
Submitted: Friday, Apr 07, 2006 at 02:24
Bros 1
CYCLONE FUND APPROACHES $14 MILLION

The Cyclone Larry victim relief fund is rapidly approaching the $14 million mark, with donations today taking the current total to over $13.8 million, Premier Peter Beattie announced today.

Mr Beattie said that National Australia Bank today banked the $635,000 collected from the public through their branches along with a matching contribution of $250,000, taking the total from bank and customers to $885,000.

"I commend NAB staff and customers alike for their efforts, and I can assure them that the victims of Cyclone Larry will benefit from their generosity," Mr Beattie said.

"Today Zinifex Ltd contributed $80,000, and the Redcliffe City Council has donated $15,000.

"Yesterday IGA donated $100,000 as well as $130,000 in food vouchers, BP contributed $80,000, Terry White Chemist and Alphapharm $30,000 and $25,000 respectively, and Roche Mining $20,000.

"The hotline has received 11,975 calls, and there have been 36,431 donations at bank branches.

"Today's donatios have brought the total to $13,812,959.70 - within striking distance of $14 million.

"I again thank all those who've made a donation, and encourage everyone to keep digging deep."

Donations can be made through any Commonwealth Bank branch, the hotline on 1800 150 411 or online www.qld.gov.au.

Major Donors Amt
Commonwealth Government 1,100,000
Queensland Government 1,100,000
Commonwealth Bank of Australia 1,000,000
Westpac ($500k now, $500k in infrastructure) 500,000
BHP Billiton 350,000
NT Government 250,000
NAB plus customer donations- matching donations up to $250,000 885,000
Queensland and NSW Club Industry 200,000
UBS Global Asset Management 200,000
IGA - $100k plus $130k food vouchers 100,000
ANZ 100,000
Macarthur Coal Limited 100,000
RACQ 100,000
Rio Tinto/Comalco Aluminium 100,000
TABCORP 100,000
Victorian Government 100,000
Visy Industries 100,000
XStrata Queensland 100,000
Zinifex Ltd 80,000
Peaody Pacific 75,000
Ports Corporation of Queensland 55,000
Stanwell Corporation 55,000
Bank of Queensland 50,000
BP 50,000
Coles Myer 50,000
Darwin City Council 50,000
Gold Coast City Council 50,000
LMG Charity 50,000
NRMA Insurance Ltd 50,000
Pharmacy Guild of Australia 50,000
Queensland Newspapers 50,000
Suncorp 50,000
Rugby League Crowds (T'ville $32,254.55; Bris $9,752.10) 42,007
Reef Hotel Casino 35,000
Shangri-La, The Marina, Cairns 30,000
Shangri-La International 30,000
Terry White Chemist 30,000
Alphapharm 25,000
Woodside Energy 25,000
Carter & Spencer Group 20,000
Guild Insurance & Financial Services 20,000
Noosa Shire Council 20,000
Roche Mining 20,000
Wilson HTM 20,000
Retravision Qld 16,800
Redcliffe City Council 15,000
Australian Pharmacy professional Conference Delegates 14,000
Advantage Motorcycles Pty Ltd 13,900
Townsville RSL 11,500
The Rivkin Report 10,755
Medtonic Australia 10,444
Australian Stock Exchange 10,000
B&R Enclosures Pty Ltd 10,000
Bloomfield Collieries Pty Limited 10,000
Broncos 10,000
Clayton Utz 10,000
East West International Pty Ltd 10,000
Freehills 10,000
Hyne Timber 10,000
Man Investments Australia 10,000
Muslim Community 10,000
Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd 10,000
Cao Chenxi/Shao Xia 10,000
JF & AM Jones 10,000
LN & JK Collins 10,000
S Gibson 10,000
D O'Shea 10,000
P Santalucia 10,000
S & G Andrejic 10,000
W Brett 10,000

http://www.exploroz.com/Forum/Topic/32625/Cyclone_Larry_relief_fund.aspx

Is there a cyclone levy relief fund a Labor government forgot about still luring about, if so, what's left in it?

Felix wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 4:11pm:

I  think you will find that quite a lot have donated thepremier.qld.gov.au/initiatives/disaster_recovery/donations.aspx

This said, then why the need for a tax, if like last time, it looks as though there will be enough for Bligh to sit on and collect interest for 5 years?

Felix, meet mellie ...

The in-house, "Bullshit Laureate"

Major donations received Premier's Disaster Relief Appeal major donors

BHP Billiton      11,000,000
New Zealand Government      2,283,105
XSTRATA Queensland      2,000,000
Rio Tinto      1,700,000
Commonwealth Bank      1,350,000
Coles      1,000,000
ConocoPhillips      1,000,000
Etihad Airways      1,000,000
Leighton Holdings      1,000,000
Mitsubishi Development Pty Ltd      1,000,000
Origin Energy      1,000,000
Queensland Government      1,000,000
South Australian Government      1,000,000
Tabcorp      1,000,000
Victorian Government      1,000,000
Western Australia Government      1,000,000
Anglo American Plc      820,000
ANZ Bank      500,000
Mitsubishi      500,000
Qantas      500,000
Westfield Ltd      500,000
Westpac & St George Banks      450,000
National Australia Bank      400,000
GM Holden Ltd      350,000
Flannery Foundation      300,000
INPEX Corporation      300,000
Mazda Network      268,000
Medibank      254,235
Australian Leisure and Hospitality Group      250,000
Brisbane Airport Corporation      250,000
Cliffs Natural Resources Pty Ltd      250,000
Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU)      250,000
CSL Limited      250,000
David Jones      250,000
Elsie Cameron Foundation      250,000
Esso Australia Pty Ltd      250,000
ExxonMobil Australia      250,000
Glencore International      250,000
Kellogg Australia      250,000
Macarthur Coal      250,000

And thanks for the link Felix, they haven't been so vocal about alerting the public about these corporate donations this time it seems.

:)

Hey Buzz,

I think me and mellie have met before. some things never change.

Perhaps, some of our big industries just like to do the right thing quietly.

Australia  donated $7.6 million to the US to assist with Hurricane Katrina, but what have the US offered us?

If poor old New Zealand were willing to donate, then why hasn't Obama?

Bush offered to help after Cyclone Larry, (Howard declined, said we were right).....

Have China lent any assistance?

You sure find out who your friends are during hard times, yes?

:)...  It appears, Obamas missing in action.. ;)

But he loaned us his corporate political fund-raising arm Oprah, so for this we should be grateful I guess?

As for donating quietly, lovely theory there Felix, but according to our transparency laws, these government donations have to be declared to the public.

:)

mellie wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 4:18pm:

Felix wrote on Feb 11th, 2011 at 4:11pm: I  think you will find that quite a lot have donated thepremier.qld.gov.au/initiatives/disaster_recovery/donations.aspx This said, then why the need for a tax, if like last time, it looks as though there will be enough for Bligh to sit on and collect interest for 5 years?

How come you repeatedly fail to understand that the appeals are for helping individuals who have been affected by distaster and that the levy is for repairing infrastructure?

Appeals = for people
Levy = for stuff that isnt people - like roads, schools, sewerage works, drains, govt buildings etc

It's quite simple really.
Although obviously not for you.

The Queen and prince Charles have made individual 'secret' donations it appears, but is this ethical, given all government donations are supposed to be made public?


Quote:

LONDON—Buckingham Palace says Queen Elizabeth II has made a private donation to help relief efforts during the floods in Australia. The palace said in a statement Wednesday that the funds will go to the Premier of Queensland’s flood relief appeal. It did not say how much the donation was. The queen said last month in a statement that she has been following the news of the floods in Brisbane with great concern, and extended her sympathies to all affected. Prime Minister David Cameron spoke to his Australian counterpart Julia Gillard earlier Wednesday by phone to express his sympathy on behalf of the British people. His office said in a statement that Cameron told Gillard that Britain stands ready to offer any assistance needed.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/920866--queen-makes-private-donation-to-aid-australian-flood-relief

Well Felix, it appears you may be right, though whilst donors may remain anonymous,  doesn't the government have a duty to declare what's been donated to date?

The donation figure/tally itself?

For how else may we determine whether or not these private donations are being spent wisely, or do we just have to have faith in a premier Bligh who sat on funding the last time for over 5 years?

;D

WAKE UP AUSTRALIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The last time this happened, the donations well exceeded the damage bill, but at least the bill wasn't being paid for twice...here we have victims being taxed on top of these generous donations  again...

;D Was this how Gillard had planned to restore some of the surplus?

;D

mellie wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 4:33pm:

As for donating quietly, lovely theory there Felix, but according to our transparency laws, these government donations have to be declared to the public. :)

You're thinking of POLITICAL PARTY donations
ANYONE can donate to a charity appeal WITHOUT a public declaration

Life_goes_on wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 4:39pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 11th, 2011 at 4:18pm: Felix wrote on Feb 11th, 2011 at 4:11pm: I  think you will find that quite a lot have donated thepremier.qld.gov.au/initiatives/disaster_recovery/donations.aspx This said, then why the need for a tax, if like last time, it looks as though there will be enough for Bligh to sit on and collect interest for 5 years? How come you repeatedly fail to understand that the appeals are for helping individuals who have been affected by distaster and that the levy is for repairing infrastructure? Appeals = for people Levy = for stuff that isnt people - like roads, schools, sewerage works, drains, govt buildings etc It's quite simple really. Although obviously not for you.

For the public, really?

Then explain this.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/in-cyclone-larry-donations-sitting-unused-in-government-accounts/story-e6freoof-1225996666344

FIVE years after Cyclone Larry ripped through north Queensland, the State Government is still sitting on more than $700,000 donated by the public to help victims.

In 2006, Australians dug deep to donate $23 million to help devastated communities around Innisfail recover, but The Sunday Mail can reveal $703,000 is still sitting in government bank accounts.

__________________

So, this said, is there any reason to believe they wont sit on it again this time?

8-)

Sorry, but I think this is a tax-rort,  Gillards special way of slogging victims with a tax that may not even be necessary,  .....has she even finished counting the donations yet?

Sorry, but according to the donation declaration on the Queensland government page, the tally isn't adding up...re $700,000 already being in lieu.....  

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/in-cyclone-larry-donations-sitting-unused-in-government-accounts/story-e6freoof-1225996666344

Well, sucked in, Abbott tried to warn you all, and look what he copped for his trouble.

Enjoy!

;)

BER taskforce chief to help in recovery


THE man charged with cleaning up the government's controversial BER program, Brad Orgill, says meeting the dual objectives of value for money and a speedy implementation of the flood rebuilding package "is achievable".

Mr Orgill -- who heads up the Building the Education Revolution Implementation Taskforce -- was yesterday appointed by Julia Gillard as one of two federal nominated board members to the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, as part of the government's flood rebuilding oversight measures.

Mr Orgill said his work as chairman of the BER taskforce would enable him to ensure there was not a trade-off between time, money and quality with the $5.6 billion to be spent rebuilding flood and cyclone devastated areas in Queensland.

"The basis of the BER taskforce that I was appointed to was to focus on value-for-money outcomes, and clearly that experience is something I will take on to the reconstruction authority in terms of what we've learnt -- how to get the best outcomes when Commonwealth money is spent," he said. "I think that delivering both speed and value for money in large governmental projects is achievable."

Mr Orgill said he believed the key lessons learnt from the BER was that community consultation, transparency of decision-making and construction-sector engagement was crucial.

Mr Orgill said his eagerness to participate in the Queensland Reconstruction Authority was in part due to being deeply affected by the images of destruction from last month's floods. "I am pleased to do whatever Mick Slater thinks is useful to contribute to helping Queensland recover."

Major General Mick Slater is head of Queensland's Flood Recovery Taskforce. He said last week that a speedy reconstruction effort was essential. Speaking on the ABC's Lateline on Friday Major General Slater said: "My concern is that we get the money in a timely manner so that our reconstruction is not slowed down by having to wait for money".

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/queensland-floods/ber-taskforce-chief-to-help-in-recovery/story-fn7iwx3v-1226001782644

Nobody should worry.
In an historic moment of moving forward, Gillard will set up a citizens committee to investigate the viability of having a committee to investigate the viability of changing the program.
As well there will be a committee to ensure that the funding for the committee is spent responsibly.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/political-cat-fight-breaks-out-over-queensland-flood-money/comments-e6freon6-1226004048613

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 3:37pm:

Nobody should worry. In an historic moment of moving forward, Gillard will set up a citizens committee to investigate the viability of having a committee to investigate the viability of changing the program. As well there will be a committee to ensure that the funding for the committee is spent responsibly. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/political-cat-fight-breaks-out-over-queensland-flood-money/comments-e6freon6-1226004048613

;D ;D Your killing me here Sprint,  ;D ;D and to think, these die hard Labor supporters will not even wake up sniff the junket/hypocrisy coming from their own cabinet...well, what's left of it anyway.

The latest face-to-face Morgan Poll shows on a Two-Party preferred basis the ALP and L-NP are now equal - 50% each - a result similar to the telephone Morgan Poll conducted at the same time (February 1-3, 2011, L-NP - 50.5% cf. ALP - 49.5% and released last Friday, February 4). If a Federal election were held now it would be too close to call. The L-NP primary vote is 43% (up 0.5% from the telephone Morgan Poll of February 1-3, 2011) clearly ahead of the ALP 39% (up 4%), Support for the minor parties shows the Greens 12.5% (up 0.5%) and Others/ Independents 5.5% (down 5%). The Roy Morgan Government Confidence Rating is up 2.5 points to 125 - with slightly more Australians are confident that Australia is 'heading in the right direction,' (54%, up.0.5% ) and 29% (down 2%) saying Australia is 'heading in the wrong direction.
__________________________________________________

I doubt this is the genuine consensus, given it's harder being ruthless (honest about how this tax stinks) face-to-face than it is on a more discrete poll.

;D What a joke!

Quote:

Australia PM introduces contentious floods tax

When the Vast majority agree it is not really contentious.

I am quite happy to help the flood victims.


Quote:

previously used one-off levies to fund a gun buyback after a 1996 massacre in Tasmania, to protect staff entitlements after the 2001 collapse of airline Ansett, and to support the dairy and sugar industries.

This Levy is at least as justified as the previous ones under the Liberal government.

A contentious gun buy back.

A contentious bail out of Ansett managements responsibilities.

mellie wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 3:32pm:

So, the rich get richer, while the middle class get taxed? And Gillard has the hide to boast a socialist-left background? ahahahaha ;D

So, Mellie, what are you suggesting!?

Instead of imposing a levy of 0.5% on income between $50,000 and $100,000 and 1% on $100,000 and above - would you support imposing a higher levy, of say 1.5-2%, on those earning above $150,000 or maybe $200,000 or maybe $250,000!?

Isn't it the case, that: the current proposal affects less than 60% of Australians (taxpayers?) because most Aussies have incomes way below $50,000 - I expect that this would come as a surprise to many...if they bothered to consider why so many Aussies have incomes so far below the headline 'Average (Full-Time) Wage'!

BTW, you may recall that Howard/Costello's proposed 2007 tax cuts (which were mostly taken up by the Rudd/Gillard Govt) resulted in 80% of taxpayers with a marginal tax rate of only 30% - this is because only around 20% of taxpayers have incomes above $80,000)!

That belies Android's claim about being a 'middle income earner' - so much for the lucky and prosperous country, eh!?

That said, this does put the $50,000 and $100,000 levy thresholds back in to perspective - and the ludicrous nature of Howard and Costello's flattening of tax thresholds for the benefit of the elite few at the expense of the vast majority!

Meantime, I don't recall Mellie defining "middle income" for us to date...

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/02/10/1226004/026984-cat-fight.jpg

PRIME Minister Julia Gillard has been accused of "breathtaking arrogance" by Lord Mayor Campbell Newman as a row over the funding of Queensland's flood repairs intensifies.

"This Prime Minister of ours has spent eight weeks waltzing around Queensland saying, 'There, there, it will be all right,' but it ain't right," Cr Newman said yesterday.

"How long does it take for Julia Gillard to come to a decision on a matter of policy and principle?"

The Federal Government has not revealed whether it will pay for damage to infrastructure including water, sewerage, and CityCat and ferry services.

Without federal funding, ratepayers face the prospect of surging utility bills.

Cr Newman said Queensland councils wanted a commitment that vital infrastructure currently exempt under federal disaster funding would be covered.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/newman-slams-flood-aid-delay/story-fn6ck51p-1226004003282

mellie wrote on Feb 12^th, 2011 at 11:47am:

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/02/10/1226004/026984-cat-fight.jpg PRIME Minister Julia Gillard has been accused of "breathtaking arrogance" by Lord Mayor Campbell Newman as a row over the funding of Queensland's flood repairs intensifies. "This Prime Minister of ours has spent eight weeks waltzing around Queensland saying, 'There, there, it will be all right,' but it ain't right," Cr Newman said yesterday. "How long does it take for Julia Gillard to come to a decision on a matter of policy and principle?" The Federal Government has not revealed whether it will pay for damage to infrastructure including water, sewerage, and CityCat and ferry services. Without federal funding, ratepayers face the prospect of surging utility bills. Cr Newman said Queensland councils wanted a commitment that vital infrastructure currently exempt under federal disaster funding would be covered. http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/newman-slams-flood-aid-delay/story-fn6ck51p-1226004003282

FFS, people are blaming Gillard for purported policy indecision - when Abbott & Co have been doing the best to undermine the decisions already made by Gillard!?

Where are the calls for Abbott & Co to get over themselves and get out of the way of providing necessary Federal funding for essential (and desirable) restoration works!?

Go figure, eh!?

She cant blame Abbott for everything, and or her wasting time appointing 'review panels' .... timely and costly bureaucracy to watch-over her own bureaucracy.

Perhaps her OCD, perfectionism is interfering with the timely delivery of policy, and rather than be seen to be making a single mistake, she's crawling around on egg shells waiting for independent review panels, to forensically examine more review panels, she appoints to review her own policies?

I think in a national disaster, we need to be realistic, this and stop blaming the coalition for her own incompetence, and just focus on  GETTING THE JOB DONE!

8-)

mellie wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 5:01pm:

FIVE years after Cyclone Larry ripped through north Queensland, the State Government is still sitting on more than $700,000 donated by the public to help victims. In 2006, Australians dug deep to donate $23 million to help devastated communities around Innisfail recover, but The Sunday Mail can reveal $703,000 is still sitting in government bank accounts. __________________ So, this said, is there any reason to believe they wont sit on it again this time?

SITTING on ?

The fund is STILL accepting - and paying out claims - as recently as last month

Typical Murdoch, tabloid RUBBISH


It is now down to its last 3%

So Buzz, being a full proud Australia who lives there and believes in the tax......


How much of it will you be paying?

Answer honestly please. How much?

Still waiting Buzz

For someone who accused me of not paying tax in Australia and not caring about the place.

You live in Australia, there is a tax to help re-build the country.

How much will you pay?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:28pm:

Still waiting Buzz For someone who accused me of not paying tax in Australia and not caring about the place. You live in Australia, there is a tax to help re-build the country. How much will you pay?

I'll pay whatever the legislation provides.  So will everyone else.  Why do you press the question?

Look, both sides aren't perfect, are not unknown for their treachery grubbery, back-stabbing and political point-scoring,... though I think, this Labor government has been particularly negligent/hopeless  where it counts most.

You name it, they have failed to deliver....  at least Libs managed the economy, this and deliver disaster relief in a timely fashion, without turning it into an opportunistic tax-grabbing exercise.

5 years later, and Anna Bligh still hadn't completed delivering relief to victims of Cyclone Larry,(700,000 left over) ... preferring to sit on the hoard and collect the interest.

I find Gillards management of recent disasters, particularly sinister and bothersome.

And like so many charities are saying.... this will deter people from donating, because in their eyes, they already have, and by forced tax..

Like my mother said, at the end of this, she's looking at having paid about $2000 in tax, (as tiny as this seems), but had Gillard not imposed the forced-charity  tax, she would have probably donated twice as much.

Charity should begin at home, not with our government opportunistically tax- gouging victims for their own relief.

At least Howard managed Cyclone Larry, without imposing a tax, however small on the middle class, and poor victims of natural disaster.
::)


http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/9307/gqpezk1297391897.jpg

You name it, Labor have failed to deliver where it matters most...even when they had a majority government.


___________

I just spoke to my mother, and it seems, she will be paying about $3800 over 12 months.

I will add, she donated $5000 to cyclone Larry.

Needless to say, she's not a fan of forced-charity, this and based on principle alone she wont be donating this year given she feels she's already been taxed her donation.

Under this government, she's been less forthright with her cash, this and distrusts their capacity to deliver on account of how badly the funding was misappropriated last time.

Aussie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:30pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 5:28pm: Still waiting Buzz For someone who accused me of not paying tax in Australia and not caring about the place. You live in Australia, there is a tax to help re-build the country. How much will you pay? I'll pay whatever the legislation provides.  So will everyone else.  Why do you press the question?

Buzz is a hypocrite on such issues.

I was criticised by him for my tax contribution in Australia when he actually paid less than me!

He now supports a tax for the floods.
He'll most likely pay none.

If you are paying, then fair enough criticise away.

But is not poor form to demand this and that, but actually keep contributing nothing?

It's free loading at best.
Champagne socialism at worst.

"Pay for it? What me? No sorry I can't...."

Aussie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:30pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 5:28pm: Still waiting Buzz For someone who accused me of not paying tax in Australia and not caring about the place. You live in Australia, there is a tax to help re-build the country. How much will you pay? I'll pay whatever the legislation provides.  So will everyone else.  Why do you press the question?

Andrei SERIOUSLY believes that retirees should have no say in Australia's direction - and your vote should carry more weight, the higher your income

Australia was simply a "cash cow" to him, for theyear it lasted it lasted
Through a legal tax scam, he was able to pay around eighty per cent of the tax on his income earned in Australia to the British Government - rather than contribute to THIS country

He has NO love for Australia
He has NO love for Australians

Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it.

Why should middle Australians and victims of disaster be forced to pay charity, the whole concept of charity is to give what you can afford, is this what Labor were worried about given most people cant afford to donate as much as they could under a well managed Liberal economy?

mellie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:54pm:

Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it.

Would you put a PENSIONER in that same basket ?
I paid my designated rate of income tax over 37 years of FULL-TIME employment

mellie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:54pm:

Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it. Why should middle Australians and victims of disaster be forced to pay charity, the whole concept of charity is to give what you can afford, is this what Labor were worried about given most people cant afford to donate as much as they could under a well managed Liberal economy?

What "charity" ?
It's essential INFRASTRUCTURE funding

mellie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:54pm:

Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it.

100 points Mellie!

In a nutshell this is Buzz and his kind.

Full of ideas but refuse to pay for any of it and instead hand those of us in the middle incomes the cheque!

Flood tax. Yes please but I won't pay.
Carbon tax. Yes please but I won't pay.
Increase welfare for the unemployed? Yes please but I won't pay.
More money for hospitals and schools. Yes please but I won't pay.

Let's tax other people for it.....

Buzz is the worst kind of Australian.
Wants everything. Doesn't want to pay for any of it.

Disgrace.

How anyone in their right mind can criticise a guy that paid MORE than he did, well the mind boggles.

We paid $8k per month Buzz.
Did you?

REPOST ...



buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 11^th, 2011 at 3:16pm:

Let's be HONEST, here ... The pros and cons of this levy have BUGGER ALL to do with AFFORDABILITY to pay - but based on "principle and POLITICAL IDEOLOGY Up to 50K pa you pay NOTHING The AVERAGE income of 65K pa, you pay under 21 CENTS a day http://resources.news.com.au/files/2011/01/29/1225996/731328-floods-document.pdf I would challenge ANYONE to declare this levy will affect their finances ? It should ALSO be noted ... This TWENTY ONE cents a day is 7% of the value of the last range of tax CUTS under this government

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 5:51pm:

Through a legal tax scam, he was able to pay around eighty per cent of the tax on his income earned in Australia to the British Government - rather than contribute to THIS country

a) A SCAM is illegal.
b) The state of Guernsey tax authority is independent from the British Government and decided by the Island. Hence the tax rate.
c) It was not 80%.


Feel free to get other things WRONG too.

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 6:09pm:

REPOST ... buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 11th, 2011 at 3:16pm: Let's be HONEST, here ... The pros and cons of this levy have BUGGER ALL to do with AFFORDABILITY to pay - but based on "principle and POLITICAL IDEOLOGY Up to 50K pa you pay NOTHING The AVERAGE income of 65K pa, you pay under 21 CENTS a day http://resources.news.com.au/files/2011/01/29/1225996/731328-floods-document.pdf I would challenge ANYONE to declare this levy will affect their finances ? It should ALSO be noted ... This TWENTY ONE cents a day is 7% of the value of the last range of tax CUTS under this government

REPOST -


HOW MUCH WILL YOU PAY?

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 6:03pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 5:54pm: Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it. Would you put a PENSIONER in that same basket ? I paid my designated rate of income tax over 37 years of FULL-TIME employment

But I bet you would be complaining if you had to fork out for it now, this and were still paying tax.

This and had a family to provide for at the same time.

Fact is... it was unnecessary, this government thinks little of family's and middle income earners.

Socialism is supposed to be about robbing the rich to give to the poor, not robbing middle class to give a little to the poor but most to the rich.

Who do you suppose is cashing in on the re-development of QLD?

8-)  Investors are rubbing their hands together...well and truly.

Why are funds taking their time?

Because those who really matter want their money up front!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 6:08pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 5:54pm: Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it. We paid $8k per month Buzz. Did you?

Not to the AUSTRALIAN Tax Office, you didn't
You often bragged LONG ago that you only paid tax on the first $30K
The rest of it went to the British Government

The only people not-complaining are those naive to the penny pinching ways of a Labor government.

Those who stand to give more than they are likely to receive in return for this imposed charity tax.

If our government wont even disclose ALL of what has been donated to date, then how is it we can be sure, this tax is even necessary, much less justified?

mellie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 6:16pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 6:03pm: mellie wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 5:54pm: Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it. Would you put a PENSIONER in that same basket ? I paid my designated rate of income tax over 37 years of FULL-TIME employment But I bet you would be complaining if you had to fork out for it now, this and were still paying tax. This and had a family to provide for at the same time. Fact is... it was unnecessary, this government thinks little of family's and middle income earners.

For CHRIST' sake

It's TWENTY CENTS a DAY for "middle income earners"


It's a slice of bread, for someone on $60 -65K pa
It's not ABOUT money or family budgets

For someone who earns  $100k, it's $1000 they could have spent on their kids come Xmas time, and or getting them back off to school for the new year.

You mean to tell me, that someone on an average (household) income / wage during these harsh times would have gladly donated $1000/ to a squandering Bligh government?

The answer to this question is no, they wouldn't have which is why Gillard imposed the tax in the first place, however small it seems.

The point is, it wasn't necessary, the levy could have been tapped from a hollow-log elsewhere, there was simply no need for Gillard to penny pinch this and expect victims of disaster to fund their own charity.


Also....the math isn't adding up...

$100,000 p/a times 1% tax = $1,000....yes?

There are 52 weeks in the year , so $1,000 divided by 52 = $20 per week, not the $5 p/w Gillard is telling us it will be.

__________________

Some of you may think $100k is allot, and so shouldn't begrudge paying $1000...  though what if only one parent is working, and you have 4 kids?

This and you are trying to pay a mortgage, run a couple of cars, pay private health and school...rady ra ra

What a crock of sh*t ::)

For those interested in calculating their levy....

http://www.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?NavId=002&ContentID=1949

But I'd run in past your accountant to be sure...  :P

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 6:46pm:

mellie wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 6:16pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 6:03pm: mellie wrote on Feb 13th, 2011 at 5:54pm: Buzz has the classic socialist welfare mentality thingy happening ....Tax is ok, so long as he doesn't have to pay it. Would you put a PENSIONER in that same basket ? I paid my designated rate of income tax over 37 years of FULL-TIME employment But I bet you would be complaining if you had to fork out for it now, this and were still paying tax. This and had a family to provide for at the same time. Fact is... it was unnecessary, this government thinks little of family's and middle income earners. For CHRIST' sake It's TWENTY CENTS a DAY for "middle income earners" It's a slice of bread, for someone on $60 -65K pa It's not ABOUT money or family budgets

Yer, it seems that certain people are both comprehension-challenged and mathematically-deficient...

So, I'll post the official table - which includes a calculation for the $100K threshold (somebody hasn't figured out that the first $50,000 of everyone's income is exempt and that the 0.5% rate applies to the next $50K, with the 1% rate only kicking for the income component over and above $100K)...

http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1949/PDF/Flood_Levy_Fact_Sheet.pdf

---

I know what the official table spells-out, but myself and a few others seem to think the numbers aren't quite adding up...

I am not an accountant, so will await educated feedback, but really, unless you are one yourself, this and are certain the table is correct,  then it might be best to wait and see.

:)

mellie wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 9:39pm:

For someone who earns  $100k, it's $1000 they could have spent on their kids come Xmas time, and or getting them back off to school for the new year. You mean to tell me, that someone on an average (household) income / wage during these harsh times would have gladly donated $1000/ to a squandering Bligh government? The answer to this question is no, they wouldn't have which is why Gillard imposed the tax in the first place, however small it seems. The point is, it wasn't necessary, the levy could have been tapped from a hollow-log elsewhere, there was simply no need for Gillard to penny pinch this and expect victims of disaster to fund their own charity. Also....the math isn't adding up... $100,000 p/a times 1% tax = $1,000....yes? There are 52 weeks in the year , so $1,000 divided by 52 = $20 per week, not the $5 p/w Gillard is telling us it will be. __________________ Some of you may think $100k is allot, and so shouldn't begrudge paying $1000...  though what if only one parent is working, and you have 4 kids? This and you are trying to pay a mortgage, run a couple of cars, pay private health and school...rady ra ra What a crock of sh*t ::) For those interested in calculating their levy.... http://www.treasury.gov.au/contentitem.asp?NavId=002&ContentID=1949 But I'd run in past your accountant to be sure...  :P

God
Where do I START ?

Firstly, the average Australian income is $65,000 pa, not $100,000
$100,000 up, is in the top 5-10% of salary earners

The AVERAGE wage earner will pay ZERO on the first $50K and 0.5% on the rest

Or $1.44 a week

The top salaries will pay ZERO on the first $50k, 0.5% up to $100k and 1% on anything over

The levy on $100K is $4.81 per week, or  about $250 a year (not $1000)

ALSO noteworthy, is the value of the levy is a SMALL fraction (10 to 20%) of the value of the last round of tax CUTS

If the average Australian income is $50 -$60k, then this would apply to a family, whereby only one parent is working, who earns say ....$100 to $120k right? The average family income being $100k to $120k, irrespective of whether or not both parents are working.

So again, Gillards not taking family's into consideration, particularly those family's dependent on a single income.

It's a one size fits all 'unnecessary' tax, irrespective of who you are, and or how many kids you have.

Crikey, no wonder that Howard and Costello left the country with such a huge structural deficit - cos right whingers can't comprehend basic maths and tax structures...

I reckon that my 12 (nearly 13) year old son could read the wording above the table and readily work out how much someone on $100K would have to pay!

Come to think of it, the maths is so basic that he could have done it in primary school - so it would seem that many right whinging voters don't comprehend anything that stretches beyond the Year 6 maths curriculum...

Little wonder that they are so readily sucked-in by the voodoo economics propaganda of the Libs - they can't think for themselves...

Seriously, how do some of these people check their own payslips - how would they know if they were being ripped off by their employers!?

How do they even number their HoR preferences from 1 to 7 (or whatever) on their ballot papers come election time!?



PS Apparently, they're not real good at working out what ordinary households earn either - even though there's ABS data out there.  I suppose that reading simple tables is beyond most of them too!?

Anyway, this is what others, including MP's have had to say about it..

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/levy-has-publics-backing-but-not-mps-20110213-1as4w.html

A person on $120K a year will be levied at $8.65 a week
This person has had TAX CUTS of $52.88 a week under this government

Equ, you are quick with the snide remarks, but other than this, you don't really lend this topic any great depth, rather egg others on to abuse others.

Don't get me wrong, I find you entertaining, albeit trite and simplistic, but It would be nice if you could add some semblance of discussion to the topic at hand.

:)

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 10:56pm:

A person on $120K a year will be levied at $8.65 a week This person has had TAX CUTS of $52.88 a week under this government

Either way, it's the principle of the thing, and I don't think Australians should be taxed thrice, (donation, tax, food prices) particularly those who may have already donated to the flood relief fund of their own free will.

She's double dipping, and I don't think it's fair when we could have found the levy elsewhere, ie, cutting back on her governments own spending.

Because had they not squandered it to begin with, then we wouldn't be needing to tax anyone.



::)

Do you recall that guy who stole just 1 cent off every persons bank account (I think he was a hacker) this and became a millionaire over night?

This is who Gillard reminds me of, and even more so that she isn't prepared to disclose all funding raised to date...re- "private flood donations".

::) The question is, can we trust this government to do the right thing with it... given their track record?


Even her own ministers have reservations, and other MP's aren't backing her.

Whilst I was showering a few minutes ago, I got to wondering...

How many Lib supporters earning $100K incorrectly calculated that they'd be up for $1,000pa - and thought they could snag a bargain by responding to Abbott's now-infamous email with a $250 or $500 donation to the Libs...

Aren't they gonna be pissed-off with the Lib scaremongering campaign, when they see the pissy amount coming out of their pay packets each week after July 1 - not to mention when they get around to lodging their 2012 Tax Returns a matter of months out from the next Federal Election...

Equitist wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 11:20pm:

Whilst I was showering a few minutes ago, I got to wondering... How many Lib supporters earning $100K incorrectly calculated that they'd be up for $1,000pa - and thought they could snag a bargain by responding to Abbott's now-infamous email with a $250 or $500 donation to the Libs... Aren't they gonna be pissed-off with the Lib scaremongering campaign, when they see the pissy amount coming out of their pay packets each week after July 1 - not to mention when they get around to lodging their 2012 Tax Returns a matter of months out from the next Federal Election...

Not nearly as pissed off as Labors voting minorities and refugees who had hoped to call Australia home, though are now preparing to be shuttled back off over seas, in accordance with Labors new 'select' migration plan, and it's accompanying MoU's.

Night.

;)

Equitist wrote on Feb 13^th, 2011 at 11:20pm:

Whilst I was showering a few minutes ago, I got to wondering... How many Lib supporters earning $100K incorrectly calculated that they'd be up for $1,000pa - and thought they could snag a bargain by responding to Abbott's now-infamous email with a $250 or $500 donation to the Libs... Aren't they gonna be pissed-off with the Lib scaremongering campaign, when they see the pissy amount coming out of their pay packets each week after July 1 - not to mention when they get around to lodging their 2012 Tax Returns a matter of months out from the next Federal Election...

the levy hasnt got through the lower house yet .. Wilkie isnt all that impressed with it.still she will probably bend to his wishes.. this I think is pretty much a do or die for her.

if it all goes pearshaped it will all hang on her head she has nowhere to hide.

As always though - I find it hypocritical for some people to say 'it really isn't very much you have to pay' from people that

1) Won't be paying themselves
2) Through personal choice have never known what its like to run a family budget

The Flood Levy is a step closer today, with Fielding the latest MP to announce that he intends to back Gillard's proposal...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/14/3137763.htm


Quote:

Fielding throws support behind flood levy Updated 1 hour 47 minutes ago    * Related Story: Windsor leaning against flood levy    * Related Story: Reluctant Katter backs flood levy The Federal Government has secured the support of a key senator and one of Australia's biggest unions for its proposed flood levy. Family First Senator Steve Fielding has agreed to vote for the levy after the Government offered to fast-track $500 million for floods rebuilding in his state of Victoria. Senator Fielding says he has also been assured the Government will examine a permanent natural disaster fund. He says he does not want politics to stand in the way of rebuilding. "Just because the Queensland Government has been physically irresponsible in failing to take out adequate flood insurance it doesn't mean people in flood-affected areas like in Victoria and other states should be left to suffer while politicians squabble in Canberra," he said. Senator Fielding's support brings the Government one step closer to securing the deal, but it still needs to win support from crossbench MPs to get the legislation through. Last week, Independent MP Bob Katter, whose electorate of Kennedy was hit hard by Cyclone Yasi, said he had little choice but to support the move. "They've got me boxed in haven't they? I mean, we've had colossal losses," he said. But fellow Independent Tony Windsor says he is leaning away from supporting the levy. Mr Windsor says he would prefer the Government fund the reconstruction by extending the budget deficit. "It seems to me this preoccupation with being back in surplus by 2012-13... I don't think that's necessarily the correct course," he said. Meanwhile, Australian Workers Union (AWU) national secretary Paul Howes says the levy is a "smart" and "sensible" response to the natural disaster. "I think that it's in our national interest to have a small once-off levy to pay for the reconstruction of our country," he said. "But I also believe it's in our national interest to balance the budget and I also believe it's in our national interest to continue spending in other key areas which needs to be done, which is why I think the Government has struck the right balance." The AWU's biennial National Conference begins on Queensland's Gold Coast today. Prime Minister Julia Gillard will deliver the keynote addresses at a dinner tonight to celebrate the union's 125th birthday. Premier Anna Bligh will address the conference this morning. Mr Howes says delegates will also discuss how to work with the government to manage cost of living pressures. "We will make sure that our members get a fair share of the profits that their companies make," he said. "But as a wider social movement, we need to start thinking outside the box and look for new solutions for how we can help working Australians on the whole deal with the increasing pressures that many are feeling due to the increasing cost of living pressures. "We need to plan out our actions and plans to improve the lives of working people over the coming years during the few days we're meeting here on the Gold Coast. "I'm pretty sure we'll come out with some unique and positive ideas to build a better society for all Australians."

Incidentally - if it is 'such a small amount'.....



Why isn't everyone paying it?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 9:17am:

Incidentally - if it is 'such a small amount'..... Why isn't everyone paying it?

Two words, Android: progressive taxation!

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 9:17am:

Incidentally - if it is 'such a small amount'..... Why isn't everyone paying it?

We found out last night why most right whingers have been in such a flap - cos Lib supporters like Mellie and a bunch of her acquaintances lack the mathematical ability to process basic tiered tax/levy calculations...

Apparently, they were all convinced that the official tables were wrong and that those on $100K pa would be up for $1,000 each!

Little wonder that they are so readily sucked-in to the voodoo economics spin of their beloved Lib pollies...

Anyway, being a beancounter yourself, perhaps you could take a couple of minutes to: demonstrate to those thickheads how to work out how much Levy would apply, to an individual with a taxable income of $100K, ta!?

GET THIS ...



Cut disabled pensions to pay for floods: business
1 hour 37 minutes ago

The Business Council says cuts to disability services ... should be considered as alternatives to the flood levy.

The Federal Government says the $1.8 billion tax is needed to help pay for flood and cyclone reconstruction in Queensland and Victoria.

Council president Graham Bradley says all current spending should be reviewed and disability pensions may not be the best use of government money.

Mr Bradley says it is in people's best interests to get back to work.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/14/3137847.htm



Comments ...

Utterly disgusting. Typical behaviour from the BCA - representing millionaires and billionaires asking for funding to be cut from the poorest people in the world.

Greed is ugly and greed is what our business groups like the BCA and the chambers of commerce stand for.

Just disgusting.

It' the principle of the thing, why should an irresponsible government scrounge around gouging holes in our pockets making excuses to impose forced charity on it's citizens, when if they had have been more responsible, we wouldn't even be discussing this right now.

If a petty thief stole 20c from your bank account, and you knew they had done this to millions of people and had become multi millionaires as a consequence of having done this, would you not feel a bit ripped off?

It's unjustified, and therefore to my way of thinking is blatant theft.

They aren't even being transparent about what the public have donated so far.

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 11:51am:

GET THIS ... Cut disabled pensions to pay for floods: business 1 hour 37 minutes ago The Business Council says cuts to disability services ... should be considered as alternatives to the flood levy. The Federal Government says the $1.8 billion tax is needed to help pay for flood and cyclone reconstruction in Queensland and Victoria. Council president Graham Bradley says all current spending should be reviewed and disability pensions may not be the best use of government money. Mr Bradley says it is in people's best interests to get back to work. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/14/3137847.htm Comments ... Utterly disgusting. Typical behaviour from the BCA - representing millionaires and billionaires asking for funding to be cut from the poorest people in the world. Greed is ugly and greed is what our business groups like the BCA and the chambers of commerce stand for. Just disgusting.

Methinks this issue deserves its own thread, Buzz!

Meantime, I too am disgusted about this display of pettiness from the top 100 CEO's in this country - since the BCA has neglected to denounce systematic discrimination by its own members against the  mentally-ill, sick, mature aged and otherwise disabled and vulnerable!

Shame on anyone, who would beat up on the terminally-ill, chronically-sick, mentally-ill and physically-disabled for minor financial and/or political gain!

mellie wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 11:56am:

. They aren't even being transparent about what the public have donated so far.

Flood victims receiving payments
16:48 AEST Thu Feb 10 2011

Queensland flood victims have started receiving payments from the public appeal which has raised more than $200 million so far.

The Premier's Disaster Relief Appeal has reached a staggering $207 million in donations since it was established in late December.

As of Wednesday, $1.886 million had been paid to 814 of the total 12,000 applicants.


http://news.slices.ninemsn.com.au/national/floods/8209224/flood-victims-start-receiving-payments

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 11:51am:

GET THIS ... Cut disabled pensions to pay for floods: business 1 hour 37 minutes ago The Business Council says cuts to disability services ... should be considered as alternatives to the flood levy. The Federal Government says the $1.8 billion tax is needed to help pay for flood and cyclone reconstruction in Queensland and Victoria. Council president Graham Bradley says all current spending should be reviewed and disability pensions may not be the best use of government money. Mr Bradley says it is in people's best interests to get back to work. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/14/3137847.htm Comments ... Utterly disgusting. Typical behaviour from the BCA - representing millionaires and billionaires asking for funding to be cut from the poorest people in the world. Greed is ugly and greed is what our business groups like the BCA and the chambers of commerce stand for. Just disgusting.

Ok, this may seem heartless....but here's just one case I know of.

I have a friend who had a cerebral haemorrhage about 18 years ago...(a burst blood vessel)...as a result, they had to drill holes in either side of his head to relieve pressure on his brain.

He is the best chess player I have ever seen, he's a musician, war-gamer, and attends conventions regularly, (he's a genius, an under achieving lazy freaking genius at that)...and I have to say, if he can do what he does, then there's nothing stopping him from going to work ...  honestly, I think he likes his lifestyle at the tax payers expense....

Look, there are allot of people on these disability benefits, that really should be re-assessed, because the criteria has changed dramatically, and what they would grant a disability pension for years ago...they wouldn't even think about granting them these days.

The rules have stiffened, but they really need to go back through those who were assessed and granted benefits for comparably minor ailments by today's standards.

Also, it sh1ts me to pieces when you have people claiming benefits for manageable/treatable mental illness, ie depression, anxiety, claiming they are suffering with a life altering debilitating affliction.....simply because they choose not to take their medication.



Then you seen them online all day posting on message boards...what about data entry?

If they can sit here and annoy the sh1t out of others all day, then why cant they do some data entry from home?

There are plenty of things they could be doing from home these days.


I'm not being heartless, and agree, many people are incapable of re-entering the work force, but what's the harm in re-assessing them periodically, this and or reintegrating them back into the workforce?

I mean, if a down-syndrome kid can collect trolleys in the stifling heat all day, then really, what's their excuse?

It's the bludging, needy, victimous mind-set that annoys me most.

Here in Australia, we are traditionally a hard working robust nation of people, we generally pride ourselves on our work ethic, and would pride ourselves on not having taken one single sicky, ...even though they are there to take.

Lately, there's been a bit of a work-culture shift, whereby people seem to be out for every thing they can get, will expend sickies just because they can, will take stress leave, because they can do this too...we are becoming such a needy princess race of spoilt people...and I put this down to many factors.

I refuse to accept there isn't something out there for everyone work-wise, (with the exception of the profoundly disabled of course), so why should we treat them like invalids?


I get a little resentful of those who are able to pick and choose their work...myself having come from a nursing background, completed a degree at uni, though had to more or less use it as a resume filler, given the hard time I had finding special needs placements for my autistic daughter.  .. but, rather than throw the towel in, and think, that's it...life over, carer to the end, nothing more for me, I decided to study, become qualified in a profession whereby I can work from home if necessary.

Sometimes I think, god, what I would give to be able to 'escape', you know what I really miss  the most?

Being able to duck out with the girls for a quick smoke on the patient balcony, grab a bite to eat and a bad coffee, (even if it was usually a crappy hospital cafeteria slop)...it's the social factor you miss most of all I think, and when I hear friends complaining they had to work a double shift...I cant help but get a pang of, I dunno, loss or something, like I wish it were me winging all over again the way I used to after a double shift.

Don't get me wrong, I love what I'm doing now, I really do, more than nursing when I was in the profession working 60 hour weeks, but you still miss what you cant have I guess.

What I wonder about these people who voluntarily disengage from the workforce, simply because centrelink made it possible to do so, don't they crave being out there and amongst it?

Being part of a working team?

Self sufficient?

Entitled to spend something they have earned themselves?

I think half of them just get into a rut and forget what it feels like to be part of it.

Which is why I think they need to be reminded, this and rehabilitated wherever possible.

:)... Labor don't agree with me however, Liberal are the better government for getting those who can back out there and into the workforce.

Sorry about the above gush, but I do think the businessman makes a point, this and don't think he means to send people who are clearly incapable out there to work if they genuinely aren't capable.

::)

mellie wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 11:56am:

It' the principle of the thing, why should an irresponsible government scrounge around gouging holes in our pockets making excuses to impose forced charity on it's citizens, when if they had have been more responsible, we wouldn't even be discussing this right now. If a petty thief stole 20c from your bank account, and you knew they had done this to millions of people and had become multi millionaires as a consequence of having done this, would you not feel a bit ripped off? It's unjustified, and therefore to my way of thinking is blatant theft. They aren't even being transparent about what the public have donated so far.

There was no fuss when the Howard government were doing it?

They had a better world economy to work off and had less need to raise money this way but still managed to gouge out their finance for about 5 seperate projects in the same manner each one with much less merit than this.

Sympathy to those objecting to this very reasonable and responsible measure = Nill.

Especially considering it was supported by the same people when the Lib's were doing it.

Dnarever wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 1:41pm:

Sympathy to those objecting to this very reasonable and responsible measure = Nill.

And why, pray tell, should we not simply add 1% to GST for a period to cover this.

Thereby ensuring that EVERYONE pays for the upkeep of the country and not just people who have x amount of dollars?

In the UK we increased and decreased VAT in response to issues.

It works and GST is the 'fair tax' meaning you don't avoid it.

I understand that if they lost power for 48 hours but were unaffected otherwise, they still don't have to pay the levy.  Household insurance would pay for loss of food etc due to power cuts, so why do they get these other benefits that could be used better for the REAL victims.

And then you have mongrels like these:  

Net closes on disaster fund cheats
Updated 6 minutes ago


Flood rort: some claimed payments when their homes were not flood-affected (AAP: Dave Hunt)

Related Story: Centrelink to take on flood fraudsters Related Story: Flood rebate rorters put on notice Related Story: Centrelink will catch flood fraud 'mongrels' Related Story: Police warn against cyclone charity scams The Federal Government says more than 1,400 disaster assistance payments may have been claimed fraudulently.

Centrelink has found people who have claimed payments when their homes were not affected, and Human Services Minister Tanya Plibersek says hundreds of other cases are being investigated and reviewed.

She says it is abhorrent behaviour and those who are caught may face criminal charges.

In the wake of Queensland's flood and cyclone disasters the Government offered a number of payments to those affected.

People who lost power for more than 48 hours were eligible for a $1,000 payment.

Ms Plibersek says some of the alleged fraud cases have come to light from tip-offs.

I still think its crap I have to pay a flood levy because my income is well over yet my wife doesnt work.  A couple who make my combined income escape it since they are just under the $50k each.

Hardly seems fair to me.

Might just have to do some serious salary sacrificing this year as a matter of principle.

Verge wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 2:13pm:

I still think its crap I have to pay a flood levy because my income is well over yet my wife doesnt work.  A couple who make my combined income escape it since they are just under the $50k each. Hardly seems fair to me. Might just have to do some serious salary sacrificing this year as a matter of principle.

Car allowance.
A cash payment car allowance is treated as normal salary every month but is a massive grey area on family and welfare benefits.

The Family Assistance officer when we claimed admitted they had no idea whether they it was supposed to be included or excluded.

When they accounted for the baby bonus, I left out my $30k car allowance and when I was later audited by the ATO they saw that and never said a thing.

Greens announce they will support Gillard Government's flood levy
February 17, 2011 4:16PM

THE Australian Greens will support the Federal Government's $1.8 billion flood levy in parliament.
Greens leader Bob Brown threw his party's support behind the initiative in Canberra today.

"We'll be supporting the package in the House of Representatives and the Senate,'' he told reporters.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/greens-announce-they-will-support-gillard-governments-flood-levy/story-e6frf7l6-1226007686852

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 3:45pm:

Greens announce they will support Gillard Government's flood levy February 17, 2011 4:16PM THE Australian Greens will support the Federal Government's $1.8 billion flood levy in parliament. Greens leader Bob Brown threw his party's support behind the initiative in Canberra today. "We'll be supporting the package in the House of Representatives and the Senate,'' he told reporters. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/greens-announce-they-will-support-gillard-governments-flood-levy/story-e6frf7l6-1226007686852

Jeez, the right whingers are gonna be confused now...

Who to demonise and vilify: the Muslims, the gays or the Greens!?

Will the hip pocket win out, or good ol' bigotry!?

If this is to pay for the levy and it's 'such a small amount'.....

Can you please tell me why EVERYONE shouldn't pay?

Why only a certain portion of people?

I mean has already declared it is next to nothing in people's budgets.
(Yet interestingly he admits he won't be paying).

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 1:43pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 14th, 2011 at 1:41pm: Sympathy to those objecting to this very reasonable and responsible measure = Nill. And why, pray tell, should we not simply add 1% to GST for a period to cover this.

And reconfigure every point of sale unit in the country - and then back again, a year later ?

How much would THAT cost business - which would be passed on to consumers ?

This was the MAIN reason behind the inflation spike following the GST introduction


DAFT IDEA !

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 4:34pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 14th, 2011 at 1:43pm: Dnarever wrote on Feb 14th, 2011 at 1:41pm: Sympathy to those objecting to this very reasonable and responsible measure = Nill. And why, pray tell, should we not simply add 1% to GST for a period to cover this. [size=14]And reconfigure every point of sale unit in the country - and then back again, a year later ?

I point you to David Cameron's Governnment.

VAT from 17.5% down to 15% then up to 20% in 14 months.
Worked fine.

UK consumer confidence dives after VAT rise
Wednesday 16 February 2011

Consumers' confidence in spending fell at its fastest rate on record during January following the Government's VAT increase.

Nationwide's spending index dived by 20 points during the month to stand at 70, the lowest level since November 2008 when the UK was in recession, and the steepest drop recorded since the study began in 2004.


http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/UK-consumer-confidence-dives-tele-1325477552.html?x=0

YES !




The Federal Government now has the numbers to have its flood levy succeed in the House of Representatives.

Tasmanian independent Andrew Wilkie has announced he has struck a deal with the Government and will now vote for the levy.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/18/3142621.htm

How much will you pay Buzz?

You know, seeing as you care alot about Australia etc....

How much then?

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 1:43pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 14th, 2011 at 1:41pm: Sympathy to those objecting to this very reasonable and responsible measure = Nill. And why, pray tell, should we not simply add 1% to GST for a period to cover this. Thereby ensuring that EVERYONE pays for the upkeep of the country and not just people who have x amount of dollars? In the UK we increased and decreased VAT in response to issues. It works and GST is the 'fair tax' meaning you don't avoid it.

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA BUDDY!  :o :o :o :o :D

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 14^th, 2011 at 1:43pm:

Dnarever wrote on Feb 14th, 2011 at 1:41pm: Sympathy to those objecting to this very reasonable and responsible measure = Nill. And why, pray tell, should we not simply add 1% to GST for a period to cover this. Thereby ensuring that EVERYONE pays for the upkeep of the country and not just people who have x amount of dollars? In the UK we increased and decreased VAT in response to issues. It works and GST is the 'fair tax' meaning you don't avoid it.

The GST is given to the states.  How do you propose we rebuild national infrastructure?

Please don't apply for the middle management position at Wesfarmers; Coles is doing quite well atm and I'm loving the savings! Wouldn't want them to go bankrupt within a few days if you step into a role there.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 17^th, 2011 at 4:10pm:

If this is to pay for the levy and it's 'such a small amount'..... Can you please tell me why EVERYONE shouldn't pay? Why only a certain portion of people? I mean has already declared it is next to nothing in people's budgets. (Yet interestingly he admits he won't be paying).

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

sPASTIC HERE WANTS US ALL TO REINVENT THE WHEEL!

DON'T GO INTO POLITICS TOO SOON WILL YA!  :-/ :-/ :-/ :-/ ;D

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D ;)

Does nobby  jobby believe in a sliding scale tax system ?!!?

What a joke!  :D :D :D :D :D