The election thread - Two middle-late aged white men trying to be blokey and convincing..., same old shit, FFS.

Who will you vote for?

  • Liberals

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Labor

    Votes: 18 30.0%
  • Nationals

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Greens

    Votes: 21 35.0%
  • Independant

    Votes: 15 25.0%
  • The Clive Palmer shit show

    Votes: 3 5.0%
  • Shooters and Fishers Party

    Votes: 1 1.7%
  • One Nation

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Donkey/Invalid vote

    Votes: 2 3.3%

  • Total voters
    60

Squidfayce

Lives under a bridge
The talk about how government money is poorly spent and some people thinking that's a good reason to pay as little tax as possible, are they gonna go out and build infrastructure or provide healthcare themselves with their tax savings?
i pay taxes. i pay less taxes so i can spend more money. Get over it :)
 

Asininedrivel

caviar connoisseur
It's such a shit line, that.

"The Bill Australia can't afford" from the last election was genius.
Yep. F*** Shorten. Backstabbing pos. Single redeeming feature from the last election result was not having him as PM.

Albanese I don't know enough about to illicit any kind of emotion. Maybe that's the idea....
 

birddog69

Likes Dirt
Sick of politics? Prime Ministers and Presidents? Promises and Lies? Take 10 minutes from the debate to watch some people having fun and enjoying their bikes
 

Oddjob

Can hench anywhere any time
The $500k payout was because Joshy touched up Ms Millar 10 years ago as well as Tudge.
Just how much of a complete fucking scumbag do you have to be, to be a LNP politician?
The hours are long, constant media scrutiny, lots of time away from home, shithead colleagues, mediocre pay outside of cabinet. Who wouldn't want that job?

There are sociopath nutbags all through parliament house and a large part of it is structural.

Sent from my M2012K11AG using Tapatalk
 

The Dude

Wasn't asking to be banned
less funding for services from less taxable employees and any tax the company or its subsidiaries may have been paying. Higher unemployment with higher welfare costs. You say "fuck off", but what happens if you have a family member that needs NDIS and that the first thing that gets cut, or you lose your job and cant get by for a short time on the lower welfare and cant access mental health services because they were cut too? extreme examples but its not simple. I think if the answer was simple, these issues wouldn't exist as they do.
Sorry, bit behind on this one - busy day, but
What's the rationale (and correct me if I'm wrong) for a multinational to shut up shop altogether in Australia over potentially giving up 25% of their profits? Are you saying that the Australian employees benefit from the positions that these companies provide with these non-taxed profits? I was under the impression that it gets sent to the Cayman Islands and that's the last we see of it. )I'd imagine it's a lot more complex, with re-investment of those CI funds, etc.)
 

The Dude

Wasn't asking to be banned
The car industry has been a victim of its own efficiencies and success imo. They have taken what is a fiendishly complex product to make, use and run and been so good at turning it into something so basic that its customers mostly no longer respect them and treat them as disposable whitegoods.

If there was more appreciation for how astronomically difficult it is to engineer a car and bring it to market, arguably we'd have had more public clamour for actually keeping ours rather than the usual "bleurgh subsidies fuck em" that we got instead.
Ahhhh, MTBs? Isn't that what many of the consumer goods industries trade on? Your 3-year old car is shit 'cause it doesn't have the spectacular new 500m collision warning system, or the new matte paint system of the new model? Like your old bike is shit 'cause it doesn't have the all-improved 0.5degree slacker head-angle that you can't even notice but-I-gotta-have-one?
 

Squidfayce

Lives under a bridge
Depe
Sorry, bit behind on this one - busy day, but
What's the rationale (and correct me if I'm wrong) for a multinational to shut up shop altogether in Australia over potentially giving up 25% of their profits? Are you saying that the Australian employees benefit from the positions that these companies provide with these non-taxed profits? I was under the impression that it gets sent to the Cayman Islands and that's the last we see of it. )I'd imagine it's a lot more complex, with re-investment of those CI funds, etc.)
The rarionale is that sometimes 25% is billions of dollars. Why pay it if you don't have to?

australians on a whole benefit from these companies employing them because those employees have jobs, taxes are paid from their salaries, and in the case of some companies like google, provide a platform to australians to join these companies without risking leaving the comfort of australia. We want them here because of the potential they represent to our country

as to whether its worth doing so (shutting up shop) ultimately depeds on the corporate structure, type of goods/services the business operates and how profits are accounted.

An extreme and easy example would be Google, which pays little to no tax here. Google employs several hundered australian employees. If we're cunty enough to Google and force them to pay 25% of their profits in taxes they are able to currently legally evade through various loopholes, Google could easily move its Australian operations elsewhere more favourable to them. Other companies would be likley caUght up in any changes affecting Google type structures/strategies and the problem compounds.

Those several hundred PAYG Google employees become unemployed (as with any other impacted companies employees if they choose to leave). This Ends up with an influx of highly skilled unemployed people competing for jobs that probably don't exist anymore at the scale they did. Many will require govt support in some form and some wil follow technology companies out of Australia. Net effect we get sweet fuck all or or worst case, net loss to where we were before the changes.

As somone pointed out, the tax system is a complex beast. It's not simple to solve and we are just balancing various loopholes against each other.
 
Last edited:

The Dude

Wasn't asking to be banned
Depe

The rarionale is that sometimes 25% is billions of dollars. Why pay it if you don't have to?

australians on a whole benefit from these companies employing them because those employees have jobs, taxes are paid from their salaries, and in the case of some companies like google, provide a platform to australians to join these companies without risking leaving the comfort of australia. We want them here because of the potential they represent to our country

as to whether its worth doing so (shutting up shop) ultimately depeds on the corporate structure, type of goods/services the business operates and how profits are accounted.

An extreme and easy example would be Google, which pays little to no tax here. Google employs several hundered australian employees. If we're cunty enough to Google and force them to pay 25% of their profits in taxes they are able to currently legally evade through various loopholes, Google could easily move its Australian operations elsewhere more favourable to them. Other companies would be likley caUght up in any changes affecting Google type structures/strategies and the problem compounds.

Those several hundred PAYG Google employees become unemployed (as with any other impacted companies employees if they choose to leave). This Ends up with an influx of highly skilled unemployed people competing for jobs that probably don't exist anymore at the scale they did. Many will require govt support in some form and some wil follow technology companies out of Australia. Net effect we get sweet fuck all or lose or worst case net loss to where we were before the changes.

As somone pointed out, the tax system is a complex beast. It's not simple to solve and we are just balancing various loopholes against each other.
I still don't get it. Maybe Google is a bad example? So Australia is missing out on, potentially, billions of dollars in tax revenue so Google can employ, let's say 1000 people on an average of $200k? Surely the potential tax revenue from the company massively outstrips the tax revenue from the employees? I don't see how still "banking" hundreds of millions, or potentially, billions, of dollars of after-tax profit would be a downside to Google. What's an example of a loophole that benefits us in allowing these massive tax-free transfers?
 

Squidfayce

Lives under a bridge
I still don't get it. Maybe Google is a bad example? So Australia is missing out on, potentially, billions of dollars in tax revenue so Google can employ, let's say 1000 people on an average of $200k? Surely the potential tax revenue from the company massively outstrips the tax revenue from the employees? I don't see how still "banking" hundreds of millions, or potentially, billions, of dollars of after-tax profit would be a downside to Google. What's an example of a loophole that benefits us in allowing these massive tax-free transfers?
It's not "just" Google. It's the collective of all the companies that behave this way. They employ thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people. Any sweeping change to the paradigm could force mNy companies to rethink their operations.

Probably easier to think of the detriment of losing large multinational employers wholesale from our employment markets.
 

Litenbror

Eats Squid
It's not "just" Google. It's the collective of all the companies that behave this way. They employ thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people. Any sweeping change to the paradigm could force mNy companies to rethink their operations.

Probably easier to think of the detriment of losing large multinational employers wholesale from our employment markets.
Hopefully we get some traction on the international minimum tax rate which should help, if only a little bit.
 

ualf

Likes Dirt
I wonder if the Harvey Norman lobbied for rules to collect GST on any goods bought overseas could be adapted to collect a sales tax on goods and services sold by overseas organisations who do not pay tax here.

If it was set at 30% it would make the transfer pricing shenanigans moot.
 

rextheute

Likes Dirt
I am always surprised by the number of employees a small business - ie a club - sports, rissoles etc can have - if you take 100 wages out of a small town say 5000 persons its a big hit .

which is quite often why towns take on fast food franchises
- not saying I agree .

but I do agree with @Squidfayce position on its complex and companies employee person - even they don’t pay tax the employees do .
its complicated .

Don’t like sComo tho, that hasn’t changed .
And be careful with preferences , I’ve been scratching around to find info on candidates - it’s not illegal but it’s is a thing .
It’s like playing hide n seek
 
Top