Name a Conservative Success Story

[Seeds]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, doesn't Apple just increase its price by 15% and keeps making the same profit? I mean we pay the GST not Apple.

I'd much prefer we just tax companies properly.

Prices are independent of tax for profit maximising companies. Prices are determined by what the consumer is willing to pay. The only exception is if the company is anti capitalist and is not trying to maximise profit. Do you think apple fits in this boat?

 

[Cap]

Prices are independent of tax for profit maximising companies. Prices are determined by what the consumer is willing to pay. The only exception is if the company is anti capitalist and is not trying to maximise profit. Do you think apple fits in this boat?

I think I'm agreeing with you in suggesting Apple would do whatever it takes to reduce its tax bill in Australia (and Ireland )

 

[DaBarz]

Pick the poor fool who’s fallen for right wing propaganda aimed at tricking the stupid into voting against their own interests.

Bet you can’t DaBarz

It was Paul Keating who quoted Jack Lang
“ in the race of life always back self interest - at least you know it’s trying”.

If you don’t look after yourself, who will ?
Oh that’s right / the govt

 

[DaBarz]

Labor about to post the first budget surplus since Howard - how is your basic thinking dealing with that?

This surplus is off the back of the previous govt policy and the underestimated jobkeeper costs
Don’t kid yourself
We won’t see another one while Labor are in office

 

[Gethelred]

It wasn't like Howard decided on his own "hey lets tighten gun laws", Port Arthur prompted the chages, not Howard. Howard just got lucky.

The only reason those laws are immovable is because it was a Liberal PM - their most beloved of the current ex PM crop - who did it.

Do you think for a moment it wouldn't have been Coalition policy to scrap and tear the shit out of gun law in this country under Abbott/Morrison (and probably Turnbull to boot) if it had been a Hawke/Keating/Rudd/Gillard legacy?

 

[DaBarz]

Hopefully all the conservative soot and microplastics you've been feeding them have no long term effects.

Micro plastics
Lookie here - Mr and Mrs Pattol raised a comedian

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Double income households becoming the norm only served to increase property prices. It hasn't liberated women.

There are two obvious follow up questions:

1. Why did it increase property prices? Sure, higher purchasing power means higher demand for goods and therefore higher prices, but in an ideal free market, competition would generate enough supply to drive prices down. There have been numerous periods like the 1950s where household wealth increased and house prices didn't spiral. Clearly the shift to dual income households wasn't the only factor.

I'm sure some people would love to blame it all on immigration, but the huge house price growth over the pandemic, when net immigration was next to nothing, shows that it's far from the only other cause. The incentives for property ownership also fuelled demand, and supply was constrained by the skills shortage and the refusal of government to put forward an effective solution to the issue, directly or indirectly.

I'd further suggest that in any market, if regulations aren't put in place to keep prices in check, the natural response of any producer to an increase in purchasing power would be to increase their profit margins and restrict competition and overall supply. We should consider that the deregulation craze also rose along with the participation rate of women over the past few decades.

2. What will actually liberate women? I don't think the answer is something as simple and painless for the business community as cheaper childcare. I think it'd be working fewer hours for the same level of pay. And if that seems ridiculous to people, it's exactly what has happened over the past 150 years:

Annual working hours per worker

Before 1950, the data comes only from full-time production workers (non-agricultural activities). Starting in 1950, estimates cover total hours worked in the economy as measured primarily from National Accounts data.

ourworldindata.org

As you can see from the graph, working hours have kept falling over time. Wages have been increasing for most of that time. But two other things are apparent. Firstly, allowing for major disruptions like WWII, the rate of decrease started dropping from the 1960s onwards despite huge innovations being made in that time, like the entire digital economy. Secondly, we work more than most other rich western countries. We were middle of the pack until the early 70s and then something changed.

Maybe real liberation is the acceleration of that trend.

True. All I'm saying is that the gay marriage plebiscite is a clear win for the conservative party over the (allegedly) more progressive ALP.

You'll get no argument from me that the ALP have no real principles. They'd sell their own mothers if they thought it would get them an extra couple of percentage points in the polls. I suspect that's also what motivated much of the Liberal Party room to vote for a plebiscite too, rather than a firm moral belief in marriage equality (or else they would have legislated it straight up).

 

[nut]

I have to admit this reminds me of a guy who was absolutely ropeable when we pointed out his solar feed in tariff was essentially a subsidy paid by people without them.

What a load of rubbish

 

[fs88]

You prefer your immigrants at the bottom of the ocean?

Callous.

Btw the tooth fairy isn’t real as well, sorry

 

[kranky al]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, doesn't Apple just increase its price by 15% and keeps making the same profit? I mean we pay the GST not Apple.

I'd much prefer we just tax companies properly.

Our gst is low compared to other countries. Are they paying more than countries with low gst?


Luxembourg and Belgium pay exactly the same price for the same spec iphone despite 17% vs 22% gst.



At the end of the day we are paying whatever Apple Pays in tax, whether it comes out of corporate profits or gst makes no difference. Right now close to 100% of their profits are going overseas.

 

[kranky al]

Thats an issue yes. But foreigners who invest in australian shares have to pay corporate taxes in australia (its the equity owners who pay corporate taxes). Get rid of corporate taxes and foreigners who invest in our shares pay zero australian tax on profits made in our country. Australian equity ownwrs will still pay tax on their profit because the reduced corporate tax simply shifts to income tax. But the foreign owners will pay nothing if we get rid of corporate tax.

Point me at the apple shares one can buy in australia.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

As an android user, I’m happy for Apple to charge more.

 

[QuietB]

I have to admit this reminds me of a guy who was absolutely ropeable when we pointed out his solar feed in tariff was essentially a subsidy paid by people without them.

Feed in tariff is a price paid for electricity. A house invests in panels - they have excess electricity - they sell it.

It is in no way a subsidy.

 

[kranky al]

This surplus is off the back of the previous govt policy and the underestimated jobkeeper costs
Don’t kid yourself
We won’t see another one while Labor are in office

Well we didn’t see one while liberals were in office.

 

[nut]

Feed in tariff is a price paid for electricity. A house invests in panels - they have excess electricity - they sell it.

It is in no way a subsidy.

Infact roof top solar has brought down the price of power for everyone…

Let’s have a turn off your roof top solar day in December …and see what happens to the grid and the wholesale power price.

The Feed in tariff is a complete joke… most people getting 6 cents which is on sold at 40cents.. so who is subsidising who?

 

[Cap]

Feed in tariff is a price paid for electricity. A house invests in panels - they have excess electricity - they sell it.

It is in no way a subsidy.

If you are being given a set price mandated by the Govt above what you would be getting, you are being subsidised....by the people paying their power bill.

 

[DaBarz]

As an android user, I’m happy for Apple to charge more.

Dog people (Apple) / cat people (Android)
Nobody’s changing despite what Apple charge.

 

[DaBarz]

Well we didn’t see one while liberals were in office.

They spent 5 years cleaning up Labors mess

 

[GreyWind]

They spent 5 years cleaning up Labors mess

It's a good slogan, just not one based in reality.

 

[Gough]

It's a good slogan, just not one based in reality.

Dutton road tested the old cleaning up Labor's mess very early in the piece whan asked about what he'd do if returned to government and he hasn't used it since. Nobody is buying that crap.

 

[Number37]

The only reason those laws are immovable is because it was a Liberal PM - their most beloved of the current ex PM crop - who did it.

Do you think for a moment it wouldn't have been Coalition policy to scrap and tear the s**t out of gun law in this country under Abbott/Morrison (and probably Turnbull to boot) if it had been a Hawke/Keating/Rudd/Gillard legacy?

No.
1/ We don't have anything like the 2nd Amendment, that forms the basis of much of the USA's gun problem.
2/ We don't have the kind of mentality in this country that would tolerate pro-gun rhetoric.
3/ I can't recall even a single voice that opposed Howard's changes. ie it was unanimous, which demonstrates how sensible we are in understanding the dangers of a 'gun culture'.
IMO if they tried it, it would end up like Work Choices, which was repudiated by a substantial majority of the population.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

They spent 5 years cleaning up Labors mess

typical Newscorp parrot.

 

[Gethelred]

I'd just like to remind everyone what this thread is not about.

It's not about casting aspersions on or defending socialist policies. It's not about discussing the merits of hypothetical taxes, not without also discussing actual taxes by conservative governments in an Australian context.

I find it genuinely mindblowing that of all people, Seeds is on topic and others aren't:

In Australia the conservative success story was ummm bob hawke and Paul Keating. They implemented the very successful reforms that thatcher and reagen/bush implemented overseas.

Let's return to trying to isolate the conservative wins, if there are any.

 

[Gethelred]

No.
1/ We don't have anything like the 2nd Amendment, that forms the basis of much of the USA's gun problem.

I didn't say we did. What I said was, if Labor had tried to engage the population in a like manner after a similar tragedy, there are/were any number of opportunists - of which Howard was one - who would've gone to the NRA and asked for money to finance negative campaigns in Australia to see if they could obtain a foothold here.

And if it happened under Gillard/Rudd, there wouldn't be a shredder for the bill fast enough for Abbott's liking.

2/ We don't have the kind of mentality in this country that would tolerate pro-gun rhetoric.

Neither did America before the culture shift in the NRA before the '70's.

3/ I can't recall even a single voice that opposed Howard's changes. ie it was unanimous, which demonstrates how sensible we are in understanding the dangers of a 'gun culture'.

... because it was someone from the Liberal party calling for it.

The Nats couldn't object due to the Coalition's policy of keeping their infighting as behind closed doors as they can; the Social Dems couldn't object because minority party; Labor didn't object because they ****ing agreed and at the time believed in honorable opposition, whose job is to hold government to account when they get it wrong rather than when they get it right. It might also be worth noting that Kim Beazley was also trying to be Howard Lite in the leadup to 2001; bipartisanship was very much the word of the day until Children Overboard and Howard's wedge was found.

IMO if they tried it, it would end up like Work Choices, which was repudiated by a substantial majority of the population.

I think an underappreciated part of Howard's political genius was his ability to completely dominate the narrative within political discourse here. It's a method that Albo is supposedly trying to replicate with his media profile. The only reason Workchoices didn't stick - which is debatable, because Rudd/Gillard didn't change it a whole lot - is because someone more savvy with modern communication mediums came along and undercut him.

Nah. The policy might've been a joe the goose, but conservatives in this country turn those into rebound 50's. Give them the win and move on.

 

[Number37]

Franking credits can only come from corporate tax paid. So your example is moot.

It's a pretty simple concept...
Corporate tax not paid doesn't make shareholders liable for that unpaid tax, why should shareholders get a refund on tax paid by a corporation?