Tim Stephens writes: While I ceaselessly agree with Bernard Keane and Glenn Dyer, I really feel they’ve misplaced the plot on this one. I’ve a vested curiosity in superannuation (like most Aussies), so I might hate to see poor returns. Nevertheless, numerous the massive firms pay bugger all in tax, as identified in Crikey on the finish of final monetary yr.
Many even have big international possession, transport earnings abroad — to not Australian tremendous funds. A shining instance is gasoline. Australia is among the largest exporters however returns about $1 billion in income to Australia, whereas Qatar manages $50 billion in tax income on gasoline exports.
Let’s face it, within the retirement section some huge cash from tremendous will get spent on healthcare. If we had cashed-up governments paying for a good healthcare system (together with every part else that folks want), then retirees may in all probability forego some returns.
Russell Searle writes: The evaluation overlooks the impact of the tax on each the businesses producing the earnings and the tremendous funds receiving the dividends. These oversights are on the stage of a primary yr college accounting course.
Firstly, not all earnings a distributed as dividends, some are retained by the corporate
Secondly, you’ve ignored franking credit. Increased taxes on these corporations don’t essentially deprive the tremendous funds, because the dividends obtained can be weighted extra in favour of franking credit and fewer money. However revenue is revenue; company tax to buyers is netted off of their closing tax place. The franking system additionally wants consideration to keep away from a switch of wealth from customers to buyers through gouging.
If extraordinary earnings are the product of gouging, then maybe the upper taxation (no matter is retained after franking credit score refunds) might be utilized to some aid for the poorer people who’re being gouged.
Keane and Dyer’s piece appears to counsel everybody goes to endure and it has zero internet impact. If the speculation is true then the individuals most affected stay these being gouged, whereas the buyers could not see a lot distinction. In the event that they do alter the franking credit, then the magnitude of the impression can be marginal and proportional to the scale of the tax-advantaged tremendous fund. Hardly a zero-sum sport.
Sandra Jones writes: Adam Bandt is correct on the cash going after super-profits. Maybe it’s time to revisit franking credit, or scale back them to share the wealth? These corporations make billions from customers. It’s time to offer some again — not simply generate further for rich shareholders.
Poverty and homelessness continues to be an enormous problem, to not point out the JobSeeker allowance is a pittance. If poverty is lowered, crime will go down.
Pauline Bleach writes: As somebody who labored within the sphere: there isn’t a privateness. Something that’s encrypted could be decrypted. And sure, all of your cellphone calls may all the time be intercepted. As is the lesson from the Millennium Problem 2002: if you’d like safe messages, don’t use digital.
Nevertheless, we can’t permit evil to flourish. Probably the most strident free speech advocates would tear down the partitions of hell to get their 13-year-old youngster’s nude images faraway from a Telegram channel.
As an alternative of useless tradition wars and thought experiments, we want guidelines and instruments. Instruments like utilizing AI to establish and report encrypted info, with no human having to see it themselves. It may present restricted info to people to establish, after which cross on the stuff all of us agree is dangerous.
The “two key system”, which has been helpful in so many methodologies, may permit regulation enforcement and moderators to entry information through a digital key solely offered in instances of clear proof.
Let’s cease whining about free speech, and as a substitute put in place the boundaries and guardrails required. If we don’t, governments will.
Invoice Wallace writes: All people, organisations and so forth have a accountability to the group by which they stay and function. Traditionally communities have constructed expectations, guidelines and legal guidelines to make sure use of services of their communities.
For instance, street guidelines. I don’t hear anybody suggesting these needs to be abolished and we should always have freedom to do no matter we want on the street. The consequence could be chaos, elevated accidents and deaths.
The identical ought to apply to the “digital highways” which were constructed. The builders have a accountability to make sure they don’t have an hostile impression on particular person customers and the communities by which they function. Which means working with governments and communities to satisfy these expectations.
Lynne Hamilton writes: I’ve been a follower of @purplepingers for a while, and consider he has lots to supply as a possible senator. Having been a Labor voter since I may vote, I’ve lastly had sufficient and consider it’s time for a brand new left on this nation; a critical different to what’s on supply, together with the Greens.
To concentrate on one problem that’s clearly vital to van den Lamb: housing, whether or not it’s a disaster or market manipulation, wants a clear slate. Eliminate adverse gearing, implement the vacant residential land tax (which is a joke and clearly not working as a result of no-one is complaining about it). Nevertheless, with so many sitting members proudly owning funding properties it’s onerous to think about that any of them would help actual change.
If van den Lamb can have a voice on points such because the local weather disaster and our appalling angle in direction of asylum seekers, possibly I’ll really feel proud to vote once more.
Carry on the democracy sausage, with vegan choices out there!
