Australian billionaires take to the streets for tax protest

www.independent.co.uk...

It was, by any measure, a most unusual rally. Many of the placard-waving protesters gathered in a Perth park wore suits and ties, and impassioned speeches were delivered from the back of a flat-bed truck by two billionaires, including Australia's richest woman.


Gina Rinehart's pearls glistened in the sunlight as she bellowed through a megaphone: "Axe the tax!" Ms Rinehart has a personal fortune of $4.8bn (£2.7bn). Andrew Forrest, in monogrammed worker's overalls, told the well-mannered crowd that Australia was "turning Communist". Mr Forrest is the country's fourth richest person, worth an estimated $4.2bn.

Both Mr Forrest and Ms Rinehart have amassed their wealth from digging up iron ore in the remote Pilbara region. Like other mining magnates, they have grown fabulously rich during a resources boom based largely on China's insatiable demand for the coal, iron, nickel and other minerals that lie in abundance beneath Australia's rust-red soil.

Now Kevin Rudd's Labour government is planning to levy an extra tax on the mining industry, and the industry is furious. The issue has dominated the political agenda for weeks, and is even threatening to torpedo Mr Rudd's chance of being returned to power at an election due to be held before the end of this year.

Labour, which had an unassailable lead over the conservative Liberal-National Party coalition six months ago, is now trailing by six percentage points, according to a poll this week. If that were translated into votes on election day, Mr Rudd would become the first prime minister for nearly 80 years to lose office after just one term.

Communist? Really? Hey Aussies on ATS do you think you have a Communist dictatorship government?

Doesn't this sound eerily familiar? Where have I heard this before, give me a minute it will come to me... Oh yeah, the Tea Parties! You're welcome Australia, we have sent you our crazy ideas and now your uber rich are out protesting for ordinary people to keep their money.

How dare they have a 40% tax on billionaires, it's a crime against humanity. Who are those dirt poor house keepers and carpenters to ask for a little bit of financial assistance. What are these people made out of money? Oh yeah, that's right.

A guy on their posted a very good comment, I thought it was hilarious.

They now understand something Jeb Bush in Florida has been operating for years with, that is: THE POOR HAVE TOO MUCH AND THE RICH DON'T HAVE ENOUGH" This is documented in the bible where Christ said, "it is easier for a poor man to gain entrance into heaven as it is for a Camel to walk through the eye of a needle".

when people asked to follow Christ, he said "sell all you have and give it to the Rich
and then follow me".

Oh, Dear poor, poor, rich people my heart bleeds for you. This is the world's smallest violin I shall play it for you, while you are so blatantly oppressed and overtaxed.

Originally posted by ldyserenity
Oh, Dear poor, poor, rich people my heart bleeds for you. This is the world's smallest violin I shall play it for you, while you are so blatantly oppressed and overtaxed.

I don't think it could have been said any better.

reply to post by Misoir


These billionnaires are out on the streets? So their Mansions are empty, their Bentleys unguarded?

Interesting......

We all know Australia is basically a giant mine - and our government wants to put a 40% tax on their "super-profits" (profits after a certain thresh-hold).

I'm personally for this tax - its being totally blown out of proportion because we have a STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! opposition leader whos party is getting massive kick backs from the Mining Council of Australia.

Ahem, sorry I just can't stand the guy.

We're a long way from Communism here - that much is certain.

What is with some people? It boggles my mind that there are people who could be that rich and still be so hungry for yet more.

It should be classified as a mental illness, it really should.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Starred

Wasn't there a study completed recently that people dealing with big money, when they trade with it, and make big deals etc, the get a dopamine rush similar to coc aine.

So I agree that it should be classified as a mental illness.

So, let's say some of the billionaires worked their nuts off to get to where they are now.

Perhaps some started from nothing, built a company, worked tirelessly for years and are now billionaires from hard work and dedicated effort.

Why should they be taxed more than the others? Just because they have more? Compare the work ethic of someone who works at McD's or someone packing groceries. They don't put in half the effort some of these self-made rich people do. Why should they get a break and the rich taxed to the teeth?

Personally, I think it's a crock. People have been conditioned to beleive all rich people are in cahoots with the govt/illuminaughty/NWO or whatever other made up conspiracy that fits their belief.

I say, if someone worked hard to make their fortune, then let them enjoy it. Why should the rich have to pay for the lack of vision in others?

reply to post by noonebutme

Well in this particular case, its a tax on profits made from selling resources. The core of the premise is that the price of resources has skyrocketed and 10 years ago the mining companies were paying a ratio far different than it is today. I can't remember the exact figures, but the example being.

2000 - 7:1 - 7 profit, 1 tax
2010 - 21:1 - 21 profit, 1 tax

Make sense? They are getting a far more disproportional wealth from the resources than they were 10 years ago - so its only fair that this is rectified.



There is a major difference between making wealth and inheriting wealth. I'm not one to scream "OmG!!!1! teh Nw0 iz cuming 2 getz m3!!1!!!" - But if you don't think 99% of billionaires have a relationship with government - you're fooling yourself.

This tax has nothing to do with them paying for the lack of vision in others (except maybe the previous Gov) - it has to do with them going back to reinvesting a proportional amount of wealth back to the people living in Australia, of whom the resources belong.



I'm still wondering whether the 40% will stand - I personally don't think it goes far enough - we should just nationalise the whole kit-and-kaboodle.

to be honest, the tax is a load of rubbish. they are already taxed in the mining industry.. what people dont realize is that if this tax goes through, that yes, the rich will be poorer, but they will also lose a lot of contracts and ultimately a lot of jobs in the mining industry (which, btw is the only industry that survived the GFC in a decent manor and kept australia out of a lot of issues) will be lost from it.

its a stupid idea. we're already one of the most taxed countries, and a lot of the time you do need to ask, where IS this cash already going. do we handle our budget so badly we need to invent a new tax to get around the fundamental flaws that already exist?

reply to post by ghostsoldier


Yeah.. they don't have any morals when it comes to money either, they'll make it by waging wars, crashing economies and cheaply buying everything up, they'll destroy our environment, kill untold animals and people to satisfy their vampiric greed.
They'll deny us alternative energy sources, basically stunting our natural evolution and growth.
There is not much they won't do and they don't care about if you're white, black, poor or realitvely rich. You're a worthless peasant in their eyes.

If this system ever changes I want several new additions to the DSM-IV, I liked that thought.

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
2000 - 7:1 - 7 profit, 1 tax
2010 - 21:1 - 21 profit, 1 tax

Ok, I see the logic behind that.

But is this tax increase being levied against those who are already in a certain level of income/wealth only, or is it againt anyone who is mining/selling the particular resource? I suppose what I'm getting at is if someone who wasn't in the upper tier of income suddenly had possession to a mine rich in resources and began to mine/sell - would they also be subject to the same new tax levies?

So long as the increase in tax is across the board on the mining resources ratio issue and not simply geared at "rich" people then I agree.

This tax has nothing to do with them paying for the lack of vision in others (except maybe the previous Gov) - it has to do with them going back to reinvesting a proportional amount of wealth back to the people living in Australia, of whom the resources belong.

Fair point. I think in my previous poast I was addressing what I assumed were people generally lumping all the rich into one pot and screaming for higher taxes on them as though it will solve financial and social issues, which it won't.

But tax levies on an industry which, technically, everyone could have access to participate in - that's logical and fair. It was only the idea that rich people should pay more simply *because* they are rich is where I take exception.

(fyi, I'm not rich! )

[edit on 14-6-2010 by noonebutme]