From that graph - at no point since the start of 2005 was the iron ore price below %50
So any suggestion of a 2007 average of $36 is deliberately misleading and such a long term average is irrelevant
GST
- Thread starter tandino
- Start date
- Tagged users None
From that graph - at no point since the start of 2005 was the iron ore price below %50
So any suggestion of a 2007 average of $36 is deliberately misleading and such a long term average is irrelevant
Elroo
Premiership Player
- Jul 2, 2014
- 3,994
- 6,809
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
The graph is showing the spot price of iron ore not the long term average; re 3 year average price.
%50?
$50
Elroo
Premiership Player
- Jul 2, 2014
- 3,994
- 6,809
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
And?
You do know how the long term average price of iron ore was/is calculated in 2007 (which is what the tai article refers to) as it is now in 2015?
You also know the spot price is not used to calculate GST distributions?
Last edited:
The three year long average price in 2007 quite clearly wasn't in the mid 30s
Elroo
Premiership Player
- Jul 2, 2014
- 3,994
- 6,809
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
The long term average price was calculated on 5 years in 2007 until WA requested it be changed to 3 years as that benefited the state in regards to GST.
A change which WA nows wants to reverse as returning to a 5 year long term average price will benefit them in regards to GST.
Elroo
Premiership Player
- Jul 2, 2014
- 3,994
- 6,809
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
How many mistakes can a poster like you make in one paragraph??
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
Cutting the days supply of hooch off the weed plant isn't real work. Agriculture, mining, manufacturing, tourism, timber production and all the other service industries that hard working west Australians have carved out of the earth, is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, where can I start
You are a in twist arent you. Now because I do care about peoples health & wellbeing I will give you some of my best advice.
Sit quietly. Take a deep breath, exhale & relax. Do this 3 times.
Now draw a good breath in slowly & make a low noise when breathing out 'IIIIIIIMMMMMMM'.
Repeat the breath but say 'IIIIIIMMMMM not really a gutless arrogant rude campaigner on the internet'
Repeat again but say 'IIIIIMMMMM really a nice guy who needs to communicate in a nice way.
Now I'm sure you will get better & your mum will love you for the change in your life.
So, Good luck to you, & all our WA friends.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Banned
- #510
Excess is right in what he states , i cant wait for the time when Tasmania share of the GST is cut right down. Tasmanians dont deserve to bludge off there fellow states , and i'm am from Victoria. Enjoy it now it wont go on for much longer. Earn your own way or enjoy a reduced lifestyle.Well, where can I start
You are a in twist arent you. Now because I do care about peoples health & wellbeing I will give you some of my best advice.
Sit quietly. Take a deep breath, exhale & relax. Do this 3 times.
Now draw a good breath in slowly & make a low noise when breathing out 'IIIIIIIMMMMMMM'.
Repeat the breath but say 'IIIIIIMMMMM not really a gutless arrogant rude campaigner on the internet'
Repeat again but say 'IIIIIMMMMM really a nice guy who needs to communicate in a nice way.
Now I'm sure you will get better & your mum will love you for the change in your life.
So, Good luck to you, & all our WA friends.
Any chance of noting how much the ACT & NT get & why? Or do you just enjoy taking cheap shots at Tassie?
Tasmania is an Island. The costs of doing business is affected by the rip off we cop from states like Victoria who we are forced to trade through. The Amount spent on road & rail transport on the big island is not duplicated by the amount spent of shipping over Bass Straight.
Communication changes have seen all big businesses remove regional offices & put them in Melbn, Sini & Brizbn. That affects places like Tassie & other regional areas like FNQ etc.
For decades we were forced to cop high prices for many goods that were produced in Melbn, Adlayd & Sini & protected by Tariffs. We got nothing in return as we are an export state, not much manufacturing for the Australian market. Melbn, Sini, Perf & Brizbn all benefit from defence bases & building, we get none of that.
The fact that young people often go to Melbn, Sini & Brisbn for career prospects. Hence we are left with an older population with the usual health needs.
So apart from cheap shots & insults which reflect more on you than anything else, what is your practical answer to the vertical & horizontal fiscal imbalances inherent in our Federal system?.
Now try to be nice about it! Not being nice is bad for you health.
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
Australia is an island and Perth is the most remote capital city on the planet. Plus, WA is three times bigger than the next biggest state in Australia and has experienced the largest population increase in the country. So your comments about Tasmania's logistical constraints dont stand up. The wasted spending... you speak of are you referring to the new Fiona Stanley Hospital, childrens hospital, schools, roads and other infrastucture because I can assure you infrastucture spending in WA is desperately needed and already hopelessly inadequate. Having been to the eastern states it clear the gulf in funding over decades was already a national disgrace without adding the unfainess of the GST carve up into the mix.
Last edited:
- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,407
- 19,537
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
I agree. We should be following the Labor and Greens way by bleeding them dry and then subsidising them!
Well thats a nicer way to approach the topic. I hope you feel better for it.
Actually Melbn & Sini have bigger population growth numbers than Perf. Melbn grew by twice the number of people in recent ABS figures I saw. Sini by nearly as much as Melbn, & Brizbn by almost the same as Perf.
Perfs % growth is slightly higher. 2.5% to Melbn 2.2%
When it comes to wasted spending, all Guments do it to some extent.
Tassie has a small population & it is spread out relative to other states. All states have infrastructure needs. Some because of growth, all need old stuff replaced.
We desperately need to fix roads here, The part which is Federal National Highway between Launceston & Hobart is pathetic in sections. The RHH is slated for a rebuild, some of it is 100 years old, in a bad way & a very inefficient hospital as a result.
The health statistics here are not good. The North of the state especially, is about the worst in the country. Should they die? Or be assisted to the same level as other states & regions?
The Question of GST is relevant only in so far as the state in question is able to operate efficiently. If WA has wasted or over spent in good times, then they need to revise the spending priorities. That is what other states have had to do. I'm sure that was taken into account with the GST calculations. If not, then their would be a legitimate complaint.
I note the Fed Gument has started to change tack in its own budgeting. Its taken 18/12 of crap, but they are easing off the attack on lower SEGs &now looking at wealthy super & negative gearing, as well as efficiencies in health spending. Just the stuff most of us were talking about last year.
The economics here are improving. The A$ falling back has helped that a lot.
Given the lib/lab fights over the number of closely contested WA seats in the Fed parliament, I find it hard to believe they would have lost out badly over money when compared to other areas.
You might enlighten upon that.
Oh & yes Oz is an island, but you have direct shipping to the world, Tassie hasnt, we have to go through the Port Of Melbn which is one of the worlds most expensive, & want to greatly increase their charges.
Yawn. Poor article. Cheerleading (charitable). Usual apologism.
"Indeed, at $US50 per tonne it is well above the $US36 price that Wayne Swan inherited in 2007"
Elroo
Premiership Player
- Jul 2, 2014
- 3,994
- 6,809
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
It appears your inability to read and comprehend articles as well as knowing there's a difference between the "long term average" and "spot price" of iron ore is matched by your inability to operate the sites quote functions.
Here is the part of the article you can't comprehend and forgot to quote; "The iron ore price is well above its long-term average".
Understandable on your part it seems; its not like the article mentions the long term average price of iron ore in the very first line and the very first sentence in the article.
Last edited:
This is hillarious. I reviewed their paper on subsidies, in the appendicies they listed what they totalled up to get the subsidies. They called building schools and hosptitals in mining towns as subsidies. They called building the road to the North a subsidy. Their paper on mining subsidies was ridiculously one sided and wholly incorrect. It would be like calling building a school in Geelong a subsidy for the car industry. They even included the building of a footy club rooms a subsidy. Are the upgrades to Kardinia Park a subsidy for the car industry?
Now, let's look at some of the other great lols they had throughout this article:
Throughout the course of the past mining boom, more than a billion federal dollars has gone to the car industry, with additional support coming from the state governments. So, yes, their industry policy decisions have been subsidised by other states.
These contracts got the project off the ground. A project that now hands over to the federal government more than $5bn per year in taxes and royalties, and has been doing so for 30 years. Compare that to the car industry, and this subsidy is a bargain at twice the price.
Greed? So, it's greed to build infrastructure that is just catching up with the rest of the country, at a time when we're doing well and contributing a net $20bn to the federation?? How the * is that greed? Greed would be ******* off the federation and being $20bn a year better off.
The TAI is so onesided when it comes to resources industries. Their NSW and Vic bias is evident. They overstate subsidies, understate benefits, ignore federal income, ignore local jobs created, etc. I wouldn't trust a thing they write when it comes to the mining and o&g industries.
The TAI calls everything a subsidy. Read the appendix at the back of their mining industry subsidy paper.
Edit: Actually I just looked at it. So, apparently building a power plant for Perth, is a subsidy for the mining industry???
Here's the schools and roads counted as subsidies:
The ports, which return money to the state government and are in fact profit making GTEs, their investments are "subsidies":
More roads included as subsidies. Even though most of the $$ is in and around Perth and non-mining country towns...
And even more infrastructure in oil and gas towns called subsidies. Including investments in Aboriginal welfare, schools, and hospitals. Including an investment in irrigation primarily used for farming.
Here is what the Ord River Irrigation Scheme is really used for:
Just because an investment in infrastructure occurs in an area known for mining, it doesn't make it a mining subsidy. The TAI needs to get their heads around this, but I think they choose to willfully misrepresent the truth to push their own anti-mining agenda.
Edit2: It frustrates me that so many people quote the statistics these guys produce as fact, when in reality they twist everything to suit their agenda. Just recently their paper on superannuation concessions, had the amount that went to the top 5% of wage earners at twice the numbers ACOSS and Treasury produced. Nobody could reconcile the TAI numbers. Yet still you see people quoting their bullshit figures as fact.
Last edited:
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
It should be a criminal offence to be so mischievous and deliberately misleading
Xsess
Norm Smith Medallist
That is truly insane.
I know, it pissed me off when I read it months ago. I baited them about it. Calling them out on a minor point which they responded to, then letting loose on the major errors. Predictably, they didn't respond a second time.
It's also worth checking out how "remote" services are defined under the GST rules. Apparently once you get past 1400km from the nearest capital it doesn't get any more expensive to provide services no matter how much further you go. Also Hobart isn't big enough to count as a capital so everything in Tassie is considered in terms of its distance from Melbourne.
Consequently, providing education services to remote communities is more expensive in Tasmania than it is in W.A.
Consequently, providing education services to remote communities is more expensive in Tasmania than it is in W.A.
Out of interest, what are you basing this on? Because it is ******* expensive providing remote education in WA. We have hundreds of Aboriginal communities, far more than any other state, that need education services. These are incredibly difficult to staff and is a major issue for our education department.
I've done a lot of work with them advising how to best do this with less money. It isn't easy as the costs involved are huge per student. In the region of $40kpa per student for some schools.
Or are you saying this is how it is counted in the GST calcs and it is incorrect?
