Andrew 'Twiggy' Forrest call to manage welfare payments

a reply to: Collateral

You are the one saying he shouldn't be able to have a say in where his tax money is spent because he is a billionaire.

No not what I meant at all. Are you actually reading or even comprehending me. I was responding this comment by you;

He contributes WAY more than you ever will in terms of a dollar value to this country.

do you remember this?

So what you appear to be saying to "constructionoflight" is that a billionaires views is more important than average voters, because they can contribute more tax thus buy politicians in the same way the mafia use to buy judges or juries in law courts to make sure they are not found guilty.While that might make alot of sense to pure ultra capitalists it is still not the manner in which democracy is suppose to work conflicts of interest are not democratic or lawful.

Oh and what kind of cake am i trying to eat two?

And three you have still not answered one of my previous posts on how they are going to find real jobs for every single person that wants and needs one. Work programs like green armies etc.. does not equal REAL jobs they working for their benefits so that doesn't count in case you use that example.
Neo liberalism/economic liberalism has something called the natural rate of unemployment been at 5% for 20 plus years now at the moment closer to 6% only goes up and never down please don't insult my intelligence as you have no idea whom your dealing with.
I have studied both micro and macro economics at university level I am knowledgeable of both plus the political economy.
Most of what LNP and Corporates advocate is ideologically driven they would like to bring Austrian Economics to Australia this will never fly I remind you most Aussies were and still are against Hockeys budget what rock have you been under until NOW?

a reply to: AlphaHawk

You speak as though Abbott is going to adopt Andrew Forrest's recommendations. He's not.

LNP is more likely to put them into legislation than not because they are both on the same ideological page Forrest and LNP.
My guess is abbott or hockeys hearts, say yes ( both Hayek, Rothbard lovers) but their heads say no because they dont want to risk more bad polls and possibly losing the next election if they keep disrespecting the majority of Australians wishes!

a reply to: 74joff

This isn't an attempted insult, but your posts are extremely hard to read.

I wonder if you contributed as much as he does to this country, if you wouldn't think you should at least be able to use your resources to voice your opinion. There is nothing illegal or immoral about what he is doing & Abbott has rejected his idea, so he isn't quite the NWO figure you make him out to be...

I appreciate such successful people suggesting ideas in how to make things better, rather than just keeping to themselves and not trying help the country they make their profits in.

You will never get unemployment at zero.
Does this mean that we shouldnt be proactive of the use of people on welfare?

As an employer, would you employ the guys who has been working for the dole and showing he is keen, or the guys who took his dole check up the pub, ran it through the pokies and let his kids go hungry?

a reply to: Collateral

I appreciate such successful people suggesting ideas in how to make things better, rather than just keeping to themselves and not trying help the country they make their profits in.

Magnates have never been interested in the nation state. Their concerns are global not national.
They make their profits as always by exploitation. They want less welfare because they dont like paying tax simple as that no one could disagree

a reply to: 74joff

Capital like a virus mutates seeking out the best returns for its surviival and growth

a reply to: Collateral

I in fact find 74joffs post easy to comprehend with the exception of calling WA a backward state.

We in the past have endured corporate welfare to the tune of over $2 billion of Government bailouts of Alan Bond, Laurie Connels Rothwell Bank, Holmes A Court etc in the late 80's. Taxpayers money! See its quite ironic how the the paper billionaires are the first to go crying to Govt for a handout when their Ponzi schemes start collapsing because of triggering events in their
cross-collaterized loans.

Does the mom and pop corner grocery store that mortgaged their home for that business loan get the same hand out? What so these billion $ revenue companies pay 1% of less of revenue into tax. So what, how many people do they actually employ? 1 or 2 thousand generating $3-4 billion in sales. Most of the work is done by machine anyway.

If you bothered to carefully read my post I said that I dont beleive in punishing the rich. What I highlighted without going into detail because I thought you were an intelligent person is how they effect favourable tax treatment legislation or utilize Transfer Pricing manipulation to avoid taxes or continue to work in Australia like Alan Bond did by hiding his wealth in Switzerland.

You state thats its not immoral what he's doing and yet you've lumped all welfare recipients (including the disabled) into a "one size fits all" category that all they do is have more kids and blow their money on booze or gambling. You to me sound like you need lessons in what morality actually means.