Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Shakey Bones

Do You Consider Holden And Ford Australian?

Recommended Posts

How does that put food on the table for those 1,000's of workers?

 

Everyone knows the mining industry is not sustainable, so thats a short term solution.

 

When the car makers and mining are gone from Australia we are going to have a lot of half skilled workers twiddling their thumbs. Possibly looking at YOUR job

This might sounds like a hard truth, but I don't understand why people like you think that there's no other jobs out there. It's like we're already scrounging for the jobs that we've got and the world will fall apart if someone loses theirs. As shitty as the infrastructure can be in SA, this isn't Greece where people are having to move countries to get another job. This isn't the parts of Africa where there's no infrastructure around to get even that first job. This isn't India where people intentionally harm themselves to become better beggars on the street. This isn't North Korea where marginal poverty is astronomically high per capita. It's also not South Korea where people will take wages less than the dole, because the shame of being on the dole is greater than the shame of not being able to eat.

 

Which would you rather have? 1000 jobs that we have to bail out every few years, or cheaper cars and significantly less of a tax drain for 22,000,000 people? If the field is not sustainable, then it's not sustainable. ADM as it sits now is not sustainable. I'll say it again, it is not sustainable. It doesn't matter how much anyone bitches and moans about losing 1000 jobs, if a field is requiring multi-billion dollar bailouts, then it's not working.

 

And what happens when you lose your job? You find another one. That's it. You do what it takes to find another job. If that means changing fields, then you change fields. It's the nature of every single person on the planet's job. Welcome to capitalism. When a market can no longer compete, it dies and the world adapts to a new market to fill the old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever the country loses in jobs it would gain in dropped car prices once the government no longer has to tax the shit out of imports to make local cars more competitive.

How does that put food on the table for those 1,000's of workers?

 

Everyone knows the mining industry is not sustainable, so thats a short term solution.

 

When the car makers and mining are gone from Australia we are going to have a lot of half skilled workers twiddling their thumbs. Possibly looking at YOUR job

 

It doesnt put food on the table for those 1000 people but the net benefit for the remaining 22,000,000 occupants of this country will outweigh the short term disruption for those 1000 people.

 

Everybody has do deal with the loss of their job sometime in their life, its just reality. I've lost my job before, i didn't go crying to the government to help me, i updated my resume, put myself out there and attended interview after interview until i got another job.

I don't care how specialised your job might be, you will have some skills that are transferable to another role. In the worst case you might have to move interstate, that happens when you live in a small town.

 

Job security for 1000 or even tens of thousands of people is not worth holding the entire country's car market to ransom. Our car prices are so artificially out of whack with the rest of the world, its almost like you're on another planet if you visit a car dealership overseas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mining would be more sustainable if they didnt tax the shit out of it its the only thing we have at the moment

 

Are you high or something dude?

 

Mining suffers MINISCULE TAX, over 80% of the operations are FOREIGN-OWNED, Australia makes jack sh*t off it and mining EMPLOYS ONLY 2% of the population.

 

Supersized font because it's one of the biggest instances of theft the Australian public will ever see. Hell, I pay more in income tax [percentage] than these bastards do, and none of my work takes anything from the communal land.

 

What makes it unsustainable is that Australia gains little or nothing from it, meaning we have less coin to plough into our infrastructure, thereby creating jobs to replace any loss in the mining sector. Once the resources are all gone and the jobs dry up, there will be no capital left to create work for the people. Essentially, we have a resource the equivalent of the Arabs oil, yet do you see wealth like the UAE? No. That's because the cash flows offshore.

 

Despite what their adverts keep telling you, these guys are not Aussie and are not your friends. They're here to take our natural resources and give us nothing for it, under the cloak of "business". To quote publications to save time typing:

 

 

http://www.miningaus...experts-respond

It’s no surprise that the version of the mining tax designed by the three largest mining companies, and negotiated over a couple of days with then newly installed Prime Minister Gillard will raise far less tax that was expected from the first version of the mining tax designed by Ken Henry.

What is a surprise, however, is how close to zero the miners version of the tax will raise.

The miners bastion of the mining tax is not only set at a much lower rate than the original, but it has a much narrower base.

While it covers coal and iron ore, it excludes gold, copper, uranium and all of Australia’s other scarce mineral resources.

The rationale for excluding these minerals has never been provided, and the costs of excluding gold, which continues to trade at record levels, is enormous; 83% of Australia’s mining is foreign owned and, in turn 83% of the profits head overseas.

The mining industry employs around 2% of the workforce and pays the lowest rate of tax on its profits of any industry in Australia.

The original mining tax would have ensured that the mining industry made the kind of contribution to the taxpayer that their expensive advertisements claim they do.

Today’s figures show that the 98% of Australians who don’t work in mining will see very little return from the high prices that foreign companies can seek Australia’s scarce resources for. We are missing out on a once in a generation opportunity.

 

http://en.wikipedia....source_Rent_Tax

The Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) is a tax on profits generated from the exploitation of non-renewable resources in Australia. It was a replacement for the proposed Resource Super Profit Tax (RSPT).

The tax, levied on 30% of the "super profits" from the mining of iron ore and coal in Australia, was introduced on 1 July 2012. A company was to pay the tax when its annual profits reach $75 million, a measure designed so as not to burden small business. The original threshold was to be $50 million until independent MP Andrew Wilkie negotiated an amendment. Around 320 companies will potentially be affected by the changes.

 

It blows my mind as to why the government has wasted any time "negotiating" with the mining companies. Even if they jack the tax into the sky, as long as those businesses are turning a profit, they will continue on. It's not like they're spoiled for choice with regard to viable locations with vast mineral reserves.

Edited by pmod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pmod enlightenment = Semi-Buddah.

 

He's right, European resources pay 70% + in tax.

 

The rest of the world really are taking our resources, then paying us cents while raking in billions.

 

Nothings changed really in 70 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pmod enlightenment = Semi-Buddah.

 

:lol:

 

Need to write a book about how businesses and Government are all sh*tkunts, and see how many followers it gets haha.

Edited by pmod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pmod enlightenment = Semi-Buddah.

 

laugh.png

 

Need to write a book about how businesses and Government are all sh*tkunts, and see how many followers it gets haha.

 

The book fascinated him, or more exactly it reassured him. In a sense it told him nothing that was new, but that was part of the attraction. It said what he would have said, if it had been possible for him to set his scattered thoughts in order. It was the product of a mind similar to his own, but enormously more powerful, more systematic, less fear-ridden. The best books, he perceived, are those that tell you what you know already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pmod enlightenment = Semi-Buddah.

 

:lol:

 

Need to write a book about how businesses and Government are all sh*tkunts, and see how many followers it gets haha.

  1. Call it "The Bible: Next Chapters"
  2. Turn it into a religion
  3. ????
  4. Profit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pmod enlightenment = Semi-Buddah.

 

laugh.png

 

Need to write a book about how businesses and Government are all sh*tkunts, and see how many followers it gets haha.

  1. Call it "The Bible: Next Chapters"
  2. Turn it into a religion
  3. ????
  4. Profit

 

Already exists.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_and_Practice_of_Oligarchical_Collectivism

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mining would be more sustainable if they didnt tax the shit out of it its the only thing we have at the moment

 

Are you high or something dude?

 

Mining suffers MINISCULE TAX, over 80% of the operations are FOREIGN-OWNED, Australia makes jack sh*t off it and mining EMPLOYS ONLY 2% of the population.

 

Supersized font because it's one of the biggest instances of theft the Australian public will ever see. Hell, I pay more in income tax [percentage] than these bastards do, and none of my work takes anything from the communal land.

 

What makes it unsustainable is that Australia gains little or nothing from it, meaning we have less coin to plough into our infrastructure, thereby creating jobs to replace any loss in the mining sector. Once the resources are all gone and the jobs dry up, there will be no capital left to create work for the people. Essentially, we have a resource the equivalent of the Arabs oil, yet do you see wealth like the UAE? No. That's because the cash flows offshore.

 

Despite what their adverts keep telling you, these guys are not Aussie and are not your friends. They're here to take our natural resources and give us nothing for it, under the cloak of "business". To quote publications to save time typing:

 

 

http://www.miningaus...experts-respond

It’s no surprise that the version of the mining tax designed by the three largest mining companies, and negotiated over a couple of days with then newly installed Prime Minister Gillard will raise far less tax that was expected from the first version of the mining tax designed by Ken Henry.

What is a surprise, however, is how close to zero the miners version of the tax will raise.

The miners bastion of the mining tax is not only set at a much lower rate than the original, but it has a much narrower base.

While it covers coal and iron ore, it excludes gold, copper, uranium and all of Australia’s other scarce mineral resources.

The rationale for excluding these minerals has never been provided, and the costs of excluding gold, which continues to trade at record levels, is enormous; 83% of Australia’s mining is foreign owned and, in turn 83% of the profits head overseas.

The mining industry employs around 2% of the workforce and pays the lowest rate of tax on its profits of any industry in Australia.

The original mining tax would have ensured that the mining industry made the kind of contribution to the taxpayer that their expensive advertisements claim they do.

Today’s figures show that the 98% of Australians who don’t work in mining will see very little return from the high prices that foreign companies can seek Australia’s scarce resources for. We are missing out on a once in a generation opportunity.

 

http://en.wikipedia....source_Rent_Tax

The Minerals Resource Rent Tax (MRRT) is a tax on profits generated from the exploitation of non-renewable resources in Australia. It was a replacement for the proposed Resource Super Profit Tax (RSPT).

The tax, levied on 30% of the "super profits" from the mining of iron ore and coal in Australia, was introduced on 1 July 2012. A company was to pay the tax when its annual profits reach $75 million, a measure designed so as not to burden small business. The original threshold was to be $50 million until independent MP Andrew Wilkie negotiated an amendment. Around 320 companies will potentially be affected by the changes.

 

It blows my mind as to why the government has wasted any time "negotiating" with the mining companies. Even if they jack the tax into the sky, as long as those businesses are turning a profit, they will continue on. It's not like they're spoiled for choice with regard to viable locations with vast mineral reserves.

 

Well said mate, I was about to jump on that poorly informed comment of Chris's until I kept scrolling and you had already aced it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does that put food on the table for those 1,000's of workers?

 

Everyone knows the mining industry is not sustainable, so thats a short term solution.

 

When the car makers and mining are gone from Australia we are going to have a lot of half skilled workers twiddling their thumbs. Possibly looking at YOUR job

This might sounds like a hard truth, but I don't understand why people like you think that there's no other jobs out there. It's like we're already scrounging for the jobs that we've got and the world will fall apart if someone loses theirs. As shitty as the infrastructure can be in SA, this isn't Greece where people are having to move countries to get another job. This isn't the parts of Africa where there's no infrastructure around to get even that first job. This isn't India where people intentionally harm themselves to become better beggars on the street. This isn't North Korea where marginal poverty is astronomically high per capita. It's also not South Korea where people will take wages less than the dole, because the shame of being on the dole is greater than the shame of not being able to eat.

 

Which would you rather have? 1000 jobs that we have to bail out every few years, or cheaper cars and significantly less of a tax drain for 22,000,000 people? If the field is not sustainable, then it's not sustainable. ADM as it sits now is not sustainable. I'll say it again, it is not sustainable. It doesn't matter how much anyone bitches and moans about losing 1000 jobs, if a field is requiring multi-billion dollar bailouts, then it's not working.

 

And what happens when you lose your job? You find another one. That's it. You do what it takes to find another job. If that means changing fields, then you change fields. It's the nature of every single person on the planet's job. Welcome to capitalism. When a market can no longer compete, it dies and the world adapts to a new market to fill the old.

 

 

If holden and ford are not sustainable then neither are the car companys from the usa and germany

 

price per person for car company bailouts

Australia $17.80

Germany $90

USA $264

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sources please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What shits me is the government has to help holden with money ( taxpayers money ) but holden has plenty of money to throw at v8 supercars. How thef**k does that work ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because V8 super cars aren't really holden back nor are they really commodores/falcon/c63/altima

 

And most of the 150million government cash gets sent back to the government as income tax anyways (120million). So really it cost tax payers 30million for a 450million dollar return yearly investment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because V8 super cars aren't really holden back nor are they really commodores/falcon/c63/altima

 

And most of the 150million government cash gets sent back to the government as income tax anyways (120million). So really it cost tax payers 30million for a 450million dollar return yearly investment

 

That's a ridiculous justification. We are not putting 150 million to get 120 million back, we would get the vast majority of that tax even if there was no bailout. The govt bailout would account for a tiny insignificant fraction of the tax bill.

Edited by Chappy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because V8 super cars aren't really holde

 

n back nor are they really commodores/falcon/c63/altima

 

And most of the 150million government cash gets sent back to the government as income tax anyways (120million). So really it cost tax payers 30million for a 450million dollar return yearly investment

 

 

 

 

I know these cars aren't really what they are badged, but holden motorsport sponsors hrt and pretty much all other holden badged cars, so where does holden motorsport get their money from ??????

... Also gmh doesnt pay the income tax employees do and it ain't that much. Without government assistance gmh would fall so fast.

Edited by S15 sxytime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ They've admitted themselves that the Commodore is killing them & openly admit they do better with imported Holden models because the manufacturing costs are offshore and much cheaper. Outsource more of the assembly on the commo, drop the price accordingly and they might turn an honest profit, not just report the govt bailout as their profit margin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would have to know how Holden is structured internally to know what division the funds go to. The Motorsport division may be plenty profitable and not require funding at all, it is probably dealt with as a separate entity under the Holden badge and therefore appears as a different entry in the books. Yes it all falls under the Holden banner but Im guessing the division causing the losses is the manufacturing division and this is where the money is needed.

 

You would think that one side bails out the other, but Im not sure if Holden operate like that, would need clarification from Holden finance

 

It seems sad that market perceptions can have a such a drastic effect on the lives of many. It is easy to look at this from a larger consumerist/capitalist perspective and yes markets operate like that over time and correct themselves. However we operate in the now and no one wants to try and live in the depression. I understand its a part of the global cycle, doesnt mean its a good thing. Anyone thinking that the mass loss of jobs is a good thing and the market repercussions wont hit them is deluded and sounds like someone who has watched too many YouTube videos or fresh out of their 1st year business degree (not pointing fingers, this statement is in reference to general comments from news.com.au)

 

29631133.jpg

 

Not picking fights here but callous statements basically saying 'sucked in you backed the wrong horse, my manufacturer of choice does it better' really don't help the situation or address the problem. These seem to be the norm in the current news coverage comments

 

It baffles my mind that people don think the fallout from 3 car manufacturers failing will impact their own lives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So your argument is, "I think differently so f**k you."?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×