Gillard driving Australia to economic distortion

Share |

Australia’s PM says ‘Australia won't be able to meet its targets for reducing carbon gas emissions without charging polluters’. Actually that is not true. She could if she wanted to simply legislate to prohibit or phase out those technologies and industries which cause pollution. After all, if the government really believes there is a dire catastrophe around the corner from climate change, it ought to take that action. The reality is that the government is using ‘fake science’ to lobby for more tax, knowing full well it will not reduce carbon emissions. In fact it will have the opposite effect; as all government ‘ideas’ tend to have. Let me give you some examples:

1. Governments in Australia, NZ, Germany, Denmark, etc had the great idea of offering free insulation to the poor, and to those homes which are reluctant to invest in such schemes. Far from resulting in subsidies, it saw installers mark up their prices, so there was in fact no benefit for home owners. It gets worse. All those installers took on more staff who incorrectly installed the product resulting in legal action, and in some cases the product integrity (i.e. the water-repellant character of the product) has been questioned, i.e. AirFoam in NZ. It gets worse. Far from helping people to save energy, it actually gave homeowners an incentives to shift from insulating their bodies with clothes to using 'inefficiently' heating their entire homes with wood fires. So some 800,000 homes in NZ alone could end up consuming more energy than they would otherwise have used...because consuming it before would have been a waste of money.

2. Governments argue too that penalizing polluters will cut pollution; but in fact it will push industry offshore to China, or other third world countries where standards are more lax, and these companies will have to ship products around, so transport costs will be higher. It can only result in a sub-optimal response. Of course business wants a carbon trading scheme so it can simply pass on the cost to customers. Of course it does not care as long as the world follows the same stupidity. This is the stupid pragmatic or relativist philosophy which will drive the world towards fascism. It gets worse.

3. Governments will be far less efficient with the tax dollars collected than business, because governments don’t actually create wealth. You say governments are not supposed to create wealth..true, but they ought to facilitate wealth creation, not sabotage the process. We must remember we really can’t afford to obstruct wealth creation, lest we be underfunded or too poor when a real catastrophe arises. Its not just about the money either; its the technology that money allows us to fund. Technology which allows us to overcome such challenges. You will not hear about those products from government. Why? Because it is not responsible for them. They are only responsible for the real crises, like financial meltdown, caused by government intervention in financial markets.

For those who still believe there is a primarily human cause to climate change, let me raise the specter of solar flares and sun spots. Research since 2005 is showing that this is a far more plausible cause of recent climate fluctuations. The correlation is unmistakably good for the last few years of day. Al Gore swooned people with his ‘hockey stick’. It was a fabrication based on dubious extrapolation of data.

If there is an end for the world in sight, it is going to be precipitated by government, and its unthinking leaders like Julia Gillard. Taxing pollution will not cut pollution it will merely impose a cost on existing plants. It will speed up the replacement of old plants. The reality is that the government does not believe the science either. It just feels compelled to appease its unthinking electoral support base. Really Labor cannot think beyond that. It will do a fabulous backdown after the election. Should we be worried then? Well yes, because we will awaken the next day as a fascist regime where facts have been displaced by the arbitrary assertions of politicians. Liberals in the media will help us get there.

Want to know more about climate change - then listen to critical thinking scientists, not the academics detached from reality with a liberal agenda. You never here about them in the media.

------------------------------------

Author

Andrew Sheldon

Resource Rent Tax Australia

Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Miners cancelling projects by the dozen

Share |

The Rudd government's plan to expropriate wealth from mining sector investors is the most opportunistic grab for cash we have probably seen in the last 100 years. Oh, there was an attempt by a Labor state government to seize the private property in the name of the public good in Parramatta a few years ago. That issue when to the High Court. Clearly this issue is heading in the same direction.

Rudd is clearly dividing the country on an important issue. It is a surprising issue. One would have hoped that we would have developed a respect for people's property centuries ago, but because of the intellectual ambivalence or inefficacy of a great many Australians, the prospect of individuals or governments stealing wealth from others is just controversial. We might have some sympathy for a person without moral guidance, if they resorted to stealing, then we might appreciate their 'grab for cash' in order to feed themselves.

The problem is that such arguments are not about 'needs' trumping rights (or wants), but about the litany of non-thoughts, non-decisions which manifested in that person needing to steal. Why did he become a thief when he could have become a productive person. No positive influences. So what type of role model is the Rudd government when it seeks to expropriate the wealth of Australians, and why is it opportunistically stealing this cash after just having passed through one of the most glorious market conditions the country has ever seen? Its not even short for cash. This is all about power over money. Rudd is not content to marry a multi-millionaire, he has to extort a thousand more besides. Legally of course. Its a fine line under fascism. All you have to do is offer the 'appearance' of a concession to enough voters, and they will sell their souls for some short range benefit. The strategy is old - divide and rule. This month the target is miners. In a few years, the Rudd would have diminished the ego of Australians by another quart, and the extent of their repression would have sunk another decibel. The number of productive members in society would have shrunk another 0.5%, and tax receipts will need a kick up to help all those extra cases of mental illness and anxiety that have been added to the cues because Rudd and a litany of other political middlemen have offered 'carrots' to those who did not deserve them, and effectively bludgeoned the productive people in this country.

We owe the productive class in any country a great deal. We do not honour them by expropriating their wealth. The reason they evade taxes, the reason why your claims exceed your generosity, is because you did not earn the right to enslave them. You never will. It is an indefensible principle. Your justification that the 'common good' trumps the individual is an illusion long since dispelled. You are not convinced because no one has appealed to your better interest at the level which you need. There are two arguments:

1. Self worth: There are those who argue that personal self worth is intrinsic or unconditional, and those who argue that its conditional or earned. This debate is mostly conceded to the collectivists or socialists. There is a great deal of rationalism here and equivocation. Right to life should not amount to claims on others rights.

2. Cognition: So long as people think cognitive efficacy is based on intuition, the collective will, there will be no chance of achieving any sense of mental efficacy, and thus no prospect of anyone retaining self-esteem.

Kevin Rudd is undermining the intellectual capital of this country. The foreign capital which will find over markets is just the start. Australia's brightest minds will head offshore. They already have. There are already a million-odd Australians living abroad. They have left the 'lucky country'. I dare say, most of them did it for the money....a very concrete reason. Rudd has given them a more compelling reason....a desire to find a country where thinkers and achievers are valued, and not bludgeoned, both financially and intellectually.

If you want an example, of what life under Rudd will be like, look no further than NZ. NZ very much lives under Australia's shadow because it cannot attract skilled people. It therefore has problem with business starts. It therefore has to substitute departing skilled NZ'ers with semi-skilled imports from Asia with collectivist values. The problem with collectivism is that its indulgent and non-intellectual. They are the basis for simple jobs like waiting on tables. They are not the values which underpin business. To be fair to these migrants, they are the best in their country. The implication is that there is a brain drain from Asia, and then we have 0.5 million NZ'ers in Australia. This is a brain drain as well. They are not just chasing money, the underlying values are different.

NZ is not a country you would associate with aspirational values. The aspirational ones leave. This of course concentrates the parasitical souls who think it is acceptable to renounce responsibility and live off the efforts of other people. As parents, we know that life is about teaching kids the consequences of their actions. Its also why we don't spoil them. If we spoil them, these cease to value, they cease to achieve. Only humanity, the 'conceptual animal' possesses the stupidity to do that. Animals cannot afford it, no species can afford to renounce its only self-worth...its too fundamental. That is what Kevin Rudd is doing, by giving people an ultimatum between:

1. Perpetrator - if you support or suspend your judgement about this Resource Rent Tax

2. Victim - loss of wealth, loss of efficacy, disempowerment, brain drain if you allow the Resource Rent Tax to be adopted.

This is not a single issue...it is a principle that has to be grasped. The line should have been drawn not at some arbitrary point, but a principle - respect for property rights. This breach was made possible by the judiciary which sanctioned the enactment of arbitrary rule. This was a departure from Common Law, which is based on principles. When 'the people' allowed that, when the judiciary allowed that, government became capable of anything. Now we have a plethora of publicly-funded spineless academics advocating far worse. Yes, miners are forced to support a whole industry which because of their concrete-based thinking, will end up destroying them, or punishing them offshore.

The problem is that governments around the world are reducing the standards of value all around the world. There is no where to find. Eventually the internet transactions will be taxed. Google on 0.1% tax rate in Australia...it will have no where to hide. Google I think pays a 10% tax in Ireland. Not in future. There will be a litany of new regulations to stop it. And you will support this new tax or law because its in your 'narrow', 'concrete' interests. You will give no thought to the more abstract principles involved. By that point the number of intellectuals will be a fraction of a percent.

Basically there is not going to be anywhere to hide. You can confront the parasites in your government, or you can confront the parasites in Asia, where you might be compelled to live because money goes further. The problem is - they know you have money. The paradox is that they want to get out of their country. There is literary no where to hide from arbitrary government. On forums, I warn Americans coming to Australia or NZ of their false hope...they have this expectation that they can escape the parasites in their government...there is no where to hide. These people have to be confronted.

------------------------------------

Author

Andrew Sheldon

Resource Rent Tax

Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Where do the smart capitalists and parasites hide?

Share |

"Four Corners tells the story of Heinrich Kieber – roguish hero to some, amoral thief to others - and the worldwide fallout from his actions".

Hiding money overseas is not difficult if you have a lot. All you need to do is hire some consultants. The trick is to find a way of hiding money without anyone finding out. The art of money laundering is attacked by Western (OECD) governments because it reduces their tax receipts. These people are depicted as drug traffickers and other low life. But could it be possible that they are just people who don't agree with the government's right to tax their wealth? Is it possible that these people are just pragmatic or practical capitalists trying to escape an immoral system, just as the Jews escaped persecution from Hitler.
It does not surprise me because I have such principles....too strong to hide behind some bank vault. Fortunately I am ready for any government tax agency that believes they have a right to my cash. Of course they can expropriate my wealth if I earn income, but as long as I live on savings they can only collect tax from what I spend. Fortunately I have modest needs.

So is Heinrich Kieber a hero? Well clearly not since he was not motivated by principles, but by money. He was paid $6 million for the information and he broke the law to achieve it. Now, before you respond that he is no worse than the capitalist he exposed, consider the following:
1. The capitalists will include among them men of principle who don't believe in tax
2. Men of no principles just trying to pragmatically hide stolen money by fraud or deception

The difference is that Heinrich Kieber is alleged to have stolen proprietary information, which is a Common Land offence, whilst the capitalists have breached an arbitrary legislative law, enacted by politicians wanting to enslave capital and capitalists for their constituency. A great many people don't think so they will not make a distinction, but they are hardly the same offences. Legislation is based on arbitrary, subjective law. I don't think it makes much difference whether you are enslaved by a majority or a minority, if you are forced to hand over your wealth or earnings, you are not a free man. So Heinrich Kieber to me is the equivalent of a gun runner for terrorists. The capitalists are just average men, most of whom don't have the clarity of mind to express their ethical principles, or otherwise they just think REASON is not the standard, so why should I show my money. Good luck to them. I trust they did not put all their money in the one place. Clearly the best way to hide money is:
1. In different people's names
2. In different countries
3. In different languages
I would rather help 10 honest men and 10 dishonest men than 1 government because every government I know is intent on enslaving the people they represent. The truth of the matter is that Western governments are imposing their system on every corner of the world. I actually think its great that there are conflicts in the world, because as long as there are ethical divides there will be:
1. Greater reflection on moral principles
2. Somewhere to hide
3. A critic of Western practices - where Western governments have defiled the concept of freedom. The concept no longer means anything. Ideas don't mean anything. People are anti-science. Even scientists are anti-conceptual. This is another fascist period again. You might be surprised by the things I say but consider the following:
1. Most academics are paid by government-owned institutions - places of safety, not competition
2. Most scientists only utilise the scientific method, which is based on indiction rather than deduction. Science has been reduced to statistics. Causation has been abandoned
3. Most philosophers are sceptics, who engage in rationalist arguments like its a mental game detached from reality. You see this from academics who sproute different ideas, but they have no commitment to any. They want to show how small you are because you don't know their secret terminology. They are word snobs, yet they would starve without a government salary. These are the impractical intellectual brutes. They are teaching your children.
-------------------------------------------------
Andrew Sheldon www.sheldonthinks.com