Right-wing think tanks the toast of the Left
In leftist rag,The New Matilda, Ben Eltham subjected Des Moore’s and Professor Sinclair Davidson’s efforts to careful analysis. Ben Eltham simply threw some of their nonsense back at them. Neither answered, again. Eltham’s articles could convince readers who are unsure whether the free market case is wrong, immoral and destructive. It degenerates. If Eltham is an economist, it is a well concealed secret. (1)
Pensions
Eltham certainly has a point.
The reason given for retention of the WWII war tax, PAYE, was to ensure all Australians had a retirement income. Politicians have since used it for buying toys and votes. So, naturally, they had to cut pensions by imposing ‘means tests’ (whatever that callous insult means), RBA’s monetary poison lopping more off and, as uncle Tony Abbot says, granting benefactions - unobservable increases – even pensioners didn’t spot the last one!
Those lucky enough to get a pension, either:
1) Go without main meals. Many don’t use life preservers, eg. air-conditioning. Some stay in bed all day shivering in winter, and starving, because they bloody well can’t afford to look after themselves.
2) Those able to, shove off to what they assumed they’d finished with, hard work. They “pension sacrifice”, earning back the “sacrifice” and then some more to afford rent, power and food. Thrilling, isn’t it?
What do they get from from the CIS, IPA and Tony Abbott ? “The little lazy ingrates lazing about in bed all day can jolly well go out and work until they drop dead.” (2)
Am I missing something? The politicians have broken the oath sworn obligation. The CIS and IPA say it is ‘economic theory’, it is principled to starve them back into work after 60 and flog them to death.
The CIS, IPA, Tony Abbott, Rudd, Swann, Dr. Ken Henry also believe it is fine to do in pensioners, who have worked damned hard all their lives and been taxed to the eyeballs. Rudd, Swann and Henry want to do this to those building their own nest eggs too - I expect to hear the Right say, “Foine, foine, foine”.
It’s moral. No fraud involved. They are irked only by the little shriveled up sods who won’t co-operate.
Eltham didn’t mention many leftists mates, who enough like the Rudds got wealthy from pseudo-businesses and psuedo-charities (The Wilderness Society for one), are no damned better. Yet, Eltham has a point.
It’s OK for the left to immiserate millions and abuse pensioners. It’s another matter when the Right do it. It is despicable. This alone has driven many to the ALP. There are readers who have queried in emails the claim the Right is the reason for the hard Left’s “success”.
Eltham, though, isn’t honest. There is “middle class welfare” doled out in billions of dollars. Local Councils and States’ and Federal Cabinets have raised ‘armies’ of ‘careerists’ and Kommissars who are not public servants. They are an insult to public servants (this is genuinely meant). On top of this, of course, there are more of these types such as legalists (not common law lawyers) making heaps out of enforcing decrees and another special mention must go to:
IPA and CIS, collecting off hapless shareholders thanks to witless directors and executives. Ron Manners, besides also funding the CIS and IPA, has encouraged more of these useless dumbkopfs through his Mannkal Foundation. All you bought, Ron Manners, is duds. Are you daft, or just in love with the self-PR photo shoots?
Professor Sinclair Davidson’s epic journey – discovery of the Laffer curve, still trying
Eltham claims “Oz” is one of the lowest taxed countries in the world. What is that supposed to mean (including if it were the opposite)? Here we are into capital theory. Eltham is equal to the Right, which shows up in Parliament; the Right put the factor into, the cringe-factor.
It is fun reminding Professor Sinclair Davidson, RMIT’s in-house amusement arcade and IPA’s gun, how feeble he really is. It did seem, though, the Left were gassed out on Quiggin’s ‘treatment’ of “Sinker’s” efforts on the Laffer curve. Wrong!
Eltham’s treatment of company taxation is asinine but it is as good as anything Davidson and the rest of the CIS and IPA have produced. Eltham finishes with a searing conclusion, ‘if you can stomach it, read him’. But, Eltham has crossed from cautious barbs into economics.
John F. Kennedy faced a crisis. His administration was facing falling tax revenues and he wanted to spend, and then there was the Vietnam War to fund too. The point of the Laffer curve was to show the only way out of recession and for growth is savings accumulation and it meant cutting the tax rate. Jackson demonstrated in Brookesnews, skewering Quiggin in the process, the truth of this for the Ronald Reagan and George Bush tax cuts. (3)
As surprising as it is to many on the Right also, many entrepreneurs in Australia are patriots and considerate of pensioners too. They don’t begrudge paying tax to meet these two obligations at all. Many I’ve chatted with are aghast at the treatment of both by Coalition and ALP Cabinets.
What is entirely false in Eltham’s statement is his misrepresentation of company taxes. Those which destroy capital and stop capital accumulation. It’s evident that it hasn’t occurred to Eltham, and neither to Rudd, Swann, Abbott, and the ‘think tank’ “clowns”, the only way Cabinet and Parliament can continue to meet those obligations is if production is so great that they can be supported out of earnings. If there is expansion in government consumption and increases in payments there must be capital accumulation or something can give way, the whole “blimming lot”. Let’s quote Franz Machlup:
Austria was successful in pushing through policies which are popular all over the world. Austria has most impressive records in five lines: she increased public expenditures, she increased wages, she increased social benefits, she increased bank credits, she increased consumption. After all those achievements she was on the verge of ruin. (Fritz Machlup, The Consumption of Capital in Austria, Review of Economic Statistics, II, 1935, p. 19). (4)
Contrary to Eltham, companies have been writing off investments in Australia over the last three decades, and it hasn’t ceased, because of taxes and regulation. Anyone who can write: company tax and regulatory burdens are light in the face of so much hard evidence is either a liar or a complete and slightly deranged moron. Which are you Eltham?
What of firms that cannot set up overseas? They go down, permanently. This is before the impact of RBA’s poison. Then there is the matter of an over-valued dollar that might have done great damage to Australia’s production structure, Yes, little Elthy, it is a nasty tax too. Oh, try telling investors and employees the contrary, and take Des Moore, Davidson, Ray Evans, Chris Berg and Greg Lindsay. A united presentation to mere oafs is “strength through joy”. I’ll book a ringside seat - just love blood sports.
ETS
Eltham mocks warnings over the impact of ETS as spooky bed time stories for children. The CIS said the same thing. The Right and Left depict it as an income tax that can be compensated for with transfers: PAYE is a pay cut, so is carbon taxation. The Right in Parliament have not departed the ‘group think’. All in all, suspicions that it might be OK are left intact. More to the point, this stupidity will see Rudd ram down the ETS this session of Parliament.
How interesting. The New Matilda is so focused on misleading its readers it peddles the lie that there is nothing wrong with an ETS. One thing is clear, it hasn’t registered in the skulls of Eltham and his welfare-ist mates that they too will be wiped out. After all, Eltham:
ETS: capital tax; 1st aim - destroy efficient coal power; the rest follows. No production = not a zac for fifth columnists either.
(Sorry readers, but as the Right, this crew need it spelled out for them in big crayons.)
Is the rag a void in quality control too? What research? No fact checking? Either they are deliberately lying, or thick, or IQ challenged and lying.
If the Right were only lost at sea in a fog, who’d give a damn?
The rotten thing is, they cast their dense fog over all Australians, discrediting the thoroughly sound and therefore highly moral free market cause and this is what Eltham’s is attacking without having to attempt a rebuttal. Leftists have one thing right:
The Right hand them opportunities to attack free markets without fearing savage, devastating reprisals from the dim-witted, bungling fools.
This reflects the total failure of our right to deal with this issue, and why. They are a bunch of lazy, spiteful and jealous incompetents. Eltham is a lucky guy. He has faced spineless economic illiterates only. Oh, I’m sorry, Elthy, your and your rag’s luck just ran out.
In the mean-time, Eltham, since you and your pals at the rag fancy yourselves as really crash-hot on the matter, why don’t you go for some-one really worth the effort. Just google carbon taxes, Brookesnews, and try and rebut the analysis and demolition of carbon taxes from capital theory. According to you, it’s a shoe-in. Good luck. I await eagerly your sterling demolition.
Yes, Sir, Right-wing think tanks are the toast of the Left, who don’t bother asking whether they take it charcoal burning or just crispy black fried. How inconsiderate.
Footnotes
(1) The Art of Taxation, By Ben Eltham, The New Matilda
The Myth of “Carbon Leakage”, By Ben Eltham- It isn’t ‘leakage’ Elthy, whatever that is supposed to mean. As for “myth’, compare Ray Evans, “It’s all a fantasy”. Who is channelling whom?!
(2)Tony Abbott wrote the position in his manifesto for his central planning grand plan, Battlelines, saying the pension should not be available until 72 years of age. yesterday, on radio, he was trying to extricate himself:
a) “It’s only an idea in the book.” Come again, Tony? This, you yourself declared it, is the ‘thinking man’s book even the man in the street can engage with intellectually’.
b) “It’s not Party policy”. Come again, Tony? Let’s see, you are a Liberal, and now leader of the Liberal Party. You, in 2000 as a member of Cabinet, were also responsible for RECs. RECs is fraud with knobs on. Readers, we have one of a number of items to post today, and many, many more this week. RECs is one of them.
You don’t have a clue about markets, you haven’t even worked in them in firms. You dont’ have a clue about capital. You don’t have a clue as to what you wrote, central planning, but what you wrote you wrote seriously. This is your platform. It could be Hunt’s and Turnbull’s too. Perhaps they plagiarise each other - paragraph, chapter and the whole damned book.
Now what could be going on? I know, the Henry tax report, which has as one of the policies to compel many to work until they drop dead, and to plunder super funds. Abbott and the rest, occupying what are Liberal Party seats, are rubbing their hands with glee. ALP does the dirty work, they collect, is the only inference because the Right, including Peter Costello, have swindled Australians so many times by this very tactic. I’ll withdraw the charge, if wrong. Right now, it looks dead accurate to me.
Unprincipled and oily are only two adjectives that leap before the eyeballs. Why they should, I don’t have a clue. So I have typed them in just in case they mean something.
3) To spell out it out for Professor Sinclair Davidson: It was a device for Kennedy and any President and Prime Minister to use to get past all consuming, all taxing ministers and bureaucrats tax cuts and get off the back of capital. A means of getting through what is a cornerstone of Austrian capital theory:
- Only savings drive growth
- Only savings drags people out of recession
But with the appeal edge: “Thus, Mr. President, you will find tax revenues increasing because production is greater and increasing.”
How clever is that, eh, and yet Professor Sinclair “Sinkers and Sunk” Davidson can’t get a grip.
(4) Jackson’s articles on President Barak Obama’s ‘economic policies’ illuminate Prime Minister Rudd’s and States’ Premiers’ policies rather well. In this article, as an example, Jackson uses the quote with deadly accurate force:
Will a tidal wave of red ink sink the American economy? Brookesnews
Ben Eltham wrote:
Douglas I’d be happy to debate you about the merits or otherwise of the Laffer Curve, the ETS and more, but I would like to point out a couple of misconceptions:
1) “Capital Theory” - you won’t be surprised I’m no fan of neo-classical capital theory, for much the same reasons advanced by John Maynard Keynes. I never claimed that Australian firms enjoy relatively lower taxes than in foreign jurisdictions. What I did point out was that “in return, Australian companies get to operate in one of the least corrupt and most sound macro-
economic environments in the world.”
2) “ETS: capital tax; 1st aim - destroy efficient coal power; the rest follows. No production = not a zac for fifth columnists either.”
It’s simply wrong to argue that Labor’s ETS is a tax on capital; for instance, the coal power that you argue correctly is very efficient is produced mainly by older power plants whose costs are well and truly sunk - which is why Garnaut argued they should not be compensated.
In reality, the ETS is a market reform, since it introduces a price for carbon pollution which is currently not reflected in economic decision making. Production will adjust to less polluting activities in the wake of this marginal cost, as even Austrian economic theory would suggest.
3) The tone of your post. Can I respectfully suggest that while insulting language might be fun to write, it doesn’t encourage the free exchange of ideas, which is something I’m assuming you will be in favour of?
Posted on 08-Feb-10 at 2:10 pm | Permalink
Book Review - Net Entrepreneurs Only wrote:
[…] was deleted Sina News | lena …The 4-Hour Workweek Book Review : Money Funk | Personal Finance …Mangled Thoughts ? Right-wing think tanks the toast of the LeftThe Best Free Article Directory ? Betting Supremacy ReviewFuture Shock: Why Online Content […]
Posted on 08-Feb-10 at 10:52 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
dear mangled, it was the west who actually put saddam into power. and kept him there. castro delivered his people from the hands of a murderering dictator[ american backed ] the think tanks you mention are there to keep their corporate masters in power, not to protect truth and liberty
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 12:14 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
the americans have been resposible for the deths of 8 million [ maily civilians ] since 1945. the left and the right are both capable of mass murder to protect their interests. true socialists believe in democracy, that includes both marx and trotsky. capitalists just believe in profit
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 12:19 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
by the way stalin was no friend of marx or trotsky.stlin actually had trotsky murdered. both marx and trotsky believed in democracy. as do all true socialists. you seem to be forgetting hitler in your history of mass murderers. oh thats right he was a socialist too wasnt he ?
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 12:24 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
more and more scientists are bcoming critical of climate change ? name them. and also name what peer reviewed journals their findings are in? ‘pinochet never received american backing ? apart from being untrue that is illogical. why would they ‘not’ support an anti communist leader ?
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 12:30 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
pinochet came into power by overthrowing democratically elected leader allendes . he was helped by the cia. the overthrow and those involved in it are on record. the americans recently apologised for their part in the coup. the cia openly admit their part in it
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 12:35 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
chaves is a catholic. latin american countries [ now virtually leftists ] are strongly catholic. that seems to contadict your view that socialism is anti christian. marx subscribed to end religion through education not mass murder. you need to ‘unmangle ‘ your thoughts
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 12:42 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
the school of the americas was responsible for the deaths and torure of thousands.the victims have names that are documented. . the american backed dictators of latin america were overthrown for obvious reasons. they were criminals. and criminals that the west fully supported
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 1:38 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
”those lucky enough to get a pension ‘. the pension was a socialist idea. as wascheap medicine for the elderely. virtually all things that have benefited the elderely were socialist reforms.
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 10:05 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
how did the workers creste captalisn, since they had no capital? slavery was abolished because of many reasons. it certainly was not abolished by the capitalists who still use slave labour today in third world countries.people fough for liberation. it was not ;given to them .
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:12 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
it was amusing how you justify the slave trade by saying ‘everyone did it? there is never any moral accountability for capitalist crimes. be it for slavery, resource wars , murder, torture. they even avoid responsibilty for the gfc, blaming it on jimmy carter cowardice is their repeated theme
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:18 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
interesting how you do not defend moncktons reputation.maybe its indefensible ? certainly all criticisms of him are based on things ”he said about himself. the sources can be checked. certainly you do not argue the science. because your views are political and nothing more
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:26 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
capitalism is reckless of the health or length of life of the labourer. unless under compulsion from society. [ karl marx ] the real reason for the abolition of slavery .
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:44 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
while many societies have practiced slavery. [ the spois of war ] the capitalists were the only ones to use it completely for economic reasons. other cultures also treated their slaves far more humanely than the capitalists.to the muslims their slaves were a valubale asset, and wre treated as such. the capitalists let 8 million slaves die in transit. a refection of their base immorality
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:53 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
the proof is in the pudding. these days virtually all of latin america is democratic. surely if the americans had done the right thing in latin america, instead of backing murderers,their legacy would have been remembered fondly and any pro american candidate in any election would have won easily ? insread anyone even remotely connected to america have no hope of winning an election . the people have long memories when it comes to the suffering they endured under puppet governments . hugo chaves is the most popular democratically elected leader in the world . whereas bush was the most ‘unpopular president in american history. i will let you try and rationalise that away
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 4:40 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
the repeated mention of a ”fifth collumn ‘ is quite amusing. all we need is proof we are about to be invaded by a foreign power to make that valid. all major parties in oz are right wing free market capitalists. and the media is owned by rupert murdoch. the ‘reds under the bed ‘ fantasy is evidence of a cold war mentality. maybe someone should mention the cold war is over.
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 4:54 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
democracy is the road to socialism [ karl mar ] i suggest you read karl marx before spreading misinformation . also anyone who knows anything of the history of iraq knows saddam was helped into power by the cia ”i arrived on the cia train [ saddam huusein ] saddam was also helped by the americans during iraqs war with iran. another fact is that the americans vetoed a resolution aimed at saddam for his treatment of the kurds. all this is verfiable if you care to check the apropriate sorces. i agreed that the muslims took part in slavery, as did the greeks and romans. however they did not do it on the industrial level of the capitalists. you obviously see nothing morally wrong with child labour, as it was practiced by the british capitalists . five year old children forced down coal mines ? you have no counter argument , other than saying its all ”lies ‘ a very unintellectual approach and a sure fire way to remain ignorant. i suggest you research the overthrow of allendes. its on histoical record .your entire opinion seems to formed by ignoring certain historical truths that make any sort of rational debate impossible
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:00 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
also your lettering for comment is way to small.you need the hubble telescope to read the print. hence the number of typos. luckily my rational and researched opinions make up for it ? remember, karl marx , saddam hussein and the overthrow of allendes is your homework assignment for today. i’ll evaluate your progress during the week. i think i will need more than one red biro?
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:06 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
allendes was the democratically elected leader of chile. that means he was popular . your slurs seem to contadict this fact if all slaves were castrated in muslim countries. how did black muslims reproduce and populate muslim land as they do today. you contadict your argument beautifully. how can castrated slaves reproduce lol ?your ad hominen attacks furher undermine your argument . your feigned sympathy for the victims of saddan also does not hold true. when he was our allie. you would have thought him acceptable im sure ? now dont forget to answer my question ‘ HOW DID CASTRATED MUSLIM SLAVES REPRODUCE ? I CANT WAIT FOR YOUR REPLY TO THAT ONE . I AM ALSO PLEASED I HAVE YOU ‘RUSHING ‘ TO REPLY. PERSONALLY, IM QUITE CASUAL ABOUT THE WHOLE THING
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:19 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
chaves is roman catholic by the way. jesus himself would be labelled a socialist .socialism actually started with the jews. communal living as on a kibbutz is certaily socialist. if you take into account korea, vietnam.the gulf wars and the other 50odd countries america has bombed since 1945 8 million dead is a conservative estimate.also why do you address your comments to an imaginary audience ? believe me your views are being totally ignored by most sensible people
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:32 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
the capitlists did not abolish slavery . why would they do this ? a certain attack of conscience ? an absurd view. wilberforce was a man of the church not an industrialist.it was public pressure that changes society. the capitalists still practice slavery today. your attempts to paint them as ‘caring ‘ is laughable
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:39 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
at present there are just over 2000 legit climate scientists studying climate? your numbers are pure fantasy ‘THEY HAVE US OUTNUMBERED ‘[ plimer ] not according to your maths? also please direct me to peer reviewed scientific journals their reports are in. i will read it with interest. could you at least give me a few names ? a little more homework for you
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:44 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
in 1970 nixon gave 10 million dollars to help unseat allendes. [ documented fact. whether you liked his politics or not, you do not overthrow democratically elected leaders. it is also against international law
Posted on 14-Feb-10 at 11:52 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
by the way, i in no way condone slavery be it white christian or muslim in origin. according to the quran no race is superior to another. the old testament teaches that blacks originated from the outcast son of noah [ ham ] this is derogatory. and points to a racist agenda by white slave traders.
Posted on 15-Feb-10 at 12:00 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
trotsky was diametrically opposed to stain and lenin ideologically.russia was in a state of civil war during the kronstadt rebellion. needless to say violence does occur during such times. the captalists were responsible for the deaths and slavery of millions. they make trotsky look like mother teresa. how are you going with your homework?
Posted on 15-Feb-10 at 5:08 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
chaves does not need to create a totalitarian state. he is successful using democracy to win power. so bob brown supports terrorists ? ever heard of the contras, . they were a terrorist group backed by the americans. though of course these butchers were called ”freedom fighters ‘. also lets not forget americas backing of the afghan insurgency agins the russians . that seems to have backfired. where did saddam get the gas he used on the kurds ?
Posted on 15-Feb-10 at 5:15 pm | Permalink
orphe wrote:
You’ll love this video on the Laffer curve:
http://www.freedomandprosperity.org/videos/laffercurve1-3/laffercurve1-3.shtml
Posted on 17-Feb-10 at 6:32 am | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
I LOVE THE WAYMANGLED GOES ON ABOUT ”NOT BEING RACIST ‘ BUT THAT HE JUST ”HATES MUSLIM SCUM ‘. LIKE THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ”NON MUSIM SCUM ? HE ATTACKS MUSLIMS, THEN GOES INTO BAT FOR PEOPLE WHO USED TO PUT 5 YEAR OLD CHILDREN DOWN COAL MINES. WHO TRANSPORTED MILLIONS OF SLAVE ACROSS THE ATLANTIC . WHO INVADED AND RIPPED OFF OTHER COUNTRIES, THROWING THE INDEGENOUS PEOPLE IN THOSE LANDS OFF THE LAND AND INTO A LIFE OF POVERTY AND MISERY . AND IF THEY FOUGHT BACK, TORTURE AND DEATH. AND THEY DID IT ALL WITH A BIBLE IN THEIR HAND. HE KNOWS NOTHING OF THE REAL HISTORY OF COUNTROES OPPRSSSED BY CAPITALISM. ANYTHING HE DISAGREES WITH, EVEN THOUGH ITS HISTORICAL FACT, HE CALLS A LIE . AVOIDING THE NEED FOR ANY RATIONAL COUNTER ARGUMENT. HE LOVES A MASS MURDERER [ GEORGE BUSH ] AND DENOUNCES THOSE WHO RESIST THE POISONED IDEOLOGY OF GLOBALISATION.
Posted on 17-Feb-10 at 5:41 pm | Permalink
davidbrown wrote:
THERES MANGLED TALIKING SHIT AGAIN. CLAIMINNG HITLER WAS A SOCIALIST WHEN HE MURDERED THREE MILLION SOCIALISTS IN THE DEATHCAMPS. HITLER WAS HEAVILY INTO PRIVATE ENTERPRISE . HE LOATHED THE COMMINISTS. BUT APPARENTLY , ACCORDING TO MAMNGLED HITLER WAS A COMMUNIST ? A TYPICAL RIGHT WING TACTIC OF BLAMING ALL THINGS FOUL ON THOSE EVIL SOCIALISTS ? AN INABILITY TOTAKE RESPONSIBILTY IS A TYPICAL RIGHT WING TRAIT. SOCIALISM ACTUALLY EVOLVED FROM A NEED TO CONFRONT THE CAPITALISTS . IT WAS ACTUALLY THE INJUSTICES OF CAPTITALISM THAT CREATED SOCIALISM.
Posted on 18-Feb-10 at 11:54 pm | Permalink