Not worth the effort of disputing.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Amazon
Collapse
X
-
As fruit consumers we have made a rod for our own back: the miserable practice that a speck on an apple banana or pear deems it worthy only for the cannery or rubbish tip.
That every piece of fruit in a supermarket has to be exactly the same size....let's look at this size thing a little closer.
Once upon a time customers did not pick and weigh fruit...the storekeeper did. You got big, small, good and sometimes the bad depending on where you shopped.
Fruit was also dead cheap.
Some years ago, my cousins who grow cherries...had to invest in a gigantic grader. Half a million $.
Now, that grader isn't big enough...so they've had to buy an even larger, more gigantic one ( these things are loooong). Of course in addition to the expense of the new grader, came the cost of a new super-sized shed to house it.
The net result is we pay in excess of $15 a kg for this fruit, up to $30 for the most eye-catching.
And now that it's picking time....a heavy flooding downpour will ruin the crop (the cherries swell and burst and they are left to rot on the trees). And all that investment for nought for this season.
The irony is that by far the best, sweetest, tastiest cheeries I ever had were ones which had been allowed to ripen to their full potential on the tree after a rain. Pickers would have chaged $3 a kg to pick them...but for what? No-one would buy them.
- Flag
Comment
-
That article is a mind blower, really cool! Makes you realize why you pay taxes and you can justify providing medicare and unemployment payments. The slight problem I see with the model is the super rich actors both individuals and companies don't pay any tax. I am firmly on the side of cutting taxes for high income earners and companies, as the super rich will spend less money on lawyers and accountants avoiding tax and moving funds or profits offshore. This will result in more actual tax paid and benefit everyone one in the economy by having a trickle down effect.
One the positive side I have also seen some amazing delivery times from Amazon. Ordered Friday delivered Monday with FedEx Express, to have something delivered as fast as I could get something delivered locally even with next day delivery is astounding. Although the rates for FexEx are pretty savage.
- Flag
Comment
-
rooster, I agree with you that many businesses do not pay any or a fair rate of tax.
If they don't pay tax already, I fail to see how reducing the tax rates will cause them to pay more.
My experience with human nature is that if people can avoid tax, they will, regardless of income.
I am a sceptic regarding the so-called "trickle-down effect". Trickle down into CEO salaries, Director's Fees and share dividends maybe.
What we need is more energetic ATO enforcement of sanctions for companies that move their profits off-shore.
(and restrictions of CEO salaries - I saw in the financial news last night that the stated salary of the new BHP CEO is $1.7M but his total package is $11.2M. Seriously - what a rort.)
- Flag
Comment
-
The pay of the ceo of that huge mining company is peanuts compared to Qantas ceo Alan Joyce's $24 million.Originally posted by Rocky View Post.
(and restrictions of CEO salaries - I saw in the financial news last night that the stated salary of the new BHP CEO is $1.7M but his total package is $11.2M. Seriously - what a rort.)
We could also discuss so-called A-lister film stars getting $40 million per picture plus a percentage of revenue for a few weeks "work". Or hip hop "artists" whose only "talent" is throwing together angry words that rhyme making millions or billions.
- Flag
Comment
-
Robusto, I think 'entertainers' - movie stars, performers, sports stars etc, are in a different category from CEOs who are corporate servants answerable (supposedly) to the shareholder and appointed by the company board.
If you own the company, you can pay yourself what you wish but I think corporate salaries have got out of control due to complicit Boards who perhaps are involved in a mutually beneficial arrangement in regard to remuneration.
- Flag
Comment
-
Rocky - One of the principle of free markets in economics is that the money will flow to cheaper tax areas and to countries who offer subsidies. The people who win with Australian high taxes are a) accountants b) lawyers many of whom later become politicians. Have a look at this article https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-...22?pfmredir=sm it is like cracking down on drugs, never has worked, never will work. The problem is the lawyers and accountants working for large multi-nationals are better and smarter on average and will be a step ahead of compliance and regulatory/tax changes. I can see two ways where companies pay more tax 1) lower tax rates (to the lower end of company tax rates world-wide) so that it becomes not worth off shoring or redirecting funds 2) A global tax agreement which eliminates tax haven's and standardizes taxes in the global market.
Robusto - Again I don't agree on capping executive salaries as we will end up with bottom of the barrel executives running Australian companies. This will mean top level executive talent leaving to overseas markets where they can get paid for their skills. In a free market economy the companies will pay market value for their executives. Having a look at this article though https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...16-p5319d.html I would say that Qantas are paying overmarket and Joyce's salary is well above salaries for our big 4 banks. The previous CEO was earning around 4 million per annum and doing better than Joyce.
- Flag
Comment
-
Rooster, I don't share your belief that paying 'less than (global) market rates for salaries will produce a 'brain-drain' in Australia.
If you look at our spectacularly well-paid CEOs over the last 30 years or so you will see that most of them were nothing special and whether they produced success for their companies was more due to wider global conditions than any individual talent. (They were often best at giving staff the high-jump to improve the short-term bottom-line))
I have never subscribed to the belief that exorbitant salaries buy you a genius. Real life just isn't like that. You see it on a micro-level in all organisations. I worked for a lot of organisations where the top people were just duds whose ruthlessness and ambition propelled them to the top jobs. In my working life I saw very few really talented leaders and the few I saw were usually quickly sidelined by the ruthlessly ambitious further up the food chain.
- Flag
Comment
-
-
That's dead right. It can work for a short time in developing economies, but that's about it. There's a market for excuses for people to feather their own nest while purporting to do so in the national interest.Originally posted by Javaphile View PostTrickle down economics doesn't work as the last 30+ years in the US has proven. The rich take everything given and continue to demand more.
Java "Greed rules" phile
- Flag
Comment

Comment