More On Land Taxes
Venal Governments and Anti-Prosperity Attitudes
Couple of things from the weekend press.
In the "Australian Financial Review" interesting article about the Victorian government...
"More serious is the land tax fiasco which has come back to haunt the government...Last Tuesday Bracks admitted he would have to act on skyrocketing land tax bills after a loud campaign by small business landholders typically facing 10-fold increases...
The concern is that new valuation methods, high property prices and lack of indexation are continuing to push modest landowners into land tax rates meant for the rich, and that the government is happy to pocket the windfall proceeds."
Well, fancy that! Just another indication of the risk in owning land and property in the future as governments desperately try to raise revenue.
Secondly, I couldn't help include this example of "anti-prosperity" thinking that is just so typical and widespread in the media.
It comes from Alan Ramsey's column in Saturday's "Sydney Morning Herald". Now I must confess that reading Ramsey's column is something that's a bit of a secret vice for me. I know I shouldn't do it, but I can't seem to resist. It's probably something to do with the fact that years ago I did admire his writing. Then something happened and he seemed to change (or maybe I did). Now, he just seems a very bitter and twisted individual.
Anyway, the article is about health care and it's failings in country areas ("Country Health Care A Poor Cousin"). Needless to say, it's all John Howard's fault of course and we need to spend bucket loads more money.
However, what really caught my attention was this comment in response to the observation that "To achieve it, Medicare funding has to provide a financial incentive, because the quickest way of getting the consultants to participate with enthusiasm is to let them know they will get more money."
Ramsey thunders...
"Of course. Money. Cross the medical specialist's palm with increased taxpayers' silver and one of the wealthiest, most highly remunerated professional groups in the community will do its bit to help bring those cancer mortality rates down. It's a sick old world."
Think of all the envy, resentment and jealousy (not to mention misplaced self-righteousness) contained in that! This sort of stuff is, unfortunately, all too common in the media. The implication, of course, is that it's wrong for medical professionals to make money and of course, we're back to the old staple that free health care is a "right" (yes, but who pays?).
Couple of things from the weekend press.
In the "Australian Financial Review" interesting article about the Victorian government...
"More serious is the land tax fiasco which has come back to haunt the government...Last Tuesday Bracks admitted he would have to act on skyrocketing land tax bills after a loud campaign by small business landholders typically facing 10-fold increases...
The concern is that new valuation methods, high property prices and lack of indexation are continuing to push modest landowners into land tax rates meant for the rich, and that the government is happy to pocket the windfall proceeds."
Well, fancy that! Just another indication of the risk in owning land and property in the future as governments desperately try to raise revenue.
Secondly, I couldn't help include this example of "anti-prosperity" thinking that is just so typical and widespread in the media.
It comes from Alan Ramsey's column in Saturday's "Sydney Morning Herald". Now I must confess that reading Ramsey's column is something that's a bit of a secret vice for me. I know I shouldn't do it, but I can't seem to resist. It's probably something to do with the fact that years ago I did admire his writing. Then something happened and he seemed to change (or maybe I did). Now, he just seems a very bitter and twisted individual.
Anyway, the article is about health care and it's failings in country areas ("Country Health Care A Poor Cousin"). Needless to say, it's all John Howard's fault of course and we need to spend bucket loads more money.
However, what really caught my attention was this comment in response to the observation that "To achieve it, Medicare funding has to provide a financial incentive, because the quickest way of getting the consultants to participate with enthusiasm is to let them know they will get more money."
Ramsey thunders...
"Of course. Money. Cross the medical specialist's palm with increased taxpayers' silver and one of the wealthiest, most highly remunerated professional groups in the community will do its bit to help bring those cancer mortality rates down. It's a sick old world."
Think of all the envy, resentment and jealousy (not to mention misplaced self-righteousness) contained in that! This sort of stuff is, unfortunately, all too common in the media. The implication, of course, is that it's wrong for medical professionals to make money and of course, we're back to the old staple that free health care is a "right" (yes, but who pays?).
posted by Kevin Francis at
10:14 pm
