Wednesday, March 29, 2017
Labor would lead us to poverty: PM
Malcolm Turnbull has accused the opposition of wanting to lead Australia into poverty by rejecting the government's 10-year corporate tax rate cut.
As the Senate prepares to debate and vote this week on the package aimed at incrementally reducing the company tax rate to 25 per cent, the prime minister warned its rejection would lead to less investment and business and fewer jobs.
"That's Labor's policy. It's the path to poverty," Mr Turnbull told parliament on Tuesday.
However, while one opinion poll on Monday showed two in five Australians backing the $50 billion tax package, the latest Essential Research survey found just three per cent of respondents see it as a priority for the government.
Instead, nearly half want more investment in hospitals and health services as a major priority and close to a third want big business to pay their fair share of tax.
With Labor sticking to its opposition to a widespread tax cut and limiting the reduction to 27.5 per cent for firms with a turnover of $2 million or less, the government needs the support of a fractured crossbench.
However, there appears to be sufficient crossbench agreement to at least back the first leg of the package, which would reduce the rate to 27.5 per cent for business with a $10 million turnover.
At the moment, corporations pay 30 per cent apart from those with $2 million or less turnover, which pay 28.5 per cent.
But Business Council of Australia president Grant King says the $10 million turnover limit is a very low number that would leave thousands of businesses out in the cold and in a "very disadvantaged" position globally.
He believes Australia's tax rate is already uncompetitive after reductions in the UK and Europe.
"If the US tax rate is cut to anywhere near where Trump campaigned, which was a headline rate of 15 per cent, it would make Australia very disadvantaged," Mr King told ABC radio.
But shadow treasurer Chris Bowen argues Australia is already quite competitive.
He said a recent US Congressional Budget Office report showed businesses do not just look at the headline rate, but also other permissible reductions and the overall average rate.
"When you look at our top corporate tax rate of 30 per cent, it comes down much closer to 20 when you look at the average that's actually paid," Mr Bowen told ABC radio.
The government can expect support from crossbench senator Cory Bernardi and Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm, while Pauline Hanson's four One Nation senators will support a reduction for businesses with a turnover of up to $50 million.
Senator Nick Xenophon's three NXT senators will back a reduction for businesses with a $10 million turnover, as will independent Derryn Hinch, while Tasmania's Jacqui Lambie has said she will back a cut for "small business".
Under the initial stages of the plan, the corporate rate drops to 27.5 per cent for businesses with a turnover of $10 million this financial year, then for those with a $25 million turnover in 2017/18 and $50 million in 2018/19.
Rampant ‘rexism’ joins conga line of political correctness
THERE is a new form of bigotry sweeping our nation. Potentially, it’s as pernicious as apartheid, as revolting as the racism against blacks in pre-civil rights America, as vile as sexism against women before the feminist revolution of the ’70s, and as subtle and insidious as the McCarthy-era black-listings.
Although it combines several prejudices, at heart it’s a dangerous combo of racism and sexism. So I’m going to give this new form of bigotry a name: rexism.
Rexism means that in at least 33 per cent of hirings inspired by diversity and inclusion, organisation ends up with an employee who’s not as good as they could be.
Rexism is directed against one specific group of people in our society – some of whom might actually be called Rex, but that’s coincidental – and it’s designed to cripple their careers, lower their earning power, and damage their self-esteem. Rexism is rampant throughout business and politics, and it is being deliberately cultivated by some of the most powerful institutions in the country. Indeed, rexists are encouraged and rewarded with money, power and influence.
I define rexism as “prejudice against heterosexual white males”.
Of course, rexists, like racists and sexists, try to justify their prejudice. As in the past, when bigots would cite crackpot theories to “prove” that blacks or Asians or women were somehow genetically or intellectually “inferior” by the shape of their head or hormones or whatever, today’s rexists hide behind weasel words and pseudo-science.
“Diversity”, “inclusion” and “perceived merit” are some of those weasel words, and the theory of “unconscious bias” is the loopy science masking this prejudice against straight white men. (Often by straight white men, funnily enough.)
Martin Parkinson is the most powerful public servant in Australia. He is Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. He is also a leading rexist. He believes in the theory of “unconscious bias”, that merit is “perceived”, and he boasts that he’s committed to “diversity” and “inclusion”.
In his own words: “Treasury’s lack of diversity was largely a product of … my own biases. Recruiting on merit meant looking for someone who had done the job before – a safe pair of hands. The only candidates ticking this box tended to look, sound and think like those of us already in Treasury. The fault wasn’t the concept of merit, but how we perceived merit.”
Think through that logic.
Two people come in for a job requiring certain credentials and experience. Applicant One is a heterosexual white male who has the appropriate CV. Applicant Two is a gay/lesbian/transgender/Asian/African/Muslim/woman/take your pick, whose qualifications for the job are: a.) better than; b.) the same as; c.) worse than Applicant One’s. Who gets the job?
In the past, it would – or should – have been the person most qualified to do the job. But now, throughout the public service and in many banks and corporations, that choice is deliberately skewed in favour of Applicant Two.
In all those businesses now boasting about diversity and inclusion (D&I), the person doing the hiring will not only be expected to counter their own “unconscious bias” by choosing Applicant Two, but they will be expected to prove it, thanks to the presence in many organisations of “D&I officers”, whose job it is to monitor them. Thus, the hirer’s own job is on the line if they don’t repeatedly show that they have defeated their own “unconscious bias”.
By definition, in at least 33 per cent of D&I-inspired hirings, the organisation ends up with c.) an employee who’s not as good as they could be.
Diversity Council chairman David Morrison chided the army for being “overwhelmingly white, overwhelmingly male, overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon”. Imagine if he’d said that about women, Muslims or gays.
Meanwhile, it gets harder for straight white men to be certain in their careers because the odds will always be stacked against them in favour of someone who represents “diversity” regardless of merit. Equally, gays/trans/Muslims etc will always have the nagging feeling they only got picked because of D&I. Ultimately, D&I means taxpayers, shareholders and consumers get dudded by political correctness.
And every day another non-gay white bloke is rejected, a victim of rexism.
Backlash over ‘racist’ theme of new Sydney bar
A NEW Sydney bar and restaurant has come under fire for its “sexy pre-war Shanghai” theme as social media users flood the business’ Facebook page with accusations of racism and cultural appropriation.
Suey Sins, a new bar and restaurant in Surry Hills, only opened its doors for business this morning but has already received a barrage of criticism over its name, traditional qipaos as staff uniforms, and theme.
The critics claimed the venue was glamorising the dark reality of Chinese culture during the British colonial era and “continuing negative colonial ideologies”, and “racist fetishisation of a marginalised women [sic] for a dollar”.
“Mind explaining the brilliant idea of blending “sins” and “chop suey” to come up with the name?” one person asked. “Mind explaining this incredibly obvious perpetuation of the longstanding stereotype of Asian women as exotic sex toys?”
Another social media user wrote: “The creepy concept of this bar makes my skin crawl. “The gross cultural appropriation is abhorrent and they also refer to “geisha chicks” in at least one of their posts while dressing their white staff in qipao as though Asian cultures are all the same. Ugh.”
In a press release, venue owner Eli West said the bar was named after “a famous Shanghai call girl ... a quintessential icon of the ‘Shanghai Naughties’.”
“I have spent most of my life travelling in Indonesia, and have some Chinese heritage and I like to think I may be related to a character very similar to Suey Sin,” Ms West wrote.
“I love the idea of this seductive, alluring woman who had old world charm and poise but also knew exactly what she wanted and how to get it. I see a bit of that in myself and the young women who will drink here.”
News.com.au understands Suey Sin was a Chinese woman working in the film industry — and not as a call girl or pre-war — in Los Angeles in the 1920s.
The venue also features a collage of Chinese-American actress Anna May Wong who, during her illustrious career, was passed over for a role playing a Chinese woman by MGM in 1935 in favour of German actress, Luise Rainer, according to concreteplayground.com.
Venue management responded to the backlash on their Facebook page but has not yet responded to requests for comment from media.
“We acknowledge and understand that there has been some criticism surround Suey Sins,” the statement read.
“It has never been our intention to offend. We simply sought to create a venue that focuses on delicious Asian fusion inspired street style food and creative beverages for all to enjoy.”
Queensland rail fail: Taxpayers foot bill for staggering cost of overhaul
A spineless Leftist government said "yes" to egregious union demands. And now all Queensland pays
TAXPAYERS have been stung more than $17 million in the wake of the rail fail as the Government scrambles to provide reliable services and overhaul the toxic organisation.
The bill includes $14.4 million Queensland Rail spent scrambling to replace cancelled trains and missing drivers caused by the timetabling disaster and chronic train crew shortages.
Taxpayers spent more than $4.2 million driving stranded passengers around in replacement buses and taxis even as they shelled out $10.2 million in train driver overtime in the months since October.
They were forced to pay ex-chief executive officer Helen Gluer a $160,000 severance payment as she left the organisation in crisis. Another $2.5 million was spent on the Strachan Commission of Inquiry to find out how to fix the chaos.
But the cost of a total overhaul of Queensland Rail’s driver training program had been dubbed commercial in confidence and remains secret as outside experts are brought in to try to trim the laborious 18-month training program down to nine months.
Transport Minister Jackie Trad released the staggering costs that show the cost of replacement buses and taxis for October to January was $206,000 more than the same period last year.
It was particularly high in December, when issues culminated in the cancellation of about one third of services on Christmas Day and led to the resignation of QR’s chief operating officer, Kevin Wright.
Queenslanders also paid $10.2 million in driver and guard overtime payments from October to February 19. Driver and guard wages in the period without overtime would have cost $5.68 million.
Ms Trad said the Government was working through all the recommendations of the Strachan commission. “He has given us a blueprint for reform and we are pursuing that,” she said.
But Opposition transport spokesman Andrew Powell said taxpayers were paying more now for 1800 fewer services a month.
Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.). For a daily critique of Leftist activities, see DISSECTING LEFTISM. To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup of pro-environment but anti-Greenie news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH . Email me here