People are selfish...at Dottys request

[just]

Gerry Harvey is a complete....... in relation to the current GST issue he is trying to push

http://www.theage.com.au/business/gerry-harvey-calls-for-gst-on-online-purchases-20101123-1850x.html

Discuss.

[Daves]

http://www.theage.com.au/business/gerry-harvey-calls-for-gst-on-online-purchases-20101123-1850x.html

Discuss.

GST is only 10%, that ain't going to save local retailers, who frankly have some of the poorest online offerings around.

[just]

GST is only 10%, that ain't going to save local retailers, who frankly have some of the poorest online offerings around.

I agree it's not going to save them but it would hurt us.

[Lucasto23]

Since when has Gerry Harvey been the retailers friend? Last time i checked, he was only his own friend

[golfbound]

All i can say is the tax on importing is a joke we pay about $7000 in fees and GST per container we bring in. We get charged GST on the price we pay for products over seas and if they believe we got the product to cheap they make up a price and charge us the GST on the made up price, we also pay import duty ranging from duty free which isnt many items right upto 52% Duty then there is dock fees container fees and freight, processing fees, AQIS processing fees, god they even charge $248 to open the container and look in and say its ok.
I think the government make enough money they dont need to do this.

[Daves]

I agree it's not going to save them but it would hurt us.

Hurt, but only slightly hinder I would suggest. Certainly won't make the locals competitive and turn everyone back to buying here.

I guess the question for Gerry is has he lowered his prices to reflect the lower import costs he is now paying? Yes ,I know that is simplistic and doesn't take account of how retailers import, lead times etc, but hey Gerry started the simplistic angle arguing!

[just]

Hurt, but only slightly hinder I would suggest. Certainly won't make the locals competitive and turn everyone back to buying here.

I guess the question for Gerry is has he lowered his prices to reflect the lower import costs he is now paying? Yes ,I know that is simplistic and doesn't take account of how retailers import, lead times etc, but hey Gerry started the simplistic angle arguing!
Completely agree Dave, but he is getting a bandwagon behind him of retailers to lobby the government to tax items less than $1000 coming in.

[Daves]

By the way, I actually think Gerry is a good guy. I have had the pleasure of meeting him and he is exactly as he comes across in the media. But as is his want, he does talk his own book, and as Chairman of Harvey Norman I guess he has an obligation to "champion" retailers.

[TheTrueReview]

...[/url]

Discuss.

... is an incredibly astute businessman. Case closed.

[Webster]

Why shouldn't you have to pay GST on items under $1000?

[golfbound]

Why shouldn't you have to pay GST on items under $1000?

Because they are not bought here Why should we pay tax on products bought over seas. They make enough off there duty etc on larger shipments. And why make us pay more so MRS RONALD MCDONALD can WASTE it.

[Webster]

Why should larger shipments pay and not smaller shipments?

[golfbound]

because it is for personal use they are not making a profit from it.

[Scottt]

I don't see the huddled masses cursing Gerry Harvey as they line up for their 12 months interest free electronics and whitegoods...

[Webster]

because it is for personal use they are not making a profit from it.

So you shouldn't pay GST on anything that you buy for personal use then?

Also, the commercial shipments will claim back any GST - so it doesn't cost them anything extra.

[just]

Some of you are incredibly dim. Yes the title mentioned Gerry Harvey, but the discussion is supposed to be about the measure that he is championing.

... is an incredibly astute businessman. Case closed.
Yes he is. What do you about GST on goods under $1000?

I don't see the huddled masses cursing Gerry Harvey as they line up for their 12 months interest free electronics and whitegoods...
Which has three fifths of **** all to do with this discussion.

Why should larger shipments pay and not smaller shipments?
Like Daves, someone who intelligent enough to understand the thrust of the topic. Because it would be an administrative nightmare and would cost you the taxpayer much more than the revenue it brings in, which you would consequently bleat about because it would hit you three times, increasing taxes to administer the program, increasing the prices of small items purchased overseas and protecting the lazy local retailers from being competitive.

[Scottt]

Just:


Which has three fifths of **** all to do with this discussion.

I disagree. The title is "Gerry Harvey is a complete..."

I'm assuming the implied answer is "****".

All I am saying is that while he may make life difficult for smaller retailers with his tactics at times, he also allows many less wealthy Australians afford to buy necessary household items that they might otherwise not be able to afford.

[macjackass]

He's a wanker, great self-promoter though. Have never bought anything at harvey norman and never will.

[just]

Just:
I disagree. The title is "Gerry Harvey is a complete..."

I'm assuming the implied answer is "****".

All I am saying is that while he may make life difficult for smaller retailers with his tactics at times, he also allows many less wealthy Australians afford to buy necessary household items that they might otherwise not be able to afford.
I have changed the title for you Scottt to make it completely clear. The first I've heard that Gerry is a humanitarian, regular Mother Theresa, albeit that interest free periods were around before Gerry Harvey and the company sells those goods at inflated prices and it's questionable whether they are necessary household items.

[WBennett]

Gerry has more money that every reader of this forum put together.

He's an astute businessman who has influence on the media due to his monumental advertising expenditure each week. I don't watch ACA, but every week I see an ad for him spruiking something. He's great for a media grab when the news is slow.

Gerry looks after Gerry. I have no sympathy for this plight - as JUST said, the admin burden for applying GST on individual small purchases from overseas would be monumental.

[Jarro]

He's a wanker, great self-promoter though. Have never bought anything at harvey norman and never will.

^^^^^ this

He's also a grub who wants to introduce 2nd tier wage earners who'll end up working for absolute peanuts in his hundreds of stores !!

[mike]

He's a businessman trying to make lots of money. That's what businessman do. Big deal.

[just]

He's a businessman trying to make lots of money. That's what businessman do. Big deal.
No problem with this. But you would think that a forum of golf ho's who buy great deals of equipment from overseas and currently slip under the threshhold would be a bit more concerned that they are potentially going to be charged at least 10% more plus whatever admin charges are chucked on. I'm not being alarmist, we all realise it's got a long way to go, but the Deputy Treasurer said today that they would be reviewing the situation based on retailer concern.

[markTHEblake]

but the Deputy Treasurer said today that they would be reviewing the situation based on retailer concern.

then as said by others, this would represent an administrative nightmare. But at least there will be more jobs in teh customs department!. As all the ebay sellers lie about the value on the customs declarations, the assessors will have to estimate and my guess is they will estimate over the price we paid

but whether this will assist australian retailers - probably.

[TheTrueReview]

Seeing as the thread title is now changed, I'll add something and perhaps state the bleeding obvious.


Gerry Harvey is seeking to look after Harvey Norman's interests.
Gerry is trying to protect his business from the effects of the drop in the US dollar
If the US dollar hadn't gone south, he wouldn't be making this statement.
Gerry Harvey doesn't give two hoots about purchases of golfing equipment online. He has bigger fish to fry.
Harvey Norman wasn't established as a charitable organisation, so morality & wider community considerations are not relevant to it.
It is apparent that Gerry has lobbied government about his proposal.
Government is lobbied by business everyday of the week.
Government won't support Gerry's proposal because with the current political situation, the potential backlash could end the current Labor government's term.
Online sales from overseas do affect Harvey Norman because the finite family budget is being spent elsewhere than with Harvey Norman.
Gerry Harvey is seeking to look after Harvey Norman's interests.
Gerry Harvey is an incredibly astute businessman.

[just]

The thread title was changed to make it more obvious to dribblers like you what the issue was, I could have picked any other retailer that's pushing it. IT WAS NEVER ABOUT GERRY HARVEY PERSONALLY, IT WAS ABOUT THE ISSUE HE WAS PUSHING. IT WAS CLEAR EXCEPT FOR A DIM LITERALIST. Can I make it anymore clear for you? The issue was GST on imported goods under $1000. You are a Gerry Harvey fan boy, we got that after the first post we didn't need any more. In which post did anyone claim that Gerry Harvey is:
a) a charitable organisation. It's established that he's looking after himself, and I have already stated there is nothing wrong with that. And no one has argued that it is a moral issue.
b) Of course he's not interested in our golf purchases personally, no one has stated that is he is. Irrelevant, but a poor argumentative device, I'm not surprised you used it. However, the issue under discussion will affect our golf purchases.
c) I've already stated that I think it's got a long way to go and I doubt they will get rid of a GST free level altogether, but there is a real possibility that it could be lowered.
d) Yes his business is affected. He should change/improve his business model and/or diversify etc.
e) Being an astute businessman is not exclusive of being a ****, you can be a **** and an astute businessman, in fact many are. I have no personal knowledge of whether Gerry is or not and no where have I stated in thread that he is.

Why don't you turn up to Ozgolf games

[kpac]

"extremely astute businessman".... lol - bollocks. He's a lucky mother ******** who ended up on the right sode of $ and saw that same opportunity as many, he was just the lucky one that got it over the line while others failed. His business strategy is hardly revolutionary, actually it's pretty fkn basic. Personally i'd reserve "extremely astute businessman" for a more creative, strategic, astute gent.

TTR, your perception is based on his wallet - hardly a decent measure. Although it does seem to be the unfortunate view in societ, "he's made $10M, must be such a smart guy", yah!

[Yossarian]

I think it is bollocks, if you can get something from overseas for under a grand cheaper than you get get it here good luck to you and maybe the retailers should have a look at their margins.

I also really like Gerry Harvey's hair.

[TheTrueReview]

...

Why don't you turn up to Ozgolf games

Just - time poor. At the moment my golf is confined to The Tour Fore Golf (http://thetourforegolfers.weebly.com/) & the odd comp round at my club.

I notice there's an Ozgolf foursome in this Sunday's Nudgee comp. Lucky there's not a spot available. I'd hate my continual dribbling to put them off their game. :smt118

[just]

Just - time poor. At the moment my golf is confined to The Tour Fore Golf (http://thetourforegolfers.weebly.com/) & the odd comp round at my club.

I notice there's an Ozgolf foursome in this Sunday's Nudgee comp. Lucky there's not a spot available. I'd hate my continual dribbling to put them off their game. :smt118
There's an Ozgolf foursome almost every Sunday at Nudgee. Since most of us are dribblers I can't see your input putting any of us off.

[markTHEblake]

The Assistant Treasurer, Bill Shorten, said yesterday the government was not considering imposing the GST on more online sales, despite signalling his concern at the competition faced by Australian retailers.
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/shopping/online-shoppers-spared-gst-for-now-20101124-187io.html

Ok, Subject closed. Can we get back to dribbling on about Gerry now?

[virge666]

TTR - A cracker of a summary.

GH is looking after GH interests just like all the people here are looking after their golf purchasing interests.

GH is also a bloody clever bloke who employs a lot of Australians.

I really cant see what you are all bitching about.

[markTHEblake]

I really cant see what you are all bitching about.

I can !

[just]

TTR - A cracker of a summary.

GH is looking after GH interests just like all the people here are looking after their golf purchasing interests.

GH is also a bloody clever bloke who employs a lot of Australians.

I really cant see what you are all bitching about.
Nothing new there.

[Johnny Canuck]

Jerry Hervey shuld concentrat less on taxing important goods and moron reducing the suicide rate of the youth in Japan.

Signed,

Dave1

[just]

Jerry Hervey shuld concentrat less on taxing important goods and moron reducing the suicide rate of the youth in Japan.

Signed,

Dave1
dave1 should really post more.

[mike]

TTR - A cracker of a summary.

GH is looking after GH interests just like all the people here are looking after their golf purchasing interests.

GH is also a bloody clever bloke who employs a lot of Australians.

I really cant see what you are all bitching about.+1





I also really like Gerry Harvey's hair.+1

I really like Donald Trump's hair.

[mike]

Seriously if I was one of the richest men in the US I'd have better hair than this,
9603

[just]

Mike
Yourself and virge think a post which has nothing to do with the topic is a great summary, mystifying, especially when it was clarified before and after said post. Says a lot about you, but unsurprising since you've had a weed on for me since I called you out. It also shows that you don't bother reading much of the posts or the article Blake posted. And quite frankly if you had bothered reading any of it you would have found:

I've already stated that I think it's got a long way to go and I doubt they will get rid of a GST free level altogether, but there is a real possibility that it could be lowered.

''Certainly there is no policy proposition about a GST for online shopping, but what is happening is there is a debate emerging from retailers in Australia who feel that the $1000 threshold [under which GST does not apply] is too high,'' Mr Shorten said yesterday.
''We'll have to work something out and see if it is administratively feasible - it is only at that stage.''
And finally:

IT WAS NEVER ABOUT GERRY HARVEY PERSONALLY, IT WAS ABOUT THE ISSUE HE WAS PUSHING. IT WAS CLEAR EXCEPT FOR A DIM LITERALIST.
Ad infinitum.

[TheTrueReview]

Looks we have a discussion thread with a lot of divergent opinions. Is that still allowed in Australia?

[just]

Looks we have a discussion thread with a lot of divergent opinions. Is that still allowed in Australia?
It's not a problem, it's completely okay EXCEPT THAT YOU HAVEN"T OFFERED AN OPINION ON THE ISSUE UNDER DISCUSSION. Another pathetic rhetorical device to make it look like I'm against debate. Play the ball not the man. Are you able to do that?

[mike]

Mike
Yourself and virge think a post which has nothing to do with the topic is a great summary, mystifying, especially when it was clarified before and after said post. Says a lot about you, but unsurprising since you've had a weed on for me since I called you out. Oh please.

I've kept right out of your way 'since you called me out'. What an insecure twat you are.

[mike]

And stop changing the thread title. I can't keep up.

[just]

Oh please.

I've kept right out of your way 'since you called me out'. What an insecure twat you are.
Laughable. Insecure is a person who worries too much about how other people play golf and what means they use to get around.
Let's try stick to the topic, to which you've added nothing.

[Eldrick]

This 36 months interest Free yet?


Gerry Harvey uses Tapatalk

[mike]

Whatever.

Just. Please put me on ignore.

[Moe Norman]

"extremely astute businessman".... lol - bollocks. He's a lucky mother ******** who ended up on the right sode of $ and saw that same opportunity as many, he was just the lucky one that got it over the line while others failed. His business strategy is hardly revolutionary, actually it's pretty fkn basic. Personally i'd reserve "extremely astute businessman" for a more creative, strategic, astute gent.

TTR, your perception is based on his wallet - hardly a decent measure. Although it does seem to be the unfortunate view in societ, "he's made $10M, must be such a smart guy", yah!

is this a joke? Gerry Harvey is just lucky he's a billionnaire, he's not smart?

[virge666]

OK, Lets try this.

Incumbant retailers buy a product in bulk at a wholesale price. They then ship, maintain, store and pay fellow Australians to on sell their product. They are currently being undercut by various online retailers who are buying product without paying GST or covering any of the above costs.

These larger retailers are trying to protect their business against violent swings in the currency and also allow them to move product that they bought when the dollar was 85 cents. The main problem they have now is people going to see a product at a retailer, using the knowledge of the sales staff and then turning around and ordering from an online source.

If is costs me 10% more on a $600 product - then I am happy to pay this to protect Australian jobs and Australian companies. If there is a major difference in overseas pricing and pricing here, then the open market will level it out... naturally. That is just the way of the world.

A local market is worth protecting - especially when the offer a service to the community not only in the way of employment but also charity work, supporting local schools and sporting clubs and various other endevours.

Now ... when the government takes a huge chunk and doesn't support the industry it took the chunk from - then I am on your side.

[just]

Interesting argument some food for thought there. I largely don't agree because I think it's protectionist which in the long run only stifles competition and innovation, hurts the economy and reduces employment.

[markTHEblake]

OK, Lets try this....
I am in an australian business that does all that importing, and our markup is about 60%. So I am on the same wavelength as you there. Fortunately for us grey importing is not an issue because of exclusive distributorship agreements and the extremely high costs of importing to a buyer :-)

That however does not apply to most retail products, and I like anyone else is after our gear at the cheapest price possible. The Australian retailers are just going to have to figure out how to compete, and eventually they will. Overall I wont mind that much if the laws are changed to hit grey imports, "pay to caesar what belongs to caeser" and all that :-) but I also dont think that would change the status quo much either. If the difference is only 10% in costs, that is probably not enough to make me make worthwhile imports.

[virge666]

Interesting argument some food for thought there. I largely don't agree because I think it's protectionist which in the long run only stifles competition and innovation, hurts the economy and reduces employment.

You have to look after your own... mainly because everyone else does.

You have to protect your labour force as much as you possibly can. Without a labour force, you have no income tax and you also have people doing stupid unsociable stuff instead of working and contributing to the country.

I would be with you if there was a level playing field... but it is anything but level.

Why can I buy a Porsche 911 in the USA for $61,000 when the same car here costs in excess of $200,000 ?
but
A HSV Commodore costs $80,000 here but only costs $62,000 in the USA and $65,000 in Europe.

Go figure...

[Daves]

You have to look after your own... mainly because everyone else does.

You have to protect your labour force as much as you possibly can. Without a labour force, you have no income tax and you also have people doing stupid unsociable stuff instead of working and contributing to the country.

I would be with you if there was a level playing field... but it is anything but level.

Why can I buy a Porsche 911 in the USA for $61,000 when the same car here costs in excess of $200,000 ?
but
A HSV Commodore costs $80,000 here but only costs $62,000 in the USA and $65,000 in Europe.

Go figure...

Well the protectionist 33% luxury car tax and 10% import tarriffs (plus 10% GST on top of all of that!) certainly doesn't help you buy your Porch here!

[Grunt]

How long before this diverts to the distribution of the GST income to the states on a per capita basis? ;) Or the fact of differing cost of living in different areas of the country, should wages be different depending where you live.

[just]

You have to look after your own... mainly because everyone else does.

You have to protect your labour force as much as you possibly can. Without a labour force, you have no income tax and you also have people doing stupid unsociable stuff instead of working and contributing to the country.

I would be with you if there was a level playing field... but it is anything but level.

Why can I buy a Porsche 911 in the USA for $61,000 when the same car here costs in excess of $200,000 ?
but
A HSV Commodore costs $80,000 here but only costs $62,000 in the USA and $65,000 in Europe.

Go figure...
No offence Virge, but these are the same old chestnuts brought up by protectionists all the time. Open markets create jobs and greater wealth for the nation, always have, always will. And you've picked an industry which illustrates a point, we protected the car industry for far too long in this country, and ended up costing the taxpayer far too much paying for inefficency.

[Ned]

Australia is expected to play by the "free trade" agreements but no one else does.

In a lot of respect we have the ability to be self sufficient for manufacturing in a number of areas but don't.

Even if we did, retailers would still purchase off shore because we can't compete against cheaper production costs, however GH'a argument that Aussies should buy locally after mark ups are added is flawed, if he is able to import because it's cheaper then why can't the general public ???

10 or so years ago we supported Brazil in developing and producing sugar cane, now they kick our arse in costs and size of crop. (and control the market price)

[virge666]

No offence Virge, but these are the same old chestnuts brought up by protectionists all the time. Open markets create jobs and greater wealth for the nation, always have, always will. And you've picked an industry which illustrates a point, we protected the car industry for far too long in this country, and ended up costing the taxpayer far too much paying for inefficency.

We cannot compete with a country like China where wages are around $600-$2800 per year. Open markets only work when both countries are in the same standard of living with comparable wages and social/medical benefits.

If you want cheaper goods - you can always move to and work in that country.



Even if we did, retailers would still purchase off shore because we can't compete against cheaper production costs, however GH'a argument that Aussies should buy locally after mark ups are added is flawed, if he is able to import because it's cheaper then why can't the general public ???


Again - the local retailer cost to store, sell and manage the stock here are included. When you buy direct from overseas... none of these costs are warranted.

The downside is when you cut out the retailer... you risk the labour force that works in that sector.

[just]

We cannot compete with a country like China where wages are around $600-$2800 per year. Open markets only work when both countries are in the same standard of living with comparable wages and social/medical benefits.

If you want cheaper goods - you can always move to and work in that country.

So you are advocating winding back the clocks and reducing our standard of living. Why would I move to China when I can get the cheap goods here imported from them.

You show a lack of understanding of markets, we can't compete on labour costs, that's why we innovate and diversify to find areas we can compete and thrive in. Open markets benefit everyone and you would find it hard to dig up a credible economist who says otherwise.

[PeteyD]

I hate to admit it but I agree with Just on this one. The thing about emerging markets and workforces is that they catch up. Japan, Taiwan, Korea etc were like China is now (with the exception of the communist government, which may or may not have implications). But I don't see leveling a GST on personal imports as protectionist. It would seem to be unworkable though.

[Scottt]

Another change to the subject line. I love it :lol:

[just]

Another change to the subject line. I love it :lol:

Couldn't help it Scottt, everyone seemed to be obsessed with the Gerry Harvey part. I must state at this point I have no opinion on Gerry Harvey. But if others are feel free to post away, it's the Ozgolf way.

[markTHEblake]

We cannot compete with a country like China where wages are around $600-$2800 per year. Open markets only work when both countries are in the same standard of living with comparable wages and social/medical benefits.

The chinese have an average net savings of about 40%, ours is next to Zero, That makes them richer than us comparatively :-)

[Dotty]

Just, can you change the title to 'people are selfish'?

When I was a kid, you could have a fancier car, or a good TV, or an overseas holiday, or a two-door fridge, or takeaway lunches, or ... (unless you were old money or 1IC of a large company).

Now, every mug wants a fancy car, AND a good TV, AND ... AND ....
In addition to these, are the newer luxuries of ... AND a fancy mobile AND an XBox AND a laptop, etc.


Gerry Harvey (and his peers) have assisted the punters to achieve this with 'nothing to pay until 2012' offers.

The punters have worked out that they can have more luxuries per dollar, by removing the middle-man.


(No more to say, as it may be self defeating.)

[PerryGroves]

As The Boss said...

Now Main Street's whitewashed windows and vacant stores
Seems like there ain't nobody wants to come down here no more
They're closing down the textile mill across the railroad tracks
Foreman says these jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back to your hometown

If the extrapolation of the GH piece is some rail against "globalisation", you aint stopping the train by raising a tax on some poxy amount of imported internet goods. Nevertheless its a decent discussion point, the US and China are involved in a war with currency as the weapon of choice. Do we sit back and allow our industry and jobs to be collateral damage on the basis that in an ideal world all things will accrue to those who do the right thing. This is the position adopted by the greatest economic vandal in history, big Al Greenspan. I have no idea how this all pans out however no reason why we can't maintain our position and await the outcome. Why believe that every global push and pull will result in an acceptable outcome for Australia.

[virge666]

So you are advocating winding back the clocks and reducing our standard of living. Why would I move to China when I can get the cheap goods here imported from them.

Nope, didn't say that at all. Try reading the words on the screen as opposed to using the force.



You show a lack of understanding of markets, we can't compete on labour costs, that's why we innovate and diversify to find areas we can compete and thrive in. Open markets benefit everyone and you would find it hard to dig up a credible economist who says otherwise.

Total and utter bullshit. Lets break it down.

we can't compete on labour costs ... followed by ... Open markets benefit everyone

You obviously don't understand why tariffs and subsidies are in place throughout many of this country's industries. maybe we should get rid of those as well...

why we innovate and diversify to find areas we can compete and thrive in

You do understand - this is the holy grail and isn't something we have been putting off till after the Ashes ??? Whilst your at it - can your sort out that Cold Fusion thing...

Whilst every economist in the world would like their country to have a myriad of your inovative jobs - anyone who is educated past year 8 economics understands that there are not enough of your magical jobs to go around and that 70% of the workforce is going to be in labour intensive jobs.

Open markets benefit everyone and you would find it hard to dig up a credible economist who says otherwise

Economists will back an open marketplace when everyone has the same costs... ie: in the same country. (the level playing field) But as I said before Open markets always benefit countries that have the lowest cost of manufacture. So a Chinese economist will agree with you - however a Australian agriculture economist will not

Now how about you man up and come up with something viable and lose the bullshit sweeping statements that fix everything.

[virge666]

Why believe that every global push and pull will result in an acceptable outcome for Australia.

Nice post.

Also keep in mind that we are but 2% of the world ecomomy. We can't even make it onto CNBC !

[just]

we can't compete on labour costs ... followed by ... Open markets benefit everyone

You obviously don't understand why tariffs and subsidies are in place throughout many of this country's industries. maybe we should get rid of those as well.
I do understand, they are in place to protect inefficient and lazy industries. Yes we should get rid of them. If you did actually know anything about markets you would know that we have rid ourselves of large amounts of tarriffs and subsidies and the rest of the world is doing the same.

why we innovate and diversify to find areas we can compete and thrive in

You do understand - this is the holy grail and isn't something we have been putting off till after the Ashes ??? Whilst your at it - can your sort out that Cold Fusion thing...

Whilst every economist in the world would like their country to have a myriad of your inovative jobs - anyone who is educated past year 8 economics understands that there are not enough of your magical jobs to go around and that 70% of the workforce is going to be in labour intensive jobs.

Open markets benefit everyone and you would find it hard to dig up a credible economist who says otherwise

Economists will back an open marketplace when everyone has the same costs... ie: in the same country. (the level playing field) But as I said before Open markets always benefit countries that have the lowest cost of manufacture. So a Chinese economist will agree with you - however a Australian agriculture economist will not

Now how about you man up and come up with something viable and lose the bullshit sweeping statements that fix everything.
Most Australian agricultural economists would agree with me, which is the reason we don't have many tarriffs or subsidies left on agricultural products, which is why we are pushing the rest of the world to do the same.
Now how about you man up and admit you no nothing about economics .

[virge666]

I do understand, they are in place to protect inefficient and lazy industries. Yes we should get rid of them. If you did actually know anything about markets you would know that we have rid ourselves of large amounts of tarriffs and subsidies and the rest of the world is doing the same.


FFS, another sweeping generalisation full of retoric.. What industries are lazy and inefficient ? Who is they. What large amount of tariffs have been removed and what other coutries are doing the same...



Most Australian agricultural economists would agree with me, which is the reason we don't have many tarriffs or subsidies left on agricultural products, which is why we are pushing the rest of the world to do the same.

Who are "most" economists ? And why would they agree with you destroying their protection against drought and flood and some kind of stable income for their industry. Not to mention a foreign flood of product that will have a serious impact on the local industry.

yes, we are pushing for the world to lower tariff's - The FTA with the USA is such a document. But that is to get some of our products into the USA that we cannot do now because of US subsidies. (Especially wheat, meat and rice) Not because of a lazy, inefficient farming methods.



Now how about you man up and admit you no nothing about economics .

Seriously - is that the best you got ? I heard better arguements from a shock jock on AM radio. Your statements have no basis or example, your knowledge is at best general and populous and I am not quite sure what you support other a self justified, simplistic view of world trade.

But as long as you are happy... Bread and Circus' for all.

[sms316]

Can we rename this "Everyone come here to argue with Just" and keep all of the shitfights here (because he starts them all).

:razz:

[PerryGroves]

Most Australian agricultural economists would agree with me

Just, love your pasion but sentences like this is what you generally have issue with, using some unknown as justification for your position.

I ignore economists in the pursuit of money. Why, because they only know what has gone before, they can only give a view of the future dimmed by their experience.

[virge666]

Solly Lew weighs in on the debate... does anyone really think that $1 billion worth of kit under $1000 comes into the country each month ?

Those numbers sound a little inflated...

http://www.smh.com.au/business/solly-lew-joins-call-for-online-tax-20101126-18af9.html

[markTHEblake]

I thought it was fun enough when Just joined in discussions, its a rip when he starts one.
and its not even about politics or theology.

[matty]

Can I put someone on 'ignore' so that I don't see their posts or they don't see mine? If so, how do I do it?

BTW, I love youse all.

Except one :razz:

[markTHEblake]

If you did that then it would look like the other ratbags arguing with themselves

[TheTrueReview]

If you did that then it would look like the other ratbags arguing with themselves

:lol:

[just]

FFS, another sweeping generalisation full of retoric..
As is your post but don't let that stop you.


What large amount of tariffs have been removed and what other coutries are doing the same...
Can you name an agricultural industry we protect large scale with tariffs and subsidies?


Who are "most" economists ? And why would they agree with you destroying their protection against drought and flood and some kind of stable income for their industry. Not to mention a foreign flood of product that will have a serious impact on the local industry.
Can you name an agricultural industry we protect large scale with tariffs and subsidies?


yes, we are pushing for the world to lower tariff's - The FTA with the USA is such a document. But that is to get some of our products into the USA that we cannot do now because of US subsidies. (Especially wheat, meat and rice) Not because of a lazy, inefficient farming methods.
We push for FTA's because we have gotten rid of tariffs and subsidies and our industries are more efficient and we need access to markets which are still protected, confirming my point. But don't let that stop your mindless rant.


Seriously - is that the best you got ? I heard better arguements from a shock jock on AM radio. Your statements have no basis or example, your knowledge is at best general and populous and I am not quite sure what you support other a self justified, simplistic view of world trade.
Hypocritical considering you previous post but unsurprising. Bob Katter makes more sense than you.


Can we rename this "Everyone come here to argue with Just" and keep all of the shitfights here (because he starts them all).:razz:
There are plenty that go on without me. Gaz and Perci had to tell me about a couple that I'd missed out on the other week.:razz:


Can I put someone on 'ignore' so that I don't see their posts or they don't see mine? If so, how do I do it?

BTW, I love youse all.

Except one :razz:
Ignoring somone is childish IMO. I never understand the coyness though, if you don't like someone tell them.


:lol:
Well may you laugh but at least I front up to my critics on a regular basis.:wink:

[PerryGroves]

Slightly off topic, how the fools at the Federal Reserve run things. And we want them running global policy


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k

[virge666]

Can you name an agricultural industry we protect large scale with tariffs and subsidies?


Look it up on the customs web page - I just cant be bothered with your ramblings. There are 21 sections and 97 chapters, so i am guessing one or two items might be protected in that lot.

[just]

Thanks, just what I wanted to know. You are a hypocrit and ignorant.

[virge666]

Thanks, just what I wanted to know. You are a hypocrit and ignorant.

When are you going back under your bridge ?

[Eldrick]

http://bit.ly/fOwjR5

Is he the goose or the gander?

[Daves]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/04/3106030.htm?section=justin

[dan]

The 10% will mean sweet f@#k all. These old school retailers need to think outside the box to stay competitive.