Finders Keepers: the key to allowing wealth to be created

Posted on June 1, 2012 by Alan Moran

Finders keepers I have a piece in the Australian today that addresses the issues which were covered in Catallaxy yesterday following the Prime Minister’s lecturing of the miners that she, and not they, owns the minerals that they have discovered. The piece addresses the comprehensive deterrance to exploration activity, and hence eventually mining, that such a belief system creates

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

125 Responses to Finders Keepers: the key to allowing wealth to be created

mondo

#494507, posted on June 1, 2012 at 7:38 am

Alan,

A good piece in The Oz. Well said.

I think though, that you could have made more of the point that, having expended large sums in locating a deposit, completing the assessment and feasibility work, and expended the capital to develop a project, a mining company has to pay substantial royalties. In WA, they pay 7.5% of revenue! That is a LOT of money.

There is a wider issue here. The requirement to pay royalties is because the miners are using what is seen to be a “public asset”. But many businesses use “public assets”. Air corridors, FM spectrum, broadband spectrum, highway corridors, railroad corridors – even land.

Surely it is time to introduce legislation that ensures that ALL public assets are identified, and that the “rent” payable to the state for use of those assets should be uniform and logically based.

Arguably the banks are using a public asset – their banking license, and the explicit (or implicit sometimes) guarantees that the government will guarantee deposits. Surely the banks should be paying some form of royalty for the use of those public assets.

It is also arguable that Kerry Packer (and other media proprietors) made their fortunes through the under-pricing of other public assets – their access to TV licenses.

Why can’t we have a wider discussion about the use and proper pricing of all public assets utilised by commercial enterprises?
Slim

#494508, posted on June 1, 2012 at 7:51 am

Did I miss the bit where Gillard said she owned the minerals?
.

#494514, posted on June 1, 2012 at 8:30 am

Clearly you did.
m0nty

#494528, posted on June 1, 2012 at 8:59 am

IN her address to the Minerals Council, Prime Minister Julia Gillard said: “You don’t own the minerals. I don’t own the minerals. Governments only sell you the right to mine the resource. A resource we hold in trust for a sovereign people. They own it and they deserve their share.”
.

#494530, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:03 am

Now read the bit where she says “here’s the rub…we are a Labor Government”.

We saw what she did there.
Token

#494531, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:04 am

…following the Prime Minister’s lecturing of the miners that she, and not they, owns the minerals that they have discovered.

Alan, you better correct the text above (as highlighted)

From 2 comments so far it is clear your gramatical mistake (which contradicts the opening paragraph of your very fine article) and not the content will become the subject of the thread.
m0nty

#494532, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:05 am

And yes, there it is, the precise moment where the whole stupid Catallaxy argument on this topic is exposed as a ridiculous conspiracy theory.
Token

#494535, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:06 am

This is the text that should be in discussion:

If we tell explorers that they don’t automatically own the wealth they have discovered on exploration leases they have been granted, ownership becomes conditional on what the sovereign people’s representatives decide.

This introduces a massive disincentive to search and would severely reduce, if not destroy, most mining activity over time.

It could be that the government decides it will itself take on this entrepreneurial exploration role. But if it does so it will not be as efficient as private-sector explorers or developers. We will have less mining activity and reduced wealth.
.

#494538, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:09 am

Okay genius, why would you say

“we don’t x”

then…

“here is the rub”

Please explain why you are trying to dumb down English.

Clearly she meant “we don’t own it, but we will treat it as such, despite what the constitution says”.

Monty…if you want mining profits get a shovel and get down a shaft you fat slag. Don’t become another centrelink client.
Token

#494539, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:10 am

And yes, there it is, the precise moment where the whole stupid Catallaxy argument on this topic is exposed as a ridiculous conspiracy theory.

Whoa, you are going a bit over the top here M0nty. It looks like you are starting the day with too many espressos.

Alan made a gramatical mistake.
.

#494540, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:11 am

I propose a super profit tax on unearned rents from IP rights that have not been “customarily” acquired.

What do you think about that monty? Would the exploiter of the IP own the IP rights or not?

How do you think this is different from the mining tax?
Slim

#494547, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:16 am

A grammatical mistake?

the comprehensive deterrance to exploration activity

Yep, I can see the end of the mining boom come July 1st.
.

#494549, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:17 am

It is already happening you miserly turd. BMA have closed down a mine near Newcastle. It was going to employ 900 people.
m0nty

#494551, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:20 am

Clearly she meant “we don’t own it, but we will treat it as such, despite what the constitution says”.

You’re being ridiculous, she said nothing of the sort. Her statements are consistent with the constitution and the law.

Certain sectors of the mining industry are being immature at the moment, and Cat denizens are enabling their hissy fits. Alan talks about disincentives from sovereign risk, and he’s on strong ground when talking about retrospectivity with a nod to the original MRRT. There are no such provisions in Gillard’s policies, so sovereign risk is not really relevant, as the numbers are known now. Governments retain the right to lower and raise taxes, that’s part of doing business. Stop whining.
m0nty

#494552, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:21 am

Whoa, you are going a bit over the top here M0nty. It looks like you are starting the day with too many espressos.

Alan made a gramatical mistake.

I was talking to Dot, mate.
m0nty

#494553, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:24 am

I propose a super profit tax on unearned rents from IP rights that have not been “customarily” acquired.

What do you think about that monty? Would the exploiter of the IP own the IP rights or not?

How do you think this is different from the mining tax?

Are you trying to drag my business into this discussion? If I was a billionaire, I wouldn’t have much of a leg to stand on. But I’m not. I’m not in the 1% quite yet!
Gab

#494554, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:24 am

Yep, I can see the end of the mining boom come July 1st.

Not quite, Slim. However Gillard has screeched the same in QT. It’s quite naive given the consequences of the tax will be detrimental over a long period. Unintended consequences being the hallmark of Labor’s taxes.
Token

#494556, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:25 am

No worries M0nty, enjoy the rumble.
.

#494558, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:27 am

You’re being ridiculous, she said nothing of the sort. Her statements are consistent with the constitution and the law.

No. They are not. The States own the minerals, vested in the Crown.

Now what about a super profits tax for non customarily acquired IP rights?

Certain sectors of the mining industry are being immature at the moment

They are shutting down and offshoring as a rational decision.

You little fascist prick. You call not bending over and taking your medicine a “hissy fit”. Miners pay a massive amount of tax anyway. Their industry rate of tax is higher than virtually any other. Treasury would be in the shitter without the mining industry.

Governments retain the right to lower and raise taxes, that’s part of doing business.

So is shutting down production and offshoring. Shut the fuck up.
Slim

#494559, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:27 am

So dot, we can put you on record as predicting the end of the mining boom come July 1st? And still quick to abuse those with whom you disagree, I see.
.

#494564, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:30 am

Are you trying to drag my business into this discussion? If I was a billionaire, I wouldn’t have much of a leg to stand on. But I’m not. I’m not in the 1% quite yet!

Because you don’t even own the IP you thief.

The gall you display is just revolting.

These billionaires and their companies pay the highest industry EMTRs already. It’s not enough for you that this has seen mines already shut down and put thousands out of work. You want to punish their generational success at any cost. The Government is too cowardly just to up the income tax rate because everyone at that level of income would pay.

Then you and other alliance supporters have the hide to call miners “whiners” for shutting down and offshoring. It is you who is really whining, that people oppose your class welfare and wealth destruction.

You thief.
.

#494569, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:31 am

So dot, we can put you on record as predicting the end of the mining boom come July 1st? And still quick to abuse those with whom you disagree, I see.

I am abusing you because you are a wrongheaded idiot.

MINES HAVE ALREADY SHUT DOWN.

FFS, are you inbred or did you just drop too much acid?
Slim

#494574, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:41 am

Is dot some kind of tag team of the Italian and the Bird?
alan moran

#494579, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:48 am

Slim and others

I know what she actually said. What she meant was that she owns the minerals as the custodian of the people and will decide how much to give to the explorer/developer and how much to use to buy elections to retain herself in power.
Sleetmute

#494583, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:56 am

Great article Alan. Very systematic and clearly argued. Unfortunately, a lot of people hate miners and mining. According to these people, we should all either work in high-tech manufacturing or community services.
Louis Hissink

#494588, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:59 am

Alan Moran’s interpretation is spot on, and so is Dot’s observation. Exploration risk capital has dried up, which means we are headed for another recession as there are other signs that indicate that as I wrote in my Henry Thornton piece the other day.
.

#494589, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:01 am

Slim and others

I know what she actually said.

LOL Alan.

These idiots think if they keep on questioning you, mines that have shut down (BMA, Newc) or others that are now unfeasible (Wandoan) are going to spring back to life like the rivers of cockagine.

These men are really children and ought to be disenfranchised.
Token

#494590, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:01 am

Don’t forget Sleet, that those people love the move the Castle, and believe in every NIMBY cause to stop people infringements on their rights…

…but in true lefty hypocritical form, they are dead keen on the government expropriating the property rights of others so they can continue to live a lifestyle beyond the level they themselves can sustain.
m0nty

#494597, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:05 am

Obviously with all these mines shutting down and thousands out of work, Gina Rinehart doesn’t need to import Chinese workers for her new mine because there are thousands of unemployed Aussie mining specialists just waiting for a new job. Two birds with one stone!
Louis Hissink

#494599, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:07 am

Alex Davidson has written an excellent piece on the Menzies House site here. Expropriating property rights is simply socialism that Gillard has, more or less, imposed on us. That is her agenda and she will continue as Labor Party leader despite the poor polling. The assault on private property rights started with Keating’s premiership when he introduced Native Title. It’s been down hill ever since, and no one seems to have noticed.
.

#494602, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:12 am

Gina’s mine is but one of thousands. The BMA mine near Newc. closing means 900 MINING jobs have been lost, on top of services to mining and the high multiplier effects of both of those industries.

BTW minty, you are lying.

http://www.minterellison.com/publications/First-Enterprise-Migration-Agreement-approved/?utm_source=first%20enterprise%20migration%20agreement&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alert

What does this approval mean?

The EMA allows Roy Hill to plan its workforce needs from the start and take a project-wide approach to meeting skill needs. The project will be able to sponsor up to 1,715 workers for the three-year construction phase through the 457 visa program where Australians cannot be found to fill the positions. The EMA covers occupations such as electricians, mechanical fitters, scaffolders, and boilermakers.

As part of the EMA, Roy Hill is required to provide up to 2,000 training places for Australians (apprenticeships, traineeships and job readiness programs for indigenous Australians) and invest in excess of A$20 million in training Australians in a variety of programs.

Case fucking closed.

Yep. Let’s tax these people more and lie about their recruitment policies to justify their vilification.
m0nty

#494606, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:15 am

900 jobs lost at the BMA mine, 1715 needed at Roy Hill. Seems like a win-win to me. Just ship the workers from BMA and other mines allegedly affected to Roy Hill and Bob’s your uncle, problem solved. Gina wouldn’t even need to spend that $20M on training.
.

#494609, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:16 am

More mines than BMA are being closed down. You clown.
m0nty

#494611, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:18 am

Yes Dot, you said “thousands” are out of work. More than enough to fill all the Roy Hill positions, if you’re not lying. So someone’s lying. Either Gina is lying about there being a local skills shortage, or you’re lying about all these poor unemployed local mining workers. Which one is it?
Slim

#494613, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:18 am

Alan – what you say she meant and what she said are different things and clearly open to interpretation. That’s fine, but it’s not helpful to claim she said something she didn’t.

Dot – maybe try camomile tea – I hear it’s very calming. So only people who agree with you should be allowed to vote?

I guess the new iron ore mine at Ngukurr in the NT and the
Alpha coal project in Queensland’s Galilee Basin are evidence of the impending demise of the mining boom come July 1st.
dan

#494615, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:19 am

So Mondo, your proposing we pay more taxes?
steve

#494618, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:20 am

Alan

What she meant was that she owns the minerals

Good to see you have added mind-reading to your economics credentials
steve

#494624, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:22 am

Alan, in your article you said:

If a valuable mineral deposit is discovered it becomes the property of the finder subject to, theoretically, known and fixed royalties to the state

Could you comment on the recently announced increases in royalties by the WA and NSW governments, and the effect they will have on mining exploration
.

#494627, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:25 am

Dot – maybe try camomile tea – I hear it’s very calming. So only people who agree with you should be allowed to vote?

It is only that you are wrong and dishonest that I find offensive. Back to your acid trips, dickhead.

Wow, two new mines.

You douchebag. You will never attribute any losses to the taxes. Any growth (even less than recent history) in mining will be considered good, despite if it is lower. If mines shut down, it will be because of “China” and “whinging miners”.

It never occurred to you that adding a new tax to an industry with a negative ERA and the highest levels of industry taxation might be job destroying.

This is such a hoax. Swan admitted the RSPT was a cash grab to pay for his unfunded superannuation promises. He just didn’t have the minerals to jack up the SCG equally nor apply an equal increase in the personal income tax rate, let alone upping the GST by 1-2% to cover his egregious spending.

All the miners wanted was a sensible policy change so they wouldn’t pay taxes in a regressive tax system. Then Swan hijacked the process and started his idiotic class warfare from there on in to pay for his malfeasance in fiscal discipline.
.

#494630, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:25 am

Good to see you have added mind-reading to your economics credentials

Both of which are world class, compared to your epic fails at trolling and pedantry.
JamesK

#494634, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:30 am

Could you comment on the recently announced increases in royalties by the WA and NSW governments, and the effect they will have on mining explorlewayer Gillardation

None as Doofus Swan and Slick-lawyer Juliar signed a contract unilaterally gauranteeing the miners that all state mining royalties are now deductaible from the MRRT

You already know you’re not terribly smart steve.

Right?
Slim

#494635, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:30 am

Dot – sounds like you won’t attribute any losses or closures to anything but taxation. And what’s with your fixation/obsession with acid trips? Having flashbacks?
.

#494637, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:33 am

Dot – sounds like you won’t attribute any losses or closures to anything but taxation

You imbecile they have a negative ERP and the highest industry rate of taxation basically.

The mining industry is therefore very sensitive to upward changes in the tax rate.

How do you hedge against tax rates, genius?
.

#494642, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:34 am

Slim – you self aggrandising fool – you realise the original from of the RSPT would have made Olympic Dam Mine unfeasible? I guess you didn’t. Must have been China. Or whinging.
m0nty

#494643, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:35 am

Yes Dot, you said “thousands” are out of work. More than enough to fill all the Roy Hill positions, if you’re not lying. So someone’s lying. Either Gina is lying about there being a local skills shortage, or you’re lying about all these poor unemployed local mining workers. Which one is it?

No answer to this, Dot? Must be you that is lying.
dan

#494644, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:36 am

Swanee can’t touch the GST, its the responsibility of the states. With any luck, the liberal states will not increase the rate, but broaden the base to better resemble the original proposal until those Senate fuckwits trashed it.

Then, it would be prudent for the state and federal treasurers to lower their inefficient taxes on property and employment.
.

#494646, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:37 am

You douchebag monty, BMA isn’t the only mine that has closed or that will close.

You halfwit.

You seem to think that if there is ANY growth, then this means there has been no reduction in growth.

You innumerate, illiterate incognoscenti.
Slim

#494650, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:42 am

Dot – you should try to calm yourself – so much anger can’t be good for your health – and it detracts from any coherence of you argument. Anyway, we don’t have the original RSPT so no sense in exorcising yourself about what might have been.
steve

#494654, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:49 am

Perhaps not JamesK.

It should be noted, however, that for those iron ore miners who will not initially pay MRRT (as a result of the transitional rules), or those who don’t meet the threshold requirements for paying MRRT, the increase in the royalty rate will represent an additional cost which will be payable upon production and may not be recovered for many years (if ever) under the proposed MRRT regime.

This article was written by Nick Heggart, Partner and Brett Arnold, Senior Associate, Perth.

Unless you know something Freehills doesn’t?
Louis Hissink

#494655, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:50 am

m0nty

Officially there are 600,000 unemployed in Australia, as stated by one of Gillard’s ministers this week. Yet the mining industry is screaming for workers.

If Aussies don’t want to work, as is obvious from the numbers, then there are plenty who elsewhere.

So you explain why we can’t attract the unemployed Aussies in spite of the high wages and excellent conditions.
Matt

#494657, posted on June 1, 2012 at 10:52 am

Unemployed Australians have no wish to work in mines in remote parts of the country. This is reality. Short of enslaving the unemployed, where should Rinehart et. al. find their workers?
m0nty

#494666, posted on June 1, 2012 at 11:01 am

You douchebag monty, BMA isn’t the only mine that has closed or that will close.

You halfwit.

You seem to think that if there is ANY growth, then this means there has been no reduction in growth.

You innumerate, illiterate incognoscenti.

You are dodging the question as usual, Dot. Is there a mining skills shortage in Australia which validates Rinehart’s importation of Chinese workers, which means you’re lying; or are there thousands of unemployed mining workers from BMA and all these other mines you claim have shut down, crying into their Hahn Lights every night who put a lie to Rinehart’s whining?

Either you’re lying or she is, Dot. The smart money is on you being the liar.
m0nty

#494672, posted on June 1, 2012 at 11:05 am

Officially there are 600,000 unemployed in Australia, as stated by one of Gillard’s ministers this week. Yet the mining industry is screaming for workers.

But Dot is telling me that there are thousands of unemployed mining workers! Are you telling me, Louis, that Dot is lying? Heaven forfend!
Token

#494673, posted on June 1, 2012 at 11:05 am

Officially there are 600,000 unemployed in Australia, as stated by one of Gillard’s ministers this week. Yet the mining industry is screaming for workers.

If Aussies don’t want to work, as is obvious from the numbers, then there are plenty who elsewhere.

Talked to a tradey doing work at my place yesterday. He prefers small jobs so he does not have to deal with the unemployable nuff-nuffs who p*ss off back to the dole once the weather is too hot, too cold, etc. Is there any wonder the miners would rather deal with people who want to do the work from overseas?
dan

#494684, posted on June 1, 2012 at 11:18 am

is that 600 000 ABLE bodied dole bludgers?

I doubt it is easy to get a fully paid up member of Gillards Surf Team to put down the bong long enough to read and understand the relevant safety acts and regulations, not to mention training on how to use a pick axe and shovel.

I think anyway, what the miners are needing are skilled Trades people to work in the fabrication shops around the country to build the modules needed to extract and transport the dirt. This is, I understand, a global phenomenon.
m0nty

#494720, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:06 pm

You are dodging the question as usual, Dot. Is there a mining skills shortage in Australia which validates Rinehart’s importation of Chinese workers, which means you’re lying; or are there thousands of unemployed mining workers from BMA and all these other mines you claim have shut down, crying into their Hahn Lights every night who put a lie to Rinehart’s whining?

Either you’re lying or she is, Dot. The smart money is on you being the liar.

Still nothing from the Dotty One. He is incapable of owning up to his failures.
JC

#494725, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:11 pm

Monster

There is no rational reason Gina would be looking overseas for workers if they were available here as it would mean tons less paperwork for local hies, so there must be some sort of bottleneck/shortage

Stop being an irrational tool.
Louis Hissink

#494734, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:21 pm

JC,

I have yet to chase it up but Shorten indicated that mining companies HAVE to go through the jobs board process now before they can look overseas for workers. This means each and every person for a particular skill set would need to be interviewed and processed at enormous expense.

Given the micromanagement we are under concerning environmental and OH&S regulations, this is an additional restriction on our property rights. Basically it means that while we have property rights to the minerals, we have, it seems, no rights left to do what we want with it. This is simply a Facist system, so we may as well learn how to game it.
m0nty

#494737, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:24 pm

Don’t be more of a moron than usual, JC. Gina doesn’t fill out the paperwork herself. She wants those foreign workers because of one thing: money. They cost less in wages, they will accept lower quality housing, they require less investment in infrastructure and services to support them.

If there is a genuine shortage though, JC, you are saying that Dot is lying and there is no pool of unemployed mining workers.
Pickles

#494740, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:26 pm

Just nationalise the mines, Julia. You know you want to.
Token

#494744, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:29 pm

Just nationalise the mines, Julia. You know you want to.

Before the budget this year this mob ensured the public service raided every couch in Canberra for spare change to get that “surplus”.

Therefore, Dullard can’t move too quickly. In Chavezian fashion, she has to wait until the capitalised running dogs have finished investing capital before she moves.
JC

#494752, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:38 pm

Don’t be more of a moron than usual, JC. Gina doesn’t fill out the paperwork herself.

Tell me I shouldn’t dispair at the sheer imbecility of the left these days.

Moron, if we transposed “Gina” with BHP no one would think the CEO of BHP would be filling in the paperwork. You rank idiot.

The point is there would be added costs and pressures which could easily be avoided with local hires as against foreign recruitment.

You really are too stupid to be here Monster and I mean this nicely.

She wants those foreign workers because of one thing: money. They cost less in wages, they will accept lower quality housing, they require less investment in infrastructure and services to support them.

Not true. They would be paid the same rates as local hires. That’s a fact that has not been disputed.

Now go away.
Louis Hissink

#494759, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm

Pickles

They are nationalised to all intents and purposes.
m0nty

#494762, posted on June 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm

if we transposed “Gina” with BHP no one would think the CEO of BHP would be filling in the paperwork.

The point I was making is that CEOs of mining companies have employees to fill out paperwork, but the money they plan to save on the mining workers more than offsets this.

Not true. They would be paid the same rates as local hires. That’s a fact that has not been disputed.

The terms of the Roy Hill EMA are that they are paid the same as similar workers in the same company. But what Rinehart wants to do is have all her low-skilled workers be foreigners on 457s in a special economic zone, so that safeguard would be meaningless. That’s the agenda here, trying to turn the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi.
dan

#494765, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:00 pm

They cost less in wages, they will accept lower quality housing, they require less investment in infrastructure and services to support them.

Don’t be naive Monty. You think the Unions wouldn’t kick up a BIG stink if some yellow bastard (mean’t in the nicest possible way) is getting less money to perform the same job? Its like my Union Stooge of a mate who actually believes the Union Propaganda that it will be UnSkilled migrants flocking here terking our Jeeerbs.
.

#494776, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:09 pm

But what Rinehart wants to do is have all her low-skilled workers be foreigners on 457s in a special economic zone, so that safeguard would be meaningless. That’s the agenda here, trying to turn the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi.

This is bullshit. You are just lying.
.

#494777, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:10 pm

Dot – you should try to calm yourself – so much anger can’t be good for your health – and it detracts from any coherence of you argument. Anyway, we don’t have the original RSPT so no sense in exorcising yourself about what might have been.

Shut up you idiot. You have been proven wrong.
.

#494779, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:13 pm

You are dodging the question as usual, Dot. Is there a mining skills shortage in Australia which validates Rinehart’s importation of Chinese workers, which means you’re lying; or are there thousands of unemployed mining workers from BMA and all these other mines you claim have shut down, crying into their Hahn Lights every night who put a lie to Rinehart’s whining?

If there is a skills shortage it does not mean I am lying.

You failed economics remember, you fat slob?

Either you’re lying or she is, Dot. The smart money is on you being the liar.

The smart money is on you being an illiterate, obese fool. You have made up a false dichotomy.

Officially there are 600,000 unemployed in Australia, as stated by one of Gillard’s ministers this week. Yet the mining industry is screaming for workers.

But Dot is telling me that there are thousands of unemployed mining workers! Are you telling me, Louis, that Dot is lying? Heaven forfend!

There are.

You are an innumerate fool.

Skills are not necessarily transferable, and a lot of training may be on the job. A copper miner (Wandoan) may not have transferable skills for a coal project.

You are fucking retarded. You have the economic awareness of the Micalef character (The Premier) in the Martin/Molloy film, bad Eggs.
JC

#494782, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:14 pm

That’s the agenda here, trying to turn the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi.

I’ve been scratching my head for the past few minutes trying to figure why that is bad, Monster.

Detail it for me.

Why would turning the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi be a bad thing?
.

#494783, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:16 pm

That’s the agenda here, trying to turn the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi.

Australians MOVE to Abu Dhabi to earn significantly higher incomes.

You fucking deadshit.

Are you really this stupid minty? Is it that easy to rip off IP of AFL Clubs and earn a derivative income off this?
JamesK

#494789, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm

Detail it for me.

Why would turning the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi be a bad thing?

He’s probably worried about the towelheads thing.

Most leftists are fledgling racists whp pretend to care about minorities in order to grandstand but only as long as they live among the great unwashed and are suitably grateful come election time.
dan

#494792, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:26 pm

I think a great many of you are misguided here. Its not the pick axe and shovel person they are screaming out for, it is the sparkies and boilies to build the basic infrastructure. Hence, peak workforce of around 8000 and only 900 for production.

Having worked around the world, Trades people are in short supply as the education emphasis for the past 30 odd years has been on Uni Degrees, not lowly Trades.
.

#494794, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:29 pm

Anyway, we don’t have the original RSPT so no sense in exorcising yourself about what might have been.

You turkey the MRRT is a bad tax, it pushes the EMTR of miners into rates not seen since 1983 and it is unequally applied. Mining already pays the highest rates per industry and has a negative effective rate of protection. It does no good at all. it was never intended as a reform, Swan hijacked the consultative process and cooked up a scheme to fund super as an unfunded liability. What a freaking idiot. Now we have these theories that mines are worth more when they don’t produce anything etc. Sheer bloody lunacy.

You left wing idiots insist that decisions are not made at the margin or that it is a perfectly efficient tax with no deadweight loss. This is nonsense. Even if it was a “perfect tax” it is applied on top of a heap of other interacting taxes. Don’t you think some of these effects can be deleteriously non linear at high EMTRs? It isn’t a brown tax nor is it a Georgist tax.

It is just a pathetic attempt by the totally inept Swan to cover his budget his mum made up one night cooking a packet mix curry in the slow cooker.
m0nty

#494795, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:30 pm

I’ve been scratching my head for the past few minutes trying to figure why that is bad, Monster.

Detail it for me.

Why would turning the Pilbara into Abu Dhabi be a bad thing?

Would you really want to live in an Australian zone where less than 15% of the population is local? Of course, you wouldn’t live there. You wouldn’t be one of the workers who pay exorbitant amounts of money to contractors to get a job and then spend years in substandard accommodation, suffering through poor OH&S practices with unacceptable levels of death and injury, to pay off debt to support families back home.

The UAE scenario is pretty much legalised people smuggling. Stop the boats, indeed. You probably would stop the boats, because those same people smugglers would be able to go legit and make more money with the same exploitative tactics. Who needs boats when they will fly you into a purpose-built slum? Thanks Gina!
.

#494796, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:31 pm

Dan,

I outlined that in the Minter Ellison newsletter I linked to, but minty continues to lie with his nonsense about Australians toddling off the Abu Dhabi to earn third world wages.

What a goose.
.

#494799, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm

Would you really want to live in an Australian zone where less than 15% of the population is local?

Yeah we’re gonna get 100 million migrants? Idiot.

Central Australia was significantly Afghani at one stage.

Do you think when the first fleet came over, we brought over 200 001 whiteys to make sure we outnumbered the ATSIs so we wouldn’t feel out of place?

You really are a rambling, dribbling maniac.
JamesK

#494801, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm

So there you have it.

According to m0nty Gina is the equivalent of a people smuggler.
dan

#494802, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:34 pm

Would you really want to live in an Australian zone where less than 15% of the population is local?

You can state your own racism, but DO NOT EVER speak on behalf of me
Token

#494808, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:38 pm

Would you really want to live in an Australian zone where less than 15% of the population is local?

You can state your own racism, but DO NOT EVER speak on behalf of me

It is amusing to see how many Lefties are falling down the union endorsed White Australia Policy slippery slope.

So often now it seems we are getting the message from the hypocritical left that the only good immigrant is the one who will arrive without identification and has no motivation to steal the jobs of union members.
Pete

#494810, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm

Monty

Am I correct in thinking you’ve never been near a mine. They all exist in a price takers market, that is they have no control over their revenue line.

The only effective mechanism for ensuring profitability BEFORE tax is cost control. That comes from in particular ensuring capital estimates come in on budget and then ensuring that operating costs are acceptable. This normally occurs through a careful optimisation of labour and technology.

When the revenue line is going down, the labour market becomes inflexible or costly and taxes go up the only choice you have is in finding additional technology related productivity increases OR lowering your capital costs.

There is no free lunch.

Woodside are now looking at increasing the amount of offshore pre fab for their LNG plants. They will basically build the plant in modules and float it across.

I’m sure that will help increase domestic mining employment.

As for the tax, its another greek like freeload on the donkeys back.

But clearly its not your donkey so I’m sure you dont care
dan

#494811, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm

From my own efforts, getting a job in Abu Dhabi, Singapore or any other “growth” region as a tradesman is a Stupid idea as you get paid the same as the other imported worker, ie, eff all. Expats in those countries earning big money are consultants, engineers and project managers
dan

#494813, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:41 pm

Token?
m0nty

#494818, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:47 pm

Australians MOVE to Abu Dhabi to earn significantly higher incomes.

As dan points out, that is a non sequitur as no Australian tradie wants to move to Abu Dhabi to get paid $8 a day.

Central Australia was significantly Afghani at one stage.

Do you think when the first fleet came over, we brought over 200 001 whiteys to make sure we outnumbered the ATSIs so we wouldn’t feel out of place?

More non sequiturs. Why not just flog the Pilbara off to China, rename it Lang Kong, and be done with it? Sovereignty, what’s that?
dan

#494829, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm

Whats your point the Monty?
Token

#494830, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:53 pm

That was not directed at you Dan, I was underlining the dangerous ground M0nty is approaching.
.

#494831, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:54 pm

As dan points out, that is a non sequitur as no Australian tradie wants to move to Abu Dhabi to get paid $8 a day.

I never said tradie. Previously you said we didn’t have a skilled labour shortage. Not all of the Roy Hill workers needed are tradies either.

The whole point of the Roy Hill thing is that Rinehart can get it off the ground quickly. Why should she wait six months because some dude laid off elsehwere ums and ahs with his wife about moving and getting the kids into another school?

These projects need technicians often, and these semi professionals are often the best paid. These people would also earn high incomes in Abu Dhabi. Technicians are a couple of steps up from a trade in the AQF as well as a couple of years experience.

A lot of these foreign workers will be technicians. Rinehart is just getting over labour market rigidities. You think her speeding up production is immoral and perhaps irrational. You are a financially illiterate fool. Please refer to the time value of money.

In terms of macroeconomics, given the multiplier of the mine and related services, these also have a TVM factor, and we are better off getting the jobs now and not later.

Never mind the macroeconomic consideration that we need increased immigration for years to come to keep our unfunded liabilities afloat.

You stupid, dishonest bastard.

More non sequiturs. Why not just flog the Pilbara off to China, rename it Lang Kong, and be done with it? Sovereignty, what’s that?

You really are fucking stupid. Fuck all of the land area is required and it is owned by company x but it remains part of Australia.

You really are a halfwit.
dan

#494837, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:57 pm

No wuckers Token
JC

#494838, posted on June 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm

Would you really want to live in an Australian zone where less than 15% of the population is local? Of course, you wouldn’t live there.

I live in one where 38% is foreign born and therefore not “local’, you idiot. It doesn’t send shiver up my spine. How about you, monster?
dan

#494855, posted on June 1, 2012 at 2:10 pm

I think this whole argument goes to Rudd expressing support for a Bigger Australia and all the unionists and other assorted leftie Wankers being against that for whatever principle.
Louis Hissink

#494860, posted on June 1, 2012 at 2:11 pm

Dan

The rot started when the trade unions forced apprentices to be paid adult wages – making their employment uneconomic and that’s why there is a skills shortage.

We are now reaping the results of those policies, and all of it self-inflicted by the trade unions and their balmain basket-weaver fellow travellers.
dan

#494871, posted on June 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm

Only on EBA sites. I know of First Year Apprentices working on building sites being paid $1000/week. Figure that out!
Token

#494892, posted on June 1, 2012 at 2:44 pm

The tradey was an ex-brickie who made the point that the $1000/week is after the guys working ont he site are hit with the myriad of union fees and charges. ‘Twas not a big fan of the unions, oh no…
dan

#494898, posted on June 1, 2012 at 2:49 pm

well, no, Token. The thing is, unions live by the rule, Equal Rights – Equal Pay. It is an untenable position as it directly attacks their members who have worked, for example, 30 years longer than said apprentice and have the Knowledge.
dan

#494905, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:03 pm

Interesting articles Louis.
m0nty

#494916, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:13 pm

I never said tradie. Previously you said we didn’t have a skilled labour shortage. Not all of the Roy Hill workers needed are tradies either.

I did not say we had a skilled labour shortage. I said that Gina Rinehart was talking about a shortage, but you claim there are thousands of unemployed skilled labourers from BMA and elsewhere just waiting for a job – and I pointed out that one of you is lying, because both statements can not be true. You have still not addressed this issue, which leads to only one conclusion: it is you who is lying.

The whole point of the Roy Hill thing is that Rinehart can get it off the ground quickly. Why should she wait six months because some dude laid off elsehwere ums and ahs with his wife about moving and getting the kids into another school?

It’s called the real world, Dot. Just because you’re a billionaire and it is physically possible to parachute in foreign scabs to be your very own serf underclass, doesn’t mean that politicians are going to approve a special economic zone to make it possible. The EMAs are a milestone on the way to Rinehart’s vision.

Rinehart is just getting over labour market rigidities. You think her speeding up production is immoral and perhaps irrational.

Rigidities are one thing, but flying in your own captive labour market is not an acceptable solution in a social democracy.

I live in one where 38% is foreign born and therefore not “local’, you idiot. It doesn’t send shiver up my spine. How about you, monster?

You’re talking about migrants who settle here, start families, and add to our nation’s wealth. Vastly different situation to temporary 457 visas. I would have no problem if Rinehart’s plan involved skilled migrants and she committed to obeying existing local OH&S and other employment laws.
dan

#494919, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:20 pm

thousands of unemployed skilled labourers from BMA and elsewhere just waiting for a jo

unfortuneatle they belong to the union and will not budge

special economic zone

it exists, hence EMA’s

You’re talking about migrants who settle here, start families, and add to our nation’s wealth. Vastly different situation to temporary 457 visas

And good fucking on em! a great many people who go through with a 457 do so in the Hope that they can become citizens.

I was hoping that after such a delay in reply you would have come up with something better than this drivel.
Louis Hissink

#494920, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:21 pm

Thanks Dan,
Louis Hissink

#494923, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:26 pm

M0nty,

ALL people who work on mine sites HAVE to comply with OH&S laws etc. You seem not to have any personal experience, and hence knowledge, about the realities of the mining industry. Those sites are under the WA Mines Safety Department’s jurisdiction, and believe me, there is no way Roy Hill operations can avoid it.
.

#494927, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:29 pm

I did not say we had a skilled labour shortage.

You are talking shit. Ever talked to people in industry?

No. You are not an economics consultant and you failed economics at university. You do not personally know any project managers or technicians in mining or related industries.

It’s called the real world, Dot. Just because you’re a billionaire and it is physically possible to parachute in foreign scabs to be your very own serf underclass

This is not what is happening you dishonest fool. I have shown what the EMA says thanks to Minter Ellis. On multiple occasions.

Rigidities are one thing, but flying in your own captive labour market is not an acceptable solution in a social democracy.

Minty Gina isn’t doing that and come next election we won’t be one.

You’re talking about migrants who settle here, start families, and add to our nation’s wealth. Vastly different situation to temporary 457 visas.

Bullshit. You also think FDI is stealing.

You really a low rent oik.
.

#494928, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:29 pm

“are a low rent oik”

FFS
Abu Chowdah

#494937, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:36 pm

Slim and others
I know what she actually said. What she meant was that she owns the minerals as the custodian of the people and will decide how much to give to the explorer/developer and how much to use to buy elections to retain herself in power.

Alan your meaning was clear, and an accurate assessment of her message to the mining magnates. Slim’s pedantic literalism is just sophistry designed to derail and misdirect.
.

#494938, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:38 pm

Exactly Abu.

Let’s see these tea cosy wearing idiots apply their cranky literary theory to any conservative, libertarian or ex ALP politician.
m0nty

#494939, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:40 pm

You are talking shit. Ever talked to people in industry?

No. You are not an economics consultant and you failed economics at university. You do not personally know any project managers or technicians in mining or related industries.

None of this addresses the question of whether there is a skills shortage or an unemployment problem, which you still haven’t answered, which is who is lying: Gina or you? Obviously it’s you, Dot. And you keep lying, because it’s the only debating tactic you know.

This is not what is happening you dishonest fool. I have shown what the EMA says thanks to Minter Ellis. On multiple occasions.

This is not what is happening as it is set up now, Dot, but if Gina gets her way with that zone bulltish then EMAs will enable the Pilbara to be littered with Abu Dhabi style slums. Less of Red Dog and more of District 9.
Louis Hissink

#494947, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:47 pm

“will enable the Pilbara to be littered with Abu Dhabi style slums”

M0nty – that’s not possible – after Twiggy’s experience with a cyclone some years back, building “slums” isn’t on anyone’s agenda except yours. Every mining operation in WA has to be under the frame work of a proposal of work, POW, and there is no way anyone can create tent cities etc to house itenerant workers like your examples.

What is it with you lefties that you have to fabricate every narrative?
.

#494961, posted on June 1, 2012 at 3:57 pm

None of this addresses the question of whether there is a skills shortage or an unemployment problem, which you still haven’t answered, which is who is lying: Gina or you? Obviously it’s you, Dot. And you keep lying, because it’s the only debating tactic you know.

I answered this before at 1.54, fuckface. If you a re a brain damaged illiterate who cannot read, I don’t give a shit.

This is not what is happening as it is set up now, Dot, but if Gina gets her way with that zone bulltish then EMAs will enable the Pilbara to be littered with Abu Dhabi style slums. Less of Red Dog and more of District 9.

You’re lying. Who do I trust? The IP thief or Minter Ellison who are officers of the law?
m0nty

#495006, posted on June 1, 2012 at 4:24 pm

“will enable the Pilbara to be littered with Abu Dhabi style slums”

M0nty – that’s not possible – after Twiggy’s experience with a cyclone some years back, building “slums” isn’t on anyone’s agenda except yours. Every mining operation in WA has to be under the frame work of a proposal of work, POW, and there is no way anyone can create tent cities etc to house itenerant workers like your examples.

That’s the rules under Gillard, but who knows what the terms would be of this special economic zone if Abbott gifts it to the mining magnates, Louis.
Token

#495018, posted on June 1, 2012 at 4:31 pm

That’s the rules under Gillard, but who knows what the terms would be of this special economic zone if Abbott gifts it to the mining magnates, Louis

Wow, so you really believe Abbott, Abbott, Abbott is keen to build Sud Afrikan type townships for the guest workers, eh?
Louis Hissink

#495025, posted on June 1, 2012 at 4:38 pm

M0nty,

The rules in force in the Pilbara and hence WA are solely WA laws and rules – Gillard has no jurisdiction over them, though she would dearly love to, I suspect. Abbott coming into power won’t change WA’s mining regime – that is totally under control of the WA government. Creating a special economic zone as you imagine would not escape the totally onerous OH&S regulations of the Commonwealth – those are more stringent than the WA ones.
m0nty

#495028, posted on June 1, 2012 at 4:40 pm

I answered this before at 1.54

You waved your arms around talking about labour market rigidities. Is there a labour market shortage or isn’t there? Your position is apparently that because it’s going to take six more months to dig up some dirt using Australian labour that the metal is going to go bad, like a lemon meringue. Newsflash, Dot: if Rinehart is worried about TVM then she can put her wealth in the bank for six months and sit it out like a normal capitalist. Despite the panic being propagated in the pages of the Australian, the Chinese aren’t going to go into recession any time soon. They will still be gagging for it six months later.

The reality is that closure of some mines is not a national disaster because there are plenty of others opening, leading to skills shortages of the kind Rinehart is complaining about. What you and Rinehart are trying to do is subvert the usual machinations of domestic wage and condition claims by bypassing the local labour market.

Now, it’s a globalised economy these days, to be sure, and it is true that plenty of economies have had great success built on the back of low-cost low-right imported labour, not the least of which is the US (and UAE). We don’t have to lower our standards just because they have, though. The Australian economy should not be turned upside down just to satisfy the ROI requirements of billionaires.
Louis Hissink

#495034, posted on June 1, 2012 at 4:43 pm

The Australian economy is being turned upside down by the lunatic Labor Party policies however, our intellectual billionaires.
.

#495086, posted on June 1, 2012 at 5:40 pm

You waved your arms around talking about labour market rigidities.

You stupid, gooify bastard.

The short answer is yes.

It amazes me you accuse me of dodging whilst you openly blather on the contrary to the explanation of a well respected law firm.

Newsflash, Dot: if Rinehart is worried about TVM then she can put her wealth in the bank for six months and sit it out like a normal capitalist.

You really are quite dumb. She can sit it out because the made up theory of yours of what is happeneing under the EMA offends you? You fascist turd.

The reality is that closure of some mines is not a national disaster because there are plenty of others opening, leading to skills shortages of the kind Rinehart is complaining about.

No. You have conflated a couple of issues here to pretend they both don’t exist. You lying dishonest turd. Your explanation is nonsense. You failed economics remember?

Now, it’s a globalised economy these day

Blah blah blah…

it is true that plenty of economies have had great success built on the back of low-cost low-right imported labour, not the least of which is the US (and UAE). We don’t have to lower our standards just because they have, though.

You stupid shit labour costs are preferable here (at present) not because of the wage rate but because of real unit labour costs.

The Australian economy should not be turned upside down just to satisfy the ROI requirements of billionaires.

It is not, you have misapplied incorrect and erroneous economic theory. Futhermore the rules are being changed to suit envious, unproductive pricks like you and Wayne Swan.

Now fuck off, you lying turd.
m0nty

#495133, posted on June 1, 2012 at 6:30 pm

It is amusing how the longer a conversation goes with Dot, any semblance of a proper point disappears and all that is left is vapid swearing. It’s like he turns gradually into Bird.

Whereas with JC, it’s all Bird all the time.
Louis Hissink

#495252, posted on June 1, 2012 at 8:24 pm

“The reality is that closure of some mines is not a national disaster because there are plenty of others opening, leading to skills shortages of the kind Rinehart is complaining about”

This is a non sequitur M0nty.

You do know what this is?

If some mines close (costs exceed expected revenue) and others start (expected revenue is greater than present-day costs) then the closures and start ups generally cannot be in the same commodity; hence skills transference may not be possible.

Any comment?
sdfc

#495256, posted on June 1, 2012 at 8:26 pm

We don’t have a problem with a lack of mining investment.
.

#495300, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:19 pm

It is amusing how the longer a conversation goes with Dot, any semblance of a proper point disappears and all that is left is vapid swearing. It’s like he turns gradually into Bird.

Whereas with JC, it’s all Bird all the time.

You just keep on lying. You are not in touch with reality. Why do you keep on making up a legal fiction that Minter Ellison disproved very clearly and concisely?

This is why I am majorly pissed off. You are presenting a complete fabrication as the truth and a reason to vilify the mining magnates.

We don’t have a problem with a lack of mining investment.

Err sdfc that is like a first world country suffering a drop in GDP growth then remarking “there is no problem with the level of GDP in OECD nation X”…
sdfc

#495303, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:20 pm

Mining investment is increasing.
.

#495310, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:25 pm

HAHAHAHA

You stupid shit labour costs are preferable here (at present) not because of the wage rate but because of real unit labour costs.

It is amusing how the longer a conversation goes with Dot, any semblance of a proper point disappears and all that is left is vapid swearing.

No you dumb shit, you just don’t get why the distinction between wages and real unit labour costs is so important.

You are a fraud. You shouldn’t portray yourself as someone with an understanding of the issues. Piss off.
.

#495315, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:28 pm

Mining investment is increasing.

…on historical data.

Now are you going to tell me that mining investment is increasing either a) due to the MRRT and carbon tax or b) not growing at a lower rate due to the taxes because the tax is perfectly efficient?

Seriously. Mining faces a negative ERP and very high industry EMTR.
sdfc

#495321, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:31 pm

The Q1 private sector capex report released this week says it is.

I’m not in favour of the MRRT but there is no shortage of mining investment.
.

#495324, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:33 pm

No one ever said “there is a shortage of mining investment” just like a recession isn’t a “shortage of GDP”.
Louis Hissink

#495331, posted on June 1, 2012 at 9:40 pm

sdfc

I’m in the mining industry on Earth; which planet are you from ?
dan

#495877, posted on June 2, 2012 at 3:37 pm

Mars. He’s talking down the Earthian industry in the hope we all build rocket ships and mine his tenements there
m0nty

#496292, posted on June 3, 2012 at 9:48 am

The true test of a crazy commenter is that they will quote the same text and reply to it multiple times. Birdian to the max.
.

#496298, posted on June 3, 2012 at 10:07 am

Or keep on repeating the same lie which has been refuted.
dan

#497953, posted on June 5, 2012 at 3:18 pm

or read the empirical evidence and disbelieve it because it doesn’t fit your argument