ABC employee Michael Janda doesn’t earn very much and so has little worth stealing.
$68,707. That’s my salary at the ABC.
You can add in a little leave loading here and there, the (very) rare overtime payment for (very) common overtime, and an employer super contribution that’s a bit ahead of the private sector standard (15.4 versus 9.25 per cent).
So far this financial year, including all overtime and extras but excluding super, I’ve earned a shade under $65,000 and had a bit over $18,000 in PAYG income tax taken out, pushed a bit higher than the usual rate because of HECS/HELP repayments.
As such he has little reason to value his privacy and …, well it shows. There is so much silliness there, but I’ll leave it for others.
Here is Richard Rahn, writing in the WSJ, explaining why some people might value their financial secrecy:
Those who demand increased taxes on global capital often rail against financial privacy and bank secrecy — forgetting they are necessary for civil society. It is true that not all people are saintly. But it is also true that not all governments are free from tyranny and corruption, and not all people are fully protected against criminal elements, even within their own governments. Without some jurisdictions in the world enforcing reasonable rights of financial privacy, those living in un-free and corrupt jurisdictions would have no place to protect their financial assets from kidnappers, extortionists, blackmailers and assorted government and nongovernment thugs.
Against that, Janda offers a confused mish mash of class envy.
Update: Milton von Smith reminds us why the ABC values privacy.
ABC Managing Director Mark Scott could not be reached for comment on Janda’s idea. Oh wait, yes he could:
The ABC has argued against releasing the salary information on the grounds that it is contrary to public interest and is connected to confidential programming material.
Mr Scott has previously argued that because the public broadcaster pays less than the commercial networks, revealing the salaries of its employees would make it more difficult to retain quality staff.
I guess that’s that then.