The Australia Institute’s Advice – Soak the Rich

TAFKAS does not know why the Greens are referred to as socialists.  They’re not socialists.  They’re fascists.  The don’t want to socialise the means of production.  They want to confiscate from those they don’t like, give to those they do like and do this all a the point of a gun.  Oh and of course they want to use the state to silence and jail anyone who disagrees with them.

Don’t accept TAFKAS’ description?  Well this is how fascism is defined on Wikipedia:

dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, and strong regimentation of society and of the economy.

Tell TAFKAS he is wrong.

There is no equality in in Green-landia.  There are the preferred and the unpreferred.

Take for example the latest contribution from “prominent Australian economist, author and public policy commentator” and Chief Economist of the Australia Institute, Richard Denniss.  He must be prominent, he himself says so in his multiple biographies including here, here and here.

Dr Denniss is as green as they come.  Here is a snapshot of his biography from, oh yes, a report against the Adani project:

But the more interesting contribution is his contribution in the AFR today where he writes:

Tax reform is simple: soak the rich – Reducing the disposable income of high income earners who save a lot and spending more on nurses and child care workers who spend the most will boost GDP.

Pretty bold statement.  Take from the rich and give to his preferred constituents; those preferred constituents being Greens voters of course.

But there is a small problem with his analysis.  No, not small.  There are multiple large problems.

To start with, the tax measures he advocates and supports don’t take money from the rich.  They take from the middle and poor.  But who cares about those people.  They don’t vote for the Greens.

But even if he was correct, in that the taxes would hit the rich only, what does he think the “rich” do with their money?  Do they put it under their beds?  Do they add tomato sauce and chili and eat the notes?  They invest  to create jobs and generate other taxes.  That is, jobs for non-public servants and non-quasi-public servants who themselves also pay taxes.  But secondary thinking is not the kind of thinking Dr Denniss seems to practice.

Then there is this:

Not all Australians have the same “marginal propensity to consume” and collecting more tax from those who save the most and spending more on those who spend the most will increase consumer spending. The economic benefits of such redistribution aren’t complicated, but they are inconvenient for the wealthy.

That’s right.  Saving and investing is bad.

This is the same logic that said that the Christchurch earthquake would be good for the New Zealand economy because it would boost GDP.

Next Dr Denniss will be advocating for conscription so that holes could be dug and refilled to boost GDP.

There is much to criticise in Dr Denniss’ diatribe, but life is short and facts and history won’t change his mind.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to The Australia Institute’s Advice – Soak the Rich

  1. Judith Sloan

    Just bizarre. A big F if he wrote that in an exam.

  2. stackja

    Makes sense to Greens politicians.
    Do Greens voters understand they will be next to pay higher taxes?

  3. Just bizarre. A big F if he wrote that in an exam.

    Depends on the University and the marker. From Professor Sloan – perhaps an F. From Professor Krugman?

  4. Fred

    I just love the old chestnut about needing more tax to spend on health and education. Only a heartless person could argue against that.

    In 2018 the federal government spent $452 billion.
    $76 billion on health (17%).
    $33 billion on education (7%).

    So for every extra dollar of soaking the rich, only 24 cents will go to health and education.

  5. Beachcomber

    A big F if he wrote that in an exam.

    Maybe if he was enrolled in of your courses Judith. Or in one of Steve’s. But in the the rest of university academia he would be encouraged as a socially committed progressive thinker.

  6. Dr Fred Lenin

    Dont professors earn big money? Does this socialist failure muppet want his comrades to rip off a lot of his salary? The late comrade Hollande did this in France , soaking the rich ,the rich all moved out to other countries taking their money ,but you cant expect socalists to understand this ,they keep trying socialism and it never works .its a mserable failure of an idea embraced by losers .

  7. Percy Popinjay

    collecting more tax from those who save the most and spending more on those who spend the most will increase consumer spending

    These sanctimonious hypocritical wrongologist idiots really do exist in some bizarre parallel universe.

  8. Squirrel

    The Straya Institoot is located in the most affluent part of the most affluent town in the country (they presumably couldn’t find suitable digs amidst the battlers they care about, in Queanbeyan, Cooma or Yass) –

    http://www.tai.org.au/node/258

    so “soak the rich” will make for some interesting conversations when Dr D. and his colleagues venture out to the nearby cafes, bars and restaurants.

  9. Beachcomber

    Soak the “rich” doesn’t refer to the Canberra nomenclatura or inner city elites. It is about soaking the middle and working class tradies and small business people who work hard to make a good living. There is little chance that Comrade Dennisss will ever have to come into contact with any of them.

  10. TBH

    I vote that all of Richard Denisssssssssss’ income and assets first. It’s only fair, as a probable rich elite person.

  11. Ƶĩppʯ (ȊꞪꞨV)

    I put the greens last, ALP 2nd last. These agrarian communists are toxic to civilisation, the last thing you need is for them to be near balance of power.

  12. Rococo Liberal

    the Canberra nomenclatura or inner city elites

    These people are not very wealthy.
    ”The rich” to them is all those peoplewho actually contribute to the economy and are the real elite. A lot of ny clients fall into thatcategory and they are invariably right wing.

  13. John Bayley

    No surprise there – this is standard leftist ‘economics’.

    It goes hand in hand with the one that says increasing social security benefits will stimulate the economy, because the beneficiaries are predominantly poor and therefore will spend it all.

    After all, we can always print more money.

    In a world where higher taxes = government savings, we know that we have always been at war with Eastasia.

    Comrades.

  14. nb

    Dr Denniss will be advocating for conscription so that holes could be dug and refilled to boost GDP.

    Aka green jobs. More jobs, they say, so many more jobs, to produce less electricity. Dumb.

  15. Fang

    These Fascist types, obviously don’t realise that all they are going to do is bring on a much more hard line right wing, right of center leader from the current appeal of a Labor goverment!!
    When we could get a coalition Goverment next time? With a harder line leader than Abbott, that basically said’s we will do No renewable subsidys, (RET, NEG,C02 tax) Nuclear research and facilitation of Thorium Reactor, Drop out of Paris Agreement! Sell the ABC! Move our Israel Embassy to Jerusalem, promote our Shared Values with USA (republican values only!!!)
    Reciprocate property ownership laws with internationals! Freeze all international aid payments to any country that host and support terrorism, and host of other hard line center right princabled and rational ideas! Premote that the individual is king!
    School/University vouchers for student’s
    This type of coalition goverment would request a minimum two terms of goverment to get what we need to get done! It will be tough, very tough! Not many will like having to go through it! But ours and your and your grand kids future will be much more safe and secure, and beneficial! And our kids and grand kids will invent and produce even better things and options than we have now?

  16. Clam Chowdah

    Yes the Greens are fascists, that is clear.

    But they are also socialists, as were the Nazis in an economic sense.

    https://mises.org/library/why-nazism-was-socialism-and-why-socialism-totalitarian

  17. Mundi

    So they claim to not be funded by, or do work for, political parties.

    Yet everything they have published pretty much aligns perfectly with Labor policies.

    Why did they suddenly start publishing so much about franking credits right when labor put up there policy? They have never mentioned then before.

  18. TAFKAS does not know why the Greens are referred to as socialists. They’re not socialists. They’re fascists.

    They’re both, it’s not a zero sum, binary equation. You’ve been fooled (like millions of others) by the fraudulent “far right = Fascism, ergo far left = not Fascism” lie.

    Socialism is the ends, Fascism is the means.

    You cannot have Socialism without Fascism. You cannot have freedom with Fascism.

  19. Fibro

    We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle. Winston Churchill

    SHUT IT DOWN

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.