So in the last few weeks, it transpires that the USA is pretty much spying on anyone and everyone in the "war on terror". This includes hacking into the mobile phones of the presidents of countries that are allied to them. It's hard to see how listening to Angela Merkel's phone conversations and messages is going to set back a terrorist group in any way. And the sheer volume of the data being collected, over 70 million phone records in just a 30 day period in France, belies any notion that this can be limited to known or suspected individuals. Little wonder then at the resultant backlash from the French, German and Spanish governments.
What's more intriguing in this climate, is the absence of any noise whatsoever from our Government. Do we not have questions? Do we already know it's happening and are quite happy about it? I can't believe that even the most pro-US administration could accept the Prime Minister's phone being routinely hacked. Maybe we naively assume that it couldn't be happening here.
I think we should at least be asking.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Monday, October 28, 2013
90% of It Isn't About the 10% At All
Our retail unions are advocating for the 10% GST to be applied to online purchases from overseas retailers because online retailers have an advantage over local retailers, which are obliged to charge GST.
Even the slightest analysis of this claim however, reveals it to be a complete red herring. Those of us who buy goods from overseas retailers do not do it to save 10%. In fact, I'd happily pay 10% more to buy from a local retailer, but the reality is, I'm usually saving between 40 and 50% on Australian retail prices by buying online. Why wouldn't I buy overseas? So, you'd be tempted to say, "Knock me out - add 10% to the overseas price and I'll still be buying from them." But here's the catch: it would be difficult, not to mention being an unwanted complication, for an overseas retailer to start collecting tax on behalf of the Australian government. The likely outcome would be that the overseas retailer would simply decide to refuse to ship to Australia (as currently happens with some suppliers). That's what the retail union is really aiming for.
The unions claim about the 10% advantage is disingenuous at best. In reality, it's a cynical attempt to try lock Australian consumers back into the over-priced local market.
Even the slightest analysis of this claim however, reveals it to be a complete red herring. Those of us who buy goods from overseas retailers do not do it to save 10%. In fact, I'd happily pay 10% more to buy from a local retailer, but the reality is, I'm usually saving between 40 and 50% on Australian retail prices by buying online. Why wouldn't I buy overseas? So, you'd be tempted to say, "Knock me out - add 10% to the overseas price and I'll still be buying from them." But here's the catch: it would be difficult, not to mention being an unwanted complication, for an overseas retailer to start collecting tax on behalf of the Australian government. The likely outcome would be that the overseas retailer would simply decide to refuse to ship to Australia (as currently happens with some suppliers). That's what the retail union is really aiming for.
The unions claim about the 10% advantage is disingenuous at best. In reality, it's a cynical attempt to try lock Australian consumers back into the over-priced local market.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
