14 Jun 2015

Forget People Smugglers: Here's 10 'Criminal Enterprises' Tony Abbott Should Be Giving Cash

By Chris Graham

If you want a real 'Return On investment' there's much better ways to spend money than with people smugglers. Chris Graham helps save the world.

Everyone’s got their knickers in a knot over the Abbott Government’s modest payments to so-called ‘people smugglers’ to return to Indonesia.

Maybe they did. Maybe they didn’t… alright, they almost certainly did.

But, dear readers, we’ve been paying large quantities of taxpayer funds to so-called ‘criminal enterprises’ for years, and it hasn’t done any of us any harm. Indeed it’s built a prosperous and equal society, where everyone gets a share of the pie, with the possible exception of the poor… who not only don’t drive cars, but apparently aren’t very fond of pie.

That’s not to suggest society is without it’s problems… we can always improve. And so with that in mind, here’s a list of other organisations the Abbott Government should be throwing cold hard cash at, because it’s in all our interests.

 

 

1. Large companies… to stop them shifting profits off-shore

If you want companies to pay tax in Australia, then the best way to achieve that is to give them more money to pay taxes with. It’s not rocket science.

Big corporations don’t set-up tax havens in Singapore and the Cayman Islands because they WANT to, they do it because they HAVE to in order to stay profitable. And if they don’t stay profitable, you know what happens then. We have to give them even more money to bail them out.

So it’s simple: give big corporations more money, and there’ll be more profits. Then at least some of those profits will come straight back to us in the form of taxes.

This entirely sustainable system is how capitalism has survived and thrived for generations.



 

2. Banks and investment firms… just because

When you owe a bank $100,000 and you can’t pay, it’s your problem. But when you owe a bank billions of dollars and can’t pay… well, it’s their problem.

And that’s just basically unfair. What sort of a system rips of the banks and investment firms that rip us off. Talk about confusing.

Government policy should be to guarantee large banks and investments firms huge quantities of cash, in order to enable them to find new and creative ways to make money producing absolutely nothing except profit.

It’s a little known fact that they don’t refer to companies as ‘too big to fail’ because they’re ACTUALLY too big to fail… they’re too big to fail without sinking the rest of us. So unless we all want to live in caves and eat gravel for breakfast, we should be providing these banks and investment firms unlimited quantities of cash, with no strings attached.



3. The Catholic Church… to stop abusing children

If there’s one thing the Catholic Church understands, it’s cold hard cash. That, and child abuse.

So it’s obvious: we should pay the Church to stop. This can take the form of massive taxpayer-funded subsidies for the myriad of money-making ventures it would like to embark on, and by allowing the Church to avoid huge quantities of tax by making everything they do tax deductible.



4. Political parties… to stamp out corruption

Paying political parties large bundles of sweaty cash ensures that they do not engage in corrupt activities, and always act in the best interests of the nation. You know it makes sense.

The small, mostly insignificant corruption scandals that have swept NSW, Queensland, Western Australia, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia, the ACT and the Northern Territory (plus the federal government and most local councils) is not because government is corrupt, it’s because the parties that run them are starved of cash. To believe otherwise is to believe that ‘the system’ is broken. And that’s just silly.

How exactly do we expect these pillars of democracy to survive, if we starve them out of existence. They don’t call them parties for no reason!

The solution is to increase taxpayer funding to large, established political organisations. Get to it LNP!



5. Politicians… so they stop diddling their perks

Currently, we give our politicians unfettered power, then ask them to survive on a meager two or three hundred thousand dollars a year, and then we wonder why they stick their hands in the till.

Science and basic common sense tells us that once people get obscenely wealthy, they stop wanting more stuff and start looking for ways to help other people. Think Gina Rhinehart. You want to stamp out pollies diddling their perks? Then give them more perks.

So this solution is simple as well: Add up what all their perks should be, and then increase their salary to that level immediately. And then double that, and add the original perks back in on top. If you want to stop politicians getting greedy, then throwing so much cash at them that they can’t possibly want for more makes perfect sense. Then stand back, salute the flag and watch our oi oi oi democracy flourish.



6. Our enemies’ enemies… so that we have a ready supply of future enemies

When Iraq – our sworn enemy – got all up in our face with weapons of mass destruction and ebola-injected reptiles – we blew the living shit of them. Hooah. And then we helped fund other Iraq-haters in the Middle east to blow more shit out of them. Hooah!

And then, when those guys we funded turned on us, we started blowing the shit out of them as well, plus we started funding the people we originally blew the shit out of to start blowing the shit out of the people we originally liked.

Obviously, it’s pretty complex stuff, which is why matters of national security and defence are best left to the experts (and done under a shroud of secrecy).

The added bonus is that blowing the shit out of other people stimulates our economy, not to mention our soldiers. We’ve got 80,000 of them, and if we didn’t send them off to war, they’d be sitting around on their arses all day licking stamps.

War’s stimulate our economy, and perpetual wars perpetually stimulate our economy. It’s simple math. The super added bonus is that if we keep fucking up the Middle East, eventually we’ll have pinched most of their oil before they even realize it.



7. Wealthy people… so that they’re more wealthy

I don’t know why this hasn’t been thought of before… paying rich people to make them richer is a no brainer.

Rich people make the world go around. Everyone knows that. So obviously, making rich people even richer will make the world go around even faster. And you know what that means: time travel.

By giving to the rich, we can speed up time and find a cure for climate change much, much quicker, before the planet heats up so much that we unleash a flood of boat people seeking shelter from the chaos we unleashed on them. And if we let that happen, imagine how much cash we’ll have to fork out to turn people smugglers around?

Investing more in the rich now is an investment in a White Australian future, with the added bonus of time travel discovery through futuristic Dr Who style science.

Suggestions for ensuring wealthy people get even more wealthy might include things like taxing the poor a greater proportion of their income, providing massive tax breaks for wealthy people, and allowing negative gearing on investment properties.

Get on it Joe Hockey, while you still have a really, really good job.



8. Big polluting mining companies… to stop them polluting

A few years ago, our government imposed a tax on companies who cause lots of pollution and pump shit into our atmosphere. They called it a ‘carbon tax’. Yeah right, Julia, like you can tax carbon (it’s an inanimate object on the periodic table, stupid!).

So we should abolish that tax and GIVE money to mining companies and big polluters to stop them polluting, rather than take money from them when they do.

Punishing large corporations for their pollution punishes us all, because the corporations are less able to pay massive bonuses to their senior executives, and this money then doesn’t trickle down to other massive corporations who pay massive bonuses to their senior executives.

This strategy is called the ‘carrot and carrot approach’ to building a sustainable future in a world where the scourge of winter has been eliminated. Axe the tax Tony!



9. The media… so that they stop writing shitty things about the government

Laura Tingle from the Australian Financial Review recently described our Prime Minister as an idiot. Where the hell does she get off? We elected that idiot!

The media more generally are always writing shitty things about the government, rather than focusing on the things that matter, like nudity and the Kardashians. And demonizing poor people for their poverty. And celebrities. And their dogs.

Giving a company like News Corporation massive tax breaks helps employ more journalists, to take the stress off already stressful newsrooms. This will enable them to focus on the things that matter.



10. Alan Jones and Ray Hadley… to shut the fuck up

While they're not really a criminal enterprise, this is pretty self explanatory.

* Overnight, New Matilda has swung violently to the right. So if you want to help us help ourselves then subscribe, you free-loading hippie scum. You can do that here :)

Log in or register to post comments

Discuss this article

To control your subscriptions to discussions you participate in go to your Account Settings preferences and click the Subscriptions tab.

Enter your comments here

Syd Walker
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 18:08

Very bent.

But you didn't mention the submarines..

 

11. The biggest boondoggle in Australian history

Variously estimated at anywhere from $20bn to $60bn, these new subs have one real use, which like Trident in Britain, will hopefully never come to pass (lest we destroy the entire world).

They are for "forward offensive" use. In plain English, if the Australian military is ever ordered to blow up Toyko, Kuala Lumpur, Beijing or Jakarta or even Mumbai, they would come in very handy.

Apart from that, as far as I can understand, they are utterly useless, whether they're built in Australia, Japan or on Mars.

On higher estimates, the cost of these damn things, redeployed, would be enough to fund nationwide fibre to the home. That would really make this continent buzz.

Yet other than incessant bickering about where they're to be built, there's almost no discussion at all in the media about the critical question: Do we need them at all?

I've seen only one article that comes close to nailing it - see Substandard strategic thinking by Professor Mark Beeson.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. jules s
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 20:06

I subscribed to see more articles supporting the right of old rich baby boomers to harvest organs and glands from the children of the poor.  This would enable the rich to live longer, let us bask in their warm glow forever and would get rid of the excess of plebs.  We need more lifters and less leaners and this is an effective way to force the leaners to do some lifting.  You know it makes sense.

We also need more articles about why the Kardashians are saving the world.  Come on NM lift your game.  How can they save us if we don't all pitch in and support them.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Chris Graham
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 21:18

Duly noted :)

This user is a New Matilda supporter. RossC
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 21:37

Chris, the only problem with this article is that it is after the fact. This shitty government is already doing all this and more, or at least has an ipa manilla folder with clear instructions for action, if required.

but the people-smuggling is truly amazing. Just when you think you've seen the stupidest that abbott can be, he somehow manages to plumb new depths....

This user is a New Matilda supporter. jules s
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 21:54

I also subscribed in the hope I'd learn to recognise what comment went on what thread.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. jules s
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:11

Tony Abbott is the people smugglers new business model.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Pegi
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:25

Thanks Chris, I had a good giggle. I am a subscriber and would not hesitate to donate more to Abbott and Co, to make sure that they cash sorry crash the boats.

Joke aside...if that is one, I truly appreciate the simplicity in which you describe the MOB. Why is it that we have elected such morons? It is incomprhensible. Well, one might ask, there is nothing to comprehend really, it is beyond belief that we ended up with such an inept bunch of people at our helm...and it keeps getting better with the weeks. Rejoice people we shall be all eating cakes SOON.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. RossC
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:25

jules s, the funny/tragic thing is that, by paying the crew - as has almost certainly happened - Tony Abbott has made Australia a people-smuggler.

Apparently, funding clandestine people-smuggling to other nations in unseaworthy boats is now Australian de-facto policy.

totally, unbelievably, hypocritical. And illegal to boot.

Not to mention that Dutton, at least, has barefaced lied about it.

 

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Pegi
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:26

I agree with you Jules....I 'd love to see the blueprint.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Pegi
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:29

It is totally illegal Ross c to bribe the smugglers...it is turning us into a nation of highseas bandits we are going to be the laughing stock of the world if we  are not already.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Disturbed
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:53

Chris , you did not mention the obvious :

Pay the ownrs editors of NM a big wad of cash and send them on a free cruise around the globe for the rest of their lives . That will stop your boat from plodding on.

 

ED'S NOTE: After the month I've had... I would accept! And thank you for thinking of it, I'm organising my donation to the Liberal Party as we speak... cruise tickets should follow. 

This user is a New Matilda supporter. ErikH
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 22:54

OK. I'm going to put something up here and I know it will be shot down. But here's a thought:

Why should ANYTHING (and I repeat: ANYTHING) be tax deductible? Why should anyone be able to claim some sort of advantage from chosing to spend their own money and then someone else (the Asustralian taxpayer) has to pay for it?

If there were no tax deductions for ANY reason, the tax rate could be reduced to diddly squat and all entities, company, individual or whatever would just bloody well pay their taxes. No excuses. No covert sinking finds. No family trusts. No overseas tax havens. No anything. (My apologies to all the tax specialists who subscribe to New Matilda. ... Oh, there aren't any? What a surprise!)

[I might add that we have two investment properties, though they are both NEW housing]

This user is a New Matilda supporter. RossC
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 23:13

Pegi. If I was a country that discovered that a neighbouring country - even a so-called 'friend' - had funded clandesine people-smuggling to my shores, I'd be dragging that neighbouring country - and its leader specifically - through the international court of justice.

That's what I'd be doing.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. jules s
Posted Sunday, June 14, 2015 - 23:46

Why should anyone be able to claim some sort of advantage from chosing to spend their own money and then someone else (the Asustralian taxpayer) has to pay for it?

Some work related expenses are choices in name only.  They are necessary and some - possibly without them that person won't be able to pay tax cos they won't be employed/earning that income.

 

I looked this page up.

 

It reckoned last year some workers could claim for protective clothing in some industries and even sunhats in some jobs.  Police are allowed to claim bulletproof vests as tax deductions.  Whether you like them or not that seems fair enough, although if its a real issue then they should be supplied by their employer.  Sex workers can claim all sorts of things.  Including condoms.  If nothing else condoms should be tax deductible for sex workers as a public health issue.

Dan Rowden
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 09:34

Chris,

Whilst this piece is essentially a throw away leftist diatribe - and that's fair enough - I have to complain at your use of "LNP".  Why is a professional journalist indulging in that lazy shorthand? You know full well there's no such thing as the "LNP" outside of Queensland.  I know the acronym has become popular on leftist blogs and Twitter, but that's hardly an excuse for its use.  The term is "Coalition."

When you employ terms and acronyms such as that it makes you, and New Matilda, look like little more than a partisan rag of the calibre of Independent Australia or AIMN.  

However, if that's your goal, then do carry on.

ED'S NOTE: Dan, if it helps, I officially HATE the Labor Party (and am on the public record numerous times noting I hate them more than I hate the LNP... sorry, the Coalition.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. boganbludging
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 09:59

Foreign aid funds have been reallocated to keep the Julie Bishop wardrobe stocked with Gucci handbags and charge entrance fees to see her shoe collection.

Money needs to be given to Joe, to put himself and friends up in one of his secondary residences, while away from his primary residence, so he can claim the generous away from home allowance, to assist with paying the mortgage payment and stock of fine cuban's

At least Tony Abbott is honest.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. boganbludging
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 10:35

@Dan Rowden.
The term is "COALition.

Hey Chris this guy expects exemplary things from you.
This isnt the standard of article we expect, when those in other publications and the coalition are such shining role models.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Chris Graham
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 13:37

Admittedly, boganbludging, the words 'first world problem' leapt into my head, followed closely by 'member of the Liberal Party... or National Party, but definitely not both'... but to say that out loud would be impolite and not at all matching the general tone of the article.

And @RossC, maybe my humour was a little too subtle on this occasion... the whole point of the article was to note that virtually everything I suggested had already been done...

This user is a New Matilda supporter. boganbludging
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 19:43

@Chris
"Admittedly boganbludging the words 'first world problem' leapt into my head, followed closely by 'member of the Liberal Party... or National Party, but definitely not both'... but to say that out loud would be impolite and not at all matching the general tone of the article".
RLMFAO that you get mentioned, on a slip instead of blatant proganada, obfuscation and sensationalism, found in the yellow press, obviously you must be held to such a high standard of scrutiny
Maybe putting a coloured tie on and lose the sense of humor, so you dont draw attention, you can be dragged along like the gutter prestitutes.
Good work Chris.

anniejean
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 16:11

--

 

 

All Tony can do is " stop the boats" so he needs more boats so they can be stopped .What better way to get more boats than to pay for them.

This debacle reminds me of the spruiking TA did for the people smugglers when in opposition, endlessly claiming that anyone could come as an economic migrant and get refugee status-they couldn't but armed with TA's claimsthatthe the door was open and would soon be closed the people smugglers packed them in with dire consequences to many .

Don't know how the man?sleeps at night.

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Sooz
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 18:59

This article made my day...I'm particularly taken by the concept of wealth generated time travel. You should be careful discussing this, you don't want to push your subscribers toward the Daily Telegraph. Rupert surely only needs to earn a few more dollars before he will be able to rematerialise in the Jurassic period, where he belongs.

There's also one more enterprise we could be splashing cash at, and right on top of EOFY, it's important to note it can be claimed on your tax return:

11. The Institute of Public Affairs Research Trust... to reimburse our most respectable plutocrats for the many thankless hours they spend manipulating government policy.

This IS an actual charity, believe it or not...

http://www.acnc.gov.au/RN52B75Q?ID=92FFFA70-B7C5-4709-812D-8E4D50C71090&noleft=1

I particularly like this bit:

"Who the Charity Benefits:  General community in Australia"

 

Comedy gold.

 

 

DON_de-Plume
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 19:37

DanRowden, one could be forgiven (given the Tone [that is a pun] of your post) for thinking that you attach some less than favourable meaning to LNP.

Lazy shorthand? 

No. An acronym for lying knobs & pillocks.

Is that really all you took from the article. Really?

I suppose it all turns on your perspective. How you "look".

This user is a New Matilda supporter. Pegi
Posted Monday, June 15, 2015 - 20:47

@Ross, I think Indonesia will be taking its case to the International Court of Justice. It might not be far at all, given the matter has made a laughing stock of what er really stand for. ( But at times I wonder what we really stand for??) 

Just the most farcical bunch of people who govern us. It is so demoralising. Thanks to NM to give a spark and an insight of what is happening. 

We will be enjoying shortly the wriggles, the twists and the houdini spectacle coming our way. Another circus in progress. 

How can we have a conversation about JUSTICE and TRUTH? Why is it that we resort to the worse of conversation/dialogue? OK, we all have different view points, that is a fact, but to the extend as to minimise our intellect and intelligence is just inane and demeaning. 

I'd better go before I rant too much.

 

This user is a New Matilda supporter. swarmi
Posted Tuesday, June 16, 2015 - 23:16

Thanks for the article and its insights. I bet you are a bit disappointed though that someone had thought of all it before you did? We surely need to give that 'someone' more money.

But I've got another way to burn cash, I mean, light a fire under the economy. Why not destroy our renewables industry? No one has thought of that I bet. With do-gooders out of the way our big employers in coal with have a boost in confidence and in the resulting euphoria, and deservedly, give themselves a huge bonus. This will immediately stimulate the economy. As we all know, every $10mil spent on a mining executive automatically means that they will be happier. And if they're happy, who needs an economy?  And, bonus, we don't have to get to the future to know that this be true - apart from the fact we don't have a future to get to.

 

CC
Posted Wednesday, June 17, 2015 - 08:02

When mentioning child abuse by religious institutions, you seem to forget abuse in the Jewish religious institutions (even more hidden and less talked about), and do you think there is any sort of abuse in the Islamic religions at all? Also add the ones in other Christian's denominations as well. How about the abuse done to the British children that came here during the war? It is not only Aboriginal that suffered abuse in the hand of authorities, but seem to me the system of the day was an abusive one for all to "enjoy", having their roots in the British system of the day.

 

troll patrol
Posted Thursday, September 3, 2015 - 09:18

I believe that whilst it is important to combat institutional child abuse by singling out the Catholic Church you have exposed yourself as a bigot. Please stop poisoning this site with your venomous hatred. There are plenty of hate sites for people like you.