4 ms·

I'm not sure of what the point this article is trying to raise? Is it that Australia is not in recession? Is it some sort of suggestion of xenophobia on the p

by brc 16y ago

I'm not sure of what the point this article is trying to raise? Is it that Australia is not in recession? Is it some sort of suggestion of xenophobia on the part of Australians? Australians have all seen this before in the 1980's when the Japanese were buying real estate, companies and generally splashing cash around. I think this time around most people are more relaxed about it, and a feeling of 'make hay while the sun shines' is probably the most prevalent. While the imagery of large parts of Australia being dug up forever are evocative, it's not very realistic for anyone who has visited this part of the world to think it's all going to run out soon. It's a massive, virtually uninhabited area and the ground you walk on is literally red from iron ore.

kentosi 16y ago
I have to agree with you. The title itself feels like the author's taking a biast stand that s/he wants to vent. But the article itself is completely indecisive. Almost as if the author wants to speak ill of Chinese hands in Australian soil, but can't. Either way, I found the article's facts interesting. I don't think many people know the scale of these operations, not the history of similar events with the Japanese. Both of these were news to me.
- brc 16y ago
  If you want a fascinating readup on the impact of Japanese investment in Australia, the effects and outcomes, read up on the Multi-Function polis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multifunction_Polis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multifunction_Polis In short, it was a plan to build a high-tech city in order to better integrate Australian-Japan relations. In the end, a complete farce, but at the time regular front-page news. It did expose an ugly side to foreign investment in Australia, but things are very much different now - probably as a direct result of nothing very much at all occuring from all the Japanese investment. Mostly the Japanese did their dough, went bankrupt and left behind some big shopping centres, resorts and golf courses which Australians of all colours continue to use and enjoy to this day. A good companion would be the re-reading of the Micheal Crichton novel "Rising Sun" - written at the peak of the 'Japan to take over the world' thought bubble, before the Japan bubble popped.
metamemetics 16y ago
It's not an editorial, it's a well written news article. It's goal was to cover multiple points of view of a massive event without explicitly endorsing one of them as canon.
zmmmmm 16y ago
> make hay while the sun shines If only we were actually making some hay, or put some of what we do make in the barn instead of gorging on it. I think a better analogy is "let's party while the champagne is flowing". Instead of long term investments in permanent infrastructure and educating our citizens we are largely just padding out the middle class with spurious welfare benefits. That's almost worse than just throwing the money away because it is creating an enormous future liability and false expectation among average folks.
- brc 16y ago
  I mostly agree with this. While I don't think we should increase mining profit taxes, I do think some of the mineral wealth should be locked away into a sovereign wealth fund - the type that can't be gotten at by sticky fingered politicians of any persuasion. The wealth fund could be used for apolitical purposes, like education funding (scholarships?), national dual lane freeway construction, large-scale water projects. But only after it reached critical mass and was throwing off a couple of billion per year in investment returns.
  - dejb 16y ago
    Actually wasn't the it called mining 'super' tax becuase it was to fund superannuation? I know there was to be some increase in funding but I'm actually not 100% sure because the govt did such a poor job of selling it. Anyway I think this may be one of those cases where the XX cents we typically get back from each dollar the govt taxes could be worth it to slow the party down.
    - zmmmmm 16y ago
      > Actually wasn't the it called mining 'super' tax becuase it was to fund superannuation? Hah! No. It was a "super profits" tax because it did not kick in unless a project was making a rate of return above 5 or 6 percent or so. So it only taxes "bonanza" profits and has no effect on companies that are making a "normal" rate of return. As for superannuation - there was some sleight of hand as well. The increased super was to be paid by companies. This was then to be partially (but not fully) offset by dropping the company tax rate, which in turn was funded by the super profits tax. So yes, they were linked, but not nearly as directly as they wanted you to believe.

by brc 16y ago

kentosi 16y ago

I have to agree with you. The title itself feels like the author's taking a biast stand that s/he wants to vent. But the article itself is completely indecisive. Almost as if the author wants to speak ill of Chinese hands in Australian soil, but can't. Either way, I found the article's facts interesting. I don't think many people know the scale of these operations, not the history of similar events with the Japanese. Both of these were news to me.

brc 16y ago
If you want a fascinating readup on the impact of Japanese investment in Australia, the effects and outcomes, read up on the Multi-Function polis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multifunction_Polis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multifunction_Polis In short, it was a plan to build a high-tech city in order to better integrate Australian-Japan relations. In the end, a complete farce, but at the time regular front-page news. It did expose an ugly side to foreign investment in Australia, but things are very much different now - probably as a direct result of nothing very much at all occuring from all the Japanese investment. Mostly the Japanese did their dough, went bankrupt and left behind some big shopping centres, resorts and golf courses which Australians of all colours continue to use and enjoy to this day. A good companion would be the re-reading of the Micheal Crichton novel "Rising Sun" - written at the peak of the 'Japan to take over the world' thought bubble, before the Japan bubble popped.

metamemetics 16y ago

It's not an editorial, it's a well written news article. It's goal was to cover multiple points of view of a massive event without explicitly endorsing one of them as canon.

zmmmmm 16y ago

> make hay while the sun shines If only we were actually making some hay, or put some of what we do make in the barn instead of gorging on it. I think a better analogy is "let's party while the champagne is flowing". Instead of long term investments in permanent infrastructure and educating our citizens we are largely just padding out the middle class with spurious welfare benefits. That's almost worse than just throwing the money away because it is creating an enormous future liability and false expectation among average folks.

brc 16y ago
I mostly agree with this. While I don't think we should increase mining profit taxes, I do think some of the mineral wealth should be locked away into a sovereign wealth fund - the type that can't be gotten at by sticky fingered politicians of any persuasion. The wealth fund could be used for apolitical purposes, like education funding (scholarships?), national dual lane freeway construction, large-scale water projects. But only after it reached critical mass and was throwing off a couple of billion per year in investment returns.
- dejb 16y ago
  Actually wasn't the it called mining 'super' tax becuase it was to fund superannuation? I know there was to be some increase in funding but I'm actually not 100% sure because the govt did such a poor job of selling it. Anyway I think this may be one of those cases where the XX cents we typically get back from each dollar the govt taxes could be worth it to slow the party down.
  - zmmmmm 16y ago
    > Actually wasn't the it called mining 'super' tax becuase it was to fund superannuation? Hah! No. It was a "super profits" tax because it did not kick in unless a project was making a rate of return above 5 or 6 percent or so. So it only taxes "bonanza" profits and has no effect on companies that are making a "normal" rate of return. As for superannuation - there was some sleight of hand as well. The increased super was to be paid by companies. This was then to be partially (but not fully) offset by dropping the company tax rate, which in turn was funded by the super profits tax. So yes, they were linked, but not nearly as directly as they wanted you to believe.