Monday 14 June 2010

Odds and Sods

Agamedes gets over-excited when solutions are demanded and proposed for the wrong problems.

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems?
email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

Ocean dumping a symptom of wider malaise

That's the Editorial in today's (14 Jun 10) West. Potentially toxic materials are being dumped, from stormwater drains, into our oceans. This, "has wide implications for the health of the beaches and for swimmers."

The Editorial cites a "sensible" proposal by Cambridge Town Council, to redirect one stormwater drain into a depleted water table. "Meanwhile," the Editor continues, "authorities charged with responsibility for our coast and waterways [the ever-present and highly fallible "they"] should be directing their best efforts to finding similarly creative solutions before it is too late."

According to this Editorial the problem is, that stormwater drains are draining into the ocean. The "sensible" solutions is, to pump this polluted water into our water tables.

And the real problem is...

The real problem is, that our stormwater drains are carrying toxic chemicals!

Previous studies have found that stormwater drains in Perth can contain heavy metals, general litter, nitrogen, phosphorous, sewage overflow and hydrocarbons, including oil. Where does all that muck come from? What are heavy metals, litter, sewage and oil doing in our stormwater drains? Who is dumping toxic muck into our drains?

There is the real problem: toxic muck is getting into our stormwater drains.

Once the muck gets into the drains, it will flow with the stormwater. Out to sea? That will kill fish, sea vegetation and ocean swimmers. Into the water table? That will kill vegetation, waterbirds and anyone who pumps water from the water table.

Yes, we need to worry about toxic water flowing into our oceans. We should also worry about toxic water flowing into our underground water tables. First, though, we should worry about the source of all that toxic waste.

The real problem is the source of the toxic matter in our stormwater drains. Stormwater has always run out to sea, usually via rivers. What we have allowed, is the addition of toxic material to that stormwater.

Prevent toxic material from getting into stormwater drains. Stop the problem at its source. Look for solutions to the real problem.

Anecdotal aside

I once worked for a computer service company which supported a small accounting system. In all the chain of programming logic, no-one could understand why a certain row of totals always printed as double the correct value. Somewhere in the system, a number was being added to itself. That doubled-up number was subsequently printed.

The real problem was, that a number was being doubled. We were not able to solve that real problem... so we "fixed" a simpler problem...

The printed value is twice what it should be? No worries... Just before printing -- divide the number by two. Then print.

Were there other issues -- other as-yet-undiscovered problems -- associated with the doubled-up numbers? Who knows? Who cares! We had removed the visible evidence. The real problem is irrelevant.

Or is it...

Imported politicians rally in Perth

On the Letters page of The West (14 Jun 10), N. Cox of Doubleview has pointed out that the anti-tax rally was "a gathering of whingeing iron ore billionaires" -- we should also remember their paid employees -- "and an orchestrated muster of Tories..."

Good grief! Tories! All the way from England! Isn't it great, that the Motherland sill cares for and supports us in our battles against taxation with elected representation. And I suppose that the Whigs will be here next week, for a pro-taxation rally?

Please, N. Cox, remember where you are. Australia has Labor, Liberal, National, Greens and perhaps a few others. England has Tories and Whigs.

Wake up, and remember where you are.

Hooray for Henry and his tax reforms!

Is it true? Did the Henry review really, as suggested in a letter from Robert Wardrop of Willeton (14 Jun 10), did the review really suggest ways to simplify our Australian tax system?

I've read plenty about government plans to add a new tax. The new tax will apply to selected companies and will follow new rules for selective impact at various levels of carefully calculated profit. Nothing simple there.

The new tax money will be -- selectively -- returned to selected mining companies. This is because the mining companies will be forced to pay more superannuation to employees. The government will take the new tax and -- so it now says -- return it to the companies. This may or may not be correct. Nothing has actually been decided. Whatever happens, though, will certainly not be simple.

The government is also promising to use the new tax on infrastructure. That is, the government will take money from mining companies -- money that the company would have spent on infrastructure, if it needed infrastructure -- and the government will spend the money on infrastructure. For the same companies? I'm not sure. Is this the same money that will be returned to pay for superannuation? I'm not sure.

But it's certainly not simple.

Why did I pick on the letter from Robert Wardrop, to introduce this rant on taxes? Because Wardrop actually suggests an approach that would lead to a simpler tax system.

Better than the real problem -- here is the real solution!

But that's enough of someone else's idea... Here is the Agamedes simple tax system:

  • Start with the GST: the tax to replace all other taxes.
  • Replace all other taxes with the GST. But call it ETax, the Envy Tax. You have more money than me? You should pay more tax. You spend more on consumer goods? You should pay more tax. ETax, the Envy Tax... just what everyone really wants.
  • Every time you earn some money, you set aside a portion and pay it as ETax. This replaces today's Income Tax.
  • Every time you receive goods or services in exchange for your efforts -- or for no reason whatsoever -- you pay a fraction of the value as ETax. This replaces Fringe Benefits Tax.
  • Every time you buy any goods or services, the seller pays part of the price as ETax. This replaces GST (and various other taxes which GST was supposed to replace).
  • If you pay for goods or services by barter -- by providing your own goods or services in exchange -- you pay a fraction of the value given, as ETax.
  • Both sides pay. An employer pays ETax based on salaries paid and fringe benefits provided (there goes Payroll Tax). An employee pays ETax on salary paid and fringe benefits received. In other transactions, both buyer and seller pay ETax. All fair, all equal.
  • Are there any tax deductions? No: the more you buy, sell, earn or pay, the more ETax you will be paying. No matter what the reason.
Okay... even I can see problems. But every tax has problems. ETax brings all the problems under one tax regime -- and simplifies the entire system.

Will ETax be paid at 10%, the same as today's GST? It's a good place to start... Easy calculation, quick transfer from GST calculations, far less than income tax...

Will the ETax rate vary, depending on the transaction? No way! That would defeat the whole simplification process.

Will ETax vary over time? Certainly! If the government needs more money -- for election promises or to satisfy elector demands for new services -- money will be raised by raising the rate for ETax. For everyone. For everything.

Ask the questions. ETax has the answers. ETax has the answers -- and they are simpler.

Independent thinking & independent analysis of your problems by
Agamedes Consulting. Support for your thought:
email nick leth at gmail dot com

No comments: