Waewick wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 9:42 pm
Unfortunately SA liberals and their backers tend to be the worst kind of liberals given the continued predominance of a number of families who haven't done anything significant or productive since the land booms in the 1890s and now ride high on the hard work of their great-great grand parents.
Marshall's CV is particularly uninspiring - running the family business into the ground to then sold off, before decamping to work for the Michells. His idea of economic reform will be cutting taxes for his buddies who rely on their extensive property portfolios for income (land tax, emergency services levy etc.). On a selfish level this should please me immensely because of the personal benefit that I and my family will receive from this, but I am capable of seeing the bigger picture (unlike a lot of my neighbours) and realise that this will not lead to a renaissance in new businesses and economic activity.
We need to attract foreign capital to this state and labor's policy of developing a niche (e.g. renewables) and flogging it shamelessly to the world has started to do just that as well as create job. Further I think that most productive small SA businesses would much rather have increased demand for their goods and services via higher population as well as economic activity generated by these large scale projects than saving a few $ on payroll tax.
JAKJ wrote: ↑Mon Mar 19, 2018 7:24 pm
I don't see how bringing up either Cory Bernardi or Jo Chapley's personal political choices re their party affiliations is relevant to the South Australian Liberal Party power base. I would be happy to change my mind if you can provide a logical argument against what I have put forward and would be overjoyed to be proven wrong for the sake of this State.
Do you honestly believe the Premier having worked in management and directorial positions with the Michell family corporations that they and their like will not have a significant influence on Liberal government policy? Can you show me how the Liberal Party's announced economic measures do not revolve around exactly what I have put forward, cuts to land taxes, payroll tax and the emergency services levy?
I hope that Marshall is able to show vision beyond this, however his stated willingness to tear up the agreement on the Virtual Power Network - a project that requires minimal government funds/ exposure to deliver external capital investment, the manufacturing of high-value components in SA and the establishment of a significant global business's office in South Australia - for the sake of a political point suggests against this.
you seek a logical argument to hearsay, slander and thought bubbles, hardly seems fair to me, so I'm just providing a summary of my thoughts Into what I think you are looking for responses to.
1. the Liberal party is not a corporate conspiracy. There are pretty much 2 corporates left in the state, and one of them is only here because it has to by law. The rest aren't interested in petty SA politics.
2. Marshall CV is likely to more inspiring than what has been pushed out by the now opposition, your other comments re influence are laughable. but if you really believe that perhaps you should notify ICAC.
3. Just on the ESL, the amount of money paid out to emergency services never changed when it went up, it isn't going down when the ESL does, just the publics direct share.
4. Payroll and land taxes, these are legitimate economic levels in a state with little other ones with some of the worst performing economic indicators in the country. I hope your family do well out of it I'm sure it would be a nice change.
5. The Virtual network, I would be stunned if Labor SA signed up a legal binding agreement that close to an election. However, Even their policy states it is an unfunded project and it might not even get past the trial stage. It is another case of lots of sizzle and no sausage.
6. The Vision, clearly this has been a huge short coming of the Liberals, despite all of their plans, releases and promises people like those on this forum don't see it and others don't either. You are right they will need to work on that, we will see in 4 years if there was one.
7. Cory Bernardi - see below. but as one of the biggest names in the party for 20 years his movement may have caused some shift in the force.
Also just quickly, I would love you to expand on your supposed powerbase of the Liberals, it sounds fascinating, I'm sure you could name a few of them?
I never said corporate conspiracy - you are right we don't have many significant corporates domiciled in SA, that is part of the issue as intrenched family businesses dominate the conservative political landscape and quite naturally try and get outcomes that favour themselves, thus a focus on changes to land tax, payroll tax for small business and the proposed changes to the ESL as reiterated by Lucas this morning in the Tiser. Big corporates tend to be fairly politically agnostic on which parties are in power and often do prefer Labor, such as was the case in WA last state election when Brendan Grylls proposed in Iron ore royalty equalisation plan for Rio and BHIP.
It is simply common human nature to use your wealth and power to better your position, unfortunately most people tend to have a short term focus. That is why it takes people of vision who are able to focus on long-term goals - I think Jay showed that promise, particularly in the last few years and on the other side of the spectrum Playford definitely had that vision. Everything I know about Marshall and his background tells me he does not and will (as the majority of people would in his place) be significantly influenced by those around him who looked after and nurtured his professional and political careers. This view, so far, is being supported by the announced policy platform. Again, would love to be proved wrong.
In terms of where I get my perspective from, I have worked for many years as a consultant, including around strategic implementation work, for big corporates, small/ medium businesses, not-for-profits, state government departments, councils and state owned enterprises across Australia - which has given me a practical perspective on how decisions are made by government, business and community run organisations.
Unfortunately free market principles advocated by our seasoned Treasurer do not work in practice, particularly for a medium sized city-state like SA (which as a political/ commercial entity is Adelaide supported by a vast productive hinterland). You very much need to pick winners and as much as the political apparatus allows run your state as a business with a focus on driving competitive advantage via the niches you have developed (for SA that would be specialised manufacturing, defence, renewables and high quality agriculture) and use cheap government money to promote and seed these projects to ultimately attract interstate investment whether that be via Federal government grants or private capital.
Whether you ideologically like it or not, in Australia government contribution to GSP or as an employment multiplier is either at or approaching 50% across most states. Having a state government in modern Australia step back from being an active decision maker in industry is irresponsible and would be economically regressive. Further, pursuing a policy of small scale tax relief for established businesses and land owners will do nothing but entrench an already well-off and to a large extent unproductive group of established land holders and family businesses instead of using those funds to incentivise private capital investment from interstate or overseas to grow industry.
Now with Beer Garden for our smoking patrons.
