Okay, I told you that I would not describe the events of my day unless the circumstances in fact warranted it. How about I tell you today's circumstances, and you can judge of they warrant publication?
Circumstances:
BJ and I went to the ABC studio in Ultimo tonight to be part of the studio audience for The Chaser's War on Everything. We went with Aileen and Stephen (Aileen organised it), and mum and dad.
I reckon it was great. I know BJ had fun too, she was laughing more than me (and you know how much I laugh). Even more interesting was the fact that mum and dad liked it too. I guess its one of those unusual times when both parents and children find the same thing funny. (I don't think my parents think that The Simpsons is very funny, but I still think its good value).
I think The Chaser rocks - I have the old CNNNN newsbar scrolling on the bottom of my desktop, just above my taskbar. The short gags are well worth the nauseous sensations I experience when the newsbar is scrolling across my peripheral vision. See what I mean by The Chaser:
http://www.chaser.com.au/ ;
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/chaser/war/
http://www.cnnnn.com/ ;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNNNN ;
I think they are one of the funniest satirical groups to reach our media for a long time. There are many reasons why I like them, one of them is because they are what one might call "ballsy". That is, they do funny stuff that I wouldn't dare do myself, but would love to watch another do it. For example, asking Malcolm Turnbull "Pursuit Trivia" questions during a press conference.
Anyway - off to bed for me!!
Thursday, March 30, 2006
RSS XML address
Okay, after getting about 300 requests within a period of less than 4 days for the RSS location, here it is: http://sage.mozdev.org/
2. If you don't use Mozilla Firefox like most normal people, then may I suggest downloading Firefox from here: http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/, then follow Instruction 1.
2. If you don't use Mozilla Firefox like most normal people, then may I suggest downloading Firefox from here: http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/, then follow Instruction 1.
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
My part time job
If you're wondering what I do in my spare time:
http://www.mtvasia.com/News/200601/24013079.html
http://www.mtvasia.com/News/200601/24013079.html
Okay, not tax, but close
Okay folks, here's a NON-TAX OPINION.
I think we should scrap the 4c per litre petrol discount system. Why? Because for the average petrol tank, you only save between $1.50 and $2 per fill. But the real caper is that the petrol industry is a very low margin business (from a retail perspective). Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the recently re-branded Coles/Shell and Woolies/Caltex outlets are happy taking a 4c per litre hit to their profit margins.
So how are the petrol chains going to maintain their profits? From all the extra profits that have been brought in through the supermarket chains!! The idea is that customers are more likely to shop at Coles to save 4c per litre at Shell petrol stations. Therefore, because of this deal, Coles brings in more customers, makes more money, and subsidises the petrol operation to keep the deal going.
Essentially, what's happening here, is that ordinary grocery shoppers are subsidising petrol consumers. Admittedly, I would imagine that vast majority of "ordinary grocery shoppers" are in fact the same petrol consumers. But there would be a significant portion of the population who cannot afford a car or to keep one on the road, and yet there are partially funding the expensive habits of car owners.
P.S. I shop at Woolies, and use the docket at the Waitara Caltex Woolies near the Blue Gum.
Saturday, March 25, 2006
Efficiency
Okay, back to my rant about a 'good tax'. A good tax, in addition to being equitable, should also be efficient. 'Efficient' in this sense takes on a specific economic meaning. It does NOT mean cost-effective, or that you get more kilometres per litre of petrol.
A tax is efficient if it does not distort economic decisions. A tax is understood to be 'inefficient' if people stop or start buying something because of tax considerations. The same can be said for producers and sellers. They should not be discouraged from selling something merely because of the tax system. Therefore, for a tax to be efficient, it must minimise any interference with the price mechanism of supply and demand. (I sound like an loyal capitalist, don't I?)
Put another way, an efficient tax is one that you don't notice as you go about your economic life.
In Australia, there seems to be little of that, especially with the myriad of concessions, rebates, subsidies and tariffs. These are designed specifically to modify economic behaviour. Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially with respect to market failures, such as pollution. It may in fact be desirable to heavily tax a particular industry that pollutes alot in order to protect the environment. It may in fact be desirable to provide concessional tax treatment to Australian film ventures in order to encourage Australian arts and protect Australian culture and identity.
Generally, however, it is desirable to have a tax that does not meddle with people's decisions.
Okay, another section break. Ah forget it, I'm going to bed. Goodnight.
A tax is efficient if it does not distort economic decisions. A tax is understood to be 'inefficient' if people stop or start buying something because of tax considerations. The same can be said for producers and sellers. They should not be discouraged from selling something merely because of the tax system. Therefore, for a tax to be efficient, it must minimise any interference with the price mechanism of supply and demand. (I sound like an loyal capitalist, don't I?)
Put another way, an efficient tax is one that you don't notice as you go about your economic life.
In Australia, there seems to be little of that, especially with the myriad of concessions, rebates, subsidies and tariffs. These are designed specifically to modify economic behaviour. Now, this isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially with respect to market failures, such as pollution. It may in fact be desirable to heavily tax a particular industry that pollutes alot in order to protect the environment. It may in fact be desirable to provide concessional tax treatment to Australian film ventures in order to encourage Australian arts and protect Australian culture and identity.
Generally, however, it is desirable to have a tax that does not meddle with people's decisions.
Okay, another section break. Ah forget it, I'm going to bed. Goodnight.
Sorry - I mislead you - Equity
I must confirm the rumours that ths blog may not necessary be "something besides tax". My first opinion for the day (see if you can tell if this is the poor researched or the better researched one).
OPINION: I think the GST should be on everything.
Why do I think that? Allow me to mention some criteria that a "good tax" must fulfil. It has been commonly accepted that a tax must be equitable, efficient, and simple.
Equity - this means that the tax should be 'fair' and perceived as such by the community. Admittedly, a lot of people in Australia still think they are paying more than their fair share. I would argue that this may be a cultural thing. Folks in Japan love paying income tax, they see it as part of their civic duty.
Equity often finds its expression in the personal income tax system through the use of progressive income tax rates. That is, as you earn more money, the more tax you pay on that extra money, and therefore your marginal rate increases, and therefore so does your average rate. An increase in your average rate of taxation means that a greater proportion of your income is paid in tax. This is often referred to as vertical equity. This expression of vertical equity upholds the principle that those who earn more should pay a higher proportion of their income in tax. Some may or may not agree with this principle, however, this is the system as it stands.
Another aspect of equity is that people who earn the same (or are in similar economic circumstances) should have the same tax burden. Therefore, a person who earns a salary should be taxed the same as a person who earns a wage, or who makes money on the sharemarket, or who develops property or who runs a business. If all these people are earning $50,000. they should all pay the same amount of tax. This is known as horizontal equity. This is not manifested well in Australia. I'll tell you why later.
Okay, time for another section break - I'll talk about efficiency in the next post.
OPINION: I think the GST should be on everything.
Why do I think that? Allow me to mention some criteria that a "good tax" must fulfil. It has been commonly accepted that a tax must be equitable, efficient, and simple.
Equity - this means that the tax should be 'fair' and perceived as such by the community. Admittedly, a lot of people in Australia still think they are paying more than their fair share. I would argue that this may be a cultural thing. Folks in Japan love paying income tax, they see it as part of their civic duty.
Equity often finds its expression in the personal income tax system through the use of progressive income tax rates. That is, as you earn more money, the more tax you pay on that extra money, and therefore your marginal rate increases, and therefore so does your average rate. An increase in your average rate of taxation means that a greater proportion of your income is paid in tax. This is often referred to as vertical equity. This expression of vertical equity upholds the principle that those who earn more should pay a higher proportion of their income in tax. Some may or may not agree with this principle, however, this is the system as it stands.
Another aspect of equity is that people who earn the same (or are in similar economic circumstances) should have the same tax burden. Therefore, a person who earns a salary should be taxed the same as a person who earns a wage, or who makes money on the sharemarket, or who develops property or who runs a business. If all these people are earning $50,000. they should all pay the same amount of tax. This is known as horizontal equity. This is not manifested well in Australia. I'll tell you why later.
Okay, time for another section break - I'll talk about efficiency in the next post.
First posting written in the first person
Hi there,
I have no idea how this blog is going to operate, perhaps I can run some ideas and opinions past you.
Firstly, it seems there has been an explosion in the phenomenon of blogging, as well as personal podcasting. This appears to demonstrate an underlying perception that people actually want to hear/read what the author has to say. Further, it also appears to assume that people have the time or will make the time to read it.
I'm no rocket scientist, I know that a maximum of 3 people will read this blog in the next 7 days or so (2 people being me and BJ). Note that maximum allows for zero people to read this post in the next 7 days.
Secondly, I'm wondering what sort of content should be in this blog. I understand that blog is short for weblog, and therefore finds in origins in the documentation of events. However, I must be honest, I often find reading protracted accounts of someone's day rather daunthing, especially if the day was in fact uneventful.
This leads me to conclude that this blog will predominately house content of a non-narrative nature, unless the circumstances are so extraordinary that they warrant a detailed account of the said circumstances.
Thirdly, and this is really an extension of the second point, I think this blog will probably be made of a a variety of humorous material (humorous to me, not necessarily to you), poorly researched and ill-informed opinions, and better researched and more informed opinions.
These opinions will be on anything.
I think its time for a nice looking section break. I'll end the post here, and resume on the next post.
I have no idea how this blog is going to operate, perhaps I can run some ideas and opinions past you.
Firstly, it seems there has been an explosion in the phenomenon of blogging, as well as personal podcasting. This appears to demonstrate an underlying perception that people actually want to hear/read what the author has to say. Further, it also appears to assume that people have the time or will make the time to read it.
I'm no rocket scientist, I know that a maximum of 3 people will read this blog in the next 7 days or so (2 people being me and BJ). Note that maximum allows for zero people to read this post in the next 7 days.
Secondly, I'm wondering what sort of content should be in this blog. I understand that blog is short for weblog, and therefore finds in origins in the documentation of events. However, I must be honest, I often find reading protracted accounts of someone's day rather daunthing, especially if the day was in fact uneventful.
This leads me to conclude that this blog will predominately house content of a non-narrative nature, unless the circumstances are so extraordinary that they warrant a detailed account of the said circumstances.
Thirdly, and this is really an extension of the second point, I think this blog will probably be made of a a variety of humorous material (humorous to me, not necessarily to you), poorly researched and ill-informed opinions, and better researched and more informed opinions.
These opinions will be on anything.
I think its time for a nice looking section break. I'll end the post here, and resume on the next post.
Friday, March 24, 2006
"Something Besides Tax" receives critical acclaim
After viewing the blog for the first time, well known internet blog critics Joe Mantovani and Sarah Ciabatta have rated the Something Besides Tax blog as "innovative, and cutting edge". This is even before the release of any details of what this blog is actually about. Rumour has it that the blog is NOT about tax, however, nothing much else has eventuated. Stay tuned.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
"Something Besides Tax" blogspot launch highly successful
Location and Time: Sydney, Australia: 11:55 pm - Tim and BJ's study table
After much preparation, including the reading of all the terms and conditions offered by Pyra, the Something Besides Tax blogspot was successfully launched, with a myriad of celebrities and VIPs attending the launch function.
Amongst the who's who, were the late Jeff Buckley, (who Tim was listening to in the lead up to the launch), Pierre Omidyar (the guy who invented eBay, on which Tim was looking for cheap TV tuners in the lead up to the launch), and Larry Sanger (one of the people behind Wikipedia, on which Tim spends too much time looking at articles, such as the article on eBay).
The launch almost didn't even go ahead at all, with early reports indicating that Tim was struggling to come up with a decent user name. An inside source has quoted Tim as saying: "I tried over and over again to get an easy username, but they were all taken. After the fourth attempt, I was very tempted to give up then and there."
It seems that Tim did manage to eventually arrive at a username. However, when asked about this username, Tim simply gave a blank stare for several seconds and said: "Crapola, I can't remember, but I wrote it down somewhere."
Sources indicate that the title of the blog: "Something Besides Tax" is not entirely true, with reports that Tim has spent so much time in the tax field, he will find it difficult to write about anything else.
After much preparation, including the reading of all the terms and conditions offered by Pyra, the Something Besides Tax blogspot was successfully launched, with a myriad of celebrities and VIPs attending the launch function.
Amongst the who's who, were the late Jeff Buckley, (who Tim was listening to in the lead up to the launch), Pierre Omidyar (the guy who invented eBay, on which Tim was looking for cheap TV tuners in the lead up to the launch), and Larry Sanger (one of the people behind Wikipedia, on which Tim spends too much time looking at articles, such as the article on eBay).
The launch almost didn't even go ahead at all, with early reports indicating that Tim was struggling to come up with a decent user name. An inside source has quoted Tim as saying: "I tried over and over again to get an easy username, but they were all taken. After the fourth attempt, I was very tempted to give up then and there."
It seems that Tim did manage to eventually arrive at a username. However, when asked about this username, Tim simply gave a blank stare for several seconds and said: "Crapola, I can't remember, but I wrote it down somewhere."
Sources indicate that the title of the blog: "Something Besides Tax" is not entirely true, with reports that Tim has spent so much time in the tax field, he will find it difficult to write about anything else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)