Mannkal Economic Education Foundation


Canberra Needs History as a Compulsory Subject

Ron Manners

6 May 2010

Check out the author's latest book at

Isn’t it strange that no-one in Kevin Rudd’s ‘control group’ appears to have studied history.

If they had, I’m sure they would hesitate to take over the provision of ‘free and instant health care for all Australians’.

That is exactly what has brought Greece and Italy to their knees as they pursued the fiction of ‘living at someone else’s expense’.

This is exactly the Ponzi Scheme being promoted by Mr Rudd’s con-men from Canberra. Perhaps I’m missing something?

If anyone knows of history giving us an example of ‘cradle to grave’ welfare provision by central governments actually working, then I’d be happy to publicize such examples.

As if that’s not enough mess to heap on the ‘Pink Batts fiasco and the school’s building scandal’, we now have the Resource Industry Super Tax Slug.

It would appear that our Prime Minister has declared war on anyone who saves and invests in Australia, including every Australian who has a superannuation policy.

Wise old Thomas Jefferson summed it up this way:

“I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labour of the industrious.”

For me, personally, about to ‘man a resource promotion booth’ in Washington D.C. and Chicago, my job is made a little more difficult but, as usual, always looking for the positive angle, I have a sign for display on the booth which announces:-


“Australia’s natural resources have a longer shelf life than our Federal Government.”

What do you think?

6 Responses to “Canberra Needs History as a Compulsory Subject”

  1. Doug Grewar says:


    Thanks for an excellent edition. Lets hope the resources tax issue will be the nail thats needed for this idiot. I cannot believe how incrementally gullible the electorate has become over the years.

  2. newson says:

    jefferson, like all classical liberals, had it wrong. there can be no such thing as an expropriating protector of property rights. parasitism continues until the host dies.

    i like your optimism, but i’d say the federal government, as an institution, will outlast any resource boom.

    finally, if the reserve bank hadn’t presided over such an enormous rise in the money supply, maybe there wouldn’t be such a pressing need for superannuation in the first place. in my grandparents’ day, money in a savings account could be counted on to maintain its value to such an extent that it was perfectly possible for the lay person to budget for retirement just looking at the account balance.

    thanks go to bernie fraser and his rba successors, along with paul keating, john howard, and kevin rudd for turning us all into hedgefund managers. a pox on all their houses.

  3. Craig Mitchell says:

    I have been sending the piece immediately below to all newspapers as this Communist nationalisation by Labour cannot be allowed to succeed.

    Funnily enough today I have heard Andrew Forrest and Clive Palmer pretty much mirror my argument so it seems a great many people are ‘on the same page’.

    I stand by everything I have said and believe none of it is exaggeration. This tax will pass over my dead body.

    The second piece,’Mad As’, was a response to a post in support of the tax. It makes for amusing reading.


    As a small investor who has foregone spending to save and invest in the key driver of Australian growth over the last decade to ensure my future financial stability, I am incensed by this Marxist nationalisation of the resources industry. This is how I have been rewarded for taking on risk of investment in what should be the economic beacon of hope for this country and state…Not anymore.

    What has taken years to build, in 3 days has seen my modest portfolio (that includes no RIO or BHP) lose over 25% of its value as international investors and hedge funds flee this insane tax that will effectively kill the boom and stop investment dead in its tracks.

    There will be no new projects, no new jobs, no corollary community investment, no royalties, no flow on to all other sectors of the economy and no hope of paying the National debt. What will your ’super-tax’ be worth then Swan?

    If this tax becomes law, Australia will become a second World Country facing fiscal disaster as is Greece. I personally no longer want to invest in any new local resource projects as I can get a better return overseas and who knows what hair brained scheme Labour will impose next week. I am sure I am one of a great many who feel the same. Without mining and energy investment we have nothing and all other industries will stagnate and provide anaemic growth. What should we do? Go back to wool?

    The economic lunacy proposed by the Rudd government fails to comprehend the cyclical nature and requirement for long term capital commitments in the Resources sector and jeopardises all Australians’ future particularly West Australians.

    The argument that all Australians own Australian Resources is true, however until investors take the risk and through their proxies, mining companies, actually develop them, it is just a patch of worthless dirt. What the three stooges of Rudd, Swan and Tanner incredibly fail to recognise is that investors had to pay to generate these profits via initial investment. You cant just say ‘well now you have paid for it, found it, developed it and sold it we are going to take a 40% cut and give to everyone who hasn’t paid!!!’ The Mafia would be proud of this standover move.

    The rationale of the Labour Communist Clown Posse is the ‘obscene’ profits of the Resources sector not being distributed ‘fairly’…! Last time I looked BHP is already paying an effective tax rate of 43%, this will hike to a World beating 57%.

    Not one mention of the Banks that routinely, every quarter, parasitically leach billions from all Australians who work for their money. How about some redistribution there? This just brings the absurdity of this tax into perspective – According to Swan’s logic, all profitable enterprises should have a 40% ’success tax’ applied to them as should every Australian worker an extra 40% on top of their income tax if they happen to do a bit of overtime or get a bonus. Bankers should be apoplectic at what this means to the long term future of the country and their businesses.

    We must not allow this to become law. It will be an absolute disaster. Cape Lambert has shelved a major project already. It is now; quite unbelievably possible that Shell will walk away from the Arrow Energy purchase, as just one example of how multinationals considering investment in Australia may view this tax.
    The next stage is job losses and all other sectors will suffer in cascading waves of rolling, momentous collapse.

    Thanks comrades Rudd, Tanner and Swan you have robbed from my future to hand it on a plate to those in the unproductive areas of NSW and Vic, who have not taken any risk, not foregone consumption, not saved and not had the guts to believe in this Country’s economic future by not investing in the key driver of economic growth for the last 10 years and the foreseeable future, the Australian Resources Sector.

    Secession now and lets be done with the Eastern Bloc for ever.


    Post by Mad As Wa Business news 5/510

    All this scare mongering … we should have done it long ago and Rudd’s only fault is waiting until 2012 to bring it in. With the world’s population heading from 6 billion to 9 billion, and much of it in India and China where massive urban construction is needed, who but the ignorant and vested interests and their mercenary lobbyists, would see a problem with this better return for ageing Australia. How many of these voices complain about Australia being ripped off for decades with miserly 3% state royalties? Zippo! Who can support the states’ rights when local small time politicians refuse to raise the royalty rates and then join the great conga line of resource industry consultants for the next stage of their career? How different is this from the brown paper bag system? If the ‘great Australian’ wants to go off shore and support competition from South America and Africa to bring this country down then take Rio and pack up and go — we can then do a 20-30 year bilateral agreement with China to take all we can produce and split the middleman’s commissions. No need to be paid in devaluing $US — we can have cargo, housing and infrastructure built in return. How many indigenous houses built in the last few years — 3? China could build 3 cities the size of Perth in that time! Give us a break – pay up or piss off!

    My response-

    Mad As of Perth 07:45 AM 4 May 10 Mad As -your suggestions are beyond laughable. They, as your name suggests, emanate from someone not quite in charge of his faculties.

    Who do you suggest will have the expertise and experience to execute your grand Maoist plan, let alone who will actually do the work? You and your layabout mates, salivating over your proposed handouts?

    Your inability to see beyond communist populist slogan is astounding and your grasp of economics is non-existent.

    You believe we should neglect the fact that it is investors that stumped up their hard earned to actually turn a patch of dirt into productive assets that give people like you jobs and money to spend? Mate, you and Rudd can share your undeveloped patch of dirt between yourselves and impose a 40% dirt tax.

    It is Investors (ie. those that have paid to make something of that patch of dirt) that will invest and build and grow this Country so we can afford to help you and other lame duck moochers.

    It is you that should pay up or piss off.

  4. John Collins says:

    Dear Ron,

    Your response to the Henry Tax report does not appear to me to be logically based. You seem to be supporting a right aligned push to remove the Labor government without really looking at the broad picture.

    It is quite clear that Australia is currently cheap in terms of revenue raised from taxing the mining of resources compared with our competitors. Australia is not getting its fair share of the profits created by the mining boom. A quick look at the relevant pages in the Henry Report shows this and elsewhere comparisons can be found of other tax regimes and the revenue recouped from mining of resources. All evidence points to Australia being cheap. This is part of the reason we are having a boom!

    Whilst everybody seems to think that Australian minerals are inexhaustible they are not, as you know. There is a need to look to Australia’s future, not just short term thinking.

    So I suggest you consider and publish a broader discussion of the issues involved. What is proposed is not so much different to what we as miners experienced in pre-boom times. It appears that those younger than us have a problem in that they have never faced the tougher times of a non-boom environment.

    I don’t have any in principle gripe about an Australia government trying to re-coup its fair share of a boom for the benefit of Australia as whole. I might agree there will be some problems in the execution details, but that is another issue.

    I suggest that you and your organization take a wider view of what is best for the whole country in the long term.

  5. Ron Manners says:

    Dear John,

    We are actually almost in harmony on this matter.

    My gripe is not so much with the Henry Report, which has largely been ignored by the Federal Government.

    It is with the Rudd & Co. ‘declaration of war’ against all productive Australians.

    The market and the decimation of the A$ are the measures of the results of their actions and this over-rides any possible noble intent they may have had for buying some short-term popularity.

    Perhaps my response is rational and predictable as it will always be, two examples of economic illiteracy and structural vandalism.

    Further reading @ Welcome to high-risk Australia:



  6. newson says:

    to john collins:
    what is the fair share of your wallet that i’m entitled to, assuming that i’m less well off than you?