Packer attackers

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on August 9th, 2017 at 07:56 am

Lots of squealing from the left—here’s a typical bunch—about Kerry Packer minimising his taxes. You’d think they’d be happy about this; after all, the less tax Packer paid, the less money was available to fund HoWARd’s imperial racism in Iraq (as it happens, a wholefoods company in Bega decided a few years ago to withhold 10% of its taxes in protest against the war; that particular tax-minimising “plan” was applauded by the taximus-maximus left).

But they’re wrong about Packer. In fact, he paid far too much. If anything, Packer was overly generous—every year he and his companies paid millions more than they needed to. Over his career, Packer possibly paid billions more than was strictly required.

In wages.

This is a concept the left struggles with; they’d prefer a businessman hand over his money to a government—any government, even a government they oppose—than directly to people (many thousands of people, in Packer’s case) attempting to earn a living. And then there’s Packer’s estimated $150 million given to charities; the left would presumably be happier if all of that had instead been delivered to the government, so that … well, so that whatever. It’s not important.

Except the left wouldn’t be happier. They’d still despise Packer because he was rich. They’re simple like that; simple and hateful. They think that someone being wealthy means someone else is denied that wealth (oddly, in cases where this actually occurs—such as ABC newsreaders and radio presenters becoming rich via the taxes of those earning less than them—the left is silent).

Did I mention “hateful”? Take a look at this, from Anonymous Lefty (and be sure to read his commenters). AL happens to be a Melbourne lawyer; it may not have occurred to him that he’s wealthier than most people on earth. For that matter, he’s wealthier than most people in history. When our anonymous lawyer pal dies, let’s hope some poor bastard from sub-Saharan Africa points out his frivolous spending habits (playing with sparklers! drinking with retards!) and concludes that here was an Australian who truly “tried to invest in industries that made the world a better place.”

Bold words, those. From a lawyer.

UPDATE. Anonymous Lefty reveals his impoverished circumstances:

Tim, who of course has never tried starting out as a barrister (it involves saving up, quitting your job as a solicitor, undertaking an expensive course for three months – without pay – having to spend thousands setting up your business (buying wig and robes etc), and then, as you gradually build up that business, often waiting months before solicitors actually pay you. Yes, new barristers are truly rolling in it …

It involves saving up! And buying a wig! Life’s tough.

UPDATE II. Peter Saunders on wages vs. taxes:

In 2001-02, for example, an average couple raising two school-age children received $508 worth of weekly government health and education services and income support payments. But they paid for $394 of this in their taxes. Their net tax-welfare gain was only $114; the rest was churned.

It is obviously inefficient for one government bureaucracy to take money from us while others hand it back. All of this churning also leads to higher taxes than are necessary, and this damages work incentives and reduces living standards.

(Via the Briefing Room)

UPDATE III. Some background on Packer, from the man himself. And this is interesting:

Anyone awaiting a heart or lung transplant in Sydney has relied on Mr Packer and St Vincent’s Hospital to get the organ that they need.

For almost 22 years one of Mr Packer’s private jets has been on permanent standby for flights to retrieve organs when they become available anywhere in Australia or New Zealand.

Posted by Tim B. on 01/01/2006 at 09:50 AM
(192) Comments • Permalink