This story below made me think…
Is it really the lack of GST for online purchases under $1000 from overseas stores that makes their products cheaper than ours?
Myer’s chairman seems to think so.

On the one hand he complains about the Federal government’s “carbon tax” and the “flood levy” (another tax)…then says our government should take another slice (in tax) ….we are already over taxed, in my opinion!

Why not the government offer the same to Aussie retailers, ie: NO GST for online purchases under $1000…
Because you know what will happen, our government wacks on the GST to overseas businesses, then but then they simply become the “tax collectors” because it will be US paying the GST…NOT the overseas business.

As far as I’m concerned, Mr McClintock does not deserve a $1.9 million dollar salary!
Screw you McClintock…cos you’re just pushing our goverment to tax us more!

Bloody idiot

=————

Myer’s chairman Paul McClintock is confident the federal government will agree to demands by local retailers and force offshore online stores to pay GST on low-priced goods next year.

Mr McClintock accused the government of making life difficult for retailers, saying the GST loophole on goods bought overseas for under $1,000 and labour costs were hurting, while economic conditions, the carbon tax and flood levy had hit discretionary consumer spending.

Fellow retailers Gerry Harvey and Solomon Lew have also called for a cut in the GST threshold, with the latter warning thousands of retail jobs would be lost in 2013 if nothing was done.

The loophole allows Australians to purchase goods offshore more cheaply than they can here, which Mr Lew argues makes removing it a politically difficult decision to make.

“My prediction is it will be fixed so we won’t lose the jobs,” Mr McClintock told reporters at Myer’s annual general meeting on Friday.

“It is incredibly unfair to have a situation where people can do exactly the same transaction in different ways and have different tax consequences.

“If the federal government truly values the retail sector, the impact of increasing labour costs and uncompetitive nature of online retailing must be balanced by measures to improve productivity or flexibility.”

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbusiness/aap/8576608/condtions-still-challenging-says-myer

Aquila said:

.we are already over taxed, in my opinion!

Does that mean that our schools and hospitals are over-funded?

Aquila said:

This story below made me think…
Is it really the lack of GST for online purchases under $1000 from overseas stores that makes their products cheaper than ours?

Not when the overseas price is 50% of local, even after you include shipping.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Aquila said:

.we are already over taxed, in my opinion!

Does that mean that our schools and hospitals are over-funded?

This question doesn’t make sense to me, unless you are saying that the request by Aussie retailers to apply GST to online overseas purchases means our government will channel this new cash straight into schools and hospitals.

the whole point of taxing is to create unemployment

lets put it this way

you collect a million dollars from the tax payer and then invest it into potplants , seasprite , towing back an iceberg from antartica or any other mad scheme.

once all those potplants are dead, the seasprite is broken up for scrap and the iceberg melted the net benefit is precisely ZERO

the best type of tax system is one that taxes the movement of money, this way if you buy overseas or here you’ll still pay tax

Angus Prune said:

Aquila said:

This story below made me think…
Is it really the lack of GST for online purchases under $1000 from overseas stores that makes their products cheaper than ours?

Not when the overseas price is 50% of local, even after you include shipping.

Exactly
This well paid retail chairman seems to think that applying this GST “will save Australian retailers”
pfft
Like I said, if this is his logic, he doesn’t deserve a $1.9 million dollar salary.

Aquila said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Aquila said:

.we are already over taxed, in my opinion!

Does that mean that our schools and hospitals are over-funded?

This question doesn’t make sense to me, unless you are saying that the request by Aussie retailers to apply GST to online overseas purchases means our government will channel this new cash straight into schools and hospitals.

channel it into schools and hospitals

i think it is you who is the witty one tonight aquila

Aquila said:

because it will be US paying the GST…NOT the overseas business.

I’m pretty sure that’s how GST works in local stores as well.

It costs money to collect GST on these incoming packages. For smallish packages it costs more to collect GST than the amount they get back. It’s not economical. Simple as that.

if you taxed the movement of money it would prove to be the more effective system

you make the tax compulsory and stop ALL tax deductions such as “trusts”. the only people winning the tax war on the population are the people with money that is protected from the government.

a compulsory tax on the movement of money at that point when the money is moved would slow all this crap that makes money markets and sharemarkets volatile – oh yes by all means use your fancy computers to move all the shares around that you want but you will pay in real time, none of this bullshit where you end up making all of your stuff ups and profits tax deductible.

party_pants said:

It costs money to collect GST on these incoming packages. For smallish packages it costs more to collect GST than the amount they get back. It’s not economical. Simple as that.

which is why i’m proposing a tax on the movement of money

see – simple

Angus Prune said:

Aquila said:

because it will be US paying the GST…NOT the overseas business.

I’m pretty sure that’s how GST works in local stores as well.

Exactly
But….this well paid Aussie chairman is saying and implying that the GST will be absorbed by the overseas business it is applied too….we all know what happens when a business’s cost go up…in this case a government tax being applied where there wasn’t one before…the business passes it on in the form of a higher priced item.
Or, they simply state in the shopping cart…item price + Australian GST = Total

Aquila said:

Angus Prune said:

Aquila said:

because it will be US paying the GST…NOT the overseas business.

I’m pretty sure that’s how GST works in local stores as well.

Exactly
But….this well paid Aussie chairman is saying and implying that the GST will be absorbed by the overseas business it is applied too….we all know what happens when a business’s cost go up…in this case a government tax being applied where there wasn’t one before…the business passes it on in the form of a higher priced item.
Or, they simply state in the shopping cart…item price + Australian GST = Total

Yes. Except it will be pretty much unenforceable.

wookiemeister said:

if you taxed the movement of money it would prove to be the more effective system

you make the tax compulsory and stop ALL tax deductions such as “trusts”. the only people winning the tax war on the population are the people with money that is protected from the government.

a compulsory tax on the movement of money at that point when the money is moved would slow all this crap that makes money markets and sharemarkets volatile – oh yes by all means use your fancy computers to move all the shares around that you want but you will pay in real time, none of this bullshit where you end up making all of your stuff ups and profits tax deductible.

Define “movement of money”.

party_pants said:

It costs money to collect GST on these incoming packages. For smallish packages it costs more to collect GST than the amount they get back. It’s not economical. Simple as that.

Exactly

Not only is the tax passed on to consumers but the extra administration costs increase for the business concerned.
Yes, and this very well paid chairman thinks his idea will “save Aussie retailers”

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

if you taxed the movement of money it would prove to be the more effective system

you make the tax compulsory and stop ALL tax deductions such as “trusts”. the only people winning the tax war on the population are the people with money that is protected from the government.

a compulsory tax on the movement of money at that point when the money is moved would slow all this crap that makes money markets and sharemarkets volatile – oh yes by all means use your fancy computers to move all the shares around that you want but you will pay in real time, none of this bullshit where you end up making all of your stuff ups and profits tax deductible.

Define “movement of money”.

when do you think money is moved?

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

Define “movement of money”.

when do you think money is moved?

You tell me, it’s your scheme. I move money around every day, what with getting paid, buying food, paying bills….

The whole thing is a crock and for most os purchases you could add the GST and still get it cheaper than your big chain can provide it and delivered to your door.

Biggest problem Harvey had was when he spat the dummy about a year ago and prompted a lot of people to look at the over seas prices. Plus online purchasing is maturing now from the clunky old systems where you always thought you were about to be ripped off. Still not perfect but much much better and way more convenient.

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

if you taxed the movement of money it would prove to be the more effective system

you make the tax compulsory and stop ALL tax deductions such as “trusts”. the only people winning the tax war on the population are the people with money that is protected from the government.

a compulsory tax on the movement of money at that point when the money is moved would slow all this crap that makes money markets and sharemarkets volatile – oh yes by all means use your fancy computers to move all the shares around that you want but you will pay in real time, none of this bullshit where you end up making all of your stuff ups and profits tax deductible.

Define “movement of money”.

when do you think money is moved?

i’ll give you some examples

when you get paid
when you withdraw cash
when you put into the bank

Angus Prune said:

Aquila said:

Angus Prune said:

I’m pretty sure that’s how GST works in local stores as well.

Exactly
But….this well paid Aussie chairman is saying and implying that the GST will be absorbed by the overseas business it is applied too….we all know what happens when a business’s cost go up…in this case a government tax being applied where there wasn’t one before…the business passes it on in the form of a higher priced item.
Or, they simply state in the shopping cart…item price + Australian GST = Total

Yes. Except it will be pretty much unenforceable.

Interesting
The article I linked did not explain the process of how this GST can be applied…
but McClintock seems to think it IS going to happen

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

Define “movement of money”.

when do you think money is moved?

You tell me, it’s your scheme. I move money around every day, what with getting paid, buying food, paying bills….

right so when you get paid its taxed but only a percentage perhaps of the total amount
when you spend that money you get taxed again but only by the percentage of the amount being used to buy something

wookiemeister said:

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

Define “movement of money”.

when do you think money is moved?

i’ll give you some examples

when you get paid
when you withdraw cash
when you put into the bank

So…your plan to tax rich people starts by increasing taxes on poor people and the working class.

wookiemeister said:

party_pants said:

It costs money to collect GST on these incoming packages. For smallish packages it costs more to collect GST than the amount they get back. It’s not economical. Simple as that.

which is why i’m proposing a tax on the movement of money

see – simple

I’m not interested in solutions, I’m only here to tell you what the problem is.

to be honest the tax system is too complicated and open to abuse

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

wookiemeister said:

when do you think money is moved?

i’ll give you some examples

when you get paid
when you withdraw cash
when you put into the bank

So…your plan to tax rich people starts by increasing taxes on poor people and the working class.

have you ever met rich people?

they have their money protected

the more money you earn, the more money you have the less tax you pay – by law

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

when do you think money is moved?

You tell me, it’s your scheme. I move money around every day, what with getting paid, buying food, paying bills….

right so when you get paid its taxed but only a percentage perhaps of the total amount
when you spend that money you get taxed again but only by the percentage of the amount being used to buy something

You’ve just described income tax and gst.

If a business can’t generate sufficient revenue to meet all the financial needs of the organisation and produce a return upon the investment of its owners, it’s not a real business.

The enthusiasm with which a Tick sucks at the blood of a dying animal serves only to hasten the death of them both.

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

You tell me, it’s your scheme. I move money around every day, what with getting paid, buying food, paying bills….

right so when you get paid its taxed but only a percentage perhaps of the total amount
when you spend that money you get taxed again but only by the percentage of the amount being used to buy something

You’ve just described income tax and gst.

but made them simpler and less burdensome

if you taxed a small amount on each money transaction it would only hurt people who have plenty of money

joe public would find that he had more money

in this mad world people their superannuation to buy a house and be free from a landlord

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

You tell me, it’s your scheme. I move money around every day, what with getting paid, buying food, paying bills….

right so when you get paid its taxed but only a percentage perhaps of the total amount
when you spend that money you get taxed again but only by the percentage of the amount being used to buy something

You’ve just described income tax and gst.

)
Pretty much…

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

right so when you get paid its taxed but only a percentage perhaps of the total amount
when you spend that money you get taxed again but only by the percentage of the amount being used to buy something

You’ve just described income tax and gst.

but made them simpler and less burdensome

if you taxed a small amount on each money transaction it would only hurt people who have plenty of money

joe public would find that he had more money

in this mad world people their superannuation to buy a house and be free from a landlord

So show me some maths. What percentage will be required to keep tax revenue the same as it is currently? I assume you’re talking a flat rate for every transaction.

Rule 303 said:

If a business can’t generate sufficient revenue to meet all the financial needs of the organisation and produce a return upon the investment of its owners, it’s not a real business.

The enthusiasm with which a Tick sucks at the blood of a dying animal serves only to hasten the death of them both.

)
I like

you could tax overseas transactions by taxing the movement of money in and out of the country

it doesn’t matter what the money was used for, if the money was taxed going in and out you could easily tax imports regardless of the amount

oh yes that includes money going to charity too, if it leaves the country it gets taxed

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

You’ve just described income tax and gst.

but made them simpler and less burdensome

if you taxed a small amount on each money transaction it would only hurt people who have plenty of money

joe public would find that he had more money

in this mad world people their superannuation to buy a house and be free from a landlord

So show me some maths. What percentage will be required to keep tax revenue the same as it is currently? I assume you’re talking a flat rate for every transaction.

i don’t have any real figures at my fingertips i don’t get briefed by treasury , the ATO or the RBA

however the idea is sound and able to be implemented easily

a simple starting point would be to tax credit card transactions

ok so you start taxing credit card transactions

you could then put money into manufacturing renewable energy installations

after a few years australia would be exporting energy to the world

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

but made them simpler and less burdensome

if you taxed a small amount on each money transaction it would only hurt people who have plenty of money

joe public would find that he had more money

in this mad world people their superannuation to buy a house and be free from a landlord

So show me some maths. What percentage will be required to keep tax revenue the same as it is currently? I assume you’re talking a flat rate for every transaction.

i don’t have any real figures at my fingertips i don’t get briefed by treasury , the ATO or the RBA

however the idea is sound and able to be implemented easily

a simple starting point would be to tax credit card transactions

So you really have no idea how this will impact anyone.

But go on, try for actual numbers. GDP, tax revenue, shouldn’t be hard to get an estimate.

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Angus Prune said:

So show me some maths. What percentage will be required to keep tax revenue the same as it is currently? I assume you’re talking a flat rate for every transaction.

i don’t have any real figures at my fingertips i don’t get briefed by treasury , the ATO or the RBA

however the idea is sound and able to be implemented easily

a simple starting point would be to tax credit card transactions

So you really have no idea how this will impact anyone.

But go on, try for actual numbers. GDP, tax revenue, shouldn’t be hard to get an estimate.

i’m sure that you’d agree that statistics are basically very good lies

the fact is the gov has no real idea of what money is being shifted around

this is why they have to wait and watch for known signs before they act – they can’t predict in any real way

it would be amusing

lets say you put a 1 dollar tax on all credit card transactions

how much money do you reckon the gov could get?

This thread is sure getting the Wookie treatment.

I sometimes wonder what would happen if Wookie was appointed a benign dictator for a 3 year term. I imagine a sort of Star Trek world, Wookie says something followed by a make it so. Result, govt by interpretive dance and handy waving vibes. Result, chaos.

Skunkworks said:

I sometimes wonder what would happen if Wookie was appointed a benign dictator for a 3 year term. I imagine a sort of Star Trek world, Wookie says something followed by a make it so. Result, govt by interpretive dance and handy waving vibes. Result, chaos.

word is that its already happened

the gov is already seriously in debt

why do you think thye need carbon tax/ everything tax/ more tax?

they have borrowed more money thatn they should

in wookieworld australia would be one of the few nations with any debt

oh yes

everyone will be working regardless who they are

ok

now i’ve solved how to tax internet transactions

any other subjects to be discussed?

wookiemeister said:

oh yes

everyone will be working regardless who they are

Ahh, forced labour for the crippled and infirm. Brilliant idea, wonder why no one ever tried it before.

wookiemeister said:

oh yes

everyone will be working regardless who they are

ahhh North Korea?

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

oh yes

everyone will be working regardless who they are

Ahh, forced labour for the crippled and infirm. Brilliant idea, wonder why no one ever tried it before.

i’ve met some of these disability claimants – lazy bastards

you can man a telephone line for a gov dept and you better be good or you’ll get your money cut

everyone works

i’d expand the reserves to have a larger army and then tell the yanks to go to hell with their religious wars

if anyone decides to attack they can expect a standing army of a million men and a rain of missiles

Witty Rejoinder said:

This thread is sure getting the Wookie treatment.

)

*sigh

Angus Prune said:

Ahh, forced labour for the crippled and infirm. Brilliant idea, wonder why no one ever tried it before.

Arbeit macht frei in WookieWorld?

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

oh yes

everyone will be working regardless who they are

ahhh North Korea?

i doubt if the leadership do any work, seen the face of dear leader? you don;t get chubby cheeks if you had to do physical labour

Witty Rejoinder said:

Angus Prune said:

Ahh, forced labour for the crippled and infirm. Brilliant idea, wonder why no one ever tried it before.

Arbeit macht frei in WookieWorld?

concentration camps are inefficient tools to get any work done

concentration camps are essentially weapons of terror rather than being any practical tool for doing anything useful

its why i’ve said in the past that i would have attacked the railway system of germany ( no railways and its harder to move the victims to the concentration camps)

the nazis loved their railways

destroy the thing they love most

wookiemeister said:

the nazis loved their railways

destroy the thing they love most

I would recommend a book called The Hardest Victory by Denis Richards which details exactly what you proposed and how it was impossible at the time, diverted too many resources from more pressing needs and how quickly the rail systems could be repaired. Actual lived experience but I reckon it would be a waste of time, you don’t really get complexity, flow on effects, expense and scarcity or unintended consequences at all.

The total value of credit card transactions and cash advances fell by 0.3 per cent in October 2009, when Australians spent just $19.189 billion, compared to $19.246 billion in September
http://australia.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/credit-card-spending-australia-down.php
===

old news but based on that you tax all transactions at one percent

you could get 190 million from the deal every month

that money could then buy some wind turbines and electricity could just be dumped on the network for free

wookiemeister said:

lets say you put a 1 dollar tax on all credit card transactions

how much money do you reckon the gov could get?

None. People would take to the streets throwing rocks and cacti at the politicians. Parliament would be burnt down and then pissed on.

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

the nazis loved their railways

destroy the thing they love most

I would recommend a book called The Hardest Victory by Denis Richards which details exactly what you proposed and how it was impossible at the time, diverted too many resources from more pressing needs and how quickly the rail systems could be repaired. Actual lived experience but I reckon it would be a waste of time, you don’t really get complexity, flow on effects, expense and scarcity or unintended consequences at all.

cities absorb bombs

this is why the british gov was happy when the germans started bombing the cities rather than the airfields – they ended up blowing up nothing of any real practical value. after the dust had settled they just built over the smoking ruins.

bombing german cities was a waste of time.

ask anyone who has ever worked on the railways they are fragile things

a 50mm cannon chewing up large lengths of sleepers will do immense damage , bent rails are like a cancer that creates a positive feedback making things worse.

the great thing is that once you’ve lined yourself a machine gun can inflict damage quickly and effectively, if you see any locomotives just put a few holes in them too

wookiemeister said:

ask anyone who has ever worked on the railways they are fragile things

a 50mm cannon chewing up large lengths of sleepers will do immense damage , bent rails are like a cancer that creates a positive feedback making things worse.

the great thing is that once you’ve lined yourself a machine gun can inflict damage quickly and effectively, if you see any locomotives just put a few holes in them too

Bullshit. Every country had specially trained railway corps whose job it was to repair damage. A few shot up sleepers were no drama for them to simply rip them out, replace sleepers and relay tracks. Piece of piss.

another thing is this

the british wasted vast amounts of men, machinery and money on doomed “raids” such as dieppe

if they could waste time doing these kinds of things how could they come to the conclusion that destroying high value soft targets would not work?

coal powered transport ruled germany

if more cars were forced onto the roads without the means to power them germany would have run out of oil for its tanks a lot sooner than 1945

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

lets say you put a 1 dollar tax on all credit card transactions

how much money do you reckon the gov could get?

None. People would take to the streets throwing rocks and cacti at the politicians. Parliament would be burnt down and then pissed on.

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

the nazis loved their railways

destroy the thing they love most

I would recommend a book called The Hardest Victory by Denis Richards which details exactly what you proposed and how it was impossible at the time, diverted too many resources from more pressing needs and how quickly the rail systems could be repaired. Actual lived experience but I reckon it would be a waste of time, you don’t really get complexity, flow on effects, expense and scarcity or unintended consequences at all.

cities absorb bombs

this is why the british gov was happy when the germans started bombing the cities rather than the airfields – they ended up blowing up nothing of any real practical value. after the dust had settled they just built over the smoking ruins.

bombing german cities was a waste of time.

ask anyone who has ever worked on the railways they are fragile things

a 50mm cannon chewing up large lengths of sleepers will do immense damage , bent rails are like a cancer that creates a positive feedback making things worse.

the great thing is that once you’ve lined yourself a machine gun can inflict damage quickly and effectively, if you see any locomotives just put a few holes in them too

There was a couple of chapters devoted to just that and as I said why it could not be done in the way you say. Planners were not stupid they knew the importance of the railways and they would have dearly loved to take them out. You could try reading it before pontificating on your fantasys about how easy it all would have been under your inspired leadership. I asked you a few weeks ago what you would do if in charge of operations in Afghanistan. You had nothing real world, just hand waving. But couldnt be bothered debating real world with wookie world tonight. Peace out.

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

ask anyone who has ever worked on the railways they are fragile things

a 50mm cannon chewing up large lengths of sleepers will do immense damage , bent rails are like a cancer that creates a positive feedback making things worse.

the great thing is that once you’ve lined yourself a machine gun can inflict damage quickly and effectively, if you see any locomotives just put a few holes in them too

Bullshit. Every country had specially trained railway corps whose job it was to repair damage. A few shot up sleepers were no drama for them to simply rip them out, replace sleepers and relay tracks. Piece of piss.

i reckon a mosquito could do serious damage to a railway line

would these crews be able to repair thousands of sleepers shot up in one day? every day and night

they should have blown up the railway tracks, instead they headed for cities that could absorb the bombs and also guarded by AA by night and fighters by day

the problem is we have been brainwashed to accept what we have been – told not what is practical

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

Skunkworks said:

I would recommend a book called The Hardest Victory by Denis Richards which details exactly what you proposed and how it was impossible at the time, diverted too many resources from more pressing needs and how quickly the rail systems could be repaired. Actual lived experience but I reckon it would be a waste of time, you don’t really get complexity, flow on effects, expense and scarcity or unintended consequences at all.

cities absorb bombs

this is why the british gov was happy when the germans started bombing the cities rather than the airfields – they ended up blowing up nothing of any real practical value. after the dust had settled they just built over the smoking ruins.

bombing german cities was a waste of time.

ask anyone who has ever worked on the railways they are fragile things

a 50mm cannon chewing up large lengths of sleepers will do immense damage , bent rails are like a cancer that creates a positive feedback making things worse.

the great thing is that once you’ve lined yourself a machine gun can inflict damage quickly and effectively, if you see any locomotives just put a few holes in them too

There was a couple of chapters devoted to just that and as I said why it could not be done in the way you say. Planners were not stupid they knew the importance of the railways and they would have dearly loved to take them out. You could try reading it before pontificating on your fantasys about how easy it all would have been under your inspired leadership. I asked you a few weeks ago what you would do if in charge of operations in Afghanistan. You had nothing real world, just hand waving. But couldnt be bothered debating real world with wookie world tonight. Peace out.

so friend

are they still fighting in afghanistan??

seems they have no more answers than me

wookiemeister said:

i reckon a mosquito could do serious damage to a railway line

You reckon? I reckon you’re wrong.

See, you’ve got no evidence to back up your point, but I’ve got your long history of being wrong to back up my point.

The Dieppe Raid, also known as the Battle of Dieppe, Operation Rutter and, later, Operation Jubilee, was a Second World War Allied attack on the German-occupied port of Dieppe. The raid took place on the northern coast of France on 19 August 1942. The assault began at 5:00 a.m. and by 10:50 a.m. the Allied commanders were forced to call a retreat. Over 6,000 infantrymen, predominantly Canadian, were supported by limited Royal Navy and large Royal Air Force contingents.

The objective of the raid was discussed by Churchill in his war memoirs:

I thought it most important that a large-scale operation should take place this summer, and military opinion seemed unanimous that until an operation on that scale was undertaken, no responsible general would take the responsibility of planning the main invasion… In discussion with Admiral Mountbatten it became clear that time did not permit a new large-scale operation to be mounted during the summer (after Rutter had been cancelled), but that Dieppe could be remounted (with the new code-name “Jubilee”) within a month, provided extraordinary steps were taken to ensure secrecy. For this reason no records were kept but, after the Canadian authorities and the Chiefs of Staff had given their approval, I personally went through the plans with the C.I.G.S., Admiral Mountbatten, and the Naval Force Commander, Captain J. Hughes-Hallett.

Objectives included seizing and holding a major port for a short period, both to prove it was possible and to gather intelligence from prisoners and captured materials, including naval intelligence in a hotel in town and a radar installation on the cliffs above it. Although neither were completely successful, some knowledge was gained while assessing the German responses. The Allies also wanted to destroy coastal defences, port structures and all strategic buildings. The raid could have given a morale boost to the troops, Resistance, and general public, while assuring the Soviet Union of the commitment of the United Kingdom and the United States.

No major objectives of the raid were accomplished. A total of 3,623 of the 6,086 men (almost 60%) who made it ashore were either killed, wounded, or captured. The Royal Air Force failed to lure the Luftwaffe into open battle, and lost 96 aircraft (at least 32 to flak or accidents), compared to 48 lost by the Luftwaffe. The Royal Navy lost 33 landing craft and one destroyer. The events at Dieppe later influenced preparations for the North African (Operation Torch) and Normandy landings (Operation Overlord).

===

if they had devoted time and money to attacking the railway system than dieppe my guesses are the war would have ended sooner.

party_pants said:

must have been from some african education dept

party_pants said:

Fark! I just pissed myself

))
You’re crackin’ me up

I’ve got a DVD or two around here that’s full of old US Army training films. One of the was about railway engineers. They really were highly trained specialist crews, specifically to repair bomb damage and get the trains moving again.

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

i reckon a mosquito could do serious damage to a railway line

You reckon? I reckon you’re wrong.

See, you’ve got no evidence to back up your point, but I’ve got your long history of being wrong to back up my point.

your right

the machine guns on a mosquito would cause no damage at all, barely touch them

lets throw 6000 men at an operation that will serve no purpose instead of taking down the railway system

party_pants said:

i should get me one of those

apparently just taxing all credit card transactions is too hard

you could get rid of carbon tax and just use the credit card tax to work its magic

just one military success after another

maybe they should have just attacked the railways instead?

to quote my management theory maxim

1 ignore the problem

2 deny the problem

3 shoot the problem

now go back to number 1

its easier for the government to ignore the problem with the loss of tax

they then deny that its a problem

anyone who pops their head up gets shot at

problem solved – now go back to ignore the problem

you’ll find that my understanding of the world is tied up in the sense that all situations are more or less handled in the same way – we have the illusion that the gov knows what it is doing but infact they are just people who managed to get into power. they have no real understanding of the world than anyone on the street.

the online shopping phenomenon is really just a whinge of the merchants in australia who are losing out to other merchants

wookiemeister said:

the online shopping phenomenon is really just a whinge of the merchants in australia who are losing out to other merchants

That at least I can agree with you about.

The internet is changing our lives. This evening I’ve watched two games of sport live on my Galaxy tablet, streamed via my home internet connection. First the cricket, then the basketball. I haven’t even turned the TV on. If the internet is also changing other areas of life, like shopping. The old strategy of getting people to physically come to your bricks and mortar building doesn’t always apply to everyone. For specialist things it’s much easier to shop online.

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

the online shopping phenomenon is really just a whinge of the merchants in australia who are losing out to other merchants

That at least I can agree with you about.

The internet is changing our lives. This evening I’ve watched two games of sport live on my Galaxy tablet, streamed via my home internet connection. First the cricket, then the basketball. I haven’t even turned the TV on. If the internet is also changing other areas of life, like shopping. The old strategy of getting people to physically come to your bricks and mortar building doesn’t always apply to everyone. For specialist things it’s much easier to shop online.

you’re right

the fact is that a shop can’t physically hold all of the items you might want

if you are taxing those bricks and mortar to the hilt then this puts another nail in the coffin

an overseas warehouse doesn’t get hit with as much tax , where the thing gest shipped here it goes straight to the consumer rather than anywhere else where it will add to the cost of the product

party_pants said:

wookiemeister said:

the online shopping phenomenon is really just a whinge of the merchants in australia who are losing out to other merchants

That at least I can agree with you about.

The internet is changing our lives. This evening I’ve watched two games of sport live on my Galaxy tablet, streamed via my home internet connection. First the cricket, then the basketball. I haven’t even turned the TV on. If the internet is also changing other areas of life, like shopping. The old strategy of getting people to physically come to your bricks and mortar building doesn’t always apply to everyone. For specialist things it’s much easier to shop online.

you’re right

the fact is that a shop can’t physically hold all of the items you might want

if you are taxing those bricks and mortar to the hilt then this puts another nail in the coffin

an overseas warehouse doesn’t get hit with as much tax , where the thing gest shipped here it goes straight to the consumer rather than anywhere else where it will add to the cost of the product

we can’t make overseas businesses sign up to pay GST in Australia.

I tried 3 local shops to buy some computer hardware. Harvey Norman said they did not stock what I wanted(SSD & Ram), two other shops wanted far too much for them. I ordered online from Melbourne, which means I paid GST. I have just installed both items a few minutes ago, and it was about half the price of the locals.

Last month I bought a projector from the US. I gave the locals first option on that too, none of them were even close.

party_pants said:

we can’t make overseas businesses sign up to pay GST in Australia.

—

If we do then there could be recipricol taxes back on our exporters.

Not that I have any faith in all these free trade agreements.

It’s December, and I’ve jmust turned the gas heater on.

I must be getting soft.

wookiemeister said:

just one military success after another

maybe they should have just attacked the railways instead?

I like playing what if historical scenarios as much as the next person but I don’t delude myself into thinking that without the benefit of hindsight and with that times information, resources and assumptions and the fog of war I could make better decisions than the contemporaries.
As you proved yourself wookie with Afghanistan if placed in a position of leadership in the now, in a situation where you could not rely on hindsight you could not provide any solutions that had not already been tried. Though I guess in 10 years with the advantages of hindsight and settled opinion you will no doubt be on some forum saying, “I would have done this…”.

In Wookieworld Wookie has replaced Churchill as Britains war time minister.

Wookie: Rightyo gentlemen as you know I analysed the situation carefully and concluded that all we have to do is take out Germanys railways, I remember you were all astonished at that time because it was so obvious but that’s why I am the boss. So how is it going, all the railways gone yet?

Chief of Air Force: Not really Sir, our bombers have a hard time hitting specific cities let alone pin point bombing railways.

Wookie: Well all you need is a better sight; do I have to think of everything? But anyway, what about the cannon equipped railway destroying plane? How are they going?

Chief of Air Force: Ummm, we don’t actually have a cannon equipped railway destroying plane Sir.

Wookie: What do you mean? I gave you all the specifications at the last meeting.

Chief of Air Force: That was a crayon drawing Sir, I assumed it was a joke. Ummm if we can build it, all our factories are at capacity, what planes should we stop building?

Wookie: Just build more factories, do I have to think of everything? If you fellows only did what I said instead of thinking of problems we will have this war won by the end of the month. Oh, and make the factories mobile, mount them on wheels so we can move them around so the enemy never knows where they are.

Chief of Air Force: Is that all Sir?

Wookie: I just had another idea for the cannon equipped railway destroying plane, give it extra fuel tanks so it can circle for 24 hours that way we can destroy the railways as they try to rebuild them. Will probably need an extra pilot and toilet as well, maybe a small crew quarters but I will leave that up to you.

Chief of Air Force: Is that all Sir?

Wookie: I think that should do it. Oh and send in my crayons and science team, I have an idea for a tank that can burrow underground and sneak up on the enemy.

Rightyo, so todays agenda items are new sights, factories on wheels, upgraded cannon equipped railway destroying plane, and a burrowing tank. If no one has any more I propose we meet again in two weeks to plan the victory celebrations.

Aquila said:

party_pants said:

It costs money to collect GST on these incoming packages. For smallish packages it costs more to collect GST than the amount they get back. It’s not economical. Simple as that.

Exactly

Not only is the tax passed on to consumers but the extra administration costs increase for the business concerned.
Yes, and this very well paid chairman thinks his idea will “save Aussie retailers”

It is even more important to make this change if he is wrong and it won’t save Aussie retailers.

Skunkworks said:

wookiemeister said:

just one military success after another

maybe they should have just attacked the railways instead?

I like playing what if historical scenarios as much as the next person but I don’t delude myself into thinking that without the benefit of hindsight and with that times information, resources and assumptions and the fog of war I could make better decisions than the contemporaries.
As you proved yourself wookie with Afghanistan if placed in a position of leadership in the now, in a situation where you could not rely on hindsight you could not provide any solutions that had not already been tried. Though I guess in 10 years with the advantages of hindsight and settled opinion you will no doubt be on some forum saying, “I would have done this…”.

you’ll never know if i am right or wrong, i’ll never be placed in control of military forces – i leave the military disasters to the professionals

do you honestly think that dieppe couldn’t be seen as a disaster unless with hindsight

in the falklands they sailed a ship into a warzone with nothing more than a bofor gun to defend it. you don’t need to be an expert to understand that this is a stupid idea.

then again i would never have put land forces onto the falklands, i would have sunk the belgrano and the aircraft carrier and laid siege to the falklands.

i would then have dropped leaflets over the island for the argentinian conscripts to know that their leaders had led them into the equivalent of stalingard and told them to lay down their arms and they would be free to go – no shooting necessary. of course the prelude to this would have been knocking out power and supplies of the miltary.

a stern warning be be issued that any civillians injured or killed by argentinina troops would be viewed badly. in the event of the civillian populace being attacked argentinia would be fair game and all power stations and water plants in argentina would be reduced to rubble, you let them know that any attacks of the civillian populace would be an extremely stupid thing to do.

you could load up missiles and use them to attack these targets. the argentinian airforce could be dealt with in a similar manner at the same time, how does an airforce function when fuel and supplies are no longer available and the airbase has already been under missile attack knocking key components to keep the aircraft flying.

the main game in any war is to roll all up under heaven not to kill the populace which could be harnessed to your needs.

In Wookieworld skunkworks has replaced Churchill as Britains war time minister.

skunkworks: Rightyo gentlemen attack dieppe – it sounds crazy but it will be worth it

Chief of Air Force: good! i’ll get right on it, it will probably be a disaster considering we’ll be going up against a well entrenched , trained military machine that has already driven us off the continent but i’m sure it will be ok.

what was the point of buggersing around trying to fight the germans in every country they were based. just concentrate all of our forces and drive our way straight into the heart of germany.

germany was powered by coal not oil. they used the trains because coal was cheaper and available – oil wasn’t. i’d give them a few weeks if they had to resort to oil and horses to move everything around – no more panzers for you hans – no oil.

in the brilliant world of wars the americans opened up another eastern front and launched a surprise attack on iraq thus stalling and weakening any chance of defeating the taliban

Wookie… nobody cares.

party_pants said:

Wookie… nobody cares.

oh yes i know

it doesn’t stop the stream of the killed and maimed coming back here

don’t worry about it – you’re paying for it

we’d still be at gallipoli if we listened to the professionals

don’t worry about it – you’re paying for it
————-
That is fine with me… I quite like pot plants.