Re: No speedrail, Badgerys creek or Kurnell

[mauried@tpg.com.au (Maurie Daly)]

On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 04:22:23 GMT, "Dave Proctor"
<daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote:

>"David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
>IsBZ5.222$Le6.1203@news0.optus.net.au">news:IsBZ5.222$Le6.1203@news0.optus.net.au...
>> Dave Proctor (daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au) wrote:
>> > "david" <david@gwmail.nmit.vic.edu.au> wrote in message
>> > 3A36D88F.4E6E8D0C@gwmail.nmit.vic.edu.au">news:3A36D88F.4E6E8D0C@gwmail.nmit.vic.edu.au...
>>
>> > > ps wasn't the project  privetly funded to a extent that they wanted
>the
>> > > extra funds from the government - and that was what they rejected ?
>>
>> > It was going to be privately funded, but with tax concessions from the
>> > government. This would not have involved any outlay by the government,
>> > merely a non-receipt of some taxation revenues.
>>
>> Which would have been recouped in other ways such as employment. The
>> government formula for calculating returns on Commonwealth money only
>> includes direct financial returns, and does not take into account social
>> returns or avoiding having to spend money elsewhere.
>
>And the silly thing is, they don't think it through properly anyway. "Let'
>see, they want us to gorego $100 million in income tax on their projected
>profits for 20 years. We can't have that, so we won't allow the project to
>go ahead." totally forgetting that if the project doesn't go ahead, they
>won't get thoat tax income anyway.
>
>(Note, figures made up for the sake of example).
>
>Dave
>
>
Why doesnt Speedrail simply go ahead without the tax concessions?

MD