SA Footy

Its been suggested that there may need to be a levy on all residents of Australia to provide the funds to pay for the damages in the Qld floods. My suggestion is that we should use the funds stored up in the Save the River Murray levy to pay the levy on behalf of all South Australians that paid into it - a fund which has never been actually used for anything. Put the funds to good use, in return for the river having been filled to capacity to a far better state than it was prior to the levy and with the Desalination plant coming on line, discontinue the levy as it is no longer required. I would only reinstate the levy when its also paid in Vic and NSW where the Murray also is fed into.

Thoughts?

Should use the save the murray tax to pay for the stupid >please don't avoid the swear filter< desalination plant.

Good idea, then we'll have it paid off in 1,000 years or so ...

dedja wrote:Good idea, then we'll have it paid off in 1,000 years or so ...

I'd rather see it destroyed than paid for in the first place.

Drop Bear wrote:

dedja wrote:Good idea, then we'll have it paid off in 1,000 years or so ...

I'd rather see it destroyed than paid for in the first place.

Well at least then it won't have the chance to destroy entire marine ecosystems...

Quichey wrote:

Drop Bear wrote:

dedja wrote:Good idea, then we'll have it paid off in 1,000 years or so ...

I'd rather see it destroyed than paid for in the first place.

Well at least then it won't have the chance to destroy entire marine ecosystems...

Exactly. Anyway, that's a whole other thread!

Sojourner wrote:...a fund which has never been actually used for anything.

Sojourner the Save the River Murray Levy fund has been used for a range of purposes over the years. Details can be found here

Sojourner wrote:...we should use the funds stored up in the Save the River Murray levy

The financial statements for the fund that can be found here show that the levy funds (approx. $18.5million annually) have, more or less, been spent in full over the seven years of its' operation.

fish, you're going to have to stop this nasty habit of proving people wrong with factual information.

This forum only exists on perceptions, not facts

redandblack wrote:fish, you're going to have to stop this nasty habit of proving people wrong with factual information.

This forum only exists on perceptions, not facts

Apologies from the original quote, its repeated from what I heard elsewhere!

Sojourner wrote:Apologies from the original quote, its repeated from what I heard elsewhere!

No worries Sojourner - was it a News Ltd. publication by any chance?

Are 5AA News Ltd?

5AA are actually more News Ltd than News Ltd .They are the like the extreme wing

queensland mps said the water was theirs and it had nothing to do with s.a not that long ago so maybe qld should pay for the damage their water created themselves

Bad taste there BS ... no-one deserves a tragedy like that.

dedja wrote:Bad taste there BS ... no-one deserves a tragedy like that.

That they don't. But the problem with something like this happening is there is always someone it'll come back and bite on the arse.

Looks like a new flood levy will be announced tomorrow.

I went to the levy but the levy was dry.
But, up here it won't be for long

ooooppps wrong levy.

Here's a suggestion for the Flood Levy: Gillard can bend over while I shove the bill up her jacksy.

I have already donated an amount of money to the QLD flood appeal and I continually toss loose change into the collection boxes at supermarket checkouts, etc. Now I'm told that I'm going to have more money taxed out of me for the purpose?!? Had I suspected that the government was going to make donation involuntary, then I would not have voluntarily given up my readies in the first place. I will certainly not be parting with any more loose change. Sod 'em.

I hope it's speed camera fines up 10% and ciggies up 20%.