BHP demands corporate welfare.

“In retrospect, it becomes clear, that hindsight is definitely overrated!” – Alfred E. Neuman.

With the ink barely dry on the result of the 2010, “There will be no carbon tax under a …,” election, Marius Kloppers, head honcho at BHP Billiton, friend of the mining tax, and compulsive ‘certainty’ seeker, called for a carbon tax, just to give him a bit of certainty, and to put Australia ahead of the pack.

Marius, for some reason was not able to see any certainty in not having a carbon tax so rather than oppose the idea, he opted to go for it.  This can be likened to sending ships to help your enemy invade so you can be sure of what the future holds.  Now he has changed his mind on how good it is going to be and is demanding corporate welfare tart status:

 JULIA Gillard is under mounting pressure to give exporters a special deal under her proposed carbon tax after BHP Billiton chief executive Marius Kloppers yesterday became the latest business leader to warn that Australia’s go-it-alone approach would be a “dead weight” on high-polluting industries.

Mr. Kloppers, the head of the world’s biggest mining company who last year championed putting a price on carbon, yesterday reinforced the company’s support for action to cut carbon emissions but told The Australian the government’s climate change measures should adopt a “sector-specific” or “mosaic” approach.

His objection in this case is not based on any rational principle other than self-preservation in the face of the results of his own advocacy.  Essentially he still supports the concept of a costly job destroying new tax as long as BHP Billiton has a wide enough space at the deep end of the public trough.

Companies have a habit of going along with government policies while at the same time seeking special deals within legislation in order to insulate themselves from it.  The result is a gravely distorted economy much of which is consumed by the churn of funds out of and back into the it, incurring administration costs along the way.

Kloppers is a symbol of this.

6 thoughts on “BHP demands corporate welfare.

  1. Kloppers is being perfectly reasonable. The whole purpose of government intervention in the first place is to arrange monopolies for cartels by disadvantaging and destroying their competitors. That has been the real aim of socialism from the beginning. This type of legislation is not supposed to be applied to the biggest businesses, it is only for the rest of us. This type of legislation is initially devised with funding from tax exempt, “philanthropic” trust funds created by big corporations. They don’t go along with it, they think it up and the government goes along with it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reece_Committee
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tax-exempt_foundations

  2. BHP is already getting corporate welfare. Our resources allocation system is not some evenly-balanced version of natural law. Rather it favors the deepest pockets. That would be offensive enough. But one must realize that the deepest pockets don’t belong to BHP. The deepest pockets belong to the Beijing communists. Hence the flow of ownership and value will go from the ground, through to the banks on the one hand and the inspiring small-scale mining entrepreneurs, on the other. And then more to the banks and onto the bigshot local resource companies like Rio Tinto and BHP. And then onto the wily patriachs of our only strategic threat.

    That would be the natural way of things. The flow of our gear through the small (but ultimately doomed) entrepreneurs, to the bigshots, and on to foreigners. We must never pretend that the current situation is capitalist perfection. Its hardly the sort of thing a band of brothers could have expected from the Klondike rush.

  3. The 50+ aged small businessmen of this party are way too humble. They haven’t caught an even break in their life and they are out their running their act, despite all the odds, in total harmony with the interests of the most humble Australians. Bigshoteria can look after itself. And we have to stop looking at bigshot executives as being superior examples of the species commensurate with their income. I’ve been in corporate finance, and I’ve seen some of these guys. Really the people that have impressed me were the small businessmen I’ve had brief acquaintance with in the LDP.

Comments are closed.