Jump to content
Melbourne Football

A-League News Thread


mus-28
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, n i k o said:

UN eyes tax on football tickets, Uber fares to raise funds for humanitarian aid

Updated about 3 hours ago

A $21 billion shortfall in global humanitarian aid could be addressed by tapping into innovative sources of finance, like smartphone apps, the football industry and wealthy Islamic donors, a United Nations panel of experts says.

Key points:

  • Micro-levies on 'mass-volume' transactions considered, like air travel and football games
  • Muslim alms-giving funds eyed, worth at least $300 billion each year
  • Funds already raised from tax on airline tickets to fight AIDS, malaria

In a new report, Too important to fail: Addressing the humanitarian financing gap, the nine panellists said despite rising global wealth, the "outdated" aid system had been unable to meet all the world's needs, including those stemming from financial crises, natural disasters and violent extremism.

The price tag for global UN aid efforts skyrocketed from $3 billion in 2000 to $35.7 billion last year, according to the experts.

Last year, a funding shortfall forced UN agencies to cut food rations to 1.6 million Syrians living in refugee camps, a move now seen as having partly triggered the mass exodus of refugees to Europe.

"The world has never been so generous ... and yet never has our generosity been so insufficient," said European Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva, who co-chaired the panel with Malaysia's Sultan Nazrin Shah.

She said helping victims of catastrophe and war was "morally right and also in our own self-interest, as the [Syrian] migrant crisis has shown".

Among the ideas discussed in the report were micro-payments levied on so-called "mass volume" transactions, such as airline tickets, said Ms Georgieva, adding that such schemes already existed.

For example, the UN's global health initiative UNITAID persuaded 10 countries to impose a small tax on airline tickets to raise funds to fight malaria and AIDS.

Ahead of the report's publication, Ms Georgieva said the panel had made initial contact with the world football governing body FIFA and had considered how funds might be generated from a "global luxury tax" or small levies on entertainment purchases or taxi rides, for example on users of the Uber smartphone app.

"Five cents, that level of micro levy on a massive volume, we think is possible," said the former World Bank economist.

However, she said the panel, which included banking executives, civil society leaders and government ministers, had not come to a consensus on specific proposals, with some of them being "dead against taxation".

Plan floated to tap into Islamic social finance

Another option proposed by the report is to tap into the billions generated annually in the Muslim world from alms-giving, or "zakat". 

Those donations amount to between $338 billion and $816 billion annually, according to Islamic Development Bank estimates quoted by the report. 

Just one percent of "zakat" would make an enormous difference in global funding, it added.

Financial contracts known as social impact bonds, which aim to offer return for investors when pre-agreed social outcomes are achieved, could also be more widely used in disaster-prone regions, the report noted.

 

So what is wrong with providing actual aid (water, food, building material etc.) that will be directly distributed to these countries that need assistance. I wouldn't trust the UN or anyone to actually use every cent for its desired purpose. What's everyone else's opinion on part of your membership going to the UN? 

No. Let the member nation governments raise more taxes in which ever way they see fit and then provide aid either directly or through the UN. Better yet, let the West pull out altogether from the Middle East and let things sort themselves out and then return with aid. As an example, the UN was involved in the Sri Lankan civil war for over 30 years until the Sri Lankan government threw them out and an all out war for 3 months brought it to an end. The Tamil Tigers were wiped out and their terrorist activities around the world ceased altogether. Then the UN went back in with some aid. Sorting out the wars in the Middle East will reduce a lot of the need for foreign aid, freeing funds for things like malaria control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm totally against it.

Quickly here's why:

1. I already pay taxes, the cretins in charge of this country use them to "not build tunnels", clearly if we can afford to waste money like that we have plenty to give in aid already.

2. I already give. It goes where I think it will help, my choice.

3. I have experience with one "developing" country. The place wouldn't need any aid if it wasn't run by corrupt incompetent mother-fuckers. 

4. I can't imagine a worse choice to run an aid programme then the UN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sloppy Stoppage Time Alert

Apparently a Chinese businessman made an approach for Newcastle, would be great if they could turn something up.

Sadly, in exchange of this information I now have to listen to "EVERYONE IN THE A-LEAGUE APART FROM KEVIN MUSCAT AND GRAHAM ARNOLD ARE AWFUL ASD ASDASDASDASDASDSDASD"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...but John van’t Schip’s side have conceded a whopping 16 goals in their last nine outings.....City fans will jump up and down, pointing to the 25 goals their side scored in those games."

Who's jumping up and down? A bit of credit would be good that we can realistically see the shortfalls of our team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, n i k o said:

"...but John van’t Schip’s side have conceded a whopping 16 goals in their last nine outings.....City fans will jump up and down, pointing to the 25 goals their side scored in those games."

Who's jumping up and down? A bit of credit would be good that we can realistically see the shortfalls of our team. 

wait so 16 is a "whopping" amount, yet he passes off 25 for as not being that good..

take last week away (3 first choice CB's out virtually) and you have 23 for and 12 against.. GD of +11 in 8 games is nothing to scoff at. 

Plus we know that there is short comings in defence, and signing a Socceroos defender will help fix that. what a shit article haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MHFCRC said:

wait so 16 is a "whopping" amount, yet he passes off 25 for as not being that good..

take last week away (3 first choice CB's out virtually) and you have 23 for and 12 against.. GD of +11 in 8 games is nothing to scoff at. 

Plus we know that there is short comings in defence, and signing a Socceroos defender will help fix that. what a shit article haha

Yep basically, that's what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion on the possibility of a TV deal (and how it wasn't ever likely to change hands from SBS in this current cycle), as well as the missed opportunity to give Channel 10 an introduction to the possibility of coverage by consistently giving the rights to the one off matches to Seven, which is unlikely to make a serious bid for the Football due to its other commitments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
1 hour ago, jw1739 said:

Don't know where to put this, but it's worth a read. Very poor ratings for the A-League.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-03/fact-check-does-womens-big-bash-league-outrate-the-a-league/7253846

Will need to reread a couple of times to fully interpret all aspects but on the face of it the article does show where the game is at commercially.  

What sticks out is the lack of product free to air; in part thanks to SBS but more so thanks to a lack of drive from FFA.

Seems like there is no desire to truly push greater public awareness of the a league product, thereby cutting away at commercial revenue (broadcasting, sponsorship or otherwise).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 4 April 2016 at 10:33 AM, mattyh001 said:

Will need to reread a couple of times to fully interpret all aspects but on the face of it the article does show where the game is at commercially.  

What sticks out is the lack of product free to air; in part thanks to SBS but more so thanks to a lack of drive from FFA.

Seems like there is no desire to truly push greater public awareness of the a league product, thereby cutting away at commercial revenue (broadcasting, sponsorship or otherwise).

Simon Hill was talking this morning about how the FFA taking over the Jets probably had a bit to do with the lack of promotion. Make of that what you will, just thought I'd mention it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thisphantomfortress said:

A bit cynical TBH. It seems FFA comes out with some bold new plan or initiative about every three months. I just don't know that it has the money, manpower or expertise to deliver tangible outcomes from any of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strongly oppose moving football matches to AFL grounds - for many spectators the view of the match is shithouse. Also I reckon playing derbies early in the season is a waste - let the clubs concerned build up some momentum first (if they're going to).
IMO an important thing is to get a more regular fixture and sensible kick-off times, so that people can get into a pattern of attendance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Strongly oppose moving football matches to AFL grounds - for many spectators the view of the match is shithouse. Also I reckon playing derbies early in the season is a waste - let the clubs concerned build up some momentum first (if they're going to).
IMO an important thing is to get a more regular fixture and sensible kick-off times, so that people can get into a pattern of attendance.

Hmm Round 3 or 4 is about right I reckon. Definitely shouldn't be first home game though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Can guarentee derby will be round 2 this season, green line please.

I honestly wouldn't go to a game at the 'G. Etihad is bad enough

Another reason that the membership prices shouldn't have increased. We only have one home derby next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So...three A-League clubs are now wholly owned by overseas interests:
Melbourne City owned by Manchester City/City Football Group (United Arab Emirates);
Brisbane Roar owned by the Bakrie Group (Indonesia);
Newcastle Jets owned by the Ledman Group (China).

Where to now for the league?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14 June 2016 at 3:25 PM, jw1739 said:

So...three A-League clubs are now wholly owned by overseas interests:
Melbourne City owned by Manchester City/City Football Group (United Arab Emirates);
Brisbane Roar owned by the Bakrie Group (Indonesia);
Newcastle Jets owned by the Ledman Group (China).

Where to now for the league?

Aren't Sydney owned by that Russian fella?

isnt Brisbane in the process of becoming Australian owned?

with the departure of the Bakries we are the only KFC look alike.

Edited by Shahanga
Brisbane update
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...