"So only people with the money to buy shares in the first place should be entitled to a share of the super profits?"
Yes indeed. If I don't buy a ticket in tattslotto I don't expect the winner to give me a share of their winnings.
The shareholders who participated in the initial purchase of shares and those who sold their shares on to others to continue to hold the risk should benefit from that risk. Companies already pay royalties to the government as payment for their risk. The companies are also subject to the vagaries of the world markets with respect to prices for minerals - doing well when prices are up, and not doing so well when prices are down. Not that long ago gold was $250.00 an ounce, when at the same time it cost over $400.00 an ounce to mine it. Gold companies were folding left, right and centre. Will the government come to the aid of companies when the mineral prices fall and hand back those super profits? I doubt it.
The govt will be looking for the next best thing to bleed - that is if it survives, which I very much doubt this one will beyond the next election.
China is slowing in its demand, perhaps there will be less profit to share to this greedy government, who, like a petulant child, kicks the parent who gives it sustenance, attempting to divert criticism of its taxes onto a select few wealthy individuals, in spite of the fact that those individuals took enormous risk and got lucky. These same individuals pay enormous taxes on behalf of their employees by way of income tax, superannuation, etc.
Indeed many people don't have the nerve to take risks, but they then shouldn't sit back and demand a share from those who do.
The minerals tax will not give back to the unsuccessful miners/shareholders, hence my analogy of the property developer who refused to share in the 'half share of the losses'.
