Expect Pain on Tuesday
- Thread starter coastymike
- Start date
Interesting comment Bill. The baby bonus was originally intended to encourage higher earning women to have children by lessening the impact of losing their high incomes. So actually, what you say makes sense.
And how's this for irony. All the people who say high income earners shouldnt get the baby bonus, ALSO say that the govt should chip in for paid maternity leave.
But...wouldnt THAT end up giving higher income earners MORE anyway? Maybe they could make it fairer by giving everyone the SAME amount of paid maternity leave. Hang on, that sound a bit like the baby bonus.
<insert a picture of a dog chasing its tail here>
And how's this for irony. All the people who say high income earners shouldnt get the baby bonus, ALSO say that the govt should chip in for paid maternity leave.
But...wouldnt THAT end up giving higher income earners MORE anyway? Maybe they could make it fairer by giving everyone the SAME amount of paid maternity leave. Hang on, that sound a bit like the baby bonus.
<insert a picture of a dog chasing its tail here>
The explanation from Lindsay Tanner was that it would help fight inflation
And he is the Finance Minster. I wish they just be honest and say, "we want the extra revenue".As what underpins this policy direction, this is not untypical of the left side of politics in this country and their inability to look beyond class and old rhetoric when it comes to discussing money and finances.
We constantly hear Swan et al constantly referring to the "rich" in all pre-budget discussions, leaks.
Old labels, old policies, same ALP
Alex,
Natural selection is about survival of the 'fittest', which in human terms can/could include smartest.
I believe that with the advent of modern medicine, that human evolution will slow down, (we are keeping alive those who would have died, and there is a tendency for more procreation in the lower socio economic and lower IQ group), therefore to enhance humanity we must act.
OK, now I am in real trouble with the politically correct.
I desperately need that TIC smilie now.
bye
Natural selection is about survival of the 'fittest', which in human terms can/could include smartest.
I believe that with the advent of modern medicine, that human evolution will slow down, (we are keeping alive those who would have died, and there is a tendency for more procreation in the lower socio economic and lower IQ group), therefore to enhance humanity we must act.
OK, now I am in real trouble with the politically correct.
I desperately need that TIC smilie now.
bye
Since when does making things more expensive help reduce inflation.
I agree. My point was that cutting CGT discounts would account for far more than the $8 billion worth of savings the article mentions all by itself without any other cuts, hence it did not imply the CGT discount would be cut.
If it was, it would probably have a far greater negative impact on the share market and by extension, on super funds. Which would be a public relations nightmare with current volatility. And end up with a 30+ billion surplus, which the public would expect to be spent at least in part, inflation fears or not. Most wouldn't understand why some of it couldn't be invested in much needed infrastructure at least...
Ahhh, Tubs, its the new orthdoxy that Australia embraced in November 2007. The "root & branch" revision of economics 101 if you like.
Wonder how much extra admin, manpower, and time it will take to determine who does and doesn't get the bonus? Perhaps our public servants will do this extra work out of the goodness of their hearts without expecting to be paid - otherwise, there goes a lot of the saving.
Uh, dude, you do realise that you're obliged to follow the same tax laws as the rest of us, no matter who you voted for? Did they create a new Liberal Party Republic when I wasn't looking? If we get taxed over and over, so do you. If the people who voted labour are fools, you're being dragged along by the fools.
You're a salary employee with no IPs. You get taxed the MOST, mate.
Alex
Am I arguing about that? I live in the same country as you, we follow the same rules.
Im saying that at least the tax system wouldn't have changed as much with Liberals...
I have more than one income, one through my main salary, the other through my ABN...
Why wasting time to argue here
1. Why are we wasting time to argue Yes or No here?
2. Wait and sleep well until tomorrow to see what it is. Your sleepless and complain will not change K R and W S mind.
3. If it does chagne the CGT or NG, a) if you are happy with the change, stay where you are; b) if you are not happy, positive people like Alexlee can give you good counselling; or we organize a strike to block parliment house, send a stripper to climb into K R house and W S house. We ask for election run-off, maybe Howard could be put in charge again.
4. good luck
1. Why are we wasting time to argue Yes or No here?
2. Wait and sleep well until tomorrow to see what it is. Your sleepless and complain will not change K R and W S mind.
3. If it does chagne the CGT or NG, a) if you are happy with the change, stay where you are; b) if you are not happy, positive people like Alexlee can give you good counselling; or we organize a strike to block parliment house, send a stripper to climb into K R house and W S house. We ask for election run-off, maybe Howard could be put in charge again.
4. good luck
Well, yes and no. Different rules apply to different people in different situations. For example, I can claim depreciation on my IPs. I can shift dividend income to my spouse and pay no tax on it. I can also package my IP interest into my salary and divert most of my super payments into my own pocket instead.
Alex
Yes, I see what you're saying. I disagree with the articles use of the word 'savings' or 'forgone revenue'. IMO it should be called 'spending' or even 'an investment' as it saves money.
It wouldn't have to be an all or nothing CGT cut, they could just increase the eligibility period from 12 months to 3 years for example.
Just remind me, who was it that bought in the GST ??? I'd call that a fairly big tax change, you mean they are planning something bigger!!!
A great tax IMO. Not many can escape this one, not even tourists. Increasing that would be a good way to curb inflation. Don't think anyone has the guts to do it though.
RE: the baby bonus. Maybe each mum could be entitled to a tax deduction of two months pay? That way it's the same for all and encourages the high income working women. Not the easiest thing to administer though. I don't want it to be a 'bogan bonus' either (wow Sharlene, think how many ringtones you can get for $5000!).
In the Army Reserve we had a similar thing. They wanted to encourage employers to allow their employees take time off for military service. Kinda didn't make sense when my employer offered $550 per week I was away when my employer had to hire a consultant at $1200 per day to cover for me, but it least it was a start and no doubt worked for many.
