Today's new wealth tax

[shiftyphil]

I for one, support this levy. The money will go to help people who need it desperately. Frankly, I've lost faith in a lot of people in this thread. Y'all are shameless, greedy and totally self centred.

Actually, the levy money will go to roads and railways (and whatever other infrastructure) that desperately need it.

She just got confused when told we needed a bigger levy for the Queensland floods

Only caught part of it on the news but there was talk of the government cutting back on infrastructure spending and environmental projects (including the solar rebates) also?

~$6 billion to repair all damaged infrastructure, most of it in Qld, but at least $1b for Vic

$1.8b from the levy
$2.8b from budget cuts
$1b from budget delays

For those stating 'this levy is here to stay', the legislation will have a sunset clause in it, if passed (still needs indie/green support), it will be illegal for the government to collect any of the levy beyond the intended 1 year period, just like all the other increases in the medicare levy have had sunset clauses.

yes they could increase this period to whatever they like, they are the government, but it would require a change in the law, passed by the independants/greens under scrutiny from the opposition, is a extension likely to happen, i think not.

The problem is, it's the independents (well, some of them anyway) who want a permanent fund set up.

 

[shiftyphil]

Exactly, Liberals govt. might have created new levies. But didn't they pay off previous Labour government debts, bring the budget to surplus,

Easy if you have a resources boom instead of a worldwide recession.

create a future fund with plenty of money

By selling an existing asset. Labor managed to put money aside into infrastructure funds out of revenue.

and reduce income tax rates in their final years?? Isn't this also a fact?

Labor reduced income tax as well. What have the Libs done that was actually different?

(PS: I know labour govt also gave tax cuts in 08-09 but that was already budgeted by the previous liberal govt.)

and 09-10, and 10-11.

 

[Indifference]

Well, if welfare payments weren't a 'birthright" and we all had some serious motivation to contribute to society, not only would the government reap higher income tax revenues, but the expenditure would also decrease proportionately... Better policies, not higher taxes.

I'm 100% behind the country paying to rebuild, but it is the manner in which our poor political leadership resolves such matters, that really concerns me...

 

[w0nnie]

The problem is, it's the independents (well, some of them anyway) who want a permanent fund set up.

whilst that may be true, this particular piece of legislation has a sunset clause and people stating 'its here to stay' are just ignoring the facts.

as for a permanent fund, which would be different beast (and something that opponents of the levy are essentially asking for, saving for a VERY rainy day), that may well eventuate as part of the horse trading required to pass the levy.

 

[oracle]

Easy if you have a resources boom instead of a worldwide recession.


By selling an existing asset. Labor managed to put money aside into infrastructure funds out of revenue.


Labor reduced income tax as well. What have the Libs done that was actually different?

and 09-10, and 10-11.

Currently, we have some of the best terms of trade we have ever had. Resources boom is still on and better than when the liberals were in power. What do we have, NO budget surplus, increased taxes. What have we got to show for the spending of money Liberals saved up? Nothing. Atleast, with Liberal govt. we got budget surpluses. Labour govt. cannot save. All they know is spend any savings, rack up huge debts, and tax the rich at every opportunity they get. This is a fact!

Yes, the 09-10 and 10-11 income tax cuts were already planned and budgeted for during the last budget presented by Costello. All Labour did was honour it since it was already budgeted they didn't have to do anyting. For them they had no option but to match what the Liberals promised at the time of election campaign.

If you reckon Labour did a fantastic job in the previous term why did they get less seats then Liberals? Obviously, I must be missing something here

Nobody minds helping people in need. That is why the rich people pay a higher rate of income taxes so that the extra money can be used by governments to do social welfare. People get frustrated when they see government mismanaging the tax money and start acting like it's their birth right to tax the rich everytime they are short of cash due to their lack of planning.

Cheers,
Oracle.

 

[shiftyphil]

Currently, we have some of the best terms of trade we have ever had. Resources boom is still on and better than when the liberals were in power. What do we have, NO budget surplus, increased taxes. What have we got to show for the spending of money Liberals saved up? Nothing.

What money saved? We still have the future fund... what else was there?

To show for it, we have one of the strongest economies in the developed world, while the US/Europe are struggling.

What increased taxes? Income tax is probably dropping for most people more than this (temporary) levy is putting it up.

 

[bluestorm]

My god shiftyphil. I'm not going to spend time going into all the details of where you are wrong, but you clearly show your complete lack of economic understanding with the statements above.

Cheers.

 

[Indifference]

What money saved? We still have the future fund... what else was there?

To show for it, we have one of the strongest economies in the developed world, while the US/Europe are struggling.

What increased taxes? Income tax is probably dropping for most people more than this (temporary) levy is putting it up.

Resources tax, Alcohol taxes (Ie. pre-mix), Car industry taxes (Ie luxury car tax now 33% up from 25% in '08)....

I think the point being made was that additional taxes have been creeping in, we are in a strong economic position nationally, but the government is running a deficit and now can't even manage a single crisis without a levy...

If we can't balance the books now, with the economy running strong, then if the economy softens in a couple of years, what hope have we got? That's the riddle....

 

[oracle]

To show for it, we have one of the strongest economies in the developed world, while the US/Europe are struggling.

Oh please, unless you can prove to me they did something special apart from spending money they didn't save up. Anyone can spend money, US and Europe spend 100 times more money then we did. It didn't save them. What is important is how the economy was managed for the past decade, government debt position and the financial regulation laws. Again, Labour had nothing to do with it.

Also, Asian economies recovered pretty quickly which benefited Australia. Again, Labour had nothing to do with it. So to me Labour government needs to still prove it can manage the economy better than Liberal without taxing the rich all the time. So far from what I have seen they can only manage to spend and increase taxes(RSPT, increase medicare threshold for high income earner, increase taxes on alcohol/cigarettes).

Cheers,
Oracle.

 

[shiftyphil]

increase medicare threshold for high income earner,

That's a tax decrease...

 

[Rixter]

That's a tax decrease...

Yeah isnt it good. They cant tax the top end earners, because thats not where the masses lay. The tax laws are written by the wealthy for the wealthy

Get a grip ppl. Its not a big outlay and it helps get the country going again. Stop your whinging, starting focusing on what you do have instead of what you dont and your life will take on a whole new perspective and appreciation for the better!

 

[shiftyphil]

Yeah isnt it good.

Well, it saved me some money. Certainly shouldn't be in a list of tax increases.

 

[FormerLurker]

I watched Anthony Bourdain tonight. Coincidentally, he was in New Orleans two years after Katrina. To actually see a town left for dead by the Government like NO was made me think about people in this thread complaining about paying cents on the dollar to help people who were affected by the floods... caliing it 'disgusting'. Well.... y'all need to take a serious look at yourselves. Pretty pathetic.

To whip out a tired, overused cliche: 'pretty un-Australian'.

Bit harsh Mark - I've donated to the flood appeal and had no problem doing so, what I do have a problem doing is being forced to pay a new tax to provide funds for something that my government (and I will happily add the former Liberal government into that statement with current Labor) should have planned for and and budgeted for.

In summary I'm not against charitably helping my fellow Australians I'm against inept governments.

 

[shiftyphil]

can't even manage a single crisis without a levy...

So considering Howard needed at least 6 different levies during his time, you no longer believe he was the greatest economic manager we have ever had?

If we can't balance the books now, with the economy running strong, then if the economy softens in a couple of years, what hope have we got? That's the riddle....

With the one-off stimulus spending gone, should be pretty easy. If not, I'll be among those complaining.

 

[sash]

Geez.....people have become a nation of wingers.....a 0.5% tax increases...and everyone whinges. Remember it only applies to people who earn more than 50k.

Our tax rates have gone down to the point now they are now:
0-6k - 0%
6k- 37k - 15%
37k - 80k - 30%
80k - 180k - 37%
180k plus - 45%

...and a miedicare levy of 1.5%

Whoopy do....other developed countries pay more when state and other deductions are included.

So cop it sweet....and get on with it.....!!!

 

[shiftyphil]

Bit harsh Mark - I've donated to the flood appeal and had no problem doing so, what I do have a problem doing is being forced to pay a new tax to provide funds for something that my government (and I will happily add the former Liberal government into that statement with current Labor) should have planned for and and budgeted for.

It's not possible to budget precisely for an unpredictable event. They either take too much, and needlessly starve the economy, or too little and need a temporary levy anyway.

What is the problem with leaving the money circulating in the economy until it is needed?

 

[Token Funder]

Geez.....people have become a nation of wingers.....a 0.5% tax increases...and everyone whinges. Remember it only applies to people who earn more than 50k.

Our tax rates have gone down to the point now they are now:
0-6k - 0%
6k- 37k - 15%
37k - 80k - 30%
80k - 180k - 37%
180k plus - 45%

...and a miedicare levy of 1.5%

Whoopy do....other developed countries pay more when state and other deductions are included.

So cop it sweet....and get on with it.....!!!

Indeed.

Fortunately, I suspect the "debate" here is not fully representative of the Australian community. A forum dedicated to an investment approach that has tax minimisation at its core, is unlikely to be populated from base to apex with people who value the societal and economic value of a decent taxation system.

And let's remind ourselves of the fact that Australia is a low tax country - a quite remarkable outcome when you consider that we provide much of the social support of the northern European countries but manage to do so with a tax base proportionally not much higher than the US; which is generally happy to leave the disadvantaged languishing at the bottom of the economic heap.

Like most Western nations we simply have the view - and are keen only to support politicians who will play to same - that all the government benefits and largesse we receive are fair and reasonable ...as long as someone else is paying for them.

For example, other tax payers contributing to my costs of holding a loss producing housing asset so that I might make a capital gain to be taxed at a discount...a good thing for everyone. Me contributing to rebuilding roads, bridges and railways destroyed by flood...an outrageous impost that will lead to the collapse of civilisation as we know it.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Bit harsh Mark

No it isn't. So you donated some money - big deal. You just donated a little bit more. If you're that upset about it, go to the charity that you gave money to and ask for your 10 bucks back.

 

[Mr. Fabulous]

Like most Western nations we simply have the view - and are keen only to support politicians who will play to same - that all the government benefits and largesse we receive are fair and reasonable ...as long as someone else is paying for them.

Aside from Thorpey's post, this is the best entry in this thread.

 

[tubs]

What I don't get is that first Kevin, then Julia said ...
Climate change is real and
We need to expect more extreme weather events

So if they expected these things to happen, why didn't they budget for them?