Today's new wealth tax

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 minimisationat it's 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 nothern 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 discounted...a good thing for everyone. Me contributing to rebuilding roads, bridges and railways destroyed by flodo...an outrageous impost that will lead to the collapse of civilisation as we know it. :rolleyes:

Nice post - love the perspective :)
 
No one is saying we should not pay the taxes. What we are saying is that due to Labor waste and ineptitude, we'll unnecessarily have to pay a lot more taxes than would have otherwise been the case.
 
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 minimisationat it's core, is unlikely to be populated from base to apex with people who value the societal and economic value of a decent taxation system.

Well I guess the flipside to this statement is, who here really wants to be the 'masses'? If you do, why bother surfing an investment forum?
 
I was probably a wee uni student, or graduate then, so didn't care. "Flood" tax - 1% increase in Medicare levy! Costs me $350 :mad:
Everyone should have to pay (not just the "rich" workers). Damn bludging $50K workers get off scott free again (after they got their $900 handouts).

apparently the amount to rebuild QLD, Vic, NSW and Canarvo in close to $50bil.

so if 10.5mil workers in Australia get taxed an average $275 extra, that's 2.88 BILLION dollars.

50 / 2.88 = 17.4 - round up to 18 years.

so that tax will remain in place for 18 years if the average payment is $275 as previously calculated.

yeah - one year my bum.
 
No one is saying we should not pay the taxes. What we are saying is that due to Labor waste and ineptitude, we'll unnecessarily have to pay a lot more taxes than would have otherwise been the case.

That's only part of the story. What about the wasteful spending on middle class welfare, like Family Tax Benefit Part B and the ridiculous Mature Age Workers Offset?

Sure, the Howard govt had the money in the bank to waste, but what if they had put some more away for a rainy day, instead of the spendathons Howard went on in 2001 and 2004.

Both parties waste money in their chosen areas. They are as bad as each other.
 
No one is saying we should not pay the taxes. What we are saying is that due to Labor waste and ineptitude, we'll unnecessarily have to pay a lot more taxes than would have otherwise been the case.

And $50 for the YEAR for the average worker is hardly a huge amount of tax. Stop making mountains out of molehills.
 
Dumb, dumb policy. So in effect this will

(a) dry up donations to the charities on the ground as people will not donate now they are being taxed for it.
(b) delay the money that people would have given till after end of FY2012
(c) make people hesitant to donate to events such as these in the future because they will be expecting another tax coming for it.
(d) will damage charities whom are vastly more efficient at delivering this service than any govt ever will be- regardless of which side is in power.

Smart policy would have been (assuming we had to have a levy which IMHO is not needed and only due to the financial and managerial incompetance of this govt and the $Billions wasted in their 4 yrs of existence)- there will be a levy.
Any donations made now to recognised charities will be automatically given a full franking credit against the levy imposed next financial year.

At least then people would have choice as to how and when they help.
I was ready to donate $1000 now and it would have been matched by the company I work for. Now they will get about $1500 from me by the end of FY2012 and i wont donate to a charity again in this type of event until a levy has been ruled out.
 
That's only part of the story. What about the wasteful spending on middle class welfare, like Family Tax Benefit Part B and the ridiculous Mature Age Workers Offset?

Sure, the Howard govt had the money in the bank to waste, but what if they had put some more away for a rainy day, instead of the spendathons Howard went on in 2001 and 2004.

Both parties waste money in their chosen areas. They are as bad as each other.

i think the issues is that many people think having money in the bank (a budget surplus) is a good thing.

I think it's just as bad as a deficit.

govt is a non-profit organisation. when your money sits in treasury's coffers, it's YOUR taxes doing sweet FA.

the howard years saw 20bil of our taxes just sitting there, doing nothing to put cops on the street, beds in hospitals, money in nurses pay packets, teachers in front of kids, kids in front of computers.

that is borderline theft.

however, for labor to run up a deficit of OVER 50bil is just unacceptable. that's spending with no regards to consequences.

if a govt has a reserve fund of $5bil, i wouldn't consider that excessive - i'd consider that smart, and taxes spent. same as if we were $5bil in deficit, i wouldn't think that was a bad thing, either.

why can't these numpties just get it right?
 
Well I guess the flipside to this statement is, who here really wants to be the 'masses'? If you do, why bother surfing an investment forum?

I have a different perspective in that I know that by any objective measure my financial position is very different to that of most Australians. I have a fairly substantial PPOR that I own freehold, no other debts, cash in the bank and a good job that pays me multiples of the average wage.

I know I've got it good and am prepared to accept that if I want the benefits of a socially and economically stable environment, I need to make a contribution.

Perhaps that's an odd perspective these days.

As an aside, what's with the sneer about "masses". Have the majority of Australian's offended you somehow?
 
given the drunken sailor spending by both sides in the last few elections, if we had budgeted for natural disasters* and had the money put away, it would have been got at by policy makers on both sides and used to buy votes.


*how we budget for what is regarded as australia's worst natural diaster, i dont know, its not like you look up your calendar and filter appointments by 'natural disaster', oh, got a flood on next week ;)
 
Ah absolutely agree. Watch donations plummet next time. Not to mention I have mixed feelings about subsidising people who choose risky areas for homes.

Which sadly sort of goes to show, we don't really care.......

We're prepared to punish innconet people in need dueto show the government what we think...

That's how mature and grown up and compassionate we are


I think you are wrong skater, we are a pretty average mob at best.......
 
the howard years saw 20bil of our taxes just sitting there, doing nothing to put cops on the street, beds in hospitals, money in nurses pay packets, teachers in front of kids, kids in front of computers.

that is borderline theft.

Ahh yes Aaron. The typical list comes out. You do realise that Police, Hospitals, Nurses, Schools, Teachers, are ALL State government responsibilities, not federal, don't you. That's why there is a different system in each state.

But it's the line that always gets brought up by the Labor voters. If you have an issue with any of these, then I suggest you don't vote State Labor :rolleyes:
 
i think the issues is that many people think having money in the bank (a budget surplus) is a good thing.

I think it's just as bad as a deficit.

govt is a non-profit organisation. when your money sits in treasury's coffers, it's YOUR taxes doing sweet FA.

the howard years saw 20bil of our taxes just sitting there, doing nothing to put cops on the street, beds in hospitals, money in nurses pay packets, teachers in front of kids, kids in front of computers.

that is borderline theft.

however, for labor to run up a deficit of OVER 50bil is just unacceptable. that's spending with no regards to consequences.

if a govt has a reserve fund of $5bil, i wouldn't consider that excessive - i'd consider that smart, and taxes spent. same as if we were $5bil in deficit, i wouldn't think that was a bad thing, either.

why can't these numpties just get it right?

I pretty much agree with that. The early noughties provided Australia with a huge opportunity to invest in infrastructure, hospitals, schools etc that would have had a lasting effect on this country for years to come.

Instead, a lot of it was wasted on middle class welfare. I still can't understand why someone over 55 is paid $500 to stay in the workforce. For someone working full time, this equates to 25 cents per hour worked. Some incentive.

And I can't understand why the Labor govt don't grow a pair and get rid of it. No one over 55 votes for them anyway.

As for your question about the numpties getting it right, this is the never-ending question. One which we may never work out the answer to.
 
Awesome isn't it?

I pay an absolute BUCKET LOAD on many different types of insurances every year to make sure I'm covered in pretty much every way possible. Now I get to kick in to a levy for those who don't pay insurance.

Whilst the $ figure isn't that big a deal, the principle really irks me. Maybe I should just cancel all my policies and put my hand out if anything ever happens. :confused:
 
i think the issues is that many people think having money in the bank (a budget surplus) is a good thing.

I think it's just as bad as a deficit.

govt is a non-profit organisation. when your money sits in treasury's coffers, it's YOUR taxes doing sweet FA.

I disagree. The mentality of 'we have money so we have to spend it' is irresponsible. I don't do this at home. Successful businesses don't do it either. Sometimes you need to budget for unexpected situations, or (in this case) situations you know will happen but you don't know when.

It's nice to know the money is there when you need it.
 
Awesome isn't it?

I pay an absolute BUCKET LOAD on many different types of insurances every year to make sure I'm covered in pretty much every way possible. Now I get to kick in to a levy for those who don't pay insurance.

Whilst the $ figure isn't that big a deal, the principle really irks me. Maybe I should just cancel all my policies and put my hand out if anything ever happens. :confused:

actually no, the levy is to be used for infrastructure items such as roads, bridges, railway lines. The sort of things needed to allow QLd to generate money again, through mining for example. It has actually been stated that this is not for the uninsured

" It is important that she stress early and stress often that the money raised by the levy will go towards building bridges, roads and rail lines that were destroyed, not providing disaster relief and helping the uninsured, as some mistakenly think." http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/for-gillard-the-soft-sell-begins-here-20110127-1a6hb.html?from=brisbanetimes_ft

EDIT: this also applies to those with the plasma tv argument.
 
Last edited:
I disagree. The mentality of 'we have money so we have to spend it' is irresponsible. I don't do this at home. Successful businesses don't do it either. Sometimes you need to budget for unexpected situations, or (in this case) situations you know will happen but you don't know when.

It's nice to know the money is there when you need it.

why did you only quote that bit - i said, further on, that having a small contingency is aprobably a good idea, but 20bil worth is borderline tax theft.
 
actually no, the levy is to be used for infrastructure items such as roads, bridges, railway lines. The sort of things needed to allow QLd to generate money again, through mining for example. It has actually been stated that this is not for the uninsured

I stand corrected.

Thought I'll still enjoy the extra levy ('temporary' of course) - seems to be the way to go these days, especially now that "budget surplus" is the new media catch phrase of the day and anyone questioning that will be stoned at the next election. :D
 
Back
Top