Tracking Labor Govt's Promises...

It will be interesting to see how Rudd goes - maybe not a promise but he did say that we will be taking care of carers; now they have had from $600 - $1500 bonus withdrawn, but only to be replaced by a $500 utility payment. Interesting moves from a Labor Government.
 
kevin says

First, we return to a version of Keating's mid-'80s regime, where capital gains is taxed at the same rate as income and negative gearing is curtailed.
Click to expand...

Next we will be back paying 18% interest again, bring back Howard!
 
mm - is that fair dinkum what rudd has said? or are you taking the mickey?

if so - well - that's really going to improve rental availability and investors building more property (sarcasm here). :rolleyes:
 
Lizzie -a slight correction --we mug taxpayers/get aheaders will be doing the belt tightening whilst gov continues to enjoy so many tax free perks. Heads down, hearts up ,press on regardless is all we can do.
 
Update 111 days in office

I intend keeping a watch on this. So far no change since my first post. Twill be interesting to see what transpires.
 
I would be happy to be corrected on this but Mr Rudd has all ready broken a promise-- Did he not promise to sign Kyoto Protocol only if India and China signed? He jumped in to sign with nary a word of censure to the recalcitrants. On the subject of censure- - how faint has been his censure of China's killing civilians in the streets of Tibet? Seemed like a feather's tap on th wrist.
 
MIZBUF said:
I would be happy to be corrected on this but Mr Rudd has all ready broken a promise-- Did he not promise to sign Kyoto Protocol only if India and China signed? He jumped in to sign with nary a word of censure to the recalcitrants.
Click to expand...

China and India have signed the Kyoto protocol. There are 2 groups of countries in the Kyoto protocol - the developed and the developing. China and India are of course part of the developing set of countries which for the first round of Kyoto had no binding reductions.

I think that was a fair structure. It would be ridiculous to say to somebody in India or China "I am 30 times richer than you and my emissions per head are way above yours as well - however I'm not dropping unless you do".
 
Muffinman said:
kevin says

First, we return to a version of Keating's mid-'80s regime, where capital gains is taxed at the same rate as income and negative gearing is curtailed.

Next we will be back paying 18% interest again, bring back Howard!
Click to expand...

Hi Muffinman,

do you have a reference for where he said this...?

If true, Kevin 07 will become Kevin 0ut !
They retreated from this policy very quickly when they hurt renters badly and investors (whom I call the housing dept) fled the sector.

They need to encourage investment in property, not hammer it, otherwise they will have to house the people and they have proved useless at this in the past.
 
It's true, they could not curtail or get rid of negative gearing again. It was a disaster (although quickly rectified) back then, it would be suicide now in this climate.

Where did this quote come from???
 
Muffinman said:
kevin says

First, we return to a version of Keating's mid-'80s regime, where capital gains is taxed at the same rate as income and negative gearing is curtailed.
Click to expand...

Next we will be back paying 18% interest again, bring back Howard!
Click to expand...
Actually, Muffinman, I'd be interested about where this quote came from.

As suggested in a previous post, the abolition of negative gearing was not successful.

But the Capital Gains Tax, was, and still is, taxed at the same rate as income. Any capital gain is added to your income, and then the prevailing tax rate is applied.

The difference now is that, if you have held something for more than 12 months, and sell it at a gain, you are only taxed on 50% of the capital gain.

Back then, the capital gain was reduced by inflation. So that if you held something for 12 months, and then sold, if the inflation was 4%, the income for tax was reduced by 4%. But if you sold something 20 years on, you had to add up the inflation over each of the previous 20 years- so you may have received, for instance, an 80% reduction in the CGT liability. It was perhaps a fairer system, but much more complicated to administer.
 
I saw Kevin giving a 'snappy salute' to George Bush on the tele this morning. That was gold. I bet he cringes when that is re-played for him.

Phil.
 
Last edited:
You're first assumption has been disproved. On your second, what can he say?

He did get up the Chinese regarding human rights issues in Tibet. When Howard was questioned about his silence on human rights issues, he replied:

"It was only brought up in private meetings"

HAHA!! yeah right!

Rudds performance so far (especially on the world stage) has made Howard look like a small minded, rank amateur.

MIZBUF said:
I would be happy to be corrected on this but Mr Rudd has all ready broken a promise-- Did he not promise to sign Kyoto Protocol only if India and China signed? He jumped in to sign with nary a word of censure to the recalcitrants. On the subject of censure- - how faint has been his censure of China's killing civilians in the streets of Tibet? Seemed like a feather's tap on th wrist.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
yieldmatters said:
China and India have signed the Kyoto protocol. There are 2 groups of countries in the Kyoto protocol - the developed and the developing. China and India are of course part of the developing set of countries which for the first round of Kyoto had no binding reductions.

I think that was a fair structure.

It would be ridiculous to say to somebody in India or China "I am 30 times richer than you and my emissions per head are way above yours as well - however I'm not dropping unless you do".
Click to expand...
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Dear YM,

1. I do not think that it is "ridiculous" nor a issue of political "expediency"/"political correctness" that is at stake here, as far as the real long term interests of Australia is concerned.

2. I personally believe that this is a highly "pragmatic" though "un-popular" business move for Australia, as was previously adopted by the former John Howard's Federal Govt in Australia, as far as the true long term economic interests of Australia is concerned.

3. Amidst the present global financial turmoil, will Australia truly NOT going to continue to export out its coal and gas reserves to the rest of the world and to retrench all the affected workers in these industries, in the near future, simply because it seems to be "polluting" the world?

4. This is especially so when both India and China ( as well as America and Japan) are openly known to be presently to be continuing to "pollute" the world openly to a larger extent and be allowed to reap all the attendant economic benefits for themselves?

5. Honestly speaking, how long will China and India be further allowed to "pollute" the world before they officially achieved their Developed Nations status?

6. Realistically speaking, if the world's biggest population centres in China and India are signing a different Protocol Agreement, what then, would exactly have the real effects which Australia intend/hope to achieve, by this signing of the different Protocol Agreements, in the first place?

7. For your further comments and discussion, please.

8. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Please kick my tyres.....
2 3
Replies
45
Views
8K
HiEquity
H
S
Journey so far - $75k salary (average), 5 years, 10 properties
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
24K
Simon L
S
Rixter
What can we learn from the Rudd vs Gillard leadership battle as property investors?
Replies
1
Views
1K
lizzie
lizzie
Peter Parker
Property investment in a steady state economy - can it work?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
4K
Deltaberry
D
S
Aussie Banks Financed by the US Fed
Replies
18
Views
3K
kotim
K
Back
Top