This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Flood Levy - Do you agree?

What do yo think of the Gillard flood levy?

  • I agree with the flood levy and the current level seems right

    Votes: 24 21.2%

  • I agree with the flood levy but the current level is too low

    Votes: 2 1.8%

  • I agree with the flood levy but the current level is too high

    Votes: 3 2.7%

  • I disagree with the flood levy

    Votes: 84 74.3%
  • Total voters
    113
Jump to new
3DT Velocity said:
...The only way the Government knows how to fix anything these days is to increase Taxes.
Click to expand...

And then what happens if the money gets spent on high salaries and then there's not enough left to fix it anyway?

So - further increase the tax?

No wonder Aussies are becomming increasingly untrusting.
 

And what qualifies you to take the high moral ground? Nokia probably had you in mind when he said some people care more for whales than people.


It appears that some are more interested in saving a whale, a dog or a flying fox than helping some human being.
Click to expand...
 
IFocus said:
The money has to come from borrowings or tax there is no frigging money tree
Click to expand...

100% agree IFocus!

What happened to all the money borrowed as "we the people"?! All gone is it?

What happened to all the tax I pay?

All spent on gourmet sandwiches and coffee for the Committee to Discuss Levies?

Govt is literally living paycheck to paycheck now, like much of the country, no buffer for anything unexpected.
 

Yeah, seems that no money is left. Gillard states it herself:

No magic pot of money for floods: Gillard


This is scary. They are handling large amounts of public funds and yet appear to be spending like there is no tomorrow. Is it possible that much of their incoming revenue is now being spent on interest payments? Maybe they need to phone LifeLine financial counselling for advice.

Even to suggest this was an unprecedented disaster is irresponsible, IMO. Wakey, wakey - it's happened before.
 
As others have said, its not the money, it's the principle. I have already given to charity yet now am FORCED to give more. The government should know these things are going to occur and have a slush fund saved.
Click to expand...

I dont disagree with any of this sentiment.
Waste in government is beyond comprehension.
The waste saving alone would probably cover the costs.

Unfortunately most governments are incompetent and ours is no different.
Unfortunaltely choice of government in a democracy isnt much help either as they are all as incompetent as each other.

So choice here is not an option--- there isnt any. Sure they will waste some of it---there is NO accountability!!

With 60% of the people argueing over $50 and those on $100k or more a few hundered
I just think for the state of the country whether that be infrastructure or those directly effected its a small price to pay.

Christ I have a great friend in a Hospice dying of cancer---$50----perspective---its NOT the end of the world.

"There are 2 biggies in life---Birth and Death---everything in between just fills in the time."
 
Those earning between $50,000 and $100,000 a year would pay an additional 0.5 per cent tax, rising to an additional 1 per cent for those earning more than $100,000.

Average wage in Australia is say $75,000 ($72,532 to be exact) so therefore LEVY TAX is $375.00 AUD

Those fortunate to be above $100,000 a year would pay $1000 PLUS AUD per annum. Considering these people already shell out $24,950 in tax (assuming NIL deductions etc) IMO it is just another impost on the golden goose who pays the most taxes.

Has anyone considered that this LEVY TAX will only be applied to individuals or is it across the board taking in companies and Family Trusts? What happens then?

Why not simply run the budget further along and return to surplus a year later than promised? WHy not wait until JUNE 30th 2011 and see what revenue they have recieved from GST and mining taxes etc etc blah blah blah THEN introduce a LEVY !

HEY ........ here is an idea ........ whay not use the money they had set aside to buy back the water schemes from the cotton farmers in the Murray Darling Basin? Surely they would have enough water now ??? Hahahhah aha ah haaahh hehehhe eh heee

Just another knee jerk reaction IMO by a Guvmint that is running out of options.
 
IFocus said:
Of course with the Wreak-er in full cry like his disciples here that's politically impossible.
Click to expand...
IFocus, do you think you could generate the same level of objectivity as you did briefly last year and remember that those of us who despise the government are not ipso facto 'disciples' of the other side, or of Tony Abbott in particular. Perhaps just actually consider that many people are utterly fed up with all the options, none of which are credible. Please stop being insulting by assuming anyone offering criticism of the government is devoted to Mr Abbott.

Surly said:
Or did they give it to Oakshot if he shut up for ten minutes?
Click to expand...
 

That calculation is wrong. You only pay 0.5% on the amount between $50,001 to $100,000. And then 1% from $100,000 onwards.

So for $75K earner, it's $125. For $100K it's $250. For $150K it's $750. For $200K it's $1250.

For me it's ~$50K on my income of $5m.
 

LOL ,,,,,, my apologies for the inference that the Guvmint would try and take more than their fair share.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1949/XLS/Flood_Levy_Calculator.xls

For the real deal on what you will pay.
 
Have the full scale of budget cuts been announced yet? 2/3 of the money for flood relief are from programs that have been cut - I note the unpopular Cash for Clunkers was one of the first to go.

I would have no problem with a deficit in 2012/13 however there is no party (state or Fed) that has the political capital to withstand deficits on the promise of surpluses. Sadly, economic intelligence is almost in as short supply in parliament as it is in society.

I did have to chuckle at Abbott's reaction - of course he would oppose it, but with his election promises and support for levies under the Howard government, he's set to overtake Garrett as the biggest hypocrite in Parliament (if he hasn't already done so).
 
The rich can escape the levy if they received the government's $1000 flood relief hand -out.

Anyone whose residence was without power for 24 hours or more on account of the flood is eligible, irrespective of whether they sustained flood damage or were merely inconvenienced.
 
explod said:
So you would agree that we need to do something about reducing global warming?
Click to expand...

That was a cheeky swipe there explod I won't get into that one, cause it's a bit off topic.

What also concerns me, is stuff like this:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/8726027/father-jailed-over-flood-relief-fraud/

Nice to know that my generous donation could well be feeding some scumbag's drug habit

Fogarty's lawyer Terry Fisher said his client claimed the money to feed his drug habit.
Click to expand...

Little prick should be abolished from society for good. Or handed over to the people and we decide his fate (he'd better hope to god that I'm not given the privilege).

The sentence starts in March after Fogarty serves the rest of a suspended sentence for previous offences.
Click to expand...

Hang him, and hang him high. 2 strikes and you're out in my book.

As I said, it's not the levy that concerns me. It's how it will be used and abused by the scumbags of society and the incompetent political parties we are forced to vote for.
 
WaveSurfer said:
we are forced to vote for.
Click to expand...

We're not forced to vote for them. There are alternatives such as Senator Online, its just that few people know about them.

The biggest hurdle is compulsary voting.
 
For those who disagree with the Flood Levy:

The levy is Optional and requires consent by the governed.

However, you are made to believe you must pay the levy by the will of the government, hence, for your consent to be given a signature on the tax return (or similar legally binding documents) will do just fine​

The levy aside, why aren't the operators of the Wivenhoe dam being investigated as they are technically the ones that flooded Brisbane due to massive releases of water as the dam did not have spare capacity during a known wet season. The reason it's there in the first place is to assist as a flood mitigation strategy, which it failed to uphold.
 

Why make a vague post like this with no clarification.

The levy is optional requiring consent of the governed? But the governed don't know this and if they sign their tax return (which is mandatory) then they have given consent to be levied?

Hogwash, demand a link or retraction.
 
Julia said:
Please stop being insulting by assuming anyone offering criticism of the government is devoted to Mr Abbott.
Click to expand...

Every time Abbott criticises the flood levy he opens himself to charges of hypocrisy. He lost any credibility he had with me with his proposal to put a levy on business firms to pay for well paid women to retain their salaries during pregnancy leave. He didn't even bother to consult the party on this.

I have doubts on whether his mouth is wired to his brain.
 
prawn_86 said:
We're not forced to vote for them. There are alternatives such as Senator Online, its just that few people know about them.

The biggest hurdle is compulsary voting.
Click to expand...

Yeah actually I remember them now you mention it. Read glimpses of media coverage back in Kevin 07. Strangely nothing since. They could have cleaned up last year with all the uncertainty.

It's a long, long road to travel with only a 0.05-0.06% total vote in 2007. Gotta start somewhere I guess.

Realistically, it still only is a 2 horse race. At this point in time anyway.

So I see two choices, pick the lesser of the 2 evils or throw away your vote (or give it to someone who gives it back to one of the two majors anyway). Hopefully that will change. Hopefully...

I don't vote BTW. Well I do, I just give it to my wife
 

You've hit the nail on the head there gg.
 
What I find interesting is the disparagement of those who disagree with a LEVY by those who agree with it. Why is that?

Last time I looked, Australia is still a free country (by thee skin of its teeth) and opinions should be freely sought and discussed. The emotive harassment of againsts by the fors has totalitarian overtones IMO.

Bear in mind that many against a LEVY would probably give far more voluntarily. Also, one off taxes (under the guise of the euphemistically titled "levy") tend to become permanent; there is a long history of this.

Australians are right to view this with suspicion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How to avoid Shorten's plan to abolish the refund of excess franking credits
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
13K
Value Collector
Superannuation pain must extend to politicians
Replies
14
Views
6K
sptrawler
State tax reform
Replies
0
Views
4K
sydboy007
Henry Tax Review - Discussion of recommendations
Replies
11
Views
6K
drsmith
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...