Labor Tax Policy, where is it?

[wayneL]

The rich and upper middle class Vote liberals the poor and middle class vote labor ....

Nope. That may have applied 100 years ago, but not today.

The richest guys in WA were (back in the day) all labor. WA Inc. anyone?

Bond, Connell et al, all actively promoted Labor. I also know many highbrows who vote Labor on ideological/sociological grounds. I have a friend who is now earning 7 figures (b@stard ), he votes Labor.


Transversely, many blue collar employees and subbies vote Liberal.

Go figure.

 

[chops_a_must]

Nope. That may have applied 100 years ago, but not today.

The richest guys in WA were (back in the day) all labor. WA Inc. anyone?

Bond, Connell et al, all actively promoted Labor. I also know many highbrows who vote Labor on ideological/sociological grounds. I have a friend who is now earning 7 figures (b@stard ), he votes Labor.


Transversely, many blue collar employees and subbies vote Liberal.

Go figure.

I agree. I don't think these stereotypes apply as much these days. Professionals are as likely to vote Liberal for economic reasons as they are Labor for ethical/ compassionate reasons.

It's got more to do with ideological grounds now moreso than social status or socio-economic factors these days...

 

[Agentm]

i see it as policy that is long term, two terms, and a lot can happen in those terms, i would have like to have seen this policy put into parliament already and given out a long time ago, and for it to be LAW. its merely an election stunt, not a plan for the future, there has been no in depth studies here on this, no real understandings of the impact of 34billion on the economy will have in terms of real future growth for the nation, just a politician saying "trust me, its going to be ok!!" spending high in the face of increasing interest rates is not in my view balanced good management.

with outclauses like, Mr costello saying, "johnny put this up, we think its not responsible governement now the economic climate has changed, so we will defer this indefinately for the next few years,, sorry"

desperation. and believe it or not, it will be a mammoth vote winner..and no doubt a labor "me too" will follow.. this is very unsettling days, roaring 20's senarios.. the economy is bullet proof!!

so health and education gets kicked in head so all can spend the economy into perhaps an interest rate increase. then god knows what else.

we have a media that loves the hand outs, and no balanced counter opinion coming out on any of these policies.. the circus will go on...

 

[Happy]

Giving back money in tax cuts is to me irresponsible.

Mentioned billions could be quite handy to solve problem or two, like hospitals, education, water, maybe some roads too.

Or simply money could be put away for bad times.

Also, claiming that Labor has no experience in managing country doesn’t cut with me either, because in 3, 6 or 9 years they will even have less.
Does it mean that they should have a crack at it 3 years each in turns?

Having said all that, I am not in Labor corner either.

I have feeling that neither has deep down our country in their hearts.

Their whiskers are on election or re-election.

 

[Rafa]

i hope labor don't just me-too this, becuase this tax package is a joke...

the tax system needs an overhaul, not a change in thresholds and tax rates... companies and individuals should both have 30% as the top tax rate.

with close to 50b to play with, and another 3 weeks before labor releases its tax policy, this is a chance to fix the tax system once and for all...

 

[Julia]

I'm completely opposed to tax cuts. The amounts available to individuals would make little real difference in overall cost of living, whilst the amount as a whole could do so much to fund e.g. a dental care plan as an add-on to Medicare, more training for all medical personnel including nurses, lower HECS fees, etc etc. The list is endless.

I would prefer the spending to be on the above infrastructure also in terms of social cohesion. By offering tax cuts to individuals it is endorsing the growing trend of individual "OK-ness" at the expense of a more inclusive and caring society.

 

[Nyden]

I'm completely opposed to tax cuts. The amounts available to individuals would make little real difference in overall cost of living, whilst the amount as a whole could do so much to fund e.g. a dental care plan as an add-on to Medicare, more training for all medical personnel including nurses, lower HECS fees, etc etc. The list is endless.

I would prefer the spending to be on the above infrastructure also in terms of social cohesion. By offering tax cuts to individuals it is endorsing the growing trend of individual "OK-ness" at the expense of a more inclusive and caring society.

I believe the reason this is happening - is the simple fact that the world is growing.

Society is no longer a tight-knit community; there are now too many people to regulate. I would personally prefer a tax-cut, as opposed to free dental for the less fortunate.

There's been too much of a trend these days; of the working people fixing the problems of those who don't - "the dole" is a perfect example of this.

If we want more money for public health care, education, & the likes - take it from those who just wish to further benefit; the ones too lazy to work.

 

[chops_a_must]

I believe the reason this is happening - is the simple fact that the world is growing.

Society is no longer a tight-knit community; there are now too many people to regulate. I would personally prefer a tax-cut, as opposed to free dental for the less fortunate.

There's been too much of a trend these days; of the working people fixing the problems of those who don't - "the dole" is a perfect example of this.

If we want more money for public health care, education, & the likes - take it from those who just wish to further benefit; the ones too lazy to work.

WTF???

So you are actually wanting a return to Dickensian times with poor houses?

 

[Whiskers]

I'm completely opposed to tax cuts.

I like tax cuts.

But, this time I have to say I'm thinking that it is just another cash handout promise to buy votes again. I'm inclined to think it's far more about political expediency than the good of the country.

The amounts available to individuals would make little real difference in overall cost of living, whilst the amount as a whole could do so much to fund e.g. a dental care plan as an add-on to Medicare, more training for all medical personnel including nurses, lower HECS fees, etc etc. The list is endless.

I would prefer the spending to be on the above infrastructure also in terms of social cohesion. By offering tax cuts to individuals it is endorsing the growing trend of individual "OK-ness" at the expense of a more inclusive and caring society.

When it's all boilded down the cutting back of the school dental health scheme and lower real health funding etc by the fed government has contributed to the big surplus.

I for one would much prefer some resources put back into our health and education systems in particular. But also our national highways and ports desperately need upgrading.

 

[Nyden]

WTF???

So you are actually wanting a return to Dickensian times with poor houses?

No


I think I came of a little harsh there! I tend to associate all the less fortunate with my no-hoper of a brother. Hopped up on drugs, hardly working a day in his life; getting money for nothing from the government, makes me sick.

I do agree that the health care system needs improvements - but, a lot of people are struggling these days in a lot of aspects ; isn't it more fair to ease their burden, allow them to live richer lives - and to let caring be a voluntary decision, and not mandatory?

 

[chops_a_must]

a lot of people are struggling these days in a lot of aspects ; isn't it more fair to ease their burden, allow them to live richer lives - and to let caring be a voluntary decision, and not mandatory?

How do you mean?

This is a pretty vague statement...

 

[Nyden]

How do you mean?

This is a pretty vague statement...

Well - as someone else mentioned in this thread - a lot of low paying jobs hardly keep up with inflation - tax cuts are something they need; not only for dental care & roads, but for bills, food, & the likes.

Why should they be forced to miss out on a possible tax cut? Why should any class of workers miss out on that?

Meanwhile ; if you don't work at all (the threshold for the health care concession card; is still fairly low pay), not only are you entitled to money from the government; but you're also entitled to free health care?

I realise it's way off topic - but, most countries don't offer unemployment benefits for the periods of time Australia does - that costs a lot of money. That money could be helping those even further who are at least on minimum wage; & if that was the case...obviously surplus could then be better used.

 

[chops_a_must]

Well - as someone else mentioned in this thread - a lot of low paying jobs hardly keep up with inflation - tax cuts are something they need; not only for dental care & roads, but for bills, food, & the likes.

Why should they be forced to miss out on a possible tax cut? Why should any class of workers miss out on that?

Meanwhile ; if you don't work at all (the threshold for the health care concession card; is still fairly low pay), not only are you entitled to money from the government; but you're also entitled to free health care?

You do realise most full time students will have a health care card, as well as people with chronic illness, such as those with juvenile diabetes don't you?

And yeah, tax cuts for the poor are the way to go. But that has hardly the way it has been under this regime.

 

[Nyden]

You do realise most full time students will have a health care card, as well as people with chronic illness, such as those with juvenile diabetes don't you?

And yeah, tax cuts for the poor are the way to go. But that has hardly the way it has been under this regime.

Is that under the current system, or is that what is to be implemented? Either way - I do believe in that. (Students, chronic suffers - should be entitled)


Well, it's hard not to be selfish though - even if you're an upper-class, it's hard not to want that tax-cut ; for the new boat that is.

Everybody likes something for nothing - a reward for hard work, positive reinforcement for working hard is important as well

 

[nioka]

Well - as someone else mentioned in this thread - a lot of low paying jobs hardly keep up with inflation - tax cuts are something they need;

Will they be better off with tax cuts AND work choices screwing their wage or no tax cuts and better paid jobs with Rudd. Anyway wait for Rudds tax policy which probably have tax cuts for them but not so much for the bigger end of town. There are those in the bigger end of town that would prefer, and be better off with, the money spent on the things Rudd is promising rather than tax cuts.

 

[Nyden]

Will they be better off with tax cuts AND work choices screwing their wage or no tax cuts and better paid jobs with Rudd. Anyway wait for Rudds tax policy which probably have tax cuts for them but not so much for the bigger end of town. There are those in the bigger end of town that would prefer, and be better off with, the money spent on the things Rudd is promising rather than tax cuts.

I understand that you've been touched rather negatively by work choices Nioka?

I do sympathise with that ; but, I personally know a lot of people (not wealthy, but lower-middle class), that are actually much better off under Work-Choices.

I'm sure there are a lot of people here as well with similar opinions.

 

[nioka]

Well, it's hard not to be selfish though - even if you're an upper-class, it's hard not to want that tax-cut ; for the new boat that is.

I need a new boat (having burnt the last one). I am counting on AGM and AUT getting me one rather than count on tax cuts. Oh forgot. I'm not upper class. Does that make a difference?

 

[The Mint Man]

question;
Would the people rather pay the amount of tax that Labors policy would have you pay or the amount that Liberal would have you pay?
Because the two policies are currently worlds apart and as I have said before, Labor has had 2 years to put their policy in the ball park at the very least. There is no doubt that when it comes to the economy, especially tax policies, Labor stands on the sidelines hoping not to slip up. In fact I think they do this on almost everything.

 

[nioka]

I understand that you've been touched rather negatively by work choices Nioka?

I do sympathise with that ; but, I personally know a lot of people (not wealthy, but lower-middle class), that are actually much better off under Work-Choices.

I'm sure there are a lot of people here as well with similar opinions.

Definitely not. Haven't worked for a boss since 1960. Actually been on the other side and appreciate the problems some of my staff had and how they struggled.
I,m sure some are better off under Work-choices but they are not the majority as I see it.

 

[nioka]

question;
Would the people rather pay the amount of tax that Labors policy would have you pay or the amount that Liberal would have you pay?
Because the two policies are currently worlds apart and as I have said before, Labor has had 2 years to put their policy in the ball park at the very least. There is no doubt that when it comes to the economy, especially tax policies, Labor stands on the sidelines hoping not to slip up. In fact I think they do this on almost everything.

Why should Labor show it's hand before the election is called or before the know the state of the economy at election time. The surplus was only known to them yesterday. You don't have to vote today. Wait and see what they have to say. If they act first Johnnie would trump them in some way, so it is fair enough to wait.