Should the GST be increased/widened?

[luutzu]

your own quote says it: 800M redirected from foreign aid, so not a cent more, and maybe less in the pockets of the various corrupt O/S politicians/oz business dealing in foreign aid.not a bad decision

I saw on ABC, briefly, that Foreign Aids to the ME has been cut since Captain Abbott send our non-boots there. Those funds, I'm guessing, were redirected towards the war chest for the year.

Carrot and Sticks... if we're using the sticks, less carrot. That's how you win wars man.

 

[Logique]

your own quote says it: 800M redirected from foreign aid, so not a cent more, and maybe less in the pockets of the various corrupt O/S politicians/oz business dealing in foreign aid.not a bad decision

A sleight-of-hand policy, which doesn't make it a good one, and just makes it harder for the next government.

Too clever by half, and only what you'd expect from this leadership.

And btw, some foreign aid actually goes to the needy, as opposed to Third World oppressive, symbolic gestures from a Paris hotel.

 

[Logique]

At least B.Bishop only spent $5,000.

Like I said, a spending problem.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...t/news-story/27873595f64f51a1da24a8064dddeaea
2 Dec 2015

The Foreign Minister is accused of ordering an empty RAAF Challenger jet to fly from Canberra to Perth to pick up her and her boyfriend from a charity dinner on October 18, the Daily Telegraph reports.
Ms Bishop and her partner David Panton were reportedly the only two passengers on the flight, costing $30,000 for the red-eye journey.

 

[Tisme]

At least B.Bishop only spent $5,000.

Like I said, a spending problem.

What's in a name eh ... both of them live like Bishops

 

[luutzu]

At least B.Bishop only spent $5,000.

Like I said, a spending problem.

Would be cheaper to charter a private jet from Perth. Saw some rich Brit chartered one for her dog from Africa to the UK and it only costs some $28,000 pound. But I guess you'd only be cost conscious like that if you're paying for it.

 

[luutzu]

What's in a name eh ... both of them live like Bishops

Yes, but the important question is: Do they feel our pain?

Back in the uni days, a professor was saying some old dude back then argued that a country should only be governed by its elite, its richest, its land owning gentry. Why? Because the rich have so much money that they cannot be bribed or corrupted by it; so much luxury that they will only spend time working for the common wealth and not of their own private interests.

Don't think that argument stacks up though.

 

[Tisme]

Yes, but the important question is: Do they feel our pain?

Back in the uni days, a professor was saying some old dude back then argued that a country should only be governed by its elite, its richest, its land owning gentry. Why? Because the rich have so much money that they cannot be bribed or corrupted by it; so much luxury that they will only spend time working for the common wealth and not of their own private interests.

Don't think that argument stacks up though.

The old Plutocrat argument. Wealth is never enough for the rich, even when they label themselves as philanthropists they still derive their power from accumulating wealth and fame.

 

[luutzu]

The old Plutocrat argument. Wealth is never enough for the rich, even when they label themselves as philanthropists they still derive their power from accumulating wealth and fame.

Don't boil my entire paragraph down to four words Alfalfa

 

[Logique]

Yes, but the important question is: Do they feel our pain?
Back in the uni days, a professor was saying some old dude back then argued that a country should only be governed by its elite, its richest, its land owning gentry. Why? Because the rich have so much money that they cannot be bribed or corrupted by it; so much luxury that they will only spend time working for the common wealth and not of their own private interests.
Don't think that argument stacks up though.

Indeed. It might have been partly true back in Churchill's day, but far less so in latter days.

 

[Logique]

Nearly 4 years since the last post on this thread. The Feds have bided their time..

I see the Feds are having another go at trying to increase the rate of GST, to 12.5%. They'll just abolish the States Payroll Tax they say ..We've seen this movie before.

To the PM's credit, and Anthony Albanese's, they have dismissed this notion out of hand. As they should. Raising the rate of GST would be a regressive move. The taxation system should be progressive. You don't slug poor people proportionately more for food and utility bills.

The now defunct Australian Democrats party -made a lasting contribution to societal fairness in this country, opposing GST on food

The political party that opposes raising the rate of GST, is the party that wins my vote.

 

[SirRumpole]

Nearly 4 years since the last post on this thread. The Feds have bided their time..

I see the Feds are having another go at trying to increase the rate of GST, to 12.5%. They'll just abolish the States Payroll Tax they say ..We've seen this movie before.

To the PM's credit, and Anthony Albanese's, they have dismissed this notion out of hand. As they should. Raising the rate of GST would be a regressive move. The taxation system should be progressive. You don't slug poor people proportionately more for food and utility bills.

The now defunct Australian Democrats party -made a lasting contribution to societal fairness in this country, opposing GST on food

The political party that opposes raising the rate of GST, is the party that wins my vote.

While I agree with abolishing State payroll tax there are other ways of raising the replacement revenue than slugging the consumers, like a tax on digital revenue from Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc, or a decent mining tax.

 

[sptrawler]

While I agree with abolishing State payroll tax there are other ways of raising the replacement revenue than slugging the consumers, like a tax on digital revenue from Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc, or a decent mining tax.

Spot on Rumpy and not untill that avenue is completely exhausted, should they even think of increasing the GST.
It is about time Government stopped hitting the easy targets and started to get an acceptable tax return from those you mention.

 

[Smurf1976]

While I agree with abolishing State payroll tax there are other ways of raising the replacement revenue than slugging the consumers, like a tax on digital revenue from Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc, or a decent mining tax.

As a concept I'm not opposed to the idea that the GST could be some rate other than 10% but agreed yes - close the various tax loop holes before we raise the rate of anything.

 

[sptrawler]

Resurrect the thread, the Federal Government irrespective of which it is, is getting into a bit of a bind with tax IMO, expenditure through the roof and the tax base shrinking.
With Labor having a full house of Federal and State Governments, it really is an opportunity to re adjust the tax base, these opportunities don't present all that often.

 

[wayneL]

Why does nobody ever mention cutting bullxchit expediture?

 

[farmerge]

Why does nobody ever mention cutting bullxchit expediture?

Well Wayne with these cuts how would the fat cats and hanger's on survive in the rareified atmosphere in which they hide.

 

[PZ99]

Reduce the GST = reduce inflation