The Abbott Government

[noco]

What a low life




http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-02/imprisoned-australian-lashes-out-at-alexander-downer/5362226

I think you are a bit off beat IFocus....what relevance has these comments and allegations got to do with this thread?

Are you now trying to link Downer with the Abbott Government for something that is alleged to have happened in 2009....I know who the low life is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[banco]

Why?

So you've lived in the same house for 30++ years and it has now gone up in value. Hello...pay more tax. I think a lot of oldies are asset rich but cash flow poor.

It would be more along the lines of "sell your 1.2 million house buy yourself a $450,000 apartment and live off the balance of the sale proceeds".

 

[drsmith]

So you've lived in the same house for 30++ years and it has now gone up in value. Hello...pay more tax. I think a lot of oldies are asset rich but cash flow poor.

The WA Labor government after coming to office in 2000 was going to introduce a premium property tax at a rate of 2%pa on properties valued at $1m or over.

After realising the impact it would have on asset rich but income poor households like the above, the idea was modified to delay payment to be made out of their estate after they died.

Whether as a means of forcing people out of their home of several decades or as a de-facto death duty, it was ultimately dropped.

 

[banco]

The WA Labor government after coming to office in 2000 was going to introduce a premium property tax at a rate of 2%pa on properties valued at $1m or over.

After realising the impact it would have on asset rich but income poor households like the above, the idea was modified to delay payment to be made out of their estate after they died.

Whether as a means of forcing people out of their home of several decades or as a de-facto death duty, it was ultimately dropped.

Grey power!!

 

[drsmith]

In terms of tax reform, I'm not a believer in taxing the family home. This is at odds with Ken Henry but just because it can't move doesn't mean we should tax it.

Instead, we should make existing taxes more robust and reducing the overall number of taxes. No single measure in isolation is the answer. It needs a broader approach. Property needs much broader reform. As an example, state government stamp duties on property transactions should ultimately be removed as should negative gearing from unrelated income such as salary.

In short, the existing base needs to be looked at before existing taxes are increased or new taxes introduced and that also includes the GST.

The problem with tax reform is there are winners and losers and more of the latter when brought about by a budget already under stress.

 

[DB008]

The WA Labor government after coming to office in 2000 was going to introduce a premium property tax at a rate of 2%pa on properties valued at $1m or over.

After realising the impact it would have on asset rich but income poor households like the above, the idea was modified to delay payment to be made out of their estate after they died.

Whether as a means of forcing people out of their home of several decades or as a de-facto death duty, it was ultimately dropped.

I agree.

Lets say I buy a home somewhere in Sydney/Melbourne today for $800k. Not a popular area at the moment, on the outskirts of the city.
In 40 years, that area might be popular and the house might be worth $3 million, but l was just an average worker and living off the pension now at ~70 years of age.
Why should I be forced to sell my house, just to pay a tax because the Government stuffed up their spending and budgeting. It's crazy.

 

[sptrawler]

It would be more along the lines of "sell your 1.2 million house buy yourself a $450,000 apartment and live off the balance of the sale proceeds".

They are having enough trouble re locating tenants from State housing rentals, in NSW.

 

[McLovin]

Why should I be forced to sell my house, just to pay a tax because the Government stuffed up their spending and budgeting. It's crazy.

On the flipside, why should I have to pay your pension while you live in your $3m house just because the government stuffed up their spending and budgeting.

 

[banco]

I agree.

Lets say I buy a home somewhere in Sydney/Melbourne today for $800k. Not a popular area at the moment, on the outskirts of the city.
In 40 years, that area might be popular and the house might be worth $3 million, but l was just an average worker and living off the pension now at ~70 years of age.
Why should I be forced to sell my house, just to pay a tax because the Government stuffed up their spending and budgeting. It's crazy.

You can't place all the blame on the "Government". It's the electorate that expects a certain level of services.

 

[DB008]

This article has gone viral. It's everywhere. Check out the comments section down the bottom....nasty

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/apr/02/coalition-review-of-consumer-laws-may-ban-environmental-boycotts

Australian government may ban environmental boycotts

Coalition MPs and industry groups are using a review of competition laws to push for a ban on campaigns against companies on the grounds that they are selling products that damage the environment, for example by using old-growth timber or overfished seafood.

The parliamentary secretary for agriculture, Richard Colbeck, said the backbench rural committee and “quite a number in the ministry” want to use the review to remove an exemption for environmental groups from the consumer law ban on so-called “secondary boycotts”.

“I do think there is an appetite in the government for changing these laws,” Colbeck said.

The exemption also applies to campaigns related to “consumer protection” but Colbeck said he would not be seeking to change that provision.

The government announced last week a “root and branch review” of competition policy headed by the economist Professor Ian Harper.

- - - Updated - - -

You can't place all the blame on the "Government". It's the electorate that expects a certain level of services.

Isn't that why we pay taxes?

Where do we draw the line on taxes? 90%
That video that someone posted here with Milton Freedman talking about a flat 25% tax rate is probably the best idea l've seen in a very long time. Pity it will never come to fruition...

 

[drsmith]

Dr Martin Parkinson at The Sydney Institute last night.

Fiscal sustainability & living standards - the decade ahead.

http://www.treasury.gov.au/PublicationsAndMedia/Speeches/2014/Fiscal_sustainability

 

[noco]

In short, the existing base needs to be looked at before existing taxes are increased or new taxes introduced and that also includes the GST.

The problem with tax reform is there are winners and losers and more of the latter when brought about by a budget already under stress.

I believe it is inevitable that sooner or later the GST will be raised to possibly 15% in line with New Zealand. But cannot see it happening this side of the next election 2016 after Abbott promised there would "NO INCREASE IN THE GST UNDER A GOVERNMENT HE LEADS DURING HIS FIRST TERM....and I believe he will honor his commitment.

I did an exercise last year based on the current income from the GST at 10%.....At 12.5% it would bring in $11 billion.......At 15% based on just double the extra 2.5% that would bring in $22 billion.per year.

At least when paying the GST on goods and services, one does know what the additional cost will be.... Unlike the carbon tax which has been added on to practically everything we buy and which has been exploited by unscrupulous companies.....nobody knows how much extra one pays for goods affected by the carbon tax with the exception of power companies....the honest companies will remove those carbon tax costs should the carbon tax be scrapped and they will be the winners.

The same thing occurred when there was a hidden sales tax....most people in my era had no idea they were paying an extra 22.5% s/t on a can of coke or 33.3% s/t on stationery or 25% on motor vehicles.....The Labor Party worked on a grand scare campaign at the time that everything would cost and extra 10%......it was unfortunate at the time that Labor could not tell the truth that all those nasty sales taxes would be deleted. Keating wanted to introduce the GST when Hawke was Prime Minister but Hawke did not have the gutz to introduce it for fear of losing voter support.

You can bet your boots if Abbott goes to the next election with an increase in the GST, our Labor Party comrades will be at it again with a "Gobbles' propaganda like you have never seen before.

Reform in all forms of taxation is a must.

 

[drsmith]

I believe it is inevitable that sooner or later the GST will be raised to possibly 15% in line with New Zealand. But cannot see it happening this side of the next election 2016 after Abbott promised there would "NO INCREASE IN THE GST UNDER A GOVERNMENT HE LEADS DURING HIS FIRST TERM....and I believe he will honor his commitment.

I did an exercise last year based on the current income from the GST at 10%.....At 12.5% it would bring in $11 billion.......At 15% based on just double the extra 2.5% that would bring in $22 billion.per year.

My view remains that the priority with GST reform should be broadening the base before raising the rate or in other words, fixing the compromise that was originally made with the Democrats to get it up in the first place. This would be a genuine tax reform rather than just a tax increase.

The most sensible political strategy for the feds will be to wait for the inevitable crawl from all the states to them and I suspect that's the strategy they'll adopt.

 

[orr]

got to do with this thread?

.I know who the low life is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah get it on topic: The Abbott Government
Thats Tony Abbott, the same Tony Abbott who sat at the knee of George Pell while he was busy destroying the body and soul of a Mr Ellis, overtly and many others covertly.
The Tony Abbott who rejoiced in the repeated penetrations of George Pells Dictums, taking deeply the essence of the old seminary, through the very same period. Entrusting his moral compass and his heavenly hereafter to the sanction of a man so worthy of admiration... Abbott happy to go down on his knees and kiss ring for absolution.
But now these two, Tony and George. Once so close, so intermit are Publicly estranged. And No comment from Tony on the obscenities the filth the horror the dereliction the Evil..

No one needs a cloak of bigotry more than Tony Abbott PM.... Bigotry, a special dog whistle bigotry so much said by saying so little, It's every bodies right.

 

[sydboy007]

I agree.

Lets say I buy a home somewhere in Sydney/Melbourne today for $800k. Not a popular area at the moment, on the outskirts of the city.
In 40 years, that area might be popular and the house might be worth $3 million, but l was just an average worker and living off the pension now at ~70 years of age.
Why should I be forced to sell my house, just to pay a tax because the Government stuffed up their spending and budgeting. It's crazy.

But WHY did the house grow in value? Could it be because quite a bit of publicly funded infrastructure was build, maybe better roads / public transport / schools etc. A land tax would help to fund this infrastructure, and overcome the current issue we have where local Government can't afford increases in population so they restrict new housing.

I say go for the taxes that cause the least amount of damage and land tax + GST seem to generate the highest level of revenue with the least cost. They distort economic activity the least. The fact it's rather difficult to hide property, and that land tax might stop so many properties sitting vacant and help to alleviate the housing affordability issues this country is facing.

 

[SirRumpole]

My view remains that the priority with GST reform should be broadening the base before raising the rate or in other words, fixing the compromise that was originally made with the Democrats to get it up in the first place. This would be a genuine tax reform rather than just a tax increase.

And how would they compensate self funded retirees not getting a pension, and with interest rates so low they are hardly getting any return on their savings ?

 

[IFocus]

I think you are a bit off beat IFocus....what relevance has these comments and allegations got to do with this thread?

Are you now trying to link Downer with the Abbott Government for something that is alleged to have happened in 2009....I know who the low life is!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who just got appointed to London by Abbott?

Its got every thing to do with this government

 

[drsmith]

And how would they compensate self funded retirees not getting a pension, and with interest rates so low they are hardly getting any return on their savings ?

Interest rates are determined by the RBA, markets and banks.

They are not determined by the government.

 

[sptrawler]

And how would they compensate self funded retirees not getting a pension, and with interest rates so low they are hardly getting any return on their savings ?

Why should they compensate self funded retirees not getting a pension?
Labor thought they were fat cats. If you don't qualify for part pension why do you need compensation?lol

 

[sptrawler]

It's also funny how for the last six months, while Abbott and Hockey have been saying we have a huge tax deficit problem.
All the "financial gurus" have been poo pahing it saying " we haven't got a problem, just Tony and Joe talking it up"

Now the Treasury and the RBA are saying it, there is a general change of rhetoric, so the gurus don't looked as stupid as they are.lol

It is classic, just dumb reporting, they blew their feet off when Labor were in. Is there any wonder SMSF are on the rise? When you see the so called gurus, making fools of themselves.