The Abbott Government

[sptrawler]

I raise several points and you have the nerve to carry on about my hurt feelings over the broken promise point, the press have covered the broken promises too so I'm not the only one who finds this government a bit hypocritical on this point but to carry on about my hurt feelings is just plain condescending. Drsmith had a sensible reply.

Here you go overhang, Alan Kohler explains the broken promises articulately, and why election promises are always broken.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-15/kohler-budget-time-bombs-meant-lies-were-inevitable/5452348

Here is a paragraph from the article. My bolds

Broken promises are nothing new - they have been happening after every election since your correspondent first became a journalist in the early 1970s, and no doubt before that too

 

[trainspotter]

And what do you think a continually increasing fuel tax will do to business costs ?

It's not just consumers that use fuel. Every business that transports goods does. Inflation will rise , the excise will increase, which contributes to inflation which causes the tax to rise ad infinitum.

I can't see how people who think they are smart can't see that this tax will be worse than the carbon tax. It really is a great big new tax on everything.

You are missing the point. If the rich can afford it they can pay the levy permanently, not just for three years. That's why it's a joke.

And the carbon tax does what again? Pretty sure this is a carbon tax wrapped in different **** paper for mine. Carbon tax on electricity for generating nasty Co2 effects EVERYBODY the same as fuel excise will.

If you can't see this as a better alternative to a carbon tax then mebbe it is you who should be looking at your IQ level. A great big tax on everything? You are kidding me right? Have you considered that by indexing fuel costs that inflation will rise, is a good thing as long as it is controlled. What is the alternative? Recession we had to have ala' Keating style? Electricity companies and everybody else affected by the carbon tax PASSED this impost onto the consumer. This convo have been done to death by "economists" with far more brain capacity then either of us. Labor introduced the carbon tax to satisfy the Greens and gain political "green" points with the marginal voters. But you are aware of all this aren't you?

What makes you think the levy will come off in 3 years? Politics is full of "core" and "non core" promises only to be broken time and time again. Think of the $10 Ansett levy and how well that was managed. Ended up in the courts and was only abolished AFTER their were enough funds to pay all entitlements to the Ansett employees. How long do you think it will be before the "debt levy" would be abolished? After the budget is returned to a surplus?

 

[drsmith]

What makes you think the levy will come off in 3 years?

A slightly different tack to the present conversation, but I suspect the current government's long game will be to go to the next election on a platform of tax cuts in their second term. This will be in part compensation for a an increased/broadened GST/bracket creep and include removal of the deficit levy at the higher end. Pensions would also need to be increased as compensation for an increased GST which could also soften the initial blow from changes to indexation. As the states will demand a significant take from any GST increase (it's been firmly put in their court to initiate the process), other areas of tax reform will be necessary to fund the above and in particular, dealing with the rigour of the existing tax base. This is where the tax white paper will be interesting.

After initially raising the tax take on higher income earners through the superannuation surcharge, we all know the tax cuts that followed under the Howard government. If this government goes the distance, it will be similar for its own constituency to the extent fiscal circumstances allow.

 

[trainspotter]

Yes drsmith, the similarities to the Howard government approach is Zachary the same. Let's hope the outcome is amenable to the voting public at the end of the day. We have until before 14th January 2017 for this to be put to bed. The States are already squawking that the decision to raise the GST has been thrust onto them. Fait accompli IMO

 

[SirRumpole]

You are kidding me right? Have you considered that by indexing fuel costs that inflation will rise, is a good thing as long as it is controlled. What is the alternative? Recession we had to have ala' Keating style?

You are kidding me right ? You agree that inflation will rise caused by a fuel tax levy. Feeding more increases in fuel tax levy. Feeding more increases in GST. Feeding more increases in inflation. Feeding reductions in consumer spending. Feeding a recession. How you intend that this cycle be controlled ?

Despite the introduction of the carbon tax inflation in this country remains low, and people have been compensated for the worst of its effects. No compensation will be made for fuel excise indexation.

Better the devil you know.

 

[trainspotter]

You are kidding me right ? You agree that inflation will rise caused by a fuel tax levy. Feeding more increases in fuel tax levy. Feeding more increases in GST. Feeding more increases in inflation. Feeding reductions in consumer spending. Feeding a recession. How you intend that this cycle be controlled ?

Despite the introduction of the carbon tax inflation in this country remains low, and people have been compensated for the worst of its effects. No compensation will be made for fuel excise indexation.

Better the devil you know.

So are you saying the introduction of the Carbon Tax has had ZERO inflationary response to the economy and has not increased the cost of living? My electricity bill went up $70 over a 60 day period with the "assumed" cost attached to the Co2 tax. Why is it that if it is a carbon tax that was supposed to be funded back into renewable energy generation it is OK with you and a petrol excise which will be funded back into road infrastructure is not OK? 40 CENTS A WEEK on petrol excise is hardly going to break the bank of the average family. It is a broad based consumption tax linked directly to your right foot rather then heating your house. What's the difference?

Compensation? What compensation? I have not received a cent in compensation for the Carbon Tax. But I have noticed the cost of living has risen which does not directly mean that inflation is directly connected to it.

Maybe instead of arguing over semantics you should read drsmiths post as to WHY this is happening. Tax cuts anyone in their second term? :

 

[SirRumpole]

So are you saying the introduction of the Carbon Tax has had ZERO inflationary response to the economy and has not increased the cost of living?

Don't verbal me please, I never said that. Of course it had some effect, just not as much as you are trying to maintain.

My electricity bill went up $70 over a 60 day period with the "assumed" cost attached to the Co2 tax. Why is it that if it is a carbon tax that was supposed to be funded back into renewable energy generation it is OK with you and a petrol excise which will be funded back into road infrastructure is not OK?

The majority of power cost increases have been due to over investment in poles and wires and a guaranteed return to power companies on their investment. Most companies would kill for a guaranteed return.

As for investment in roads, by not providing alternatives the government is suckering people in to paying the ever increasing fuel excise. It might start at 40 cents a week, what will it be in 2 years, 5 years, 10 years ? Is the government going to build ever increasing roads or just put the money into general revenue ? If the latter then it's another con.

It is a broad based consumption tax linked directly to your right foot rather then heating your house. What's the difference?

The difference is because the carbon tax affects Liberal party donors, not the average Joe. That's why they want it out.

Compensation? What compensation? I have not received a cent in compensation for the Carbon Tax. But I have noticed the cost of living has risen which does not directly mean that inflation is directly connected to it.

The tax free threshhold went up from $6000 to $18000.

Maybe instead of arguing over semantics you should read drsmiths post as to WHY this is happening. Tax cuts anyone in their second term? :

What semantics ? I'm arguing about the policy dynamics.

Tax cuts in their second term ? Do you really believe that after Hockey said "this is only the beginning of the cuts" ?

If you do believe him, I really wonder about the level of your IQ.

 

[trainspotter]

Dear Horace,

As I have better things to do with my time then argue on the internet with someone who has a very small grasp of the tabloid headlines and repeat them in here verbatim I bid you adieu in your endeavours to profligate the Labor party ethos.

Let me leave you with this gem:-

ENERGY company Synergy is pocketing millions of bonus carbon tax dollars by holding on to the money collected from West Australians for up to a year before handing it over to the Federal Government.

The monopoly electricity retailer already has collected $68 million from households and businesses and will raise an estimated further $150 million before it passes on one cent in tax.

Synergy admitted to The Sunday Times that it had squirrelled away millions of dollars into a bank account accruing interest and won't pay anything to the Gillard Government until mid-next year.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...n-carbon-tax-con/story-e6frg6n6-1226514353609

 

[sptrawler]

Rumpole, is the fuel excise levy the same one Bob Hawke promised to remove as soon as he attained office.lol,lol,lol. because it was a tax on the poor.
Guess what he did? sod all, he didn't even remove the indexation on it, from memory.

Also for some reason you seem to be indicating the carbon tax was a fixed cost, were as the fuel tax will be indexed.
Don't know where you got that idea from.

The carbon tax has added heaps to the cost of electricity as generators burn more expensive fuels and install more capital intensive alternative energies.

 

[overhang]

Here you go overhang, Alan Kohler explains the broken promises articulately, and why election promises are always broken.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-15/kohler-budget-time-bombs-meant-lies-were-inevitable/5452348

Here is a paragraph from the article. My bolds

Broken promises are nothing new - they have been happening after every election since your correspondent first became a journalist in the early 1970s, and no doubt before that too

Sptrawler as I have explained what I have drawn exception to is how heavily the Abbott government as opposition and the Murdoch press campaigned against Labor's broken promises, they clearly don't hold themselves to the same ethics they expected of Labor.


Back on the budget and what a disgrace this is, given all the cuts made to health and education but the god botherer can still find $245 million to spread religious dogma "Schools will lose the option of appointing secular social workers under the national school chaplaincy program, for which the Abbott government has found an extra $245m in budget funding." Are we in a budget crisis or not? Given Pyne was adamant that schools are the responsibility of the states then why is the federal government wasting this sort of money for schools?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...secular-social-workers-at-schools?CMP=soc_568

 

[SirRumpole]

Rumpole, is the fuel excise levy the same one Bob Hawke promised to remove as soon as he attained office.lol,lol,lol. because it was a tax on the poor.
Guess what he did? sod all, he didn't even remove the indexation on it, from memory.

So what ? I'm not a Labor party person, I'm just looking at alternatives. What happen 30 years ago doesn't mean a fig to me.

Also for some reason you seem to be indicating the carbon tax was a fixed cost, were as the fuel tax will be indexed.
Don't know where you got that idea from.

Fair point. I think the actual rate of the CT is too high and there is scope for reducing it.

 

[Julia]

This sort of nonesense from Truss, won't help their case.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-pm-warren-truss/story-fnihsrf2-1226918078356

As if someone with a relatively modest super balance is going to blow it, to live on the bloody pension.
The same applies for those who have accumulated $millions in super, as if they are going to blow it to get a health care card. What a joke, I bet the tax dept have figures on exactly what is really going on.
Everyone I know on a self funded pension are trying extremely hard to make their money last as long as possible, it gives them options.
Truss should try living on the aged pension, rather than the taxpayer funded one he is going to get.lol

What absolute stupidity from Warren Truss, to so insult a significant portion of his voter base.
It's about as smart as Joe Hockey's comment that the $7 was about a third of the cost of a packet of cigarettes or X quantity of beer. That's implying that all the people worrying about the $7 are indiscriminately sucking on cigarettes and beer.

A better group of communicators could have sold this budget, but as with everything else they have touched other than perhaps the border issue, they have no idea about how to take the electorate with them. Instead they have produced a 'them and us' situation with massive antagonism toward the government.

The tax free threshhold went up from $6000 to $18000.

That was an illusion. Yes the tax free threshold was altered but at the same time some of the allowances and tax free exemptions were removed so there was effectively almost no difference at all in how much someone could earn without paying tax.

 

[SirRumpole]

Dear Horace,

As I have better things to do with my time then argue on the internet with someone who has a very small grasp of the tabloid headlines and repeat them in here verbatim I bid you adieu in your endeavours to profligate the Labor party ethos.

Let me leave you with this gem:-



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...n-carbon-tax-con/story-e6frg6n6-1226514353609

Obviously something that could and should be addressed

View attachment 57967

Is that your power bill ? Your kwh appears to have about doubled as as your bill. What is the point you are trying to make ?

 

[sptrawler]

I must appolgise Rumpole, from memory I thought Hawke promised to abolish the fuel excise.

Upon furter investigation it was Hawke who introduced it apparently, what a laugh.

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailyteleg...mments/pain_at_pump_could_backfire_on_abbott/

my bolds
The excise on fuel was introduced by Labor Prime Minister Bob Hawke in 1983, and increases were linked to the consumer price index, effectively delivering bi-annual price hikes.

After a party room revolt in August 2000, John Howard froze the level of excise as part of the tax trade-off that accompanied the introduction of the goods and service tax in 2001

I will have to check further and keep you posted.

 

[sptrawler]

Back on the budget and what a disgrace this is, given all the cuts made to health and education but the god botherer can still find $245 million to spread religious dogma "Schools will lose the option of appointing secular social workers under the national school chaplaincy program, for which the Abbott government has found an extra $245m in budget funding." Are we in a budget crisis or not? Given Pyne was adamant that schools are the responsibility of the states then why is the federal government wasting this sort of money for schools?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...secular-social-workers-at-schools?CMP=soc_568

Agree completely

 

[SirRumpole]

What absolute stupidity from Warren Truss, to so insult a significant portion of his voter base.
It's about as smart as Joe Hockey's comment that the $7 was about a third of the cost of a packet of cigarettes or X quantity of beer. That's implying that all the people worrying about the $7 are indiscriminately sucking on cigarettes and beer.

Absolutely right Julia. Arrogant and insulting tripe from Truss. Along with the cigar smoking episode, it just represents what a bunch of out of touch egotistical elitists we have in government.

A better group of communicators could have sold this budget, but as with everything else they have touched other than perhaps the border issue, they have no idea about how to take the electorate with them. Instead they have produced a 'them and us' situation with massive antagonism toward the government.

I doubt if the Archangel Gabriel could sell this Budget.

Instead of hitting those who could afford it the least, a better way to go would be modest increases in income and company tax to maintain services. Polls have consistently shown that people want services to be available when they need them, and are prepared to pay a bit of extra tax for peace of mind.

At the same time, the costs of government can be reduced . Australians pay 10 times more for medicines than in NZ. Why is this the case ? $1 billion could be wiped off the health bill if medicines were a reasonable price.

 

[trainspotter]

Is that your power bill ? Your kwh appears to have about doubled as as your bill. What is the point you are trying to make ?

That the cost of the Carbon Tax is far more then what the petrol excise is going to be.

Note the wording on the document "This includes 2.255 cents/unit for Synergy's estimate of it's costs for the Federal Governments carbon price, Synergy's allowable return and GST"

So as an "estimate" becomes an actual charge when? If their "estimate" is incorrect do I have to pay more once the policy has been finalised and if it is less do you think Synergy will refund the amount they have taken from me?

“There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead, but let me be clear: I will be putting a price on carbon and I will move to an emissions trading scheme.” Julia Gillard

"Whether it’s a stealth tax (like) the emissions trading scheme, whether it’s an upfront and straight forward tax like a carbon tax, there will not be any new taxes as part of the Coalition’s policies." Tony Abbott

“There are no circumstances under which I will return to the leadership of the Australian Labor Party" Kevin Rudd

Howard/Hawke/Keating/Menzies/Whitlam ... makes no difference ...

 

[sptrawler]

Instead of hitting those who could afford it the least, a better way to go would be modest increases in income and company tax to maintain services. Polls have consistently shown that people want services to be available when they need them, and are prepared to pay a bit of extra tax for peace of mind..

Below you mention NZ, they have a company tax rate of 20% and you want to increase ours from 30%. As though that will help increase jobs.
By the way NZ also pay less per capita in welfare.
Also I don't see many Aussies rushing to live in NZ, there seems to be counter flow of population.

At the same time, the costs of government can be reduced . Australians pay 10 times more for medicines than in NZ. Why is this the case ? $1 billion could be wiped off the health bill if medicines were a reasonable price.

They are trying to reduce the cost of government.

 

[SirRumpole]

Below you mention NZ, they have a company tax rate of 20% and you want to increase ours from 30%. As though that will help increase jobs.
By the way NZ also pay less per capita in welfare.
Also I don't see many Aussies rushing to live in NZ, there seems to be counter flow of population.

So what are you saying ? Conditions for business are better in NZ, but still N.Zedders come here ?

Seems contradictory.

 

[sptrawler]

So what are you saying ? Conditions for business are better in NZ, but still N.Zedders come here ?

Seems contradictory.

Not really NZ is trying and suceeding in atracting business to move there.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/australian-jobs-on-the-move-to-nz-20120417-1x5jv.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arc...e-to-new-zealand/story-e6frg98x-1226064066666