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.
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.
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.What makes you think the levy will come off in 3 years?
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.
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?
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?:
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.
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
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.
What absolute stupidity from Warren Truss, to so insult a significant portion of his voter base.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
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.The tax free threshhold went up from $6000 to $18000.
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
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
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?