IFocus
You are arguing with a Galah
- Joined
- 8 September 2006
- Posts
- 7,683
- Reactions
- 4,783
Some good news...
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ins-program-20140619-3af5y.html#ixzz352po5RaP
If you read the superannuation thread, he puts $50b of it down to super tax concessions.
I think he is cherry picking, to support ideological arguement.
These same fiscal issues were present when Labor was in government, he said nothing, now the coalition is in, he can't shut up.
Any coalition sugestions, he is unwilling to entertain, so what is the point in debating when all he wants is an audience.IMO
Please don't misrepresent what I've said.
Please don't misrepresent what I've said.
I've complained that the super tax expenditures are around $30B with the industry and retail funds skimming $18B a year, while the SMSF sector is probably another $5B a year.
So to resolve an aged pension problem of $35B we're costing ourselves over $50B with the cost escalating rapidly. to me that is not sensible policy. I've complained of this when labor was in Government.
As for not supporting any current Govt policy, I've said I support the indexation of fuel excise and believe it was one of Howard's worst decisions, up there with tax free super and removing of RBLs.
There's nothing else worth supporting in the budget. PPL - no thanks. School Chaplains - nope. Medicare co payment - I would if it was better targeted. Deficit levy - it's a band-aid solution not meaningful reform. Removal of the carbon and resources taxes - not unless Abbot can replace the revenue more fairly.
I'd be interested to know what you currently support from last Months budget.
More good news
Jihadi Aussies mustn't be allowed back: PM
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...ng-iraq-sitation/story-fni0xqi4-1226960777157
But they are Australian citizens. How can he stop them coming home? Also, how can he prove that they were Jhadi and not just visiting relatives? I don't think there will be a problem with locking them up as it is against the law to fight foreign wars.
Consumer groups and industry super funds have hit out at the federal government's decision to push ahead with controversial changes to financial advice reforms.
Under changes to be introduced from July 1, the government will abolish a 'catch-all' provision for advisors to act in the best interests of their clients.
It will also exclude general advice from conflicted remuneration rules and remove the requirement for investors to 'opt-in' to authorise ongoing fees every two years.
The changes follow months of debate and speculation over the amendments to the future of financial advice (FOFA) reforms, introduced under Labor in response to a series of corporate collapses.
Consumer group Choice said the changes would wind back essential protection for consumers seeking financial advice.
''Conflicted and poor financial advice has cost consumers billions and in too many cases led to people losing their homes and life savings,'' chief executive Alan Kirkland said.
''This is why consumer protections were originally needed and exactly why they should not be removed.''
Low life Abbott government backing the big end of town to screw the punters how disgusting.....where is the outrage from the Abbott lovers here.
Surely this legislation that they have pushed into parliament is so indicative of Abbott and his total disregard for any semblance of integrity.
Anger as Coalition waters down financial advice laws
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/bank...advice-laws-20140620-3ahyl.html#ixzz35BZFODyk
he Senate committee is telling Finance Minister Mathias Cormann to redraft his FoFA bill, but is trying not to say it too loudly. So Alan Kohler says he'll do it for them: REDRAFT THE BLOODY BILL, MINISTER!
In a way, the two Senate inquiries were around the wrong way. The ASIC inquiry should have concluded before the other one began.
The ASIC one has been looking at what happens when advisers are paid commissions and don't act in their clients' best interests, and the inquiry into FoFA amendments has been looking at what to do about it.
So the Minister should wait for the second half of this opportunity (the Senate's report on ASIC's performance and the dreadful consequences of conflicted financial advice that it will contain) to think again before reacting to the suggestion from the FoFA committee's report that he redraft the amendments.
Maybe if he does that - and he also thinks about why he went into public life in the first place - Australia's hapless users of financial advice will end up with a good result.
Stagger me! I have to agree with IFocus.
Abbott lovers? I can't think of even one on this forum.Low life Abbott government backing the big end of town to screw the punters how disgusting.....where is the outrage from the Abbott lovers here.
From Alan Kohler
Redraft the bloody FoFA bill, Minister
Abbott lovers? I can't think of even one on this forum
Hi Sydboy, I think your analysis of cost vs. saving is overly simplistic.
IF there was NO superannuation system that same pool of assets would be in the individuals hands (well...whatever % wasn't spent as it was earned)....and so it would still be invested somewhere, whether that be investment properties, shares, managed funds etc. and would still be subject to fees. Accounting, agents fees, fund manager, stockbroker, financial planner, bank, legal etc.
Hi Sydboy, I think your analysis of cost vs. saving is overly simplistic.
IF there was NO superannuation system that same pool of assets would be in the individuals hands (well...whatever % wasn't spent as it was earned)....and so it would still be invested somewhere, whether that be investment properties, shares, managed funds etc. and would still be subject to fees. Accounting, agents fees, fund manager, stockbroker, financial planner, bank, legal etc.
Smacks of whinging to me
Barking up the wrong tree
Attacking thecpeople who give the most
Tall poppy
Poor understanding of the real world and the risks and stresses of many high income earners
Well I'm one and proud of it.
He may not turn out to be as great a PM as John Howard but compared to the labor rabble that was previously in Government he has integrity in spades.
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?