Well when middle class is decimated, you need to get the money somewhere, and whatever bs you read on Labour manifesto, you will can not get it from the few uber richHere's one for the "true believers".
Earn less than $90k and you'll be paying more tax.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09...-secret-heart-federal-budget-surplus/11554990
Here's one for the "true believers".
Earn less than $90k and you'll be paying more tax.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09...-secret-heart-federal-budget-surplus/11554990
Just to keep the theme balanced, here is one for the delusional "true believers".
https://www.afr.com/politics/former...-income-tax-rate-way-too-high-20180805-h13kk0
Easier just to bring on a death tax, why tax the crap out of people earning and inve sting, why not just tax what is passed on?He's right.
Get the personal tax rates down , but also do away with the perks like negative gearing and superannuation tax benefits to balance the system.
Well then get rid of it completely, not just make it for the rich.Negative gearing amounts to taxpayers funding excessive debt - which is one of the things stalling the economy, it also distorts the price of housing - putting it out of range of first home buyers and it's a gravy train where money is siphoned from the have-nots to the haves.
It's one of the reasons we have to tax the crap out of people for the sake of little or no return.
What was done in the U.K years ago was, first home buyers could claim their home interest as a tax deduction, not investors. Which isnt a bad idea.Absolutely get rid of it completely. Should've been done years ago.
Not a bad idea because it mitigates debt - so the return is a lesser burden on the state.What was done in the U.K years ago was, first home buyers could claim their home interest as a tax deduction, not investors. Which isnt a bad idea.
The other godd thing with it is, it still encourages endeavour and reward, in Australia we are too preoccupied with punishing endeavour and rewarding complacency. IMONot a bad idea because it mitigates debt - so the return is a lesser burden on the state.
Easier just to bring on a death tax, why tax the crap out of people earning and inve sting, why not just tax what is passed on?
You want to encourage endeavour and let people enjoy the the proceeds, but that shouldnt mean the next generation should be able to do sod all because they inherit.
Im sure it will be looked at in the review, as the population ages and the super system matures, there will be on going changes for the next 20 to 30 years IMO.You may want to mention that to the LNP.
Yes ,Dutton Cash et al were bragging how they were going to expose or bring down Industry super funds...that was before the banking royal commission discredited their own preferred funds.Now they are trying another way to get into industry funds..As an old man told me 'there are more ways to skin a cat than stuffing a pound of warm butter up its rear end'I think the Government will just stop or slow down the increase in contributions planned.
It doesn't look good when wage growth is 2% and the next rise is 0.5%, especially when the economy is in trouble.
They will also look at trying to hobble the Industry Funds for no good reason.
I think they will mainly avoid any hard decisions and kick the can down the road, but then again I am a huge fan of Rob Sitch's Utopia.
That is true knobby, in a lot of ways there is no point in low income earners living on the bread line, while they have money stuffed away, so they can have enough when they retire to reduce or replace their pension. To me that seems a bit cruel.I think the Government will just stop or slow down the increase in contributions planned.
It doesn't look good when wage growth is 2% and the next rise is 0.5%, especially when the economy is in trouble.
They will also look at trying to hobble the Industry Funds for no good reason.
I think they will mainly avoid any hard decisions and kick the can down the road, but then again I am a huge fan of Rob Sitch's Utopia.
That is true knobby, in a lot of ways there is no point in low income earners living on the bread line, while they have money stuffed away, so they can have enough when they retire to reduce or replace their pension. To me that seems a bit cruel.
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?