This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The ScoMo Government

Jump to new
"Now translating that to this debate about franking credits, what Labor needs to do is"

Apologies Smurf haven't read all of yours or anyone else's comments but the above caught my eye.

Forget Labors attempts to address the issue it did not fly.

But the problem won't go away whether the revenue comes from a different source or as a result of winding back the franking credits hand out at some point you cannot keep handing out revenue that is not targeted to serve the purpose of government.

Realistically the whole tax system require reform (everyone knows this) so that any imbalance in removing franking credits are addressed. Note the current arguments for keeping franking credits wouldn't get a guernsey because of the changes for greater efficiencies required for effective taxes.

With the election of a populous no policy d!ckhead tax reform is probably a generation away and will be too late I note again the cost of franking credits is higher than the cost of education thats forsaking Australia's future right there, disgusting.
 
Maybe if the opposition had been more honest and equitable with their focus, they may well have been in Government now, they will always have trouble getting support if their policies can't stand scrutiny.
As I said, if their policy had said all who don't pay tax don't get the credits, that is fine.
They didn't say that, I would rather have no policy d!ckheads, than nasty ba$tards that want to attack a small sector of the community.
Obviously as per the election result, most agreed with my sentiments, except the rich of course they would have kept their $250m pay packet tax free.
 
SirRumpole said:
I think they would be in government now had they been less honest.

That seems to be the way things happen these days.
Click to expand...
That's true but then they would wear the tag of not taking it to the election, really they ended up with too many vested interests wanting Bill to do things for them, it all became a big mess.
Morrison needs to lift his game or he will be thrown out, four terms of doing nothing wont cut it that's for sure.
 
IFocus said:
Realistically the whole tax system require reform
Click to expand...
Ultimately that's what it comes down to but I'd add to the list that welfare also needs substantial reform.

I'm not opposed to the concept ideologically, indeed I think that realistically Newstart probably ought to be increased, but there's something fundamentally wrong when (depending on who's figures you use) something like a third or even half or all households are receiving some sort of handout.

Handing people money because they bought a house, had a baby or simply because they're old and taxing everyone to pay for that seems rather odd. It's akin to taking water out one end of the bath and tipping it in the other - zero net benefit. Let people keep more of their own money then they can afford to raise the child, buy a house, save for their retirement or whatever.

Needless to say the manner in which government spends money on other things also needs a serious look at and by that I mean everything from dubious allocation of grants for sports facilities through to paying $38K to install a power point.
 
IMO the problem with super is, it is still evolving and its direction is being developed on the run, rather than following a pre defined strategy. There will come a time where everyone who has worked, will have a large enough amount that they can fund their own retirement, but also those who don't work want and expect a comfortable retirement from the age pension.
So at the moment because the majority don't have enough in super, the temptation is to take it off those who have saved in super, to give to those who haven't.
Well that will soon become a big issue as both numbers grow, so what they will have to do is find a way that encourages those who work to save for retirement, not discourage them.
The only way I can see it working is the same as Canada, U.K and NZ, where everyone gets a pension and those who want to save more for a better retirement can do so, but the retirement income from the super is taxed the same as wages.
Then the money going in and while it is growing has a tax break, but when it comes out it is treated the same as normal income. That would have to streamline a lot of the issues and also take away the stigma of the age pension.
 
Last edited:
Mate, you're too smart to be on a public forum. And if that wasn't enough, also visible from space at Christmas time! Can't disagree with any of that
 
I like it spT:
"..The only way I can see it working is the same as Canada, U.K and NZ, where everyone gets a pension and those who want to save more for a better retirement can do so, but the retirement income from the super is taxed the same as wages... spTrawler"
 
I think if you look at your graph IFocus, the elephant in the room is disability, carer's and NDIS, that sector is growing faster than anything else.
 
Prominent Liberal Party Climate denier, serial liar and the coal lobbies current favorite xitch Craig Kelly has been busily lying about climate science on his Facebook Page.

One of the scientists hose work he "misrepresents" (that is being so nice ...) has corrected him on his Farce Book page.

UK climate scientist corrects Australian MP Craig Kelly's 'blatant misrepresentation'
Prof Sandy Harrison tells the Liberal on his Facebook page that his misuse of her study should not go unchallenged

Graham Readfearn


@readfearn
Wed 22 Jan 2020 13.36 AEDT Last modified on Wed 22 Jan 2020 13.38 AEDT
Shares
3




Craig Kelly has used Prof Sandy Harrison’s study to claim in a Facebook post that rising CO2 can’t be linked to Australia’s bushfire crisis. Photograph: Mike Bowers/The Guardian
A leading UK climate scientist has used the Facebook page of the MP Craig Kelly to correct his “blatant misrepresentation” of a study she co-authored on a 70,000-year history of bushfires in Australia.

Kelly, a serial denier of climate change, has been using the 2011 study to claim rising CO2 in the atmosphere can’t be linked to Australia’s bushfire crisis, because the study had shown total area being burned was going down while CO2 is rising.

But Prof Sandy Harrison told Guardian Australia: “I am a working scientist and I do not routinely engage in arguments on social media, but I do not think that the misuse of scientific analyses should be allowed to go unchallenged.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ian-mp-craig-kellys-blatant-misrepresentation
 
Meanwhile the BS that ScoMo is sprouting about "protecting jobs" by not doing anything to reduce emissions is eviscerated very nicely thank you.
No one job is worth saving at the expense of climate catastrophe. Not even Scott Morrison's
Richard Denniss
Promising Australia won’t tackle the climate crisis unless every coal worker’s job is safe is a cruel hoax designed to conceal inaction

Would the prime minister rule out protecting Australians from terrorism if it cost a single job? Would he promise that no nurse, teacher or other public servant would be sacked in pursuit of a budget surplus? Of course not. But when it comes to preventing dangerous climate change, the government whose policies closed the entire Australian car industry claims that every job is sacred. Yeah, right.

The one thing we can say with certainty about the coal industry is that, regardless of climate policy, automation will decimate coal communities in the coming decade. The coal companies sacked around half their workforce in the late 80s – the minute new technology let them – and the coal industry is gearing up to do it again. Adani promised its proposed Queensland coalmine would be automated “from pit to port” and the rest of the industry is publicly preparing for the same goal.

But while #ScottyFromMarketing loves to position himself as defending coal workers from climate activists, he is strategically silent when it comes to protecting those same coal workers from the ravages of automation. If the Coalition wanted to protect the jobs of those who currently work in the coal industry, they would ban the introduction of robot-driven trucks and trains in existing mines and ban the construction of new, highly automated mines in regions that have never mined coal. But they won’t, because supporting the coal industry has nothing to do with protecting the jobs of existing coal workers. Coal is about symbolism and the symbiotic relationship between the Coalition and the coal industry.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-climate-catastrophe-not-even-scott-morrisons
 
sptrawler said:
We are talking about funding in general and the ways to tax to pay for it, without getting all emotive about. Which appears to be the difficult part these days.
Click to expand...

Chiffs point exactly, tax reform would see franking credits gone, it would see the need to raise revue for the purpose required of government that means yes heaven forbid the thought, helping those less well off or disadvantaged you know that old Australian-ism no longer held (a fair go) not hand it to the likes of Dick Smith $100,000s every year.
The elephant BTW remains the pension (you can own assets worth millions and still get it)not disability, carer's and NDIS IMHO
 
Talking about the sports rort anyone here thinking the quite Australians don't care?

Waiting for the question to Smoko "will Bridget be handing out the grants to farmer bushfire victims and which seats will benefit?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bill Shorten: High Flying Fake Or The Worker's Friend
Replies
5
Views
2K
Investoradam
J Capital Research
Replies
1
Views
2K
greggles
R
The 7 Moats of Quality Companies
Replies
7
Views
7K
divs4ever
M
The Night of the Long Prawn
Replies
0
Views
3K
Michael Cornips
M
R
Multiple Sclerosis: If you know of any MS patients
Replies
4
Views
6K
noirua
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...