The issue wasn't about taking the franking credits off Dick Smith, Twiggy Forrest, it was about taking it of low income people and self funded retirees with minimal income.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
What I was meaning by the elephant in the room comment was, in reference to the growth trajectory not who qualifies, more the fact that it is increasing and points to a decline in our underlying health.The elephant BTW remains the pension (you can own assets worth millions and still get it)not disability, carer's and NDIS IMHO
That’s what it came down to.The issue Labour had was those on welfare could claim it, those in industry funds could claim it, billionaires could claim it, the only ones who couldn't were self funded retirees in a SMSF and low income people.
That’s where the bit about Labor having abandoned their traditional support base came from. They should have done the exact opposite if there was a need to cut it back - start with the billionaires not the bricklayers.
The trouble with both major parties is they’re stuffed full of people who’ve lived rather comfortable lives doing things which are a very long way removed from the reality of those they supposedly represent.
That is why neither Party is addressing the issues, neither has a clue what the reality is like.The trouble with both major parties is they’re stuffed full of people who’ve lived rather comfortable lives doing things which are a very long way removed from the reality of those they supposedly represent.
I hope the labour Party believe that.I don't really think many with SMSF's are traditional Labor base.
More likely Labor's push for higher renewable energy targets frightened those who are currently struggling to pay their power bills, and those in coal mining electorates like the Hunter wondered if they would still have a job under Labor.
.
The trouble with both major parties is they’re stuffed full of people who’ve lived rather comfortable lives doing things which are a very long way removed from the reality of those they supposedly represent.
I hope the labour Party believe that.
I guess that doesn't matter, what matters is why the affluent areas swung to Labour and the blue collar areas swung away, If you think it was climate change and coal mines fine.Well maybe we could have a quick whip round here as to those who have retired on SMSF's and how often they voted Labor.
I guess that doesn't matter, what matters is why the affluent areas swung to Labour and the blue collar areas swung away, If you think it was climate change and coal mines fine.
I think it was the loss of franking credits to low income people, be they working or retired and the effect the removal of negative gearing would have had on established home values.
One thing for sure, it wasn't because the Liberals were a brilliant choice for Government.
It is hardly a representitive cross sectional view, polling an investment forum, but as the papers proved polling means nothing, just my opinion.
I see Morrison is now an expert on bushfires and hazard reduction.Wonder if he consulted the experts before his announcements-or more likely trying to divert for the rorting .I could see intelligence in Rudd and Turnbull ...but this bloke?
I am trying to ween myself off franking credits...got an email from a mob that I already have money with NBI ....world wide bonds...pay 6 percent.If they are as safe as Australian Banks time will tell ?...but they are listed on ASX so I can sell pronto if I get worried.With the franking credit arguments, they must all be with financial advisers and need their advice to diversify.Their penury arguments never gelled with me -they never showed their hands.
It is very much like people who haven't had children, telling those that have, how it should be done.
Absolutely, the tax system is there to fund what the Government of the day feel works, whether that is to support mothers going to work or to increase the population by other means than immigration.Or paying higher taxes so other people can get a baby bonus or Family Tax Welfare.
I don't really think many with SMSF's are traditional Labor base.
He must be an expert, because there wouldn't have been a fanfare when he was away, if he wasn't. At the very least it proved the Country can't function without him, so he should be a shoe in next election.I see Morrison is now an expert on bushfires and hazard reduction.Wonder if he consulted the experts before his announcements-or more likely trying to divert for the rorting .I could see intelligence in Rudd and Turnbull ...but this bloke?
I don't really think many with SMSF's are traditional Labor base.
.
If anyone needs an example of middle class welfare, that's it right there.Or paying higher taxes so other people can get a baby bonus or Family Tax Welfare.
I should perhaps clarify that my primary concern on the franking credits issue has always related to money held outside of superannuation.
Thinking of all those whose circumstances I'm aware of, most of those in blue collar (and many other) fields of work do realise that their exit from the workforce most likely won't be voluntary.
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?