New posts

Reply to thread

Message

As long as it is non discriminatory, there wouldn't be a problem, I see today that Dutton is suggesting first home buyers will be able to offset their home interest against their income tax that is discriminatory IMO.
Trump, Dutton, Albo, all of them give breaks to the rich and the cult cheer it on, tribal politics is what got us to this. Both sides bribing their cult. You talk about the right wing religious cult, others talk about the left wing loony cult, they come from fringe dwellers on both sides.
The middle and high income earners are the only ones in Australia are the only ones who pay effective tax, low income earners pay very little tax when offsets are included.
Well that would be unless you took the franking credits off them, then they would be paying 30% on all their shares income, with no tax free threshold. Meanwhile the rich would get a tax offset on their income, that's cult mentality, take from the poor and give to the rich.

Back to Trump?

<blockquote data-quote="sptrawler" data-source="post: 1326239" data-attributes="member: 28038">As long as it is non discriminatory, there wouldn&#039;t be a problem, I see today that Dutton is suggesting first home buyers will be able to offset their home interest against their income tax that is discriminatory IMO.Trump, Dutton, Albo, all of them give breaks to the rich and the cult cheer it on, tribal politics is what got us to this. Both sides bribing their cult. You talk about the right wing religious cult, others talk about the left wing loony cult, they come from fringe dwellers on both sides.&nbsp; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />The middle and high income earners are the only ones in Australia are the only ones who pay effective tax, low income earners pay very little tax when offsets are included.Well that would be unless you took the franking credits off them, then they would be paying 30% on all their shares income, with no tax free threshold. Meanwhile the rich would get a tax offset on their income, that&#039;s cult mentality, take from the poor and give to the rich. <img src="https://www.aussiestockforums.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/roflmao.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":roflmao:" title="Roflmao&nbsp; &nbsp; :roflmao:" data-shortname=":roflmao:" />Back to Trump?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="sptrawler, post: 1326239, member: 28038"] As long as it is non discriminatory, there wouldn't be a problem, I see today that Dutton is suggesting first home buyers will be able to offset their home interest against their income tax that is discriminatory IMO. Trump, Dutton, Albo, all of them give breaks to the rich and the cult cheer it on, tribal politics is what got us to this. Both sides bribing their cult. You talk about the right wing religious cult, others talk about the left wing loony cult, they come from fringe dwellers on both sides. ;) The middle and high income earners are the only ones in Australia are the only ones who pay effective tax, low income earners pay very little tax when offsets are included. Well that would be unless you took the franking credits off them, then they would be paying 30% on all their shares income, with no tax free threshold. Meanwhile the rich would get a tax offset on their income, that's cult mentality, take from the poor and give to the rich. :roflmao: Back to Trump? [/QUOTE]

Verification