- Joined
- 28 October 2008
- Posts
- 8,609
- Reactions
- 39
That has much in common with Rudd/Gillard Labor.
It limps on under the heavy burden of its policy failures and lies without the respect of the vast majority of the voting public.
That has much in common with Rudd/Gillard Labor.I shall limp on with the heavy burden of not having your respect..........
You admit to being scared by my posts???????
Rather, perhaps you find opinions different to yours confronting.
So despite what you said before, your situation has actually got nothing to do with the Carbon Tax 'package' at all.http://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/content.aspx?doc=/Content/00223292.htm&page=9
"On 11 May 2011, (as part of the 2010-11 Budget measures) the Treasurer announced changes to the dependent spouse tax offset. As announced, it is proposed that from 1 July 2011 only taxpayers with a dependent spouse born on or before 30 June 1971 will be eligible to claim this offset."
My wife was previously eligible, but since she's born in 1983 and they've moved the goalposts she is no longer.
Yes, there seems to be more freedom here than on other fora where political issues seem to be taboo. It is important to remember that places like this cannot be taken too seriously. Just like your posts doc; every time I read one of your posts that seems to contain some serious content, I look at your avatar and cannot help but to burst out laughing!I doubt very much that you have the forum mods worried.
Which you cannot help replying to.I wasn't aware that you had opinions on anything. Just snide remarks.
Would you care to go back to my post (in this thread) regarding the economic effects of a tax on carbon, and rebut?It is my opinion that the introductuion of the Carbon Tax in itself will have a negligible effect on anything as long as business proprieters do not price gouge.
Ah, I knew eventually there'd be something I'd like about your posts, Eager.Yes, there seems to be more freedom here than on other fora
Ah, I knew eventually there'd be something I'd like about your posts, Eager.
Just fancy, someone actually using the word 'fora'.
That has much in common with Rudd/Gillard Labor.
It limps on under the heavy burden of its policy failures and lies without the respect of the vast majority of the voting public.
To the extent that it results in increased economic growth, tax cuts as a means of returning to surplus is a very credible strategy.None actually but sure to be brought to you by PM Abbott, no carbon tax, no mining tax, tax cuts and record return to surplus.(apparently its a DNA thing).
Now about that structural hole thingy...............LOL just keep looking the other way.
I can change it if you like.Yes, there seems to be more freedom here than on other fora where political issues seem to be taboo. It is important to remember that places like this cannot be taken too seriously. Just like your posts doc; every time I read one of your posts that seems to contain some serious content, I look at your avatar and cannot help but to burst out laughing!:
No prizes for guessing who he's running down.
I shall limp on with the heavy burden of not having your respect..........
When the government announced the carbon tax, it also announced an increase to the tax free threshold to $18,200 from the current level of $6000.
What they omitted to mention, except in some fine print, was that along with this increase would go the abolition of the low income tax offset.
I had occasion to ask some questions of the ATO today re projected tax free thresholds for something I'm considering doing. I was interested to have them say that so far they have no advice from government about any coming change in the tax free threshold or associated offsets.
Hasn't all this legislation been passed now? Why wouldn't the tax office be in a position to advise people re the situation as it will apply in the coming financial year?
ENERGY company Synergy is pocketing millions of bonus carbon tax dollars by holding on to the money collected from West Australians for up to a year before handing it over to the Federal Government.
The monopoly electricity retailer already has collected $68 million from households and businesses and will raise an estimated further $150 million before it passes on one cent in tax.
Yes, I've heard that too. It's one of the most devious lies concocted by the power generators, in order to justify their "god-given right to profit" from selling more dirty power at fatter profits.I queried about all the people with solar panels generating their own electricity and he claims that they are actually driving the price up !!
Well, the amount being paid to people who have the solar panels has to come from somewhere, and it's my understanding that (at least in Qld) it is coming from an additional charge on the bills issued to general consumers without the solar panels. eg those who perhaps were renting or simply didn't have the available capital to install the panels have subsequently been indirectly paying the subsidy to those who could afford them.I had a wholesale electricity supplier in the other day and he showed me some startling figures where over 20% of the energy bill is made up of fees and charges (unethical in his opinion) Only about 9% is actual generation of electricity and the remainder was to pay for the "asset" and bureaucrats wages and profit back to the government. The less we use in electricity (and once again in his words) the more we will have to pay in "fixed costs". I queried about all the people with solar panels generating their own electricity and he claims that they are actually driving the price up !!
I wouldn't be surprised. It's completely out of control, it seems. In Qld we will have a 13.6% increase in July and ditto in future years unless something is changed.He also went on to say that electricity (in Western Australia) is going to go up by 54% in the next 3 years - State budget documents duly handed over and noted as fact.
Not just the carbon tax and GST but the reality that the infrastructure was (sensibly enough, before the whole solar/green energy craze) upgraded to cover increased population and to provide reliability of service, but then with the proliferation of the solar panels, fewer households actually consumed electricity, leaving ever fewer suckers who were not able to install the panels liable to meet a much greater proportion of the fixed cost attributable to the infrastructure improvements.Apparently the modelling was done on an exponential growth in electricity consumption but it has actually turned out that we are using less electricity because of the price increases (read carbon tax and GST blah blah blah)
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?