Oh..the budget..
Oh..the budget..
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....Pete the great (ar$ehole)
Trouble is Tin Piss, the cost of fuel has gone up a minimum of 10 cents a litre in the last 12 months. An average tank of 75 litres is $7.50 so we're back $1.50 and sneering Pete gets more GST, great deal. 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And here we see a classic example of ... Australia has got the government it deserves.
This budget will only really benefit the top 10% of earners in this country. Have a look at the tables of tax relief. It starts out at about $4/week if you are on 20K, reaches the HUGE $6/week around 35K and stays that way until you are on over 50K. Then it goes up in leaps and bounds. About $40/week less tax if you are on 70K, $87/week if you are on 125K etc. etc.
51% of the rest are now scatching their heads wondering if the way they voted last year really was the smart thing to do?
Once those lying (where are those Weapons of Mass Deception?) mongrels rip apart what is left of the unions when they have control of the Senate in July, the HUGE $6 tax cut for most in this country 'aint gonna be worth a can of cold pi$$.
But, to keep this thread on an aviation link (else it will get canned) - at least now the average take-home airline salary will now be back at 2002 levels.
When these low-lifes destroy the minimum wage and take yet another step to keep the working poor down, pilots can say to the rest of the country - "hey guys, that's how our industry has been for years now, it's Johhny's new Australia"
To the average Australian worker, bend over now, you know it's gonna hurt, prepare for a major Rogering!
This budget will only really benefit the top 10% of earners in this country. Have a look at the tables of tax relief. It starts out at about $4/week if you are on 20K, reaches the HUGE $6/week around 35K and stays that way until you are on over 50K. Then it goes up in leaps and bounds. About $40/week less tax if you are on 70K, $87/week if you are on 125K etc. etc.
51% of the rest are now scatching their heads wondering if the way they voted last year really was the smart thing to do?
Once those lying (where are those Weapons of Mass Deception?) mongrels rip apart what is left of the unions when they have control of the Senate in July, the HUGE $6 tax cut for most in this country 'aint gonna be worth a can of cold pi$$.
But, to keep this thread on an aviation link (else it will get canned) - at least now the average take-home airline salary will now be back at 2002 levels.
When these low-lifes destroy the minimum wage and take yet another step to keep the working poor down, pilots can say to the rest of the country - "hey guys, that's how our industry has been for years now, it's Johhny's new Australia"
To the average Australian worker, bend over now, you know it's gonna hurt, prepare for a major Rogering!
Last edited by Boney; 11th May 2005 at 14:04.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No disrespect intended to anyone,but I thought it was quite simple and VERY fair.....if you PAY MORE TAX,then of course you get more BACK!! It's all directly proportional to what you've forked out,so why on earth should a worker on 50k receive an equal slice of the pie as a worker on 100+ who has been crippled by 47% tax for years ??
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the minister for qantas has announced that there will be reductions in en route charges. I bet this will be only for the selected few favourites, and the rest of us will have to pay more to make up the shortfall.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool & the gang
Fair point.
However, Howard did say, "the economy has been doing well so we all share in that result".
Fair enough but it would appear that if you make say, 40K then you have obviously made less of a contribution then a person on 125K because of the new tax tables. The tax breaks are now $6/week for the first and $87/week for the second (and all the sliding scales in between).
This is just blatantly unfair.
Yes, those on higher incomes do pay too much tax, and yes I have been on decent money in a former life. However, salaries have been built around this for 50 years. Lets face it, the only reason an IT Manager gets 80K is because the tax is so high. For example, if the tax rate was a flat 20%, and always had been, then these IT Managers would only be on 50-60K.
However, Johnny made it out to be like a bonus - "here is a tax break because the country has been doing fairly well, but only 10-15% of you will really benefit".
The above is not a quote but that is the reality of what the Liberals stand for.
Absolute disgrace!
The fair thing to do may have been to give say someone on 40K, $10/week tax break sliding up a scale to $30/week for those on 120K.
After all, it adds up to the same % gross.
So unfair - I WANT MT ONCE GREAT COUNTRY BACK!
Fair point.
However, Howard did say, "the economy has been doing well so we all share in that result".
Fair enough but it would appear that if you make say, 40K then you have obviously made less of a contribution then a person on 125K because of the new tax tables. The tax breaks are now $6/week for the first and $87/week for the second (and all the sliding scales in between).
This is just blatantly unfair.
Yes, those on higher incomes do pay too much tax, and yes I have been on decent money in a former life. However, salaries have been built around this for 50 years. Lets face it, the only reason an IT Manager gets 80K is because the tax is so high. For example, if the tax rate was a flat 20%, and always had been, then these IT Managers would only be on 50-60K.
However, Johnny made it out to be like a bonus - "here is a tax break because the country has been doing fairly well, but only 10-15% of you will really benefit".
The above is not a quote but that is the reality of what the Liberals stand for.
Absolute disgrace!
The fair thing to do may have been to give say someone on 40K, $10/week tax break sliding up a scale to $30/week for those on 120K.
After all, it adds up to the same % gross.
So unfair - I WANT MT ONCE GREAT COUNTRY BACK!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes perhaps we need another dose of high tax and 17.5% interest rates.
Banana Republic and the recession we had to have are fond memories.
Something is very screwy though we still gettin wacked for stamps and various other duties.
Perhaps one tax regime may be simpler than seven?
Banana Republic and the recession we had to have are fond memories.
Something is very screwy though we still gettin wacked for stamps and various other duties.
Perhaps one tax regime may be simpler than seven?
Registered User **
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a non Aussie (Permie res soon to be citiziz) I find the tax system here particularly complex and bureaucratic (gotta find something for all those public servants in ACT to do).
That said, I'm in the top bracket(without a crooked accountant to novate lease all my posessions except my shoes), but I's much rather see the breaks go to the lower majority, a few hundred smackeroos a year to us won't change our lifestyle significantly.
I've not looked, but as a parent , I'd like to see more in childcare, education , infrastructure and health, not that my position has changed from when I was single, but I can't help noticing that childcare and education is unwarrantedly expensive here. It does look like the big-end of town has more "pull" than it should.
If Howard wants a nice population growth, then he's not showing it.
Tinpis,
"Yes perhaps we need another dose of high tax and 17.5% interest rates."
Perhaps we do, the cost of debt is so little, it has made any reasonable housing well beyond the reach of young people these days, and we're ending up with an ageing population who will vote in their interests, ie health, no education, no minimum wage, no super reform as they'll already have got it.
Remember High interest rates erode debt and increase wages, not the other way round.
just my thoughts.
That said, I'm in the top bracket(without a crooked accountant to novate lease all my posessions except my shoes), but I's much rather see the breaks go to the lower majority, a few hundred smackeroos a year to us won't change our lifestyle significantly.
I've not looked, but as a parent , I'd like to see more in childcare, education , infrastructure and health, not that my position has changed from when I was single, but I can't help noticing that childcare and education is unwarrantedly expensive here. It does look like the big-end of town has more "pull" than it should.
If Howard wants a nice population growth, then he's not showing it.
Tinpis,
"Yes perhaps we need another dose of high tax and 17.5% interest rates."
Perhaps we do, the cost of debt is so little, it has made any reasonable housing well beyond the reach of young people these days, and we're ending up with an ageing population who will vote in their interests, ie health, no education, no minimum wage, no super reform as they'll already have got it.
Remember High interest rates erode debt and increase wages, not the other way round.
just my thoughts.
Last edited by 7gcbc; 12th May 2005 at 09:31.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In a burrow
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boney, you are failing to mention the people on 40K are entitled to much higher rates of family payments, child care benefits etc than higher income earners (who pay heaps more tax) who do not qualify for the gov handouts.
You have to take it all into account before you go claiming unfairness.
The gov we have is much better than the alternative!!
You have to take it all into account before you go claiming unfairness.
The gov we have is much better than the alternative!!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats assuming you have children.
Lets turn it around. If people earning 40K got $87/week off their tax, sliding down to $6/week for those on 125K, would you be peeved?
You betcha.
Lets turn it around. If people earning 40K got $87/week off their tax, sliding down to $6/week for those on 125K, would you be peeved?
You betcha.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
The fair thing to do may have been to give say someone on 40K, $10/week tax break sliding up a scale to $30/week for those on 120K.
Australia's tax scale is punitive, and unnecessarily complex, especially when you consider the GST that you pay from what's left of your salary AFTER the tax man has already taken his cut.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptain
You are correct.
However, as the liar himself said, this is like a bonus for us ALL as the economy has been doing well of late.
And yes, I agree, the high earners in this country pay way too much tax. This is why I believe it would be fair that, yes, the higher earners get more of a break, but check out the examples published today.
Family 1.
Income total, 55K
$9+ per week tax relief
= $480 pa approx
Family 2.
Income total, 280K
$170+ per week tax relief
= $9,000 pa approx
$480 compared to $9,000?
There is a difference between reducing tax for the high earners and blantantly bending over the average Aussie.
You are correct.
However, as the liar himself said, this is like a bonus for us ALL as the economy has been doing well of late.
And yes, I agree, the high earners in this country pay way too much tax. This is why I believe it would be fair that, yes, the higher earners get more of a break, but check out the examples published today.
Family 1.
Income total, 55K
$9+ per week tax relief
= $480 pa approx
Family 2.
Income total, 280K
$170+ per week tax relief
= $9,000 pa approx
$480 compared to $9,000?
There is a difference between reducing tax for the high earners and blantantly bending over the average Aussie.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Owen
Many business commentators have made the point that ANY tax relief will at the end of the day, put pressure on interest rates because if people have more money in their pockets, they will, amongst other things, invest in Real Estate. This is true, does not matter if it is the top or lower ends of wages that gets the cuts, the end result will be similiar.
The government has gone ahead with tax cuts to help stimulate an economy, which of late, has slowed right down.
I have no problem with that - good idea.
But what it does mean is that people that have a decent income will be able to invest/buy due to the generous tax break, therefore moving the price of owning a home higher again and the likely rising of interest rates.
Those under about 55K are in the same situation they were last week.
THANKS ONLY TO A GOVERNMENT DECISION - the cost of buying a family home in 2 years may well be another 5% higher than it would have been anyway plus another percent of interest.
I don't think an extra $6/week is going to cover that, but an extra $100 probably will.
Do you get my point?
Many business commentators have made the point that ANY tax relief will at the end of the day, put pressure on interest rates because if people have more money in their pockets, they will, amongst other things, invest in Real Estate. This is true, does not matter if it is the top or lower ends of wages that gets the cuts, the end result will be similiar.
The government has gone ahead with tax cuts to help stimulate an economy, which of late, has slowed right down.
I have no problem with that - good idea.
But what it does mean is that people that have a decent income will be able to invest/buy due to the generous tax break, therefore moving the price of owning a home higher again and the likely rising of interest rates.
Those under about 55K are in the same situation they were last week.
THANKS ONLY TO A GOVERNMENT DECISION - the cost of buying a family home in 2 years may well be another 5% higher than it would have been anyway plus another percent of interest.
I don't think an extra $6/week is going to cover that, but an extra $100 probably will.
Do you get my point?
Last edited by Boney; 14th May 2005 at 12:23.
Registered User **
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boney,
"I don't think an extra $6/week is going to cover that, but an extra $100 probably will."
Actually, it probably won't, given inflation and momentum.
It's a fiscally unimaginative budget, a play safe in other words, The majority "battlers" voted him back in because of 1) fear of immigration, 2) fear of interest rates and 3) fear of terrorism and 4) a prosperous economy (which to be fair is almost true for a certain segment of the population)
Neither of which are real, but then again, we all cower in fear through life, don't we - making choices out of fear.
Disappointing frankly, what did we expect ?
"I don't think an extra $6/week is going to cover that, but an extra $100 probably will."
Actually, it probably won't, given inflation and momentum.
It's a fiscally unimaginative budget, a play safe in other words, The majority "battlers" voted him back in because of 1) fear of immigration, 2) fear of interest rates and 3) fear of terrorism and 4) a prosperous economy (which to be fair is almost true for a certain segment of the population)
Neither of which are real, but then again, we all cower in fear through life, don't we - making choices out of fear.
Disappointing frankly, what did we expect ?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a laugh..
Here in sad ol NZ with our socialist neo femi nazi politically spotless government we get taxed on every dollar we earn (..no letoff for the first $6000) and its 20%..then thirty something for every dollar over 38000 and the top rate is in the 60k area.
55c in every dollar mogas and half a packet of fags is tax and 20% or so on alcohol..
...oh and 12.5% GST on top of all that..
...plus don't you guys get a free deposit on a house?
...move aside I'm coming ova
Here in sad ol NZ with our socialist neo femi nazi politically spotless government we get taxed on every dollar we earn (..no letoff for the first $6000) and its 20%..then thirty something for every dollar over 38000 and the top rate is in the 60k area.
55c in every dollar mogas and half a packet of fags is tax and 20% or so on alcohol..
...oh and 12.5% GST on top of all that..
...plus don't you guys get a free deposit on a house?
...move aside I'm coming ova
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sydney
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Introducing new arguments when we haven't finished the old"?
Umm ... it all part of the same argument, is it not? It's called economics.
"Why this obsession in Australia to knock anyone doing better them themselves"
Oh please .....
And that last paragraph has lost me completely? Am I being accused of having a chip on my shoulder? When you can't make the argument, get personal???
For your information, in many ways this new tax arrangement may even be better for me personally (That is, if we want to get personal)
You obviously have no idea what so ever of the points I have been trying to make.
Glad I didn't waste my time putting alternative views forward????
Umm ... it all part of the same argument, is it not? It's called economics.
"Why this obsession in Australia to knock anyone doing better them themselves"
Oh please .....
And that last paragraph has lost me completely? Am I being accused of having a chip on my shoulder? When you can't make the argument, get personal???
For your information, in many ways this new tax arrangement may even be better for me personally (That is, if we want to get personal)
You obviously have no idea what so ever of the points I have been trying to make.
Glad I didn't waste my time putting alternative views forward????
Last edited by Boney; 15th May 2005 at 09:52.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Time out guys!
You are both in agreement (I think), but too intent on winning individually (and as a result ripping into each other) to see that there is probably more COMMON ground than different.
I believe you BOTH agree that Australia's taxation system is too overly complex.
The best and fairest system would be to tax EVERYONE equally - regardless of income - but that EVERYONE who individually benefits MUST pay his share.
And that when a tax break occurs, it happens across the board -EQUALLY for EVERYONE.
What p!55e5 a lot of us off is NOT the fact that some people are making LOTS of $$$'s, but the fact that not only are they avoiding/evading tax, but they are rubbing the noses of the less fortunates - who ARE playing by the rules, and paying their share of the tax - by openly flaunting their ill gotten gains by way of ostentatious property purchases.
"Millionaires' Row" - now more correctly Billionaires' Row - on Hedges Avenue, Mermaid Beach (Gold Coast), is a prime example.
The modus operandi there, is for several houses valued at a couple of million dollars EACH to be bought by one purchaser, all then totally demolished, and a single, private residence constructed on the previous multiple sites.
You are both in agreement (I think), but too intent on winning individually (and as a result ripping into each other) to see that there is probably more COMMON ground than different.
I believe you BOTH agree that Australia's taxation system is too overly complex.
The best and fairest system would be to tax EVERYONE equally - regardless of income - but that EVERYONE who individually benefits MUST pay his share.
And that when a tax break occurs, it happens across the board -EQUALLY for EVERYONE.
What p!55e5 a lot of us off is NOT the fact that some people are making LOTS of $$$'s, but the fact that not only are they avoiding/evading tax, but they are rubbing the noses of the less fortunates - who ARE playing by the rules, and paying their share of the tax - by openly flaunting their ill gotten gains by way of ostentatious property purchases.
"Millionaires' Row" - now more correctly Billionaires' Row - on Hedges Avenue, Mermaid Beach (Gold Coast), is a prime example.
The modus operandi there, is for several houses valued at a couple of million dollars EACH to be bought by one purchaser, all then totally demolished, and a single, private residence constructed on the previous multiple sites.