Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

General Social Discussion
User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9406
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast

Re: Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

Post by Yossarian » Wed 06 Jun, 2018 12:03 pm

Okay seeing as though you're returning to your condescending way of discussion I'll break off. As usual you change your definition as it suits your argument. One minute 1950s Venezuela is boom time, the next it's not.

I do enjoy discussions even robust ones. I don't enjoy people who belittle and who won't bend at all. Worse are those with an inflated sense of their intelligence who hope that their inaccuracies go unnoticed. Many times you've been caught using inaccuracies or misrepresentations to suit your agenda. You show no sign of wanting to genuinely discuss things just a desire to present your view as fact and any dissent as being stupid.

For the first time in a longtime it's time to engage the foe button.


Abraham
Member
Member
Posts: 1166
Joined: Mon 25 Mar, 2013 1:09 pm

Post by Abraham » Wed 06 Jun, 2018 12:23 pm

The belittling came from you, and i simply responded in kind, as i always will.

If you don't like it, don't dish it out to start with.

Sorry, but there is no moral high ground for you to occupy here.

Nelson
Member
Member
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat 31 Oct, 2015 11:17 am

Post by Nelson » Wed 06 Jun, 2018 12:51 pm

Abraham wrote:
Wed 06 Jun, 2018 12:23 pm
The belittling came from you, and i simply responded in kind, as i always will.

If you don't like it, don't dish it out to start with.

Sorry, but there is no moral high ground for you to occupy here.
You argue like a condescending jerk. I'd say most of the people reading this thread see him sitting pretty comfortably on the moral high ground. Even people that agreed with your basic views would probably be happy to see you shot down because of your obnoxious expression.

Abraham
Member
Member
Posts: 1166
Joined: Mon 25 Mar, 2013 1:09 pm

Post by Abraham » Wed 06 Jun, 2018 1:18 pm

Nelson wrote:
Wed 06 Jun, 2018 12:51 pm
You argue like a condescending jerk. I'd say most of the people reading this thread see him sitting pretty comfortably on the moral high ground. Even people that agreed with your basic views would probably be happy to see you shot down because of your obnoxious expression.
Welcome to the condescending jerk club, Nelson.

I'm nominating you for president and Jerk-in-chief.

formerguest
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3768
Joined: Fri 07 Jun, 2013 7:33 pm

Post by formerguest » Thu 21 Jun, 2018 12:12 pm

So after taking more than a decade to finally unshackle our economy from the structural deficit and majority of the subsequent national debt that Howard/Costello's previous cuts gave us, their equivalents have just forced through changes that are potentially more disastrous.

Really hard to believe that changes were passed today that will likely cover the period of this and the next two elected governments.


Silentio
Member
Member
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon 01 Jun, 2015 1:21 pm

Post by Silentio » Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:33 pm

Strangely I've never heard any real debate or explanation about the tax cuts. It seems a little odd given the noise about projected increasing costs of healthcare, ageing population etc.

But when you scratch beneath the surface, it gets weird.

From 2025, the tax cuts are massively skewed to benefit those on high incomes. I did these calculations showing annual wage, tax cut and the tax cut as a % of income:

$25,000 $200 saving 0.8% of income
$50,000 $540 saving 1.08% of income
$100,000 $1125 saving 1.13% income
$150,000 $3375 saving 2.25% income
$200,000 $7225 saving 3.61% income

Seems really unfair. A 3.61% saving to someone on a lower income would make a big difference whereas Mr/Ms $200k will probably use it to further rort the tax system through negative gearing a useless unproductive asset (i.e an investment property).

Some of the politicians who claim they supported the legislation to help working class families are nothing short of disgraceful.

jadtiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 2910
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 8:12 am
Location: bayview

Post by jadtiger » Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:55 pm

Just another decision to help the rich get richer at the expense of many working Australians

magpiecol
Member
Member
Posts: 2982
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 3:02 pm

Post by magpiecol » Thu 21 Jun, 2018 11:29 pm

jadtiger wrote:
Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:55 pm
Just another decision to help the rich get richer at the expense of many working Australians
I agree. Let's get rid of those pesky rich people and we can all work for the Government. Or we can stay on welfare. All problems solved.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4422
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 12:40 am

I know a few rich people and they certainly don't need tax breaks, they would not know which pocket to put the extra in.

I don't believe in unhindered wealth that goes beyond for example the price of three median-priced houses. People like Zucker etc don't deserve their great wealth and eventually their strategy or invention would have been taken up other people if they did not.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

jadtiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 2910
Joined: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 8:12 am
Location: bayview

Post by jadtiger » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 6:45 am

magpiecol wrote:
Thu 21 Jun, 2018 11:29 pm
jadtiger wrote:
Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:55 pm
Just another decision to help the rich get richer at the expense of many working Australians
I agree. Let's get rid of those pesky rich people and we can all work for the Government. Or we can stay on welfare. All problems solved.
You always take things out of context.There are many people in this country that need help just to provide for themselves and their families due to lack of money.
I hope that you never have to deal with poverty

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4422
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 6:54 am

If you compare executive rates of salary compared to the working class over a few decades you will find that the execs have jumped up dramatically, whereas as workers have had cost of living adjustments (probably those arranged for by Hawke Accord) and not much else. I can remember decades ago I think it was that no one was getting more than the prime minister whereas nowadays that is chicken feed.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 17322
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Post by Cultured Bogan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 8:03 am

Silentio wrote:
Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:33 pm
Strangely I've never heard any real debate or explanation about the tax cuts. It seems a little odd given the noise about projected increasing costs of healthcare, ageing population etc.

But when you scratch beneath the surface, it gets weird.

From 2025, the tax cuts are massively skewed to benefit those on high incomes. I did these calculations showing annual wage, tax cut and the tax cut as a % of income:

$25,000 $200 saving 0.8% of income
$50,000 $540 saving 1.08% of income
$100,000 $1125 saving 1.13% income
$150,000 $3375 saving 2.25% income
$200,000 $7225 saving 3.61% income

Seems really unfair. A 3.61% saving to someone on a lower income would make a big difference whereas Mr/Ms $200k will probably use it to further rort the tax system through negative gearing a useless unproductive asset (i.e an investment property).

Some of the politicians who claim they supported the legislation to help working class families are nothing short of disgraceful.
Negative gearing needs to change now. It should be grandfathered though, the housing market will implode if you abolish it altogether.
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

Cuando llegue el día, y estoy parado a las puertas del cielo, será Dios pidiendo mi perdón...

formerguest
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 3768
Joined: Fri 07 Jun, 2013 7:33 pm

Post by formerguest » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 10:04 am

Cultured Bogan wrote:
Fri 22 Jun, 2018 8:03 am
Silentio wrote:
Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:33 pm
Strangely I've never heard any real debate or explanation about the tax cuts. It seems a little odd given the noise about projected increasing costs of healthcare, ageing population etc.

But when you scratch beneath the surface, it gets weird.

From 2025, the tax cuts are massively skewed to benefit those on high incomes. I did these calculations showing annual wage, tax cut and the tax cut as a % of income:

$25,000 $200 saving 0.8% of income
$50,000 $540 saving 1.08% of income
$100,000 $1125 saving 1.13% income
$150,000 $3375 saving 2.25% income
$200,000 $7225 saving 3.61% income

Seems really unfair. A 3.61% saving to someone on a lower income would make a big difference whereas Mr/Ms $200k will probably use it to further rort the tax system through negative gearing a useless unproductive asset (i.e an investment property).

Some of the politicians who claim they supported the legislation to help working class families are nothing short of disgraceful.
Negative gearing needs to change now. It should be grandfathered though, the housing market will implode if you abolish it altogether.
Yeah agreed, particularly as many of those that are set to gain the most out of these tax cuts are already utilising this opening, along with generous superannuation concessions to minimise their liabilities. Governments should be about communities, not about assisting those in the Tooraks or Double Bays of our land, which is where the most benefit of these latest tax cuts will fall, rather than the residents of rural areas and outer suburbs that need the break.

I am not against people earning a decent income for their endeavour and labour, nor using the rules to obtain the best outcome for themselves, but those that are on the higher incomes are generally the ones making the decisions and rules that are framing the increasing disparity between the haves and have nots. The income gap between corporates and service employees has become obscene over the last three and a bit decades, whilst their tax liabilities have also fallen dramatically.

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4422
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 10:20 am

I think that we have to virtually stop migration to prevent house price blow out and to save the environment. I don't mind socialist style housing where housing becomes a non issue. It is sort of a birthright that does not put financial pressure on young marriages causing them to break. Also people will concentrate on developing themselves rather then their houses. Generations going back to World War days did not expect to have monster houses that cost a financial and environmental fortune.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 17322
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Post by Cultured Bogan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 10:58 am

Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Fri 22 Jun, 2018 10:20 am
I think that we have to virtually stop migration to prevent house price blow out and to save the environment. I don't mind socialist style housing where housing becomes a non issue. It is sort of a birthright that does not put financial pressure on young marriages causing them to break. Also people will concentrate on developing themselves rather then their houses. Generations going back to World War days did not expect to have monster houses that cost a financial and environmental fortune.
Wealthy foreigners are buying the properties and having them sit dormant to accrue value. Migration is not, if at all, the major problem here.

Houses are more environmentally friendly than they have ever been. BASIX compliance in NSW sets a minimum performance standard for homes.
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

Cuando llegue el día, y estoy parado a las puertas del cielo, será Dios pidiendo mi perdón...

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 17322
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Post by Cultured Bogan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 11:01 am

formerguest wrote:
Fri 22 Jun, 2018 10:04 am
Cultured Bogan wrote:
Fri 22 Jun, 2018 8:03 am
Silentio wrote:
Thu 21 Jun, 2018 4:33 pm
Strangely I've never heard any real debate or explanation about the tax cuts. It seems a little odd given the noise about projected increasing costs of healthcare, ageing population etc.

But when you scratch beneath the surface, it gets weird.

From 2025, the tax cuts are massively skewed to benefit those on high incomes. I did these calculations showing annual wage, tax cut and the tax cut as a % of income:

$25,000 $200 saving 0.8% of income
$50,000 $540 saving 1.08% of income
$100,000 $1125 saving 1.13% income
$150,000 $3375 saving 2.25% income
$200,000 $7225 saving 3.61% income

Seems really unfair. A 3.61% saving to someone on a lower income would make a big difference whereas Mr/Ms $200k will probably use it to further rort the tax system through negative gearing a useless unproductive asset (i.e an investment property).

Some of the politicians who claim they supported the legislation to help working class families are nothing short of disgraceful.
Negative gearing needs to change now. It should be grandfathered though, the housing market will implode if you abolish it altogether.
Yeah agreed, particularly as many of those that are set to gain the most out of these tax cuts are already utilising this opening, along with generous superannuation concessions to minimise their liabilities. Governments should be about communities, not about assisting those in the Tooraks or Double Bays of our land, which is where the most benefit of these latest tax cuts will fall, rather than the residents of rural areas and outer suburbs that need the break.

I am not against people earning a decent income for their endeavour and labour, nor using the rules to obtain the best outcome for themselves, but those that are on the higher incomes are generally the ones making the decisions and rules that are framing the increasing disparity between the haves and have nots. The income gap between corporates and service employees has become obscene over the last three and a bit decades, whilst their tax liabilities have also fallen dramatically.
Oh look I agree. The problem with a housing market implosion is that it just doesn't affect the investors, sole home owners (many of whom are struggling,) will have the value of their properties wiped as well.
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

Cuando llegue el día, y estoy parado a las puertas del cielo, será Dios pidiendo mi perdón...

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 4422
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm

Post by Byron Bay Fan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 11:19 am

I have done a few reno jobs under BASIX and it is virtually meaningless. It should be the rule that all new aircons purchased must be solar electricity supplied. That is only starters but will never be adopted. That all new houses be limited to a certain number of vehicles that the roads can currently hold and will assist in eventually limiting vehicles emissions. Again will never be adopted. If a few simple and very effective measures are not taken then they may as well drop all other environmental concerns as they will be useless. There should on how many wall surfaces can be glass as is also terrible for the environment - heating up in winter and cooling down in summer.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 17322
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains

Post by Cultured Bogan » Fri 22 Jun, 2018 11:26 am

Byron Bay Fan wrote:
Fri 22 Jun, 2018 11:19 am
I have done a few reno jobs under BASIX and it is virtually meaningless. It should be the rule that all new aircons purchased must be solar electricity supplied. That is only starters but will never be adopted. That all new houses be limited to a certain number of vehicles that the roads can currently hold and will assist in eventually limiting vehicles emissions. Again will never be adopted. If a few simple and very effective measures are not taken then they may as well drop all other environmental concerns as they will be useless. There should on how many wall surfaces can be glass as is also terrible for the environment - heating up in winter and cooling down in summer.
Unless you have 20kW solar systems with battery walls you'll be hard up getting that across the line Byron.
Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest!

Cuando llegue el día, y estoy parado a las puertas del cielo, será Dios pidiendo mi perdón...

Post Reply