Like the idea. Twiggy and Gina would both have aneurisms.
Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here
- Thread starter Kul
- Start date
- Status
Tim Sheens
Well-known member
Negative gearing and capital gains taxation rules, plus changes to foreign ownership.
Regarding national debt, the next round of income tax cuts from $120 to 200k to a flat rate of 30% need to be repealed as part of it. In it's place, the soon to be removed next July Low and Middle Income Tax Offset that provides up $1,080 to $90k (with new additional $420 up to $125,999) should be integrated permanently from next year.
Basically, I propose that they bring forward the drop from 32.5% to thirty in next financial year up to $105k in 23/24, which @$1500 means no loss for anyone if a no worse off test is applied. Then maintaining that test of whichever is greater when taking the 30% rate through to $120k in 24/25, a cut that will give them up to an additional $375.
I see that as much fairer than taking $1,500 away from people struggling to live on $45k. What isn't fair is those earning $200k getting $7,200 above and beyond such in tax cuts with a flat rate from $45k in 24/25. Even more unfair per Senator Rex Patrick is that Qatar collects $26.6 Billion in royalties from a similar amount of LNG export as ours and Australia only get a measly $0.8B.
Last edited:
Just a question on housing and affordability....and I'm not entering the political debate at all.
When I bought my first house 35 years ago, and my parents, and grandparents before them bought their houses, they started at the bottom, paid off a bit, built equity, spent time doing it and never really had issues with interest rates and affordability as such.
It seems these days with interest rates so low, every Tom, Dick & Harry has gone in for the million dollar houses and huge mortgages, and then cry poor about the cost of living, jobs and housing affordability when prices go up. I'll bet these same people whinging have the latest Iphone, new cars with loans, flat screen TVS, credit cards, Foxtel, etc etc.
At what stage do we stop whinging about the cost of living and how the government have not supplied enough housing etc and wanting handouts, because of a decision those people have made to go in deep straight up?
Sure generalising, but its a pretty good one. Just interested on who is responsible for this and why?
When I bought my first house 35 years ago, and my parents, and grandparents before them bought their houses, they started at the bottom, paid off a bit, built equity, spent time doing it and never really had issues with interest rates and affordability as such.
It seems these days with interest rates so low, every Tom, Dick & Harry has gone in for the million dollar houses and huge mortgages, and then cry poor about the cost of living, jobs and housing affordability when prices go up. I'll bet these same people whinging have the latest Iphone, new cars with loans, flat screen TVS, credit cards, Foxtel, etc etc.
At what stage do we stop whinging about the cost of living and how the government have not supplied enough housing etc and wanting handouts, because of a decision those people have made to go in deep straight up?
Sure generalising, but its a pretty good one. Just interested on who is responsible for this and why?
Magpie_Magic
Well-known member
How would shareholders be compensated? They are the ones who take the risks.
May as well socialise all housing then too. Fed up of all the indirect subsidies pumping up those.
Are we a free market economy or heading red?
They'll be compensated from mining operations elsewhere. I don't endorse all industry being nationalised. Mining is a large part of our economy though and I would like to see all value retained for the benefit of Australians, not just those who happen to be shareholders.
If we start digging up houses to sell, sure, nationalise them too.
I don't believe we are, or if we ever were, a free market economy? I always thought Australia had a mixed market economy due to regulation and government planning.
earl
Well-known member
Like every single economy in the world. I think even Russia and China would be exactly the same. It's just a matter of degree.
Magpie_Magic
Well-known member
So people can own overpriced houses untouched while assets belonging to shareholders are confiscated to pay back indirect subsidies to housing.
In that scenario nobody should own wealth in housing either.
What a joke.
Magpie_Magic
Well-known member
Lots of green and reds on here.
What's yours is yours and whats mine is yours lol.
Scary stuff.
What's yours is yours and whats mine is yours lol.
Scary stuff.
Wipe both the housing and mining subsidies then. If you want a truly free market economy, let them go it alone, if they can't survive that's their problem. Not sure about you either, but I didn't get jackshit to build the house I have now.
Also, I should clarify I support grandfathering mining changes, BHP and RT etc can keep their existing mines, just can't get new ones. I don't believe in just retroactively applying laws either, same as any changes to negative gearing etc.
I've voted all over the place over the years, even Liberal.
This country has to start looking after it's own interest first. 30-40 years of neoliberalism (the ALP and LNP have both been responsible for facets of it,) have sent jobs off shore, shrunk the middle class, increased the gap in wage to house affordability and whoring off of all our public assets. This country does nothing here anymore but dig holes, and we even leave that to private enterprise.
pawsandclaws1
Well-known member
The issue I have with housing is even in a country city such as Orange a block of land is around $700k and in Sydney if you buy a unit many of those are over a $1m. I do have sympathy for those buying into the housing market. Buy within your means but even then it is difficult. I started with a 2 bedroom unit at Corrimal but the market was different then. Some kind of means based assistance is needed, but for the minimum required to house a family.
Tiger Tarl
Well-known member
Are you kidding? About one third of large companies failed to pay a cent of tax in 2020, according to the Tax Office's corporate tax transparency report released on 2nd Jan, 2020. Or are they inaccurate and exaggerative as you say?
Of 2,214 entities covered by the ATO data for 2017-18, 710 did not pay any tax. Many companies claimed tax losses and concessions that often go back several years.
There were 1,504 corporate entities in the 2017–18 data that reported tax payable of $52.3 billion — a net increase of $6.6 billion from the previous year. And yet paid no tax.
Also, 192 of Australia’s biggest companies paid tax of 10% or less of their profit in 2018-19, including seven that paid more in political donations than they did in tax.
These are facts and figures that are undisputed, not exaggerated or inaccurate. And that's just what the system allows. There are still instances of outright tax avoidance, in which multinationals attempt to shift profits outside of Australia to reduce their local taxable income.
I understand cognitive bias can be strong (both ways) but let's educate ourselves so that we can have accurate and pragmatic policy formation as you say without turning a blind eye as we have been doing. These are facts. Most corporations are not paying their fair chare like you and me. And if they paid like the rest of us do, then Australia would be far better off economically.
And here are just a few links to satisfy those who are open to it:
A third of big companies paid no tax in 2019-20, this table reveals which ones
The number of Australian public companies that paid no tax rose during COVID-19 lockdowns, according to the ATO's latest transparency data.
www.abc.net.au
Some of Australia's biggest companies paid more in political donations than tax in 2018-19
Tax report reveals Chevron Australia paid no tax on $900m but $129,685 in donations to Labor, Liberal and National parties
www.theguardian.com
One-third of big businesses in Australia still don’t pay any tax five years into ATO crackdown
Some 782 out of 2,370 large companies paid no tax in 2019-20, mostly because they made a loss or claimed credits for previous losses
www.theguardian.com
Jedi_Tiger
Well-known member
plenty of Comrades
Jedi_Tiger
Well-known member
all sources from the turnbull times and abc I seeAre you kidding? About one third of large companies failed to pay a cent of tax in 2020, according to the Tax Office's corporate tax transparency report released on 2nd Jan, 2020. Or are they inaccurate and exaggerative as you say?
Of 2,214 entities covered by the ATO data for 2017-18, 710 did not pay any tax. Many companies claimed tax losses and concessions that often go back several years.
There were 1,504 corporate entities in the 2017–18 data that reported tax payable of $52.3 billion — a net increase of $6.6 billion from the previous year. And yet paid no tax.
Also, 192 of Australia’s biggest companies paid tax of 10% or less of their profit in 2018-19, including seven that paid more in political donations than they did in tax.
These are facts and figures that are undisputed, not exaggerated or inaccurate. And that's just what the system allows. There are still instances of outright tax avoidance, in which multinationals attempt to shift profits outside of Australia to reduce their local taxable income.
I understand cognitive bias can be strong (both ways) but let's educate ourselves so that we can have accurate and pragmatic policy formation as you say without turning a blind eye as we have been doing. These are facts. Most corporations are not paying their fair chare like you and me. And if they paid like the rest of us do, then Australia would be far better off economically.
And here are just a few links to satisfy those who are open to it:
A third of big companies paid no tax in 2019-20, this table reveals which ones
The number of Australian public companies that paid no tax rose during COVID-19 lockdowns, according to the ATO's latest transparency data.
Some of Australia's biggest companies paid more in political donations than tax in 2018-19
Tax report reveals Chevron Australia paid no tax on $900m but $129,685 in donations to Labor, Liberal and National parties
One-third of big businesses in Australia still don’t pay any tax five years into ATO crackdown
Some 782 out of 2,370 large companies paid no tax in 2019-20, mostly because they made a loss or claimed credits for previous losses
Tim Sheens
Well-known member
I will hazard a guess that it is the disproportionate rise in cost compared to wages and a colour TV was still about a decade away in 1965 that the following screenshot refers to. Prior to the Gold Amex card and for reference, an approximate period that your parents purchased a home.
A mobile phone of any variety was still very much a rarity when you bought your home, but a normal part of life for decades now and housing affordability is some 25% worse yet in the few years since that 2018 article. For mine it is somewhat unfair to compare era norms of household goods, technology etcetera in judgement.
pawsandclaws1
Well-known member
Easier access to "finance". The only issue is paying it back especially if interest rates rise.
mozo.com.au
Nano breaks the mould with the "world's fastest home loan"
Taking aim at two of the biggest gripes amongst home borrowers – slow approvals and uncompetitive rates – digital lender Nano has opened its doors in Australia with super cheap rates and what it claims to be "the world's fastest home loan".
mozo.com.au
earl
Well-known member
We've done this though. It's not like the government has said go out and borrow as much as possible to outbid everyone else.
My parents bought there house which they still live in for 20k.
What can the government really do about that ?
I don't think people should expect to be given a 4 bedroom family home. I live in an area with a lot of apartments. I think that is a way to increase housing supply which could in turn decrease house prices or at least stop the crazy boom that we've been through year after year.
earl
Well-known member
Easier access to "finance". The only issue is paying it back especially if interest rates rise.
Nano breaks the mould with the "world's fastest home loan"
Taking aim at two of the biggest gripes amongst home borrowers – slow approvals and uncompetitive rates – digital lender Nano has opened its doors in Australia with super cheap rates and what it claims to be "the world's fastest home loan".
I think easier access to finance makes the situation worse.
Magpie_Magic
Well-known member
The real issue is due to QE, excessively low interest rates and tax biases, all the value is not so much in the building but in the unimproved value of the land.
That means houses are tax payer subsidized and savers are punished by receiving no interest on their savings and nearly the whole tax code is geared to protecting house prices for owners and banks.
Tradies are indirectly subsidized with home building grants and excessive immigration without adequate infrastructure including water transfers to support a growing population.
It ends up devaluing nearly everything else by extension work,business endeavors your garden and even personal relationships.
Last edited:
- Status
