Where can I hide for the next eight months?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hp8

Lets hear it. It couldn't be any worse than the shambles we have now:fingerscrossed:

---

As I outlined above. Push as much down to local level as possible. If you don't like what your Councillor is doing you know where they live.

It never ceases to amaze me how many lobbyists and even individuals vox popping on the street all have this list of ways to spend "government" money. So any just don't seem to get that it our tax money they are spending, there is no magic slush fund. So every time they spend money on support services for left legged lesbians that either comes out of health and education or your taxes go up.

The other fabulously puerile argument is that we can somehow tax the rich. The fact is that at a certain income it becomes economically feasible to structure your money to minimize tax. No matter what laws you put in place the clever tax accountant and lawyers will always be ahead of you. The middle class always end up paying. Those imbeciles in the greens wanted to bring back death duties a few years back, probably still do. Made it sound like a capital idea with a floor at a couple of million. Won't affect me says Johnny envirosocialist, lets make those rich people pay. Trouble is it doesn't work. You get death duties back in, virtually no money gets raise so they either drop the floor or wait for bracket creep to trap you.

Anyway, pointless. The thieves are managing the bank.

To quote some historic (I can't remember which one) US president "You don't help the worker by screwing the bloke that pays his wages."
Regards

We've recently seen an example of the tax shuffle with the health funding fiasco in Victoria.

People need to realize that the government money pit is not bottomless and when export income
falls the bottom of the pit gets closer to the top. I think we've had too much waste and too many
soft headed ideas take control in this country. Something goes awry "the goverment (apologies to
R.J. Hawke for the pronunciation ) can fix it"". That means we pay.

I was amazed when i watched a program on ABC (Foreign Correspondent?) about the American economy.
I take my hat off to those folk for their rather sanguine attitude to life. Can you imagine that here??

I'm in Corangamite in Victoria , held by Labor by less than 1%, D Cheesman the Labor member is living up to his name, like a block of mouldy cheese, past his us by date.
Can't wait to see results in September? NF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Duke

To quote some historic (I can't remember which one) US president "You don't help the worker by screwing the bloke that pays his wages."
Regards

---

Yeah that's fair enough, but IMO it doesn't even come to that. The simple fact is people beyond a certain income level will always be able to minimize tax. Thus all tax laws end up stinging the middle class.

Consumption taxes aren't fair either because poor spend all their money every week while the wealthy have more discretion.

If someone came up with a viable plan to hit higher income earners I'd back it, but what actually happens is reforms are sold as targeting the rich and it's ALWAYS the middle class that get hit. I have been on the cusp of that for some years, where I was just about making enough to make structuring worthwhile. I was astonished at my options once income is high enough to cover setup.

We have known we are over governed for decades. We know the PS is bloated and increasingly incompetent (I got a redundancy last December and it didn't come a minute too soon) and in queensland at least corrupt and rife with nepotism. The trouble is the people running the show have an interest in the status quo and the electorate aren't angry enough to drive change.

Sigh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damian

If someone came up with a viable plan to hit higher income earners I'd back it,

Sigh.

---

Why should there be a different tax rate?
Both work for what they get.

The real problem is those who will not work, not those who cant work, and get paid by us who do work, that is the imbalance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwbuild

Why should there be a different tax rate?
Both work for what they get.

The real problem is those who will not work, not those who cant work, and get paid by us who do work, that is the imbalance.

---

My partner hasn't been able to work for 10 years. Some days she can't get out of bed.

Prior to that shed worked her guts out, had a years sick leave accrued, paid income protection insurance (AXA screwed her on that), had scrimped and saved and bought her home, put herself through university.

The trouble with the disability pension is the government has been shunting people onto it for years to get them off the dole numbers. I know people who have had this done, and they don't complain. More money less paperwork. I have no beef with those with a genuine disability. I'm tempted to make a remark about refugees but we don't need another punch up do we :)

Some years I pay as much tax as some people earn, this years going to be one of them. I don't mind that 1/3 the federal budget is social security. It probably bothers me more that 1 in 3 australian workers are (or were last time I looked) directly or indirectly government employees.

One of the more provocative ideas I've toyed with over the years is weighing votes on taxes paid. We don't have universal suffrage, under 18's for example don't get a say. Why is an electoral system less valid if tax payers get a bigger say ? :) It would shunt elections very much towards the middle class, and perhaps provide an incentive to not minimise quite so much..

Incidentally voluntary voting usually shunts results to the conservative side. Envirosocialists love to whinge but ask anyone who's worked on a polling booth in a labor seat about how they complain about being made to turn up...so inconvenient....

Anyway all pointless. Those with the power won't change the system :)