Tax the rich?

[MAD]

If you take a step back and see how tough it would be for families to get on if all the family benefits were removed, would they even be considered middle class? I think more like on on the border of 'lower class' at a minimum.

Is this just another thing bred by the "we can't let them fail" mentality?

Like a student never being held back at school, while they think they're doing ok, once put in the real world they find themselves lacking.... Bring in Fairwork to make sure everyone gets a "fair go".... and so on with any other examples you can think of.

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by zilo

Take your pick...social worker/philanthropist or capitalist.

I don't have to pick, I have worn all three hats and am comfortable multi tasking.

Originally Posted by zilo

You choose to be poor...that's fine.

It's not me, it's the wife! I believe it is crass to talk about how much you earn but we could move up in the world. We currently pay tax on our combined income in the second highest band. We could get into the top band if she would just get with the program. My wife feels her efforts are better spent where she is. She is happy taking a pay cut to help those less fortunate.

And that's in spite of the caustic venom spewed at her type by people with NFI.

Originally Posted by zilo

You can lead a horse to water...

Lead a horse, Work Horse; I see what you did there.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by zilo

That's an easy one mate.

Get her to apply for a position in an expensive private school where remuneration is based on merit rather than years served.

Sounds like she's got the goods to go further.

A heads up on the way a teacher gets paid.

There are 2 common pay scales (sort of like awards) used in NSW, depending on what 'system' you teach under. The 'step' system, used by most schools (Catholic, State and some Independent).

The step system stops at 13, meaning that a newly graduated teacher (who generally starts at step 5) will be earning the highest step within 10 years of full time teaching (ie early 30's for most people).

Once you get there, you only get CPI increases, UNLESS you do additional tasks or get promoted (Coordinator, AP, Executive, Head Teacher).

The Band system I'm not too familiar with, but is broken into Band 1-3. Again, once you are on band 3, the only way to get more income is to be promoted.

My wife works at an 'expensive private school' and her pay is based experience (years served). If she were to get promoted they pull out the award and select the appropriate additional remuneration she should get based on the extra work done.

Even the promotion pays are stepped "Coordinator 1, 2 or Executive 1, 2" etc. There is also a sliding scale for Principals and Assistant Principals. I.e., a Principal of a school with 200 students will be on less than a principal of a school with 400 students.

Where my wife works, fees are between $25-30k a year. She does not get 1 cent more than a person who works in another independent school where fees are $5k a year.

Hope that has helped!

Jason

[b0son]

Originally Posted by karj

Another thing that could be done to "save" money is introduce the HECS-HELP scheme for athletes undertaking a program with the AIS.

Amen. Granted, many sports pay very little. But its ridiculous how many of our Olympians rake in the big bucks with endorsements etc, while receiving public funding to train.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

Awesome, please post details of the positions at expensive private schools for teaching English to refugees.

Supply and demand.

Its typical public sector mentality that expects reward for qualifications that were neither asked for nor needed.

Meanwhile out in the private sector, those of us with skills that are not in demands, either find ways to apply those skills in other industries, or retrain altogether.

No offence, but it sounds like your wife should have also studied some economics if she thought those skills were a path to greater remuneration.

[MattstaF6]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

The 2 problems in this country are:
1. The rich (companies and people) getting away with paying minimum tax possible
2. Too many people rorting the welfare system and not bothering to do their bit for society (1 million people on the disability pension, and increasing by 10,000 per month!! how many are genuinely deserving of this fund I ask?)

THE solution? Drop income tax altogether, and bump up the GST to compensate (be it to 15% or 20%), that way everyone pays based on their spending spree. AND, tighten the system, stop being a nation of givers. Some Asylum seekers who arrived in this country 10 years ago are still earning benefits and haven't worked a day in their lives! IMO, 3 months support, then you're on your own... that's how it is in the U.S.A.

Mate im with you

[b0son]

Originally Posted by cheap

Speaking of tax, here's this gem, I don't care if you're a peter or a paul, but the mining tax has proven to be the most stupid taxation policy by far. At least the CO2 tax raised money which was its intent.

Funny, I thought its intent was to reduce emissions. Instead, it was an income tax dressed as environmental policy.

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by b0son

Amen. Granted, many sports pay very little. But its ridiculous how many of our Olympians rake in the big bucks with endorsements etc, while receiving public funding to train.

Or they could focus on recovering some coin from overpaid little twats who were originally from Germany, were trained at the AIS with public money, claim to be “Aussie” and to add insult to injury, change their tax base to Monaco.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

and i'm supposedly in the top 5% of income earners . is it possible i'm getting a hell of a lot of money back of the govt , without even realizing ????

No. Don't monetize the services you get back from the government, this is the entire point of taxation after all. The issue is actual welfare, ie. direct cash.

[MattstaF6]

Whats happened to work for the dole? Cant these welfare bums work for the dole and do something?

[b0son]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

13 billion for negative gearing that's how much us tax payers give back to the home owners here your welcome signed poor tax payers

All that would change is WHEN the deduction is claimed. Even without negative gearing, when the property sold, they would still be entitled to claim all the depreciation and interest incurred. The benefit of scrapping NG is not in tax, but in house prices (as there would fewer investors), but this would have the consequence of reducing stamp duty revenue.

[xxx000]

Originally Posted by MattstaF6

Whats happened to work for the dole? Cant these welfare bums work for the dole and do something?

That term 'work for the dole' is a classic
It's called employment

[xxx000]

Originally Posted by b0son

All that would change is WHEN the deduction is claimed. Even without negative gearing, when the property sold, they would still be entitled to claim all the depreciation and interest incurred. The benefit of scrapping NG is not in tax, but in house prices (as there would fewer investors), but this would have the consequence of reducing stamp duty revenue.

I thought if you remove the deduction it's not a case of changing when they could claim rather they couldn't claim anything.
The belief is that removing negative gearing would lower house prices making them more affordable to buy for people who currently rent. This would in turn lead to an increase in home ownership and sales thereby govt receives more stamp duty.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by xxx000

I thought if you remove the deduction it's not a case of changing when they could claim rather they couldn't claim anything.
The belief is that removing negative gearing would lower house prices making them more affordable to buy for people who currently rent. This would in turn lead to an increase in home ownership and sales thereby govt receives more stamp duty.

NG simply allows you to claim expenses associated with one income stream, against another income stream. normally, they would be partitioned (eg. a capital loss on shares for example, cannot be applied against your wage income, only against a capital gain). A property investor would still be entitled to claim his expenses at the time of sale, like an form of investment. If you disallowed this, all it would do is create a share asset bubble as you would be artificially favouring one type of investment. An example of the last time this happened was just prior to GFC, when share prices soared partly in response to changes in superannuation taxation, and a lot of money flowed into the market.

[JG34JA]

The whole taxation/redistribution system has become so convoluted, so complex that it defies easy understanding and welcomes both clever and vulgar abuses of its intention.

None of us writing here created it, but nevertheless it exists and certain methods of navigating through it are used. A lot of the anger on this thread is a response to some of the claimed benefits (both business and welfare sides).

How about change the system, make it SIMPLE, make it transparent, make it ethical so valued work will be rewarded; take the hands of regulation off it - for every loser you address you create another.

Hence suggesting a simple 11% tax as the ONLY tax in society. Absolutely nothing else. Adjust everything else around it, then be surprised as the economy (sum of all of our efforts) takes off through the roof.

The other thing that is an absolute must is a requirement for the parliament to balance the nation's budget EACH YEAR. That would see it impossible to rack up the types of debt destroying the Western World. Those US Founding Fathers absolutely nailed it.

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by b0son

Supply and demand.

Its typical public sector mentality that expects reward for qualifications that were neither asked for nor needed.

Meanwhile out in the private sector, those of us with skills that are not in demands, either find ways to apply those skills in other industries, or retrain altogether.

No offence, but it sounds like your wife should have also studied some economics if she thought those skills were a path to greater remuneration.

I could make a glib response like;" Its typical keyboard hero mentality to come in guns blazing without understanding the post was a joke."

Your post gave me a good chuckle.

No offence, but go and find a grown up and get them to explain the meaning of irony to you.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

I could make a glib response like;" Its typical keyboard hero mentality to come in guns blazing without understanding the post was a joke."

I get that the post I responded to was a joke, but the one it followed on from was not... ? Surely its not only you that wants your wife to be better paid? I'm sure the thought has crossed her mind? I cant see why anyone would spend their own money training up to go nowhere financially. It makes no sense.

I used to work in research at uni, and it was par for the course... under-resource so that we work unpaid hours or pay for stuff ourselves. Eventually you realise that (a) this is not sustainable, and (b) the joke is on you. Suffice to say, I'm long gone from there. Why aren't teachers coming to the same conclusion after only a couple of years?

[Work Horse]

Originally Posted by b0son

I get that the post I responded to was a joke, but the one it followed on from was not... ? Surely its not only you that wants your wife to be better paid? I'm sure the thought has crossed her mind? I cant see why anyone would spend their own money training up to go nowhere financially. It makes no sense.

I used to work in research at uni, and it was par for the course... under-resource so that we work unpaid hours or pay for stuff ourselves. Eventually you realise that (a) this is not sustainable, and (b) the joke is on you. Suffice to say, I'm long gone from there. Why aren't teachers coming to the same conclusion after only a couple of years?

No,no,no the post before it was tongue in cheek also. Mate if I have to explain the joke it's no longer funny. I knew the extra study my wife did would not increase her income. I supported her because it what she wanted to do.

My wife works at an English language school. In order to teach there she did a post graduate diploma in TESOL, Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. It's where she wants to be working.

As for your guff about people only obtaining more training to get more money? You are applying your values to others.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

My wife works at an English language school. In order to teach there she did a post graduate diploma in TESOL

misunderstood. you said earlier it was to 'assist' implying (to me at least) she already was working in that area.

fair point re: values. some people don't value the money ahead of the job satisfaction. given the only time we hear about teaching in the media is when the union is calling for another wage-related strike, I always assumed it was high on most teachers list of priorities.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Work Horse

Lead a horse, Work Horse; I see what you did there.

Thought that one would go straight to the wicket keeper.

Proceed to Go and collect 200 dollars....

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by M&Ms View Post

2. Too many people rorting the welfare system and not bothering to do their bit for society (1 million people on the disability pension, and increasing by 10,000 per month!! how many are genuinely deserving of this fund I ask?)





hmmmmm a little inside info on super is people are losing employment so fast they are starting to panic and go out on disability while they can still get thier super . why trust a govt to give you your own money . grab it now while its available people are saying .

AND SECONDLY .There will be much much much much more of this for people born after 1965 , from tomorrow night onwards , even if people aren't intending to rort , they will end up unable to work by age alone . the GOVT HAVE NO IDEA THE CAN OF WORMS THEY ARE OPENING . (OR PERHAPS THEY DO)

[BHDOGS]

Oh i will defiantly be dead before i turn 70 especially if i start having any sort of memory loss issues or cant wipe my own **** id just kill myself rather then live like that but saves the gov money i spose.

[MAD]

Time to start ridding the jail system of those that are deemed unfit for rehabilitation.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

Oh i will defiantly be dead before i turn 70 especially if i start having any sort of memory loss issues or cant wipe my own **** id just kill myself rather then live like that but saves the gov money i spose.

By the time any baby boomer/Gen X had to go into a high level care aged care facility, it will all be 457 Visa workers "looking after" them because there sure as **** isn't anyone who is willing to work in aged care anymore, hard work, low pay, no respect, I'd rather be a light vehicle mechanic and thats saying something because those guys are just about on par wages and conditions wise.

So don't worry about jumping off the west gate bridge, they'll give you someone elses meds and finish you off like they did to my great grandma last year.

[ILLaViTaR]

http://www.thevine.com.au/life/news/...140509-281174/

Originally Posted by article

Australia’s gross national debt as a percentage of GDP (2014) is 29.2%
-We're the 47th highest debt from a list of 58 countries
-We're the best performing first world country
-Japan ranks 1st with 242%
-The US, 6th at 107%
-A better example is Denmark, 31st with just under 48%—CONSIDERED TO BE LOW DEBT!

[MattSAU2XR8]

All this talk about education got me thinking....
I have a couple of (useful) degrees that related directly to jobs that took 3 and 4 years respectively
But kids now go to school for a total of 13 years which is a fairly long time
So perhaps in addition to tightening up HECS funding govco could look at how much of the stuff taught at primary and secondary school is actually necessary?
If you are 30 and have a good job and can't remember a good deal of this stuff then it probably wasn't necessary to try and learn it in the first place
Alternatively it seems amazing that you can train a people for 13 years and they can't all find something gainful to do right away
Also if (like me) you just turned up and bummed around and got passed because they have to let he majority through then the government was just paying $15k per year to keep you (and) me off the dole queue :-(

[Work Horse]

Have I woken up in a parallel universe?!

The Liberal government wants to increase the tax of people earning over $180,000?!

AND

The Labour and Greens opposition are opposing increasing the tax of people earning over $180,000?!

I'm scared to look in the driveway for fear my Ford has become a Holden!

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by MattSAU2XR8

All this talk about education got me thinking....
I have a couple of (useful) degrees that related directly to jobs that took 3 and 4 years respectively
But kids now go to school for a total of 13 years which is a fairly long time
So perhaps in addition to tightening up HECS funding govco could look at how much of the stuff taught at primary and secondary school is actually necessary?
If you are 30 and have a good job and can't remember a good deal of this stuff then it probably wasn't necessary to try and learn it in the first place
Alternatively it seems amazing that you can train a people for 13 years and they can't all find something gainful to do right away
Also if (like me) you just turned up and bummed around and got passed because they have to let he majority through then the government was just paying $15k per year to keep you (and) me off the dole queue :-(

Less Romeo and Juliet/Macbeth and more useful stuff, I haven't used just about anything I learned from year 11-12 in a real life situation yet.

The only useful part was English and essay writing, not so much for writing essays but its helped me with my report writing for TAFE, thats it.

I haven't needed to figure out what angle light is refracting off a glass triangular prism that I was taught in physics, I've never used algebra or trigonometry taught in year 11/12 maths, the closest thing I used was ohms law once or twice at work in 4 years.

School doesn't prepare you for the real world at all, its a bit of a shock to the system, I finished year 12 in 2009.

[MAD]

It depends where you go afterwards.
I used a lot of math in my first years at TAFE out of VCE (Computer systems & Electronics)
Then I used physics and good old Pythagoras a crap-load at uni for Mechanical Engineering, and still do in the day job work.

But, there's heaps of Thermodynamics, and metallurgy that I don't use, but does that mean I shouldn't have learn it? No. Every step along the education path is a refinement on where you're heading.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Less Romeo and Juliet/Macbeth and more useful stuff, I haven't used just about anything I learned from year 11-12 in a real life situation yet.

The only useful part was English and essay writing, not so much for writing essays but its helped me with my report writing for TAFE, thats it.

I haven't needed to figure out what angle light is refracting off a glass triangular prism that I was taught in physics, I've never used algebra or trigonometry taught in year 11/12 maths, the closest thing I used was ohms law once or twice at work in 4 years.

School doesn't prepare you for the real world at all, its a bit of a shock to the system, I finished year 12 in 2009.

I use most of that stuff every day or at least several times a week. Even the Shakespeare, not the stories so much though they do make for light dinner table entertainment but the messages, learning and ideas that come from them.
School has done well by me thanks, even the 'righting, wreeding and rifmatik'

Justin