Secret plans drawn up to lift GST to 15 per cent with tax cuts on the table
November 1, 2015
Herald Sun

THE GST will rise to 15 per cent, middle-income earners will secure tax cuts and fresh food will remain GST-free under tax options being closely examined by the federal government.

Setting the scene for a tax battle at the next election, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals.

Despite describing the tax reform agenda as being in the “discovery phase’’, Treasury officials have worked for months on different options to increase the GST to 15 per cent.   :(

The Sunday Telegraph has confirmed that four main GST reform options were canvassed by Treasury in proposals provided to senior ministers, including former prime minister Tony Abbott, earlier this year.

Treasury’s work on the ­reforms has operated continuously and is now being re-examined by the Turnbull government as it prepares for next year’s election.

Mr Turnbull and Treasurer Scott Morrison have ­argued all options are on the table during this “discovery’’ phase, including extending the GST to fresh food.   :(


Lifting the GST to 15 per cent, while compensating households with incomes of up to $100,000, would raise $24.5 billion in extra taxes, but some argue it is not generous enough to also offer company tax cuts.

The increase to the GST would be designed to help fund a shortfall in health and education spending.


The National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling estimates the average household would face extra costs of $2915 a year under a 15 per cent GST.   :(

One option discussed by officials would carve up the revenue from the GST hike between the states and the Commonwealth, providing a revenue stream to help fund GST compensation for pensioners and income tax cuts for low- and middle-income workers.

Some state premiers, ­including NSW’s Mike Baird and South Australia’s Jay Weatherill, have called for debate on a 15 per cent GST, while Victoria’s premier Dan Andrews remains opposed.

Mr Andrews has proposed increasing the Medicare levy.
Treasurer Scott Morrison said all options were on the table when discussing the GST.

Mr Baird and Mr Weatherill have previously signalled they would consider increasing the GST to 15 per cent in return for more money for the states and other trade-offs.

Mr Weatherill is opposed to putting the GST on fresh food but is open to extending it to some areas of health and pharmaceuticals.

Cabinet ministers stressed the discussions were in the “embryonic’’ stages and would require the support of cabinet, the party room and voters at the next election.

The Prime Minister would seek a clear mandate from voters for GST reform if the party and cabinet agrees to the election strategy, and any changes would need to be ­negotiated with the states.

Mr Morrison has highlighted the prospect of funding income tax cuts as one reason for GST reform.

“When you have the average wage earner in this country about to move into the ­second-highest tax bracket at $80,000 next year, you’ve got a problem with the incentives in your tax system,” he said.

Parents Alan and Jane Mawer, from Coogee, said there was little doubt a GST rise would make life more expensive.   :(

“It depends on how it is packaged up,” Mr Mawer, 40, said. “Frankly, life would be a bit more expensive.

“We won’t be the most ­affected family, but it is concerning for our parents. What would the government do with the extra money?”.

THE GST CHOICES ON THE TABLE   :(

Option A:

Increase GST from 10 per cent to 15 per cent with no exemptions which would broaden the base to include fresh food, health and education including private school fees

Option B:

Regarded by officials as a more likely option, was a 15 per cent GST that still exempts fresh food. This would increase the price of existing goods that already attract the GST, for example takeaway food, and other goods and services

Option C:

A 15 per cent GST that exempts food, health and education. This would deliver the status quo in terms of exemptions but increase the rate on existing goods that already attract the GST

Option D:

A 12.5 per cent GST. The smaller increase to the GST was regarded as an unlikely prospect by officials because it would fail to deliver enough revenue to provide for income tax cuts and cover the state’s funding shortfalls in health and education

They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5.

The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:37am:

They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid.

I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:52am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life.

WOW now a huge tax increase is a large vision - (insert abusive term questioning intelligence).

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:55am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:52am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life. WOW now a huge tax increase is a large vision - (insert abusive term questioning intelligence).

It is for the government that can't stop spending.

All that extra money to play with woohoo!!!! bring out the cigars and champagne.....oh how they laughed at us.

http://i.qkme.me/366g73.jpg

Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:52am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life.

This thread isn't about abusing other posters. It's about Liberals wanting to attack low income households across the country.

Now lets see if the Libs can break the mould and link their higher tax with a $50 a week rise in dole payments and pensions.

____ wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 7:35am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:52am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life. This thread isn't about abusing other posters. It's about Liberals wanting to attack low income households across the country. Now lets see if the Libs can break the mould and link their higher tax with a $50 a week rise in dole payments and pensions.

$100 for the dolies and $50 for the pensioners, all types, but especially aged......mwah! next year for this little duck.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 7:33am:

Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset.

We keep paying more tax and they keep taking, taking, taking, giving stuff all.

It has to work both ways.

Increasing GST while the Australian dollar is in a death spiral is just obscene. Imports have already jumped in price 30-40% in the past year.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:55am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:52am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life. WOW now a huge tax increase is a large vision - (insert abusive term questioning intelligence).

It is CHANGE - something you don't seem to be able to handle. It is a compensated-for tax increase but what you seem to struggle with is CHANGE.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 8:03am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:55am: mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:52am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life. WOW now a huge tax increase is a large vision - (insert abusive term questioning intelligence). It is CHANGE - something you don't seem to be able to handle. It is a compensated-for tax increase but what you seem to struggle with is CHANGE.

Change is good IF it is a change for the better.

This isn't.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 7:33am:

Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset.

Look at the prices over there as well. In a land that sells cucumbers by the slice, there's not a bargain in sight.

Libs answer to stimulating some growth , jesus , what a failure  :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 7:33am:

Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset.

Sweden has just introduced a 30-hour work week. Think about it - they only have to work for 30 hours a week to earn enough tax to pay for all the government services.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 8:03am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:55am: mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:52am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life. WOW now a huge tax increase is a large vision - (insert abusive term questioning intelligence). It is CHANGE - something you don't seem to be able to handle. It is a compensated-for tax increase but what you seem to struggle with is CHANGE.

The only one saying it is fully compensated for is you and in fact if it is compensated for there is no point in doing it, the reason for increasing a tax is to get more money from us.

i.e. "typed very slowly" -  they want more money and they want to take it from us. You get it ?

Also another large part is protecting Australian retail by killing imports.

I no longer can afford to buy imported goods, the price (collapsing AUD) + shipping makes a $10 book from Amazon go up to $30, throw 15% GST on that and its $35... for a $10 book.

I wanted a new video card, $600 on Newegg, once I worked out the price to import, it was over $1000 Australian (and I could pick it up for slightly cheaper at local store MSY).

15% GST on imported goods is the final death knell for online shopping in Australia

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 7:33am:

Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset.

Two pizzas a 4 glasses of coke cost me $140 Au in Norway 15 yrs ago .... I'm not so sure you want to emulate Norway, it has some of the highest costs of living in the world.

they also have higher wages, don't fund private education or health, a lot of their industries are government owned, they have a huge percentage of the population employed in the public sector and pay unemployment benefits at the same rate as your previous salary was before dropping it to 80% after 6 months. Before they discovered oil, Norway was almost a 3rd world country.

You still want to look at Norway dopey?

Notice there is no talk of reducing the wages of public servants instead -

just more & more taxes.

Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:03am:

Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first.

Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:05am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority.

What's the point of lowering our PAYE tax & then taking it back with a higher GST?

John Smith wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:34am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 7:33am: Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset. Two pizzas a 4 glasses of coke cost me $140 Au in Norway 15 yrs ago .... I'm not so sure you want to emulate Norway, it has some of the highest costs of living in the world. they also have higher wages, don't fund private education or health, a lot of their industries are government owned, they have a huge percentage of the population employed in the public sector and pay unemployment benefits at the same rate as your previous salary was before dropping it to 80% after 6 months. Before they discovered oil, Norway was almost a 3rd world country. You still want to look at Norway dopey?

Why the hell should taxpayers fund private education or private health? Hello??? That's what your membership fees are for, dopey!!!

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:03am:

Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first.

The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:08am:

John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:34am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 7:33am: Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset. Two pizzas a 4 glasses of coke cost me $140 Au in Norway 15 yrs ago .... I'm not so sure you want to emulate Norway, it has some of the highest costs of living in the world. they also have higher wages, don't fund private education or health, a lot of their industries are government owned, they have a huge percentage of the population employed in the public sector and pay unemployment benefits at the same rate as your previous salary was before dropping it to 80% after 6 months. Before they discovered oil, Norway was almost a 3rd world country. You still want to look at Norway dopey? Why the hell should taxpayers fund private education or private health? Hello??? That's what your membership fees are for, dopey!!!

I agree, they shouldn't ... the govt. should pull all funding from private hospitals and schools, and remove all rebates for private health insurance. ... funnily enough you're usually the idiot that argues FOR those things :D :D :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:09am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue.

the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:06am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:05am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority. What's the point of lowering our PAYE tax & then taking it back with a higher GST?

The point is that it redistributed the tax burden away from the wealthy and towards the poor.

We are in the position we are primarily because the Howard government reduced mostly the high range income tax further than was affordable.

The obvious first step is to return income tax to the correct level.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:05am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority.

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/Fonz.jpg

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:56am:

We are in the position we are primarily because the Howard government reduced mostly the high range income tax further than was affordable. The obvious first step is to return income tax to the correct level.

Maybe we should restore it to where it was even long before that, with maybe about 12 steps leading up to 60-70%.

Yes, we need to undo so much of the Howard/Costello profligacy and economic mismanagement. I have said this consistently for a looong time. I have also said Rudd/Swan were idiots to give a tax cut in 2008/9.

Bobby keeps talking about PS pay having to be reduced. Folly at a time like this! He doesn’t understand economics but even Bobby should be able to understand that when the economy is in recession cutting pay cuts demand cuts jobs = deeper recession.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 11:18am:

Yes, we need to undo so much of the Howard/Costello profligacy and economic mismanagement. I have said this consistently for a looong time. I have also said Rudd/Swan were idiots to give a tax cut in 2008/9.

Remember this? 

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/Debt%20Free.jpg


Rudd & Gillard Labor have already undone it..... :D

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 11:43am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 11:18am: Yes, we need to undo so much of the Howard/Costello profligacy and economic mismanagement. I have said this consistently for a looong time. I have also said Rudd/Swan were idiots to give a tax cut in 2008/9. Remember this?  http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/Debt%20Free.jpg Rudd & Gillard Labor have already undone it..... :D

Well just sold of medibank, what's next?

Just ignore infrastructure deficit for 2 decades, selling off Australias gold reserves far below market value crashing the global gold exchange, selling off all public infrastructure to mates which has further hampered infrastructure investment in Australia, giving away 350 billion in vote buying.

A monkey could have given Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid-00s.

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:04pm:

Just ignore infrastructure deficit for 2 decades, selling off Australias gold reserves far below market value crashing the global gold exchange, selling off all public infrastructure to mates which has further hampered infrastructure investment in Australia, giving away 350 billion in vote buying. A monkey could have given Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid-00s.

So Keating must have been more hopeless than a monkey?

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:04pm:

Just ignore infrastructure deficit for 2 decades, selling off Australias gold reserves far below market value crashing the global gold exchange, selling off all public infrastructure to mates which has further hampered infrastructure investment in Australia, giving away 350 billion in vote buying. A monkey could have given Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid-00s.

A money did give Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid 00s they were know as Howard and Costello.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 11:33am:

Bobby keeps talking about PS having to be reduced. Folly at a time like this! He doesn’t understand economics but even Bobby should be able to understand that when the economy is in recession cutting pay cuts demand cuts jobs = deeper recession.

But public servants are being paid out of borrowed money -

how can that be sustainable?

Watch the next election -

Labor will carry on about how unfair the 15% GST is but if they win

they will grab the 15% like an alcoholic grabs a bottle of whiskey.

Bobby. wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:06am:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:05am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority. What's the point of lowering our PAYE tax & then taking it back with a higher GST?

PAYE taxes carry higher deadweight losses.

crocodile wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:06am: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:05am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority. What's the point of lowering our PAYE tax & then taking it back with a higher GST? PAYE taxes carry higher deadweight losses.

It's all smoke & mirrors but we know that our taxes are going up.

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 11:43am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 11:18am: Yes, we need to undo so much of the Howard/Costello profligacy and economic mismanagement. I have said this consistently for a looong time. I have also said Rudd/Swan were idiots to give a tax cut in 2008/9. Remember this?  http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/Debt%20Free.jpg Rudd & Gillard Labor have already undone it..... :D

I remember. But edify us Swaggie. Why is it so important ?

Didn't you read the headline? SSHHH it's a SECRET.

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:29am:

Also another large part is protecting Australian retail by killing imports. I no longer can afford to buy imported goods, the price (collapsing AUD) + shipping makes a $10 book from Amazon go up to $30, throw 15% GST on that and its $35... for a $10 book. I wanted a new video card, $600 on Newegg, once I worked out the price to import, it was over $1000 Australian (and I could pick it up for slightly cheaper at local store MSY). 15% GST on imported goods is the final death knell for online shopping in Australia

And I can buy an item that costs $600 here for $100 overseas. By the time it gets to me it is around $220. I am still massively better off.

John Smith wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:34am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 7:33am: Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset. Two pizzas a 4 glasses of coke cost me $140 Au in Norway 15 yrs ago .... I'm not so sure you want to emulate Norway, it has some of the highest costs of living in the world. they also have higher wages, don't fund private education or health, a lot of their industries are government owned, they have a huge percentage of the population employed in the public sector and pay unemployment benefits at the same rate as your previous salary was before dropping it to 80% after 6 months. Before they discovered oil, Norway was almost a 3rd world country. You still want to look at Norway dopey?

And in other threads you talk about how wonderful Norway is.  You really don't have a handle on the idea of having a single position on anything, do you?

Labor voter wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:12pm:

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 12:04pm: Just ignore infrastructure deficit for 2 decades, selling off Australias gold reserves far below market value crashing the global gold exchange, selling off all public infrastructure to mates which has further hampered infrastructure investment in Australia, giving away 350 billion in vote buying. A monkey could have given Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid-00s. A money did give Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid 00s they were know as Howard and Costello.

Hmm so based upon your Welcome Reply #575 - Oct 30th, 2015 at 8:04am, by branding Howard & Costello with a detrimental name I guess it "shows me that you have lost this argument" LV..... :D


Labor voter wrote on Oct 30^th, 2015 at 8:04am:

Hi all As you can tell by my display name I am a labor voter and have been since I first started voting in 1966, so there is no way I will change now. As far as I am concern people that change their votes all the time e.g. swinging voters, are only worry about what they can get from the government not is what is good for all Australians. If we are talking about something and you start to call me names all it does is shows me that you have lost the argument. Just remember that sticks and stones might break my bones but names will never hurt me.

Pleas for a political truce with the Labor states on GST ignored

Date
    November 1, 2015
    The Age

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is not afraid to raise the GST as part of a broader tax reform package, Arthur Sinodinos says - but the Cabinet Secretary has warned the states would have to be at least be "neutral" and not "hostile" to the idea.

However, the prospect of a political truce appeared unlikely with Victorian Labor Premier Daniel Andrews immediately restating his opposition and vowing to fight any increase to the consumption tax in the lead up to the next election.   :)



News Corp reported on Sunday that Treasury has offered the Coalition four main GST reform options.

These were previously provided to former prime minister Tony Abbott and include:

·      raising the GST to 15 per cent and impose it currently exempted goods and services including food, health and education

·      raising the GST to 15 per cent but continuing the exemption on fresh food but not on health and education

·      raising the GST to 15 per cent

·      raising the GST to 12.5 per cent

Cabinet Secretary Arthur Sinodinos said the new prime minister was keen to maximise his political capital and use it to win the consent of the people for tax reform at the next election.

"If you're someone like Malcolm Turnbull if you want to do something substantial you've got to do it quickly and upfront," Senator Sinodinos told Sky.

"You have to do it soon in the context of putting stuff to an election rather than seeking to foist something on people before an election."

Any tax increase would involve other tax trade-offs, possibly clamping down on superannuation concessions for the rich and potential tax incentives for the lower paid. Senator Sinodinos stressed the need for any tax package to be fair and share the burden of reform equally between the wealthy and those less well-off.

Senator Sinodinos said the Coalition was conscious of fighting for higher consumption taxes and against the Labor states and federal opposition.

"We have to make sure that in the run-up to the election, states are at least neutral on the issue as opposed to actively hostile," he said.

But a spokesman for Victorian Labor Premier Daniel Andrews said on Sunday he would fight any proposal to increase the GST from 10 per cent.   :)

"Simply jacking up the GST to 15 per cent is not genuine reform. The GST is not a fair tax, it has no regard for a person's capacity to pay," the spokesman said.

But Fairfax Media understands that if Mr Turnbull were to win an election on the issue the Victorian Government would respect his mandate.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten told reporters before flying out on a four day visit to Pacific nations, that federal Labor would also oppose a hike in the GST.   :)

Speaking at Essendon airport on Sunday morning, Mr Shorten said a hike in the GST would predominantly hit low-to-middle income earners.

"The truth of the matter is people with lower incomes spend more of their income on the cost of living and the items people need just to get by," Mr Shorten said.

"This is going to squeeze people already finding it hard to save."

He added that if the government were going to compensate people for a GST-hike then the question had to be asked: "why increase the GST to begin with?"

Mr Shorten said instead the government should seek to cut back on superannuation concessions for high income earners and to draw more tax revenue from multi-national companies.   :)

crocodile wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:31pm:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:06am: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:05am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority. What's the point of lowering our PAYE tax & then taking it back with a higher GST? PAYE taxes carry higher deadweight losses.

Yes they take money from people who have some and not from people who don't.

bogarde73 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 11:07am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:56am: We are in the position we are primarily because the Howard government reduced mostly the high range income tax further than was affordable. The obvious first step is to return income tax to the correct level. Maybe we should restore it to where it was even long before that, with maybe about 12 steps leading up to 60-70%.

I would think that a more moderate approach would do the job and also look at collecting a lot of the tax being avoided legal or not and taxing the multi nationals a reasonable amount.

We don't really have an income problem it is just that we don't bother to collect the money which should be paid.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:40pm:

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:29am: Also another large part is protecting Australian retail by killing imports. I no longer can afford to buy imported goods, the price (collapsing AUD) + shipping makes a $10 book from Amazon go up to $30, throw 15% GST on that and its $35... for a $10 book. I wanted a new video card, $600 on Newegg, once I worked out the price to import, it was over $1000 Australian (and I could pick it up for slightly cheaper at local store MSY). 15% GST on imported goods is the final death knell for online shopping in Australia And I can buy an item that costs $600 here for $100 overseas. By the time it gets to me it is around $220. I am still massively better off.

That is one way unemployed is so high. You are not spending money in Australia to keep the economy ticking over

Labor voter wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 1:19pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 12:40pm: Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:29am: Also another large part is protecting Australian retail by killing imports. I no longer can afford to buy imported goods, the price (collapsing AUD) + shipping makes a $10 book from Amazon go up to $30, throw 15% GST on that and its $35... for a $10 book. I wanted a new video card, $600 on Newegg, once I worked out the price to import, it was over $1000 Australian (and I could pick it up for slightly cheaper at local store MSY). 15% GST on imported goods is the final death knell for online shopping in Australia And I can buy an item that costs $600 here for $100 overseas. By the time it gets to me it is around $220. I am still massively better off. That is one way unemployed is so high. You are not spending money in Australia to keep the economy ticking over

Rubbish - you can't buy many of the things you want here -

a lot of stuff is only available from Ebay.

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:48pm:

Labor voter wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 12:12pm: Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 12:04pm: Just ignore infrastructure deficit for 2 decades, selling off Australias gold reserves far below market value crashing the global gold exchange, selling off all public infrastructure to mates which has further hampered infrastructure investment in Australia, giving away 350 billion in vote buying. A monkey could have given Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid-00s. A money did give Australia a surplus from the mid 90s to mid 00s they were know as Howard and Costello. Hmm so based upon your Welcome Reply #575 - Oct 30th, 2015 at 8:04am, by branding Howard & Costello with a detrimental name I guess it "shows me that you have lost this argument" LV..... :D Labor voter wrote on Oct 30th, 2015 at 8:04am: Hi all As you can tell by my display name I am a labor voter and have been since I first started voting in 1966, so there is no way I will change now. As far as I am concern people that change their votes all the time e.g. swinging voters, are only worry about what they can get from the government not is what is good for all Australians. If we are talking about something and you start to call me names all it does is shows me that you have lost the argument. Just remember that sticks and stones might break my bones but names will never hurt me.

Are Howard and Costello members of this forum?

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 11:43am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 11:18am: Yes, we need to undo so much of the Howard/Costello profligacy and economic mismanagement. I have said this consistently for a looong time. I have also said Rudd/Swan were idiots to give a tax cut in 2008/9. Remember this?  http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/Debt%20Free.jpg Rudd & Gillard Labor have already undone it..... :D

No, it was the structural Budget deficit H&C created with their profligacy building in tax cuts and wealthfare from revenue from a necessarily temporary boom. The boom bust in 2008 and so the boom revenues disappeared but not the boom spending. Gillard/Swan cut some of the profligacy back, not abbott or Malodorous.

The real estate boom H&C fanned and fed with tax cuts and pork left a highly indebted private sector facing bleaker times after the boom. Hence we see the present low confidence levels.

Payment back of the debt took place over a long time. H&C only played a small part in that. Geez the Libs here are dumb!

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 1:23pm:

No, it was the structural Budget deficit

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/structural%20claytons.jpg

:D ;D

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 1:41pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 1:23pm: No, it was the structural Budget deficit http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/structural%20claytons.jpg :D ;D

The structural Budget deficit the gift that keeps taking.

The deficit that is passed on to someone else.

In the Howard years they managed to structure our economy to be reliant on the greatest boom in memory to break square. Obviously that means that the economic parameters returning to more normal values would leave a shortfall of income.

The Howard government spending like drunken sailors has left us in the lurch. 

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 12:42pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:34am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 7:33am: Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset. Two pizzas a 4 glasses of coke cost me $140 Au in Norway 15 yrs ago .... I'm not so sure you want to emulate Norway, it has some of the highest costs of living in the world. they also have higher wages, don't fund private education or health, a lot of their industries are government owned, they have a huge percentage of the population employed in the public sector and pay unemployment benefits at the same rate as your previous salary was before dropping it to 80% after 6 months. Before they discovered oil, Norway was almost a 3rd world country. You still want to look at Norway dopey? And in other threads you talk about how wonderful Norway is.  You really don't have a handle on the idea of having a single position on anything, do you?

You either struggle with basic comprehension or you're an idiot.

How does my explaining Norways economy to armpit a change in position exactly?   :D :D :D :D

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 1:41pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 1:23pm: No, it was the structural Budget deficit http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/structural%20claytons.jpg :D ;D

lefty spin? .... so you think someone works on commission only should budget as if their commissions remain at their best rates ever? :D :D :D

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 8:03am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:55am: mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:52am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:37am: They will increase the GST to 12.5% all this talk about 15% is designed to make us feel good about 12.5. The target was never 15%, that is just an ambit claim put up because they think we are all stupid. I weep for you and your small expectations and ideas. I doubt you've ever had a large vision in your entire life. WOW now a huge tax increase is a large vision - (insert abusive term questioning intelligence). It is CHANGE - something you don't seem to be able to handle. It is a compensated-for tax increase but what you seem to struggle with is CHANGE.

So, what are you saying.  That there is a neutral outcome for Government to the change?

John Smith wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:28am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:09am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue. the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed.

Another class JS lie based on his ignorance. Stamp Duty was NOT included in the taxes to be removed. Those taxes that were to be removed - have been. Costello threatened to cut GST payments off from states that were being slow on it. Suddenly, the job was finished.

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 1:41pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 1:23pm: No, it was the structural Budget deficit http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/structural%20claytons.jpg :D ;D

It is quite the laugh, isn't it?  Up until Rudd screwed things up, nobody had even heard of structural deficit. We just had surpluses of deficits. Now we had to invent a way to say that Howard spend more than he earned  - a deficit - even though he saved close to $300B.

It is that glorious way how lefties can turn truth into lie.   Now if only some of them could use their skills in JOBS instead!

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 5:54pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:28am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:09am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue. the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed. Another class JS lie based on his ignorance. Stamp Duty was NOT included in the taxes to be removed. Those taxes that were to be removed - have been. Costello threatened to cut GST payments off from states that were being slow on it. Suddenly, the job was finished.

you just keep making crap up don't you?

What was the deal?

The Howard Government's original plan for the GST envisaged the states abolishing a swag of financial taxes, which in effect would be replaced by the GST. They included:

    The financial institutions duty.
    The bank accounts debits tax.
    The NSW accommodation tax.
    Conveyancing duties on transfer of business property.
    A range of other stamp duties on leases, mortgages, sales of shares, cheques and credit arrangements.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Getting-to-the-bottom-of-the-GST/2005/03/07/1110160752766.html

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 5:54pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:28am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:09am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue. the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed. Another class JS lie based on his ignorance. Stamp Duty was NOT included in the taxes to be removed. Those taxes that were to be removed - have been. Costello threatened to cut GST payments off from states that were being slow on it. Suddenly, the job was finished.

It was.

Don't you get tired of being flogged on just about every claim you make, 'Maria?'

Yeah, spending more than revenue and living off short sighted sales totally sustainable.

The fact is Howard was a terrible economic manager who was lucky he fell into a resources boom fuelled by China.

Saved 300 billion? They pissed away 350 billion on programs that were completely worthless vote buying. They didn't upgrade Infrastructure at all for a decade leaving Australia woefully under developed for the 21st century. There were plans to roll FTTN out in the early 90s, now the Libs are doing it 20 years later while scrapping the CHEAPER Fiber option. Howard basically gave away Australias gold supplies for nothing while crashing the entire global market  ;D

You rusted on Liberals are a joke. I can't actually believe that half the country buys your crap.

'Implementation of the Intergovernmental Agreement has already delivered significant economic benefits as a result of a first phase of taxation reforms from as early as 1 July 2000. As part of the initial reforms:

    the Australian Government fully implemented its commitments by:
        removing the wholesale sales tax;
        implementing the GST; and
        ensuring that all GST revenue is provided to the States and Territories; and
    the States and Territories partly implemented their commitments by abolishing a first tranche of state taxes by 1 July 2005:
        accommodation tax;
        financial institution duty;
        quoted marketable securities duty; and
        debits tax.'

'Even though GST revenues are now sufficient so that the States and Territories would not be worse off, relative to if the previous financial arrangements had continued, they have so far refused to fulfil their commitments by nominating a timetable for abolishing this final remaining tax (edit: mine Stamp Duty).'

http://www.budget.gov.au/2007-08/bp3/html/bp3_main-12.htm

Stamp Duty is a state based tax.

John Smith wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:15pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 5:54pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:28am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:09am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue. the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed. Another class JS lie based on his ignorance. Stamp Duty was NOT included in the taxes to be removed. Those taxes that were to be removed - have been. Costello threatened to cut GST payments off from states that were being slow on it. Suddenly, the job was finished. you just keep making crap up don't you? What was the deal? The Howard Government's original plan for the GST envisaged the states abolishing a swag of financial taxes, which in effect would be replaced by the GST. They included:     The financial institutions duty.     The bank accounts debits tax.     The NSW accommodation tax.     Conveyancing duties on transfer of business property.     A range of other stamp duties on leases, mortgages, sales of shares, cheques and credit arrangements. http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Getting-to-the-bottom-of-the-GST/2005/03/07/1110160752766.html

Pravda on the Yarra (the Age) never misses an opportunity to con the gullible into believing what they want to here. The original proposal for GST was 12.5% and included payroll tax and stamp duty. When it became obvious that was not going to fly, it was dropped to 10% and stamp duty and payroll tax taken out of the mix. SOURCE: John Howard.

All other taxes and charges as per the original GST agreement HAVE been removed.

Just in case you missed it, I highlighted PRAVDA's own admission of this fact.

You are a really dumb poster.

Aussie wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:26pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 5:54pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:28am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:09am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue. the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed. Another class JS lie based on his ignorance. Stamp Duty was NOT included in the taxes to be removed. Those taxes that were to be removed - have been. Costello threatened to cut GST payments off from states that were being slow on it. Suddenly, the job was finished. It was.

I was referring to stamp duty on real estate transfers. All other stamp duties were extinguished except insurance.

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:28pm:

Yeah, spending more than revenue and living off short sighted sales totally sustainable. The fact is Howard was a terrible economic manager who was lucky he fell into a resources boom fuelled by China. Saved 300 billion? They pissed away 350 billion on programs that were completely worthless vote buying. They didn't upgrade Infrastructure at all for a decade leaving Australia woefully under developed for the 21st century. There were plans to roll FTTN out in the early 90s, now the Libs are doing it 20 years later while scrapping the CHEAPER Fiber option. Howard basically gave away Australias gold supplies for nothing while crashing the entire global market  ;D You rusted on Liberals are a joke. I can't actually believe that half the country buys your crap.

Oh really?  FTTN for what exactly? almost nobody had internet at all. Most businesses didn't have email and there were about 500 websites worldwide - Microsoft, Smithsonian and 498 porn sites.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:51pm:

I was referring to stamp duty on real estate transfers. All other stamp duties were extinguished except insurance.

and I've already put up a link showing where IT WAS :D :D :D

everything else was negotiated with the democrats AFTER the election and it was not what the people voted for. Like I said, stamp duty was supposed to have gone the first time around.

Nats Senators Barnaby and Nash thought about what the Bush needed in terms of broadband and designed something very similar to Labor’s FTTH. They knew Howard didn’t give a stuff about infratructure, health or education so just filed the plan in Page House.

Telstra did want to roll out FTTN but Howard put the kybosh on that, wanting Telstra dividends to splash on pork.

Now the MTM is proving an expensive failure that will have to be run out before this benighted flipping country can get real broadband. By then NZ will be the dynamic economy not Australia.

You have to admire politicians - if they don't get their way they'll find  some end run around the issue to get the same result.  Kinda gives the lie to democracy, eh?

mariacostel wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:15pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 5:54pm: John Smith wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:28am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:09am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. The GST should be 15% and should apply to EVERYTHING. The government could then abolish stamp duty and a myriad of other taxes while still recording an increase in revenue. the govt. was supposed to abolish stamp duty the last time around. .... along with a myriad of other taxes ... instead we got the GST, and they kept a large portion of the taxes that were supposed to be removed. Another class JS lie based on his ignorance. Stamp Duty was NOT included in the taxes to be removed. Those taxes that were to be removed - have been. Costello threatened to cut GST payments off from states that were being slow on it. Suddenly, the job was finished. you just keep making crap up don't you? What was the deal? The Howard Government's original plan for the GST envisaged the states abolishing a swag of financial taxes, which in effect would be replaced by the GST. They included:     The financial institutions duty.     The bank accounts debits tax.     The NSW accommodation tax.     Conveyancing duties on transfer of business property.     A range of other stamp duties on leases, mortgages, sales of shares, cheques and credit arrangements. http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Getting-to-the-bottom-of-the-GST/2005/03/07/1110160752766.html Pravda on the Yarra (the Age) never misses an opportunity to con the gullible into believing what they want to here. The original proposal for GST was 12.5% and included payroll tax and stamp duty. When it became obvious that was not going to fly, it was dropped to 10% and stamp duty and payroll tax taken out of the mix. SOURCE: John Howard. All other taxes and charges as per the original GST agreement HAVE been removed. Just in case you missed it, I highlighted PRAVDA's own admission of this fact. You are a really dumb poster.

you haven't highlighted anything except how stupid you are ... the original proposal had a scrapping of stamp duty ... it was only after they renegotiated with the democrats after the election . .. but by then it was to late, the public had already voted.

wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 6:25am:

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals

Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts?

Wolseley wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:26pm:

Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts?

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:46am:

The point is that it redistributed the tax burden away from the wealthy and towards the poor.

Wolseley wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:26pm:

wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:25am: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts?

:D :D :D :D

quote of the year

this will be screenshotted

thank you for the lol

namaste

I have not read all the replies, I just want to say my bit.

Since a few weeks ago, on my current pension, my car sits in the driveway, unregistered. It will not get registered, and I have to use public transport, walk ( I am not getting any younger) and sometimes need to come home from the major fortnightly shopping in a taxi. I needed to use the heater a bit more this winter, and I paid dearly for the privilege. Next winter will be warmer clothes, from op shops.
In simple terms, my state gov now gets no money/tax via car rego, petrol etc. I get to keep a bit extra in my pocket, to budget for xmas.
My bet is, they will try to bring in a GST rise by then.

I AM OPPOSED TO ANY GST TAX RISE.

What I am trying to say is, the cost of living has reached a type of "critical mass", in the form things are too expensive to buy, and too expensive to sell due to costs of the retailer.
So even if they raise the GST, if will be zero advantage, maybe worse because people simply will go with less.

AUSTRALIANS MUST STOP BEING JELLY-BACKS ON THE GST ISSUE, AND LET THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT KNOW LOUD AND CLEAR, NO RISE TO THE GST, PERIOD.

We have had enough of all this BS.

I hope there will national street marches, car bumper stickers, letter drops, A4 size placards, and whatever else that can send a message to canberra to ALL political parties, 

NO GST HIKE, EVER.

leave it at 10% as it is, we have learnt to live with it. If anything, the nation ought to be budgeted on 10% GST or adjust other things to suit the economy.

To raise the GST, then the Government of the day truly has Socialism in it veins in some form or another.

Turnball, if you make it to raise the GST, you have LOST MY VOTE and I will make some noise if it does get raised,


Pensioner of Australia

Swagman wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 1:41pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 1:23pm: No, it was the structural Budget deficit http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/timbo2530/structural%20claytons.jpg :D ;D

The Howard/Costello changes to superannuation—still in place, costing us $50Bn this year, more the next.

The Costello tax cuts, still in place.

CGT concession, still in place.

All things you can afford in a boom. But we can hardly remember the last boom, ended 7 years ago. But the idiots built the spending and tax cuts into the Budget. Hence $400Bn debt.

Chris Richardson pointed out the structural Budget deficit years before 2007.

So, it is as real as the current growing deficits and debt.

Told you you had no knowledge of economics.

Wolseley wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:26pm:

wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:25am: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts?

OK, I'll bite.

1. Those that pay only a small amount of tax or none at all such as very low income earners and pensioners pay the extra 5% but get no tax cut.

2. Bracket creep will eventually hoover up the lost revenue as taxpayers are exposed to inflation with immovable tax scales. The benefit of the income tax cut is only ephemeral.

The gummint should really look at spending first.

$50Bn spent on tax exemptions for super. Pretty much all goes to those in the top 10% incomes. Complete waste of money, does nothing to ensure people retire on adequate super. More Howard nuggets of poop in the policy slippers.

Cut that, use some of the savings to boost NewStart, problem solved!

ozzyoi wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:48pm:

I AM OPPOSED TO ANY GST TAX RISE. AUSTRALIANS MUST STOP BEING JELLY-BACKS ON THE GST ISSUE, AND LET THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT KNOW LOUD AND CLEAR, NO RISE TO THE GST, PERIOD. We have had enough of all this BS. NO GST HIKE, EVER. Turnball, if you make it to raise the GST, you have LOST MY VOTE and I will make some noise if it does get raised,

You won't be the only one.

Turnbull thinks he is liked more than he is. He'll soon find out that he has always been on shaky ground if he talks about raising the GST.

Shortie will start to look a whole lot better.

15% GST = death knell.

Especially with all those tax exemptions going to the top 10%, with large companies paying derisory amounts of tax here. A neocon govt reckons all that is great even as the debt and deficit climb and the economy turns to sh1t.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:05am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:03am: Increasing the GST should be the last option not the first. Increase the GST and lower income taxes should be the priority.

Moving from a progressive to regressive system hardly seems worthwhile without strong protections in place.

Even then it's going to favour the more well off.

That is why they do it.

"Increasing the GST is a very unfair model and it is a more regressive form of taxation as it has a higher marginal effect on lower income earners than it does on higher income earners.   :(

Wolseley wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:26pm:

wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:25am: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts?

Because they are labor supporters. And yes, that is the ENTIER argument.

ozzyoi wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:48pm:

I have not read all the replies, I just want to say my bit. Since a few weeks ago, on my current pension, my car sits in the driveway, unregistered. It will not get registered, and I have to use public transport, walk ( I am not getting any younger) and sometimes need to come home from the major fortnightly shopping in a taxi. I needed to use the heater a bit more this winter, and I paid dearly for the privilege. Next winter will be warmer clothes, from op shops. In simple terms, my state gov now gets no money/tax via car rego, petrol etc. I get to keep a bit extra in my pocket, to budget for xmas. My bet is, they will try to bring in a GST rise by then. I AM OPPOSED TO ANY GST TAX RISE. What I am trying to say is, the cost of living has reached a type of "critical mass", in the form things are too expensive to buy, and too expensive to sell due to costs of the retailer. So even if they raise the GST, if will be zero advantage, maybe worse because people simply will go with less. AUSTRALIANS MUST STOP BEING JELLY-BACKS ON THE GST ISSUE, AND LET THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT KNOW LOUD AND CLEAR, NO RISE TO THE GST, PERIOD. We have had enough of all this BS. I hope there will national street marches, car bumper stickers, letter drops, A4 size placards, and whatever else that can send a message to canberra to ALL political parties,  NO GST HIKE, EVER. leave it at 10% as it is, we have learnt to live with it. If anything, the nation ought to be budgeted on 10% GST or adjust other things to suit the economy. To raise the GST, then the Government of the day truly has Socialism in it veins in some form or another. Turnball, if you make it to raise the GST, you have LOST MY VOTE and I will make some noise if it does get raised, Pensioner of Australia

Your pension will rise accordingly. You will not be any worse off.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:22am:

ozzyoi wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:48pm: I have not read all the replies, I just want to say my bit. Since a few weeks ago, on my current pension, my car sits in the driveway, unregistered. It will not get registered, and I have to use public transport, walk ( I am not getting any younger) and sometimes need to come home from the major fortnightly shopping in a taxi. I needed to use the heater a bit more this winter, and I paid dearly for the privilege. Next winter will be warmer clothes, from op shops. In simple terms, my state gov now gets no money/tax via car rego, petrol etc. I get to keep a bit extra in my pocket, to budget for xmas. My bet is, they will try to bring in a GST rise by then. I AM OPPOSED TO ANY GST TAX RISE. What I am trying to say is, the cost of living has reached a type of "critical mass", in the form things are too expensive to buy, and too expensive to sell due to costs of the retailer. So even if they raise the GST, if will be zero advantage, maybe worse because people simply will go with less. AUSTRALIANS MUST STOP BEING JELLY-BACKS ON THE GST ISSUE, AND LET THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT KNOW LOUD AND CLEAR, NO RISE TO THE GST, PERIOD. We have had enough of all this BS. I hope there will national street marches, car bumper stickers, letter drops, A4 size placards, and whatever else that can send a message to canberra to ALL political parties,  NO GST HIKE, EVER. leave it at 10% as it is, we have learnt to live with it. If anything, the nation ought to be budgeted on 10% GST or adjust other things to suit the economy. To raise the GST, then the Government of the day truly has Socialism in it veins in some form or another. Turnball, if you make it to raise the GST, you have LOST MY VOTE and I will make some noise if it does get raised, Pensioner of Australia Your pension will rise accordingly. You will not be any worse off.

BS not very likely.

Yeah, can’t compensate the lower income levels too much, will leave nothing for the rich and ultra rich!

crocodile wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 10:32pm:

Wolseley wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:26pm: wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:25am: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts? OK, I'll bite. 1. Those that pay only a small amount of tax or none at all such as very low income earners and pensioners pay the extra 5% but get no tax cut. 2. Bracket creep will eventually hoover up the lost revenue as taxpayers are exposed to inflation with immovable tax scales. The benefit of the income tax cut is only ephemeral. The gummint should really look at spending first.

However, we also know that pensions and other welfare will also rise to compensate and so in the end, no one is worse off and some are better off - largely the poor.

Unfortunately, it seems the argument of compensation never really gets understood.  They are happy to take reduced taxes and higher welfare but when GST is increased at the same time it is suddenly unfair. A lot of these people simply 'don't get it'.

Yeah, they don’t get “it” the “it” being adequate compensation. Longy just doesn’t get it.

:D :D :D

Why creep the rise in the GST by small amounts. Tax everything at 56% now and then it's next future rise is a decade away.

whats SECRET about all this crap?
if anyone thinks gst will forever stay at 10% have they got rocks for brains. ::) ::) ::)

The cat's out of the bag.

As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda.

We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%.

Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while.

That is right cods, the GST is a piggybank the Lib govts can go to whenever they spend too much, which is always. As such it is to the detriment of sound economic management.

Raising the GST right now is about the stupidest act by a stupid Party!

I wish Swan had raised the GST to 15% and overcompensated those on the lowest incomes. Now the Libs will raise it and under-compensate those on lowest incomes.

____ wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:27am:

Why creep the rise in the GST by small amounts. Tax everything at 56% now and then it's next future rise is a decade away.

Don't give them ideas Greens.

They'd love to, cigars, helicopters and champagne forever more.

cods wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:28am:

whats SECRET about all this crap? if anyone thinks gst will forever stay at 10% have they got rocks for brains. ::) ::) ::)

You mean that John Howard lied to us when he deliberately put the mechanism in place to ensure it could never be changed ?

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:29am:

The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while.

wow praise indeed from a dyedinthewool lefty...


it takes guts to raise the GST....something lefties dont have.. hey pan si did you see where the HECS DEBT will reach $70billion by 2018...and thats not counting the $9000 shortarse is planning to give to" higher education"..

what a joke... ::) ::) ::)..

$70billion


imagine what that would do for all those unemployed  homeless people if that was paid back.... ;D ;D ;D ;D

ho hum.. all this DEBT  makes sense to some

We were all sucked in by Howard when he said
that the GST of 10% was set in concrete -

he lied - it was always going to rise.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:30am:

That is right cods, the GST is a piggybank the Lib govts can go to whenever they spend too much, which is always. As such it is to the detriment of sound economic management. Raising the GST right now is about the stupidest act by a stupid Party! I wish Swan had raised the GST to 15% and overcompensated those on the lowest incomes. Now the Libs will raise it and under-compensate those on lowest incomes.

god some are m ore stoooopid than I gave them credit for..

THE STATES GET THE GST HASNT ANYONE TOLD YOU THAT DEAR?

Bobby. wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:36am:

We were all sucked in by Howard when he said that the GST of 10% was set in concrete - he lied - it was always going to rise.

GOT A LINK TO WHERE HE SAID THAT SUNSHINE???...

the GST is a TAX I have never heard one pollie claim any TAX was set in concrete...but prove me wrong.

The states get the GST as it stands ATM. Of course, on its introduction the feds cut various payments to the states.

The federal Parliament can amend the GST Act and keep some or all of the extra GST revenue for themselves.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:25am:

crocodile wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 10:32pm: Wolseley wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:26pm: wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 6:25am: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is prepared to ask voters for a clear mandate on GST reform and tax cuts if his party room agrees, according to senior Liberals Can someone explain why raising GST is such a bad thing when it is accompanied by tax cuts? OK, I'll bite. 1. Those that pay only a small amount of tax or none at all such as very low income earners and pensioners pay the extra 5% but get no tax cut. 2. Bracket creep will eventually hoover up the lost revenue as taxpayers are exposed to inflation with immovable tax scales. The benefit of the income tax cut is only ephemeral. The gummint should really look at spending first. However, we also know that pensions and other welfare will also rise to compensate and so in the end, no one is worse off and some are better off - largely the poor. Unfortunately, it seems the argument of compensation never really gets understood.  They are happy to take reduced taxes and higher welfare but when GST is increased at the same time it is suddenly unfair. A lot of these people simply 'don't get it'.

I really don't see the government raising the pension, and other government benefits by 5%, but by all means, they can put forth a proposal.

god the left dont even know what the GST is and o9r what it does...arrrrrrrrhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:38am:

The states get the GST as it stands ATM. Of course, on its introduction the feds cut various payments to the states. The federal Parliament can amend the GST Act and keep some or all of the extra GST revenue for themselves.

NO THEY CANT.......THE STATES DECIDE WHO GETS WHAT...

stop making it up..you are a typical desperate lefty.. who believe crapola put out by lefties..

cods wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:38am:

Bobby. wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:36am: We were all sucked in by Howard when he said that the GST of 10% was set in concrete - he lied - it was always going to rise. GOT A LINK TO WHERE HE SAID THAT SUNSHINE???... the GST is a TAX I have never heard one pollie claim any TAX was set in concrete...but prove me wrong.

OH Cods that was the whole point of the states all having to agree, he said it could never happen.

Remember he wanted to get elected and one of the threats to that was the proposition that the GST would be increased like it has been everywhere else it has been used. He claimed that he could set it up in a way that would prevent it from ever increasing.

Not desperate at all cods.

The GST Act is a Commonwealth law and the Parliament can change it if it wants to. So it can change the rate and it can change the distribution so the C/w gets some of the revenue. Once that change is made the first time the Commonwealth will rapidly increase the rate to 20% or higher. Libs are lousy economic managers and always need more money.

cods wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:40am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:38am: The states get the GST as it stands ATM. Of course, on its introduction the feds cut various payments to the states. The federal Parliament can amend the GST Act and keep some or all of the extra GST revenue for themselves. NO THEY CANT.......THE STATES DECIDE WHO GETS WHAT... stop making it up..you are a typical desperate lefty.. who believe crapola put out by lefties..

of course the feds can amend the GST act ... did you overdose on stupid pills this morning?

cods wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:36am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:30am: That is right cods, the GST is a piggybank the Lib govts can go to whenever they spend too much, which is always. As such it is to the detriment of sound economic management. Raising the GST right now is about the stupidest act by a stupid Party! I wish Swan had raised the GST to 15% and overcompensated those on the lowest incomes. Now the Libs will raise it and under-compensate those on lowest incomes. god some are m ore stoooopid than I gave them credit for.. THE STATES GET THE GST HASNT ANYONE TOLD YOU THAT DEAR?

That rule works in the same way that the government can not raise the GST without state approval. I don't know that they will do that but they certainly can if they like.

How does all this make all the conservative posters who every election cycle have been trying on the scare tactic of Labor raising the GST and that it is a very bad idea ?

Lucky nobody ever believed them.

I can imagine how relived and accepting everyone will be when they announce that it will only be increased to 12.5% .

I can see this strategy working, people will not work out how much it will cost them till too late.

cods wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:40am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:38am: The states get the GST as it stands ATM. Of course, on its introduction the feds cut various payments to the states. The federal Parliament can amend the GST Act and keep some or all of the extra GST revenue for themselves. NO THEY CANT.......THE STATES DECIDE WHO GETS WHAT... stop making it up..you are a typical desperate lefty.. who believe crapola put out by lefties..

Of course they could do that. GST is legislation, and legislation can be amended.

Taxing our way to prosperity - yeah good idea !


Socialism eventually runs out of RBA thin air money.

Quote:

Australian Constitution - Section 81 - Consolidated Revenue Fund All revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall form one Consolidated Revenue Fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities imposed by this Constitution.

Nothing in the constitution says that the GST must go to the states. They can do as they please with it.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 7:33am:

Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset.

It all starts with our crooked politicians, they're in the back pockets of big business being pulled out as required.

So the people see that our leaders are all good for nothing legal crooks and so they take as much as can be taken legally.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:44am:

cods wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:38am: Bobby. wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:36am: We were all sucked in by Howard when he said that the GST of 10% was set in concrete - he lied - it was always going to rise. GOT A LINK TO WHERE HE SAID THAT SUNSHINE???... the GST is a TAX I have never heard one pollie claim any TAX was set in concrete...but prove me wrong. OH Cods that was the whole point of the states all having to agree, he said it could never happen. Remember he wanted to get elected and one of the threats to that was the proposition that the GST would be increased like it has been everywhere else it has been used. He claimed that he could set it up in a way that would prevent it from ever increasing.

It's OK - Cods had a memory lapse.

Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:21am:

Taxing our way to prosperity - yeah good idea ! Socialism eventually runs out of RBA thin air money.

If our government had this countries cash cows in its hands our streets would be lined with gold.

Too bad they all got sold to a hand full of men.

The really depressing thing about it is they were public assets, they weren't Kennets or Keatings to sell as though their grandpapa left it to them in his will.

We should have had the opportunity to vote on such important matters.

I don't care about "compensation" if they debate the GST hike issue. It's all words constructed sentences to make it appear "logical".
Turnbull and Sinodis are like your teflon speeking sleazy car sales administrators. Their smirks now reveal who they really are.
As for Shorten, he has no idea of real work, he is all talk talk to. He may be labor, but he has not worked for wages that I am aware of.

All of them have no idea what so ever what it's like to survive in real world situations.
Mr Xenophon does. He gets my vote regardless now, there is not much more this Australian nation has to lose.
Mr X for PM in the next election, done deal.

Either way, Liberal or Labor say one thing and do another when elected, this was clearly started bu Gillard with her promise of no carbon tax, then the silky worded sentences make it look other wise. She did not last either.

Politicians must remember, pain, ( economical ), is not something one forgets too easy no matter what the sweetener is, it will make no difference this time.

Everything else they try to "sell" is simply smoke and mirrors.  That is what most politicians do best, glorified lawyers.

This nation is run by lawyers, bankers, accountants, which most have no idea or lost the relationship they may have once had of what it is really like try to make ends meet in the real world.

NO GST HIKE, EVER

Ajax wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:31am:

Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:21am: Taxing our way to prosperity - yeah good idea ! Socialism eventually runs out of RBA thin air money. If our government had this countries cash cows in its hands our streets would be lined with gold. Too bad they all got sold to a hand full of men. The really depressing thing about it is they were public assets, they weren't Kennets or Keatings to sell as though their grandpapa left it to them in his will. We should have had the opportunity to vote on such important matters.

If the Govt can go into debt without a vote it should be able to sell assets without a vote.

Debt is a defacto tax increase whereas sale of public assets is a defacto tax cut.

Those that don't pay tax therefore don't give a rat's about debt.

Ajax wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:31am:

The really depressing thing about it is they were public assets, they weren't Kennets or Keatings to sell as though their grandpapa left it to them in his will.

What a government gives you, it can also take away from you

Swagman wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:41am:

Ajax wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:31am: Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:21am: Taxing our way to prosperity - yeah good idea ! Socialism eventually runs out of RBA thin air money. If our government had this countries cash cows in its hands our streets would be lined with gold. Too bad they all got sold to a hand full of men. The really depressing thing about it is they were public assets, they weren't Kennets or Keatings to sell as though their grandpapa left it to them in his will. We should have had the opportunity to vote on such important matters. If the Govt can go into debt without a vote it should be able to sell assets without a vote. Debt is a defacto tax increase whereas sale of public assets is a defacto tax cut. Those that don't pay tax therefore don't give a rat's about debt.

Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:41am:

Ajax wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:31am: The really depressing thing about it is they were public assets, they weren't Kennets or Keatings to sell as though their grandpapa left it to them in his will. What a government gives you, it can also take away from you

With attitudes like that, that's why today we are controlled by a hand full of people that hoard the wealth of all nations in this world.

Sorry fellas the government should be above corporations not vise versa.

Swagman wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:41am:

Debt is a defacto tax increase whereas sale of public assets is a defacto tax cut.

Come on Swag, you can do better than that

Swagman wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:41am:

If the Govt can go into debt without a vote it should be able to sell assets without a vote. Debt is a defacto tax increase whereas sale of public assets is a defacto tax cut. Those that don't pay tax therefore don't give a rat's about debt.

It can sell assets without a vote, just not without consequences.

Using you analogy selling public assets creates a short-term cut, which leads to later long-term increases.

Bias_2012 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:46am:

Swagman wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:41am: Debt is a defacto tax increase whereas sale of public assets is a defacto tax cut. Come on Swag, you can do better than that

You disagree? Why?

Just stating a fact Ajax, unless we successfully protest otherwise, the government has the constitutional power to give and to take away. Personally I preferred the public utilities to remain in public hands. Their sale was never about raising funds for infrastructure, it was a bastard act of handing them over to the private sector as an ideological move where the bankers, private companies and politicians have teamed up to control all revenue in a globalised world

Swagman wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 9:41am:

Debt is a defacto tax increase whereas sale of public assets is a defacto tax cut.

Very often the sale of public assets results in the loss of income that has to be made up from taxation.

Swag is, shall we say, simplistic in his economic utterances?

What about the elephant in the room ?? Negative gearing and capital gains concessions for house hoarders draining 9 billion from the tax revenue stream each year !!

How come Malcolm won't even talk about it - instead he wants to penalize people on the lowest incomes who can't even afford to own their own home !!

bugger these pollies and their double standards :(

Quote:

Sorry fellas the government should be above corporations not vise versa.

Absolutely, but try rolling it back now.
The corps have it at the moment till it is bled dry, then they move on. By the time they move on, the politicians of the day have used whatever means possible to nest their eggs.

Is it right in this nation called Australia, where a pensioner has to defer registering a 4 cylinder car because the 51% foreigner of-shore has to appease the shareholders over my electricity bill ? It already has 10% GST.

So let look at the straight numbers

Pension (single ) about 750 PF
Supplement about 120
Total Aprox 900 pf
My rent used to be 25 % of my 750,
BUT, wait on, the SA State Gov ( Foley ) changed the rules
and made it so the 120 supplement paid to me by the Commonwealth is "income".
It also used a formula so it gleans the maximum rent assistance.
So my rent on Gov housing is now 336 pf
900 - 336 = 564 to live on per fortnight.
I don't drink and I do now Vape with the occasional cigar.

Food, bus, expenses and things I call the "dignity house budget"
Where is now the Liberal Government to tell the State Gov,
HANDS OFF THE PENSION SUPPLEMENT !

But Foley was a sneaky bugger, he has now retired, I think too many broken noses, cos he hung out at the strippers and got it one night.
So his and many decisions are based around a pint or 2.

Friends, this nation is running on deluded by alcohol politics.

It is time we we spoke out.

I was in the city today, Rundle Mall in fact.

It has lost it's soul, there was no where I could by an apple from the fruit stall, because it has been sqweezed out by Woolworths and the council friends.

Ya see what I am getting at ?

Corp-orates and like minded politicians are bleeding this nation as we speak.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 1:06pm:

Swag is, shall we say, simplistic in his economic utterances?

That's being charitable in the extreme, but...

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 1:06pm:

Swag is, shall we say, simplistic in his economic utterances?

That's the only way you Truebelievers have any chance of comprehending them.... :D

Bam wrote on Nov 1^st, 2015 at 9:10am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 7:33am: Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset. Sweden has just introduced a 30-hour work week. Think about it - they only have to work for 30 hours a week to earn enough tax to pay for all the government services.

The Swedes also have a 25% GST.

'Sweden Personal Income Tax Rate  1995-2015'

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/sweden/personal-income-tax-rate

56.9%?

Sir lastnail wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 3:00pm:

What about the elephant in the room ?? Negative gearing and capital gains concessions for house hoarders draining 9 billion from the tax revenue stream each year !! How come Malcolm won't even talk about it - instead he wants to penalize people on the lowest incomes who can't even afford to own their own home !! bugger these pollies and their double standards :(

Hear hear sir Nail,

let Longy/Maria get out of that one!

Swagman wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 3:46pm:

Bam wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:10am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 7:33am: Look at Sweden or Norway - I can't remember which it is. They have free health care, free public transport, and so on. They also pay a lot more tax than us but don't mind because they get excellent services from their government for FREE. Can't see that happening here with your narrow "me, me, me, gimme, gimme, gimme" mindset. Sweden has just introduced a 30-hour work week. Think about it - they only have to work for 30 hours a week to earn enough tax to pay for all the government services. The Swedes also have a 25% GST.

Point is, Swag, they don't mind paying as long as they get value for money.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:23am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:22am: ozzyoi wrote on Nov 1st, 2015 at 9:48pm: I have not read all the replies, I just want to say my bit. Since a few weeks ago, on my current pension, my car sits in the driveway, unregistered. It will not get registered, and I have to use public transport, walk ( I am not getting any younger) and sometimes need to come home from the major fortnightly shopping in a taxi. I needed to use the heater a bit more this winter, and I paid dearly for the privilege. Next winter will be warmer clothes, from op shops. In simple terms, my state gov now gets no money/tax via car rego, petrol etc. I get to keep a bit extra in my pocket, to budget for xmas. My bet is, they will try to bring in a GST rise by then. I AM OPPOSED TO ANY GST TAX RISE. What I am trying to say is, the cost of living has reached a type of "critical mass", in the form things are too expensive to buy, and too expensive to sell due to costs of the retailer. So even if they raise the GST, if will be zero advantage, maybe worse because people simply will go with less. AUSTRALIANS MUST STOP BEING JELLY-BACKS ON THE GST ISSUE, AND LET THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT KNOW LOUD AND CLEAR, NO RISE TO THE GST, PERIOD. We have had enough of all this BS. I hope there will national street marches, car bumper stickers, letter drops, A4 size placards, and whatever else that can send a message to canberra to ALL political parties,  NO GST HIKE, EVER. leave it at 10% as it is, we have learnt to live with it. If anything, the nation ought to be budgeted on 10% GST or adjust other things to suit the economy. To raise the GST, then the Government of the day truly has Socialism in it veins in some form or another. Turnball, if you make it to raise the GST, you have LOST MY VOTE and I will make some noise if it does get raised, Pensioner of Australia Your pension will rise accordingly. You will not be any worse off. BS not very likely.

Just because you lack the ability to calculate the compensation correctly does not mean people much brighter than you cannot.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 8:29am:

The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while.

WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA.

It's all a distraction from copper internet: https://delimiter.com.au/2015/11/02/fifield-gets-serious-about-vdsl-cross-talk-issue/

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:22pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA.

It's all a distraction from copper internet: https://delimiter.com.au/2015/11/02/fifield-gets-serious-about-vdsl-cross-talk-issue/

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:22pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA.

YOU may have.

I did not (and will not).

Kat wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:43pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:22pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA. YOU may have. I did not (and will not).

Don't care. Surely by now you have worked out that the world is run by the majority and losers like yourself just play with bikes and get angry at everyone instead.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:22pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA.

No we did not ...

the majority of the votes were opposed to it, by a long way, and the only reason it got through was because the Democrats, who went to the election promising to never support it, changed their tune post election

John Smith wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:04pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:22pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA. No we did not ... the majority of the votes were opposed to it, by a long way, and the only reason it got through was because the Democrats, who went to the election promising to never support it, changed their tune post election

Yes even many Liberal voters supported the Democrats in the senate with the belief that they were effectively blocking the GST.

This is the reason that the Democrats do not exist today, they betrayed the people who voted for them.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:22pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA.

Pigs bum we did! Howard got 48.5% of the vote in 1998. That is why for the rest of his term he just spent on pork and wealthfare.

Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:22pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA.

I am not aware of anyone saying it is a good thing.

It is a reality that nobody is interested in removing is all.

Who said that I am opposed to the GST, I am opposed to unnecessarily and unreasonably increasing it but I would think that the majority would agree.

I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:25pm:

I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous.

And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST.

lee wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:28pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST.

True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 5:47pm:

Kat wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:43pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:22pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA. YOU may have. I did not (and will not). Don't care. Surely by now you have worked out that the world is run by the majority and losers like yourself just play with bikes and get angry at everyone instead.

I'm a better, smarter person than you in every way, so why don't you just get back in your carton?

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:34pm:

lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise.

He certainly never DESERVED to be PM.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:18pm:

Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining.

A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically!

Neferti wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:44pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically!

Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD.

lee wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:28pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST.

“win” he got like 48.5% FGS!

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:49pm:

Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD.

You are so wrong. The Wholesale tax on many items was at 33% and the GST reduced those to 10%.

What Woollies, Coles and Hardly Normal did was "hide" the fact.

Can you work out what the difference is between 33% on a $5 item and 10% on the same item?

NOBODY really noticed the GST ..... but TVs, computers and so forth DID get cheaper. 

IF the GST goes up to 15% it will still be cheaper than some taxes on items BEFORE the GST.

Neferti falls into the trap of forgetting the old sales taxes were on wholesale prices.

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:12pm:

Neferti falls into the trap of forgetting the old sales taxes were on wholesale prices.

You have no idea about what went on (in Parliament and elsewhere) regarding the GST, do you?  I did.

The GST "across the board" REDUCED prices of many items. What Woolies, Coles and others did is NOT relevant.

I still think the the GST should be 15% or even 20%.

Kat wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:43pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:47pm: Kat wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:43pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:22pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:29am: The cat's out of the bag. As soon as the media gets a hold of it, we know it's on the agenda. We didn't want 10% and we certainly don't want 15%. Bye bye Turnbull, it was nice having you for a while. WE actually voted for it. And even the ALP now accepts it was a good thing.  Opposition is just now the province of leftovers like you and DNA. YOU may have. I did not (and will not). Don't care. Surely by now you have worked out that the world is run by the majority and losers like yourself just play with bikes and get angry at everyone instead. I'm a better, smarter person than you in every way, so why don't you just get back in your carton?

Was it getting into cartons that lead to your being homeless?

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:49pm:

Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD.

The RBA does not target the exchange rate. It is not possible to target the interest rate and the exchange rate at the same time.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:34pm:

lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise.

Wow.... you are a deluded one, that is for sure. You think Howard won an election by the second biggest margin EVER jst because of comments on the GST?

No wonder you loved the carbon tax. You are crazy.

Neferti wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:20pm:

The GST "across the board" REDUCED prices of many items. What Woolies, Coles and others did is NOT relevant.

and increased the cost of ten times as many other items .... funnily enough, the stuff you buy every 10 yrs went down, but the stuff you buy daily went up ...

yeaaahh GST  ::) ::) ::) ::)

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:26pm:

You think Howard won an election by the second biggest margin EVER jst because of comments on the GST?

why not? you seem to think labor lost by the second largest margin ever based on the carbon tax  :D :D :D :D :D

Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:10pm:

lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. “win” he got like 48.5% FGS!

Please read my post. Where does the word "win" appear?

Still having reading and comprehension issues.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:26pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:34pm: lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise. Wow.... you are a deluded one, that is for sure. You think Howard won an election by the second biggest margin EVER jst because of comments on the GST? No wonder you loved the carbon tax. You are crazy.

In 95 Howard was Mr 17 precent he had already been thrown out as opposition leader and the Libs didn't want him back, they had recently lost an election based on Howards GST presented by Hewson.

The only way they would agree to making Howard leader again was on the condition that he had to kill any prospect of a GST stone dead.

In 95 when Howard got the leadership back his numbers were diabolical and they didn't start to turn around till after he killed the prospect of a GST. after that the gap closed and in the end he won but with the threat of a GST over his head likely that the numbers may not have ever started to move in his favour anyway - not that he would have been the Liberal leader.

Howard didn't just perminantly dump the GST he had supported all his political life for no reason, he was forced to do it.

Howards problem wasn't really the electorate it was his party.

Much like we see today with Turnbull put back into the leadership - the conditions are that he keeps many of Abbotts policies.

Again - why would plans to raise the GST be secret?  It's an obvious move from a government bereft of genuine policy thrusts and desperate for a dollar to spend as they choose.

Genuinely creating jobs and a reliable future for the majority, as opposed to chopping the majority off at the knees to garner some form of social control, would be a far better option and would generate far greater revenue via income tax.

Chopping off the leeches in super, negative gearing, wealthfare, and corporate subsidy would help, as well as chopping off the perks and lurks for the privileged class....

Age of Entitlement is over.... unless you are part of the Entitled class.....

lee wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 6:28pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST.

Howard had promised to never ever take a GST to an election, it is not difficult to understand how long never ever ever goes for. In Howards case it went from 1996 to mid 1997, around 8 months.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 10:47pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:34pm: lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise. Wow.... you are a deluded one, that is for sure. You think Howard won an election by the second biggest margin EVER jst because of comments on the GST? No wonder you loved the carbon tax. You are crazy. In 95 Howard was Mr 17 precent he had already been thrown out as opposition leader and the Libs didn't want him back, they had recently lost an election based on Howards GST presented by Hewson. The only way they would agree to making Howard leader again was on the condition that he had to kill any prospect of a GST stone dead. In 95 when Howard got the leadership back his numbers were diabolical and they didn't start to turn around till after he killed the prospect of a GST. after that the gap closed and in the end he won but with the threat of a GST over his head likely that the numbers may not have ever started to move in his favour anyway - not that he would have been the Liberal leader. Howard didn't just perminantly dump the GST he had supported all his political life for no reason, he was forced to do it. Howards problem wasn't really the electorate it was his party. Much like we see today with Turnbull put back into the leadership - the conditions are that he keeps many of Abbotts policies.

Bene vocalibus......

crocodile wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:22pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:49pm: Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD. The RBA does not target the exchange rate. It is not possible to target the interest rate and the exchange rate at the same time.

In the same week as the president of the RBA came out with a statement saying that the AUD was significantly overvalued, the Treasurer said almost the same thing.

RBA release Dec 2014.


Quote:

The exchange rate has traded at lower levels recently, in large part reflecting the strengthening US dollar. But the Australian dollar remains above most estimates of its fundamental value, particularly given the significant declines in key commodity prices in recent months. A lower exchange rate is likely to be needed to achieve balanced growth in the economy.

Quote:

Reserve Bank of Australia governor Glenn Stevens wants the dollar to fall to levels last seen a decade ago and says official interest rate cuts need to be delivered in a way that boosts confidence rather than remind people of the economy's woes........He indicated the currency should now be closer to about US75¢; Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/rba-governor-glenn-stevens-says-australian-dollar-better-at-us75-20141211-125g73.html#ixzz3qL8M32NF

The AUD was trading at about 93c at that time - It is now trading at 70c the difference largely driven by comments by the RBA and politicians. Nothing to do with fundamentals.



Quote:

Joe Hockey tells RBA he’s not happy with unbiased stance The Reserve Bank of Australia’s move to a “neutral bias" on monetary policy has angered the Abbott government, which believes any upward pressure on the dollar makes economic management in the next two to three years more difficult. The central bank has been informed directly of Treasurer  Joe Hockey ’s displeasure. Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/joe-hockey-tells-rbahes-not-happy-with-unbiased-stance-20140421-ix3wx#ixzz3qLCljZmY Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 10:51pm:

Again - why would plans to raise the GST be secret?  It's an obvious move from a government bereft of genuine policy thrusts and desperate for a dollar to spend as they choose. Genuinely creating jobs and a reliable future for the majority, as opposed to chopping the majority off at the knees to garner some form of social control, would be a far better option and would generate far greater revenue via income tax. Chopping off the leeches in super, negative gearing, wealthfare, and corporate subsidy would help, as well as chopping off the perks and lurks for the privileged class.... Age of Entitlement is over.... unless you are part of the Entitled class.....

Quote:

Again - why would plans to raise the GST be secret?

With the amount they pay people smugglers there is an obvious on water aspect and you know we can't talk about that.

Neferti wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 7:10pm:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:49pm: Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD. You are so wrong. The Wholesale tax on many items was at 33% and the GST reduced those to 10%. What Woollies, Coles and Hardly Normal did was "hide" the fact. Can you work out what the difference is between 33% on a $5 item and 10% on the same item? NOBODY really noticed the GST ..... but TVs, computers and so forth DID get cheaper.  IF the GST goes up to 15% it will still be cheaper than some taxes on items BEFORE the GST.

Can you work out what the difference is between 33% on a $5 item and 10% on the same item?


You can work out the difference between a variable rate of tax starting at about 8% - 45% on a few wholesale items compared to 10% on everything.

Services were not taxed, there was no tax on your Electricity, gas phone bills or any services.

By the way anyone worked out the difference in GST on your shopping bill if they remove food as an exemption ?

When I currently do a full family shop it can be $330 or so and I pay about $12 GST. This would increase to $33.

Finding an extra $30 to $50 for the average family can be a game changer for their budget and this is just for food. It is also an extra $20 or so on the electricity bill, the rates, gas, phone etc.

This makes the fixed carbon price look like a x'mas present.

I currently buy 2 litres of milk a day @about $3.

A GST of 45 cents per day is $3.15 a week - 12.60 a month and $160 a year and just a little less for bread.

A 15% GST on food would mean an extra $300 a year just for bread and milk for me.

You righties should look at these numbers across the board and work out what this really means for people. Time to put the dogma away and stop being silly.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 10:47pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:34pm: lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise. Wow.... you are a deluded one, that is for sure. You think Howard won an election by the second biggest margin EVER jst because of comments on the GST? No wonder you loved the carbon tax. You are crazy. In 95 Howard was Mr 17 precent he had already been thrown out as opposition leader and the Libs didn't want him back, they had recently lost an election based on Howards GST presented by Hewson. The only way they would agree to making Howard leader again was on the condition that he had to kill any prospect of a GST stone dead. In 95 when Howard got the leadership back his numbers were diabolical and they didn't start to turn around till after he killed the prospect of a GST. after that the gap closed and in the end he won but with the threat of a GST over his head likely that the numbers may not have ever started to move in his favour anyway - not that he would have been the Liberal leader. Howard didn't just perminantly dump the GST he had supported all his political life for no reason, he was forced to do it. Howards problem wasn't really the electorate it was his party. Much like we see today with Turnbull put back into the leadership - the conditions are that he keeps many of Abbotts policies.

Garbage from end to end. Howards 18% popularity was in the late 80s. By the time he got the leadership he was getting half-decent polls and the Libs were well in front. His GST comments didn't make any difference and he recorded the Lbs 2nd biggest ever victory.

Retelling of history says a great deal about you and it was all bad.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 6:32am:

By the way anyone worked out the difference in GST on your shopping bill if they remove food as an exemption ? When I currently do a full family shop it can be $330 or so and I pay about $12 GST. This would increase to $33. Finding an extra $30 to $50 for the average family can be a game changer for their budget and this is just for food. It is also an extra $20 or so on the electricity bill, the rates, gas, phone etc. This makes the fixed carbon price look like a x'mas present. I currently buy 2 litres of milk a day @about $3. A GST of 45 cents per day is $3.15 a week - 12.60 a month and $160 a year and just a little less for bread. A 15% GST on food would mean an extra $300 a year just for bread and milk for me. You righties should look at these numbers across the board and work out what this really means for people. Time to put the dogma away and stop being silly.

What is it about 'compensation' that you cannot understand?  You are more than happy to accept and understand te Carbon Tax compensation but when it is a policy by the Liberals suddenly your brain fails you?

COMPENSATION....  work it out.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2015 at 11:46pm:

crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:49pm: Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD. The RBA does not target the exchange rate. It is not possible to target the interest rate and the exchange rate at the same time. In the same week as the president of the RBA came out with a statement saying that the AUD was significantly overvalued, the Treasurer said almost the same thing. RBA release Dec 2014. Quote: The exchange rate has traded at lower levels recently, in large part reflecting the strengthening US dollar. But the Australian dollar remains above most estimates of its fundamental value, particularly given the significant declines in key commodity prices in recent months. A lower exchange rate is likely to be needed to achieve balanced growth in the economy. [quote]Reserve Bank of Australia governor Glenn Stevens wants the dollar to fall to levels last seen a decade ago and says official interest rate cuts need to be delivered in a way that boosts confidence rather than remind people of the economy's woes........He indicated the currency should now be closer to about US75¢; Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/rba-governor-glenn-stevens-says-australian-dollar-better-at-us75-20141211-125g73.html#ixzz3qL8M32NF

The AUD was trading at about 93c at that time - It is now trading at 70c the difference largely driven by comments by the RBA and politicians. Nothing to do with fundamentals.



Quote:

Joe Hockey tells RBA he’s not happy with unbiased stance The Reserve Bank of Australia’s move to a “neutral bias" on monetary policy has angered the Abbott government, which believes any upward pressure on the dollar makes economic management in the next two to three years more difficult. The central bank has been informed directly of Treasurer  Joe Hockey ’s displeasure. Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/joe-hockey-tells-rbahes-not-happy-with-unbiased-stance-20140421-ix3wx#ixzz3qLCljZmY Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

[/quote]

That's all lovely Dna but nothing there that shows the RBA has actually targeted a fixed exchange rate. If you think that the markets can be hoodwinked into slipping demand for the AUD by the Governor's whim then you're nuts. Stevens is simply uttering the likely trend. The dollar is down because the USD is gaining strength, the next interest rate movement is predicted to be down and the arse has fallen out of commodity prices.

The RBA can set an exchange rate by manipulating the money supply but in so doing they lose control of fixed interest rates. If you need more information then google 'open market operations' or get a macro textbook.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 7:55am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 10:47pm: mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:26pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:34pm: lee wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:28pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:25pm: I point out how dishonest the implementation was from the PM who promised to never ever implement a GST it was dead and buried. Without his commitment to never ever have a GST as policy Howard would have never been PM of Australia -his lie on this was monstrous. And then he went to an election on the promise to introduce the GST. True but irrelevant, he would not have been PM without the promise. Wow.... you are a deluded one, that is for sure. You think Howard won an election by the second biggest margin EVER jst because of comments on the GST? No wonder you loved the carbon tax. You are crazy. In 95 Howard was Mr 17 precent he had already been thrown out as opposition leader and the Libs didn't want him back, they had recently lost an election based on Howards GST presented by Hewson. The only way they would agree to making Howard leader again was on the condition that he had to kill any prospect of a GST stone dead. In 95 when Howard got the leadership back his numbers were diabolical and they didn't start to turn around till after he killed the prospect of a GST. after that the gap closed and in the end he won but with the threat of a GST over his head likely that the numbers may not have ever started to move in his favour anyway - not that he would have been the Liberal leader. Howard didn't just perminantly dump the GST he had supported all his political life for no reason, he was forced to do it. Howards problem wasn't really the electorate it was his party. Much like we see today with Turnbull put back into the leadership - the conditions are that he keeps many of Abbotts policies. Garbage from end to end. Howards 18% popularity was in the late 80s. By the time he got the leadership he was getting half-decent polls and the Libs were well in front. His GST comments didn't make any difference and he recorded the Lbs 2nd biggest ever victory. Retelling of history says a great deal about you and it was all bad.

Howard was forced to kill the GST by the party or he would not have been elected as leader - that is a fact.

http://polling.newspoll.com.au/image_uploads/cgi-lib.12936.1.4113C.pdf

Senator Ian Macdonald says he would vote against any increases to the GST   :)
November 3, 2015
News.com.au


LIBERAL Party backbencher Ian Macdonald has vowed to oppose any increase to the GST, saying as a member of the Howard Government he “swore in blood” the tax wouldn’t exceed 10 per cent. 

The Queensland Senator said he supports broadening the GST, but “certainly would not be voting for any increase”.   :)

“I was around when this GST proposal was originally introduced and at the time I and everyone around from the Prime Minister down promised that it would never go beyond 10 per cent,” he told ABC News Radio.   :)   



‘Swore in blood’ ... Senator Macdonald, right, was a member of the Howard Government that introduced the goods and services tax in July 2000. He is pictured here with the former prime minister in 1997.Source:News Corp Australia

The Goods and Services Tax was introduced by the Howard Government in July 2000.

Speculation the tax could be broadened to apply to some goods and services that are currently exempt, including fresh food, health and education, has been widespread since Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull confirmed all tax reform options were “on the table”.

Senator Macdonald said he couldn’t recall whether or not GST applied to health and education under the original Howard Government proposal, but he wanted “whatever we took to the people at that time” to be adopted now.

“As history shows we had to compromise to get that financial reform though the senate at the time, but it still did interfere with the original proposal that the people of Australia adopted by electing us at that election,” he said.

“I want the GST proposal that our government took to the people and was elected on that promise and that was a broad based GST without exemptions

“My recollection is that it covered everything at the time, but … what I’m saying is whatever we took to the people at that time is what should be adopted now and it would allow for addition money for the states.”

Dnarever wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 6:32am:

By the way anyone worked out the difference in GST on your shopping bill if they remove food as an exemption ? When I currently do a full family shop it can be $330 or so and I pay about $12 GST. This would increase to $33. Finding an extra $30 to $50 for the average family can be a game changer for their budget and this is just for food. It is also an extra $20 or so on the electricity bill, the rates, gas, phone etc. This makes the fixed carbon price look like a x'mas present. I currently buy 2 litres of milk a day @about $3. A GST of 45 cents per day is $3.15 a week - 12.60 a month and $160 a year and just a little less for bread. A 15% GST on food would mean an extra $300 a year just for bread and milk for me. You righties should look at these numbers across the board and work out what this really means for people. Time to put the dogma away and stop being silly.

Low income earners and the average family benefit most from ANY taxation.  GST not excluded.  :-?

That $300 bucks would be returned in spades, even without any monetary compensation.

Look past your nose for a change.... ;D

LIBERAL Party backbencher Ian Macdonald has vowed to oppose any increase to the GST, saying as a member of the Howard Government he “swore in blood” the tax wouldn’t exceed 10 per cent.   :D

Quote:

Just because you lack the ability to calculate the compensation correctly does not mean people much brighter than you cannot.

Exactly maria, I do lack the ability and not too proud to admit I'm not the smartest kid on the block, plus I really don't have the time right here to post exact figures to suit oh your greatness.
I am speaking from a point of principle and survival on the obvious, not a word perfect and number perfect account.
I have stated I am a pensioner, if you want exact figures there are 2 things you need to look up to satisfy your perfection which is publicly available,
1. What pensioners get paid at a centrelink office closest to you, go pick up a pamphlet.
2. 25 % of income is the calculation for the rent to be paid in State owned gov housing, also available in a pamphlet, or ring up your local state housing authority, wait 2 hours and you might be lucky on the day for your call to be answered.
I'll freely give you a tip though, don't ever try to ring up on the first Tuesdays in November, somehow, statistically there seems to be no answer. It's best to go in person.

It's a no brainer really.

Other wise maria, shut the fffffff up unless you have something constructive to say.

ozzyoi wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 9:30am:

Quote: Just because you lack the ability to calculate the compensation correctly does not mean people much brighter than you cannot. Exactly maria, I do lack the ability and not too proud to admit I'm not the smartest kid on the block, plus I really don't have the time right here to post exact figures to suit oh your greatness. I am speaking from a point of principle and survival on the obvious, not a word perfect and number perfect account. I have stated I am a pensioner, if you want exact figures there are 2 things you need to look up to satisfy your perfection which is publicly available, 1. What pensioners get paid at a centrelink office closest to you, go pick up a pamphlet. 2. 25 % of income is the calculation for the rent to be paid in State owned gov housing, also available in a pamphlet, or ring up your local state housing authority, wait 2 hours and you might be lucky on the day for your call to be answered. I'll freely give you a tip though, don't ever try to ring up on the first Tuesdays in November, somehow, statistically there seems to be no answer. It's best to go in person. It's a no brainer really. Other wise maria, shut the fffffff up unless you have something constructive to say.

Maybe you should have worked harder, spent less and saved more when you were younger so you would OWN a house now.

crocodile wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 8:34am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 11:46pm: crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:49pm: Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD. The RBA does not target the exchange rate. It is not possible to target the interest rate and the exchange rate at the same time. In the same week as the president of the RBA came out with a statement saying that the AUD was significantly overvalued, the Treasurer said almost the same thing. RBA release Dec 2014. Quote: The exchange rate has traded at lower levels recently, in large part reflecting the strengthening US dollar. But the Australian dollar remains above most estimates of its fundamental value, particularly given the significant declines in key commodity prices in recent months. A lower exchange rate is likely to be needed to achieve balanced growth in the economy. [quote]Reserve Bank of Australia governor Glenn Stevens wants the dollar to fall to levels last seen a decade ago and says official interest rate cuts need to be delivered in a way that boosts confidence rather than remind people of the economy's woes........He indicated the currency should now be closer to about US75¢; Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/rba-governor-glenn-stevens-says-australian-dollar-better-at-us75-20141211-125g73.html#ixzz3qL8M32NF The AUD was trading at about 93c at that time - It is now trading at 70c the difference largely driven by comments by the RBA and politicians. Nothing to do with fundamentals. [quote]Joe Hockey tells RBA he’s not happy with unbiased stance The Reserve Bank of Australia’s move to a “neutral bias" on monetary policy has angered the Abbott government, which believes any upward pressure on the dollar makes economic management in the next two to three years more difficult. The central bank has been informed directly of Treasurer  Joe Hockey ’s displeasure. Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/joe-hockey-tells-rbahes-not-happy-with-unbiased-stance-20140421-ix3wx#ixzz3qLCljZmY Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

[/quote]

That's all lovely Dna but nothing there that shows the RBA has actually targeted a fixed exchange rate. If you think that the markets can be hoodwinked into slipping demand for the AUD by the Governor's whim then you're nuts. Stevens is simply uttering the likely trend. The dollar is down because the USD is gaining strength, the next interest rate movement is predicted to be down and the arse has fallen out of commodity prices.

The RBA can set an exchange rate by manipulating the money supply but in so doing they lose control of fixed interest rates. If you need more information then google 'open market operations' or get a macro textbook.
[/quote]

The proof is in the pudding - they were talking down the AUD and it responded by going down ?

Then a bit later the AUD started to recover and the RBA gave the AUD another verbal serve and guess what happened this time - right it fell again.

Awful lot of coincidences. The federal treasurer tells the RBA to put downward pressure on the AUD and then the RBA start talking the currency down. The AUD in response drops and then drops again as a result of the same verbal stimulus.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 7:57am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 6:32am: By the way anyone worked out the difference in GST on your shopping bill if they remove food as an exemption ? When I currently do a full family shop it can be $330 or so and I pay about $12 GST. This would increase to $33. Finding an extra $30 to $50 for the average family can be a game changer for their budget and this is just for food. It is also an extra $20 or so on the electricity bill, the rates, gas, phone etc. This makes the fixed carbon price look like a x'mas present. I currently buy 2 litres of milk a day @about $3. A GST of 45 cents per day is $3.15 a week - 12.60 a month and $160 a year and just a little less for bread. A 15% GST on food would mean an extra $300 a year just for bread and milk for me. You righties should look at these numbers across the board and work out what this really means for people. Time to put the dogma away and stop being silly. What is it about 'compensation' that you cannot understand?  You are more than happy to accept and understand te Carbon Tax compensation but when it is a policy by the Liberals suddenly your brain fails you? COMPENSATION....  work it out.

You really think it is possible to compensate every Australian by that sort of number ? You could not be that stupid you are just playing the old record and not thinking.

You need to put that old dogma on a leash and grow a small crop of honesty.

When the GST was implemented the rich got hUGE tax cuts, those on lower incomes got a bit of bracket creep returned. It will be the same this time—pure neocon play.

Will they put the GST on rents?

Swagman wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 9:24am:

Dnarever wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 6:32am: By the way anyone worked out the difference in GST on your shopping bill if they remove food as an exemption ? When I currently do a full family shop it can be $330 or so and I pay about $12 GST. This would increase to $33. Finding an extra $30 to $50 for the average family can be a game changer for their budget and this is just for food. It is also an extra $20 or so on the electricity bill, the rates, gas, phone etc. This makes the fixed carbon price look like a x'mas present. I currently buy 2 litres of milk a day @about $3. A GST of 45 cents per day is $3.15 a week - 12.60 a month and $160 a year and just a little less for bread. A 15% GST on food would mean an extra $300 a year just for bread and milk for me. You righties should look at these numbers across the board and work out what this really means for people. Time to put the dogma away and stop being silly. Low income earners and the average family benefit most from ANY taxation.  GST not excluded.  :-? That $300 bucks would be returned in spades, even without any monetary compensation. Look past your nose for a change.... ;D

WOW there is a bunch of silly unsupportable statements.

The problem is that the $300 for bread and milk is probably about 0.2 % of the total cost to the average family.

Go feed your dogma, I think its gone crazy.

mariacostel wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 10:12am:

Maybe you should have worked harder, spent less and saved more when you were younger so you would OWN a house now.

or maybe he should have done what you did and married someone who would provide everything for him?

mariacostel wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 10:12am:

ozzyoi wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 9:30am: Quote: Just because you lack the ability to calculate the compensation correctly does not mean people much brighter than you cannot. Exactly maria, I do lack the ability and not too proud to admit I'm not the smartest kid on the block, plus I really don't have the time right here to post exact figures to suit oh your greatness. I am speaking from a point of principle and survival on the obvious, not a word perfect and number perfect account. I have stated I am a pensioner, if you want exact figures there are 2 things you need to look up to satisfy your perfection which is publicly available, 1. What pensioners get paid at a centrelink office closest to you, go pick up a pamphlet. 2. 25 % of income is the calculation for the rent to be paid in State owned gov housing, also available in a pamphlet, or ring up your local state housing authority, wait 2 hours and you might be lucky on the day for your call to be answered. I'll freely give you a tip though, don't ever try to ring up on the first Tuesdays in November, somehow, statistically there seems to be no answer. It's best to go in person. It's a no brainer really. Other wise maria, shut the fffffff up unless you have something constructive to say. Maybe you should have worked harder, spent less and saved more when you were younger so you would OWN a house now.

something constructive to say.


You seem to have missed this bit ?

People don't half bitch and moan.
Life is what you make of it. You decide things are tough, you don't get the breaks etc, life is unfair then you'll find it tough.
But if you get on with things you'll actually find like I have that life isn't really that hard at all.....

Dnarever wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2015 at 10:31am:

crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:34am: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 11:46pm: crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:49pm: Neferti wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:44pm: Jovial Monk wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:18pm: Also, it is very hard to get rid of the GST, would have to take away tax cuts—try taking that to an election—and get the states to reimpose all sorts of taxes. So, the GST has proved to be a lousy tax but it is just there, not removable until the economy improves—and it is declining. A General Service Tax (GST) was much better than the old Wholesale/Retail tax system where some items were taxed as high as 33% as "luxury" items. Things such as TVs and so forth dropped in price, dramatically! Fairly sure that TV's were not luxury items and TV's etc are going up 30% currently thanks to the RBA and Treasurer deliberately sinking the AUD. The RBA does not target the exchange rate. It is not possible to target the interest rate and the exchange rate at the same time. In the same week as the president of the RBA came out with a statement saying that the AUD was significantly overvalued, the Treasurer said almost the same thing. RBA release Dec 2014. Quote: The exchange rate has traded at lower levels recently, in large part reflecting the strengthening US dollar. But the Australian dollar remains above most estimates of its fundamental value, particularly given the significant declines in key commodity prices in recent months. A lower exchange rate is likely to be needed to achieve balanced growth in the economy. [quote]Reserve Bank of Australia governor Glenn Stevens wants the dollar to fall to levels last seen a decade ago and says official interest rate cuts need to be delivered in a way that boosts confidence rather than remind people of the economy's woes........He indicated the currency should now be closer to about US75¢; Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/rba-governor-glenn-stevens-says-australian-dollar-better-at-us75-20141211-125g73.html#ixzz3qL8M32NF The AUD was trading at about 93c at that time - It is now trading at 70c the difference largely driven by comments by the RBA and politicians. Nothing to do with fundamentals. [quote]Joe Hockey tells RBA he’s not happy with unbiased stance The Reserve Bank of Australia’s move to a “neutral bias" on monetary policy has angered the Abbott government, which believes any upward pressure on the dollar makes economic management in the next two to three years more difficult. The central bank has been informed directly of Treasurer  Joe Hockey ’s displeasure. Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/national/joe-hockey-tells-rbahes-not-happy-with-unbiased-stance-20140421-ix3wx#ixzz3qLCljZmY Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

That's all lovely Dna but nothing there that shows the RBA has actually targeted a fixed exchange rate. If you think that the markets can be hoodwinked into slipping demand for the AUD by the Governor's whim then you're nuts. Stevens is simply uttering the likely trend. The dollar is down because the USD is gaining strength, the next interest rate movement is predicted to be down and the arse has fallen out of commodity prices.

The RBA can set an exchange rate by manipulating the money supply but in so doing they lose control of fixed interest rates. If you need more information then google 'open market operations' or get a macro textbook.
[/quote]

The proof is in the pudding - they were talking down the AUD and it responded by going down ?

Then a bit later the AUD started to recover and the RBA gave the AUD another verbal serve and guess what happened this time - right it fell again.

Awful lot of coincidences. The federal treasurer tells the RBA to put downward pressure on the AUD and then the RBA start talking the currency down. The AUD in response drops and then drops again as a result of the same verbal stimulus.
[/quote]

The bigger pudding is the commodity prices. The dollar tracks it very well. Funny about that.

http://www.rba.gov.au/statistics/images/commodity-prices.gif

http://research.perthmint.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/usdfx.png