Surprising group fighting ‘stage 3’ tax cuts revealed in new survey
A surprising group of people who are fighting monster “stage three” tax cuts has been revealed.



October 2, 2022
News.com.au




Almost twice as many Australians want the “stage 3” income tax cuts scrapped as those who want to keep them, a new survey suggests.

The Australia Institute has released a poll which found 41 per cent of people support the Albanese government repealing the tax cuts, compared with 22 per cent who are opposed.

The progressive think tank enlisted pollster Dyanata to conduct a “nationally representative” online survey of 1409 voters over three days in early September.

Nearly half – 46 per cent – of the people surveyed identified that the cuts would benefit high income earners the most.

Forty-three per cent of respondents who identified as Labor voters supported the cuts being ditched.

The stage 3 tax cuts are the third in a series of cuts introduced by the former Coalition government after the first two tranches offered targeted tax relief to low and middle income taxpayers.

The Labor government has come under political pressure to backflip on its election commitment to keep the stage 3 cuts in place, given the economic storm gripping the country.

The cuts will kick in from July 2024 and abolish the entire 38 per cent tax bracket, meaning everyone earning between $45,000 to $200,000 will pay only 30 cents of every dollar they earn.


The policy means about 95 per cent of Australians will face a marginal tax rate of no more than 30 per cent as well as the 2 per cent Medicare levy.


Critics say the stage 3 cuts, which will cost the federal budget more than $20bn a year and an estimated $243bn over a decade, are not affordable or equitable.

The Australia Institute’s poll found 61 per cent of Australians thought adapting economic policy to suit changing circumstances was more important than keeping an election promise.

Asked what they thought was better for the nation’s long-term interests, 60 per cent of the respondents chose “increased spending on government services like health and education” compared with 15 per cent who selected proceeding with the tax cuts.

The poll showed high income Australians were more aware of the stage 3 cuts and more likely to support their repeal than lower income earners.

Of the respondents who identified as Greens voters, 54 per cent wanted the cuts scrapped, compared with 46 per cent of independent voters, 35 per cent of Coalition voters and 19 per cent of One Nation voters.

The Australia Institute executive director Richard Denniss said more than one third of the survey’s respondents said they were still making up their minds.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has maintained that Labor won’t change or ditch the cuts.

Dr Denniss said this “indicated the debate is there to be won or lost, based on the economic evidence and on what is fair”.

“Voters expect responsible management of the economy,” he said.

“The fact is the economic conditions of 2022 and budget projections over the forward estimates are vastly different to when these tax cuts for high income earners were first announced by Scott Morrison in 2018.”

Jim Chalmers has stared down calls to scrap or amend the stage 3 cuts as he prepares to deliver his first budget later this month.

The Treasurer told ABC 730 last Thursday: “Our position on the tax cuts hasn’t changed, our policy is as it has been”.

“We do need to make sure that the money that we invest in the budget, from the budget, in the Australian people and in their economy, does get maximum bang for buck,” he said.

Dr Chalmers told reporters at Parliament House last Wednesday he had no reason to remove the cuts at this stage.

“Even if we took some of the steps that people have been urging us to do on stage 3 tax cuts, that would not change the inflationary environment that we confront right now,” he said.

“I think the public conversation sometimes doesn’t quite understand that.”

if australia is to succeed, we are going to need our best and brightest to pull us up.

thats not going to be those at the bottom who are surviving , not thriving.

thats going to be our movers and shakers.

money spent by government on various social welfare projects just makes people dependant infants, always trying to suckle off canberra.

its so much better if we give that cash to people who are the risk takers, innovators , entreprenuers , go-getters , the people who have an awesome vibe, that can get stuff done.

these people tend to be those earning about 200k to 500 k.

we have to give them every resource we can to help them help us.

i say double the tax cuts to this noble and wonderful group of "real" australians

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 5:23am:

if australia is to succeed, we are going to need our best and brightest to pull us up. thats not going to be those at the bottom who are surviving , not thriving. thats going to be our movers and shakers. money spent by government on various social welfare projects just makes people dependant infants, always trying to suckle off canberra. its so much better if we give that cash to people who are the risk takers, innovators , entreprenuers , go-getters , the people who have an awesome vibe, that can get stuff done. these people tend to be those earning about 200k to 500 k. we have to give them every resource we can to help them help us. i say double the tax cuts to this noble and wonderful group of "real" australians

earning about 200k to 500 k  ?

Those would be mostly the managing directors of companies.
From what I've seen of any companies I look at or have worked for
they are all badly run by bean counters and in many cases
those companies sack their best workers leaving the place top heavy with managers.
I can't understand how many companies are even still in business.


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/117/114/716/small/1c21e6f0cf4b090b.jpg

Bobby. wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 5:33am:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 5:23am: if australia is to succeed, we are going to need our best and brightest to pull us up. thats not going to be those at the bottom who are surviving , not thriving. thats going to be our movers and shakers. money spent by government on various social welfare projects just makes people dependant infants, always trying to suckle off canberra. its so much better if we give that cash to people who are the risk takers, innovators , entreprenuers , go-getters , the people who have an awesome vibe, that can get stuff done. these people tend to be those earning about 200k to 500 k. we have to give them every resource we can to help them help us. i say double the tax cuts to this noble and wonderful group of "real" australians earning about 200k to 500 k  ? Those would be mostly the managing directors of companies. From what I've seen of any companies I look at or have worked for they are all badly run by bean counters and in many cases those companies sack their best workers leaving the place top heavy with managers. I can't understand how many companies are even still in business. https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/117/114/716/small/1c21e6f0cf4b090b.jpg

Oi!
What about politicians; surgeons; anaesthetists; doctors; lawyers; locksmiths; dentists; plumbers; electricians; roofers; prostitutes; footballers; news readers; radio presenters; senior public servants ... ?

Captain Nemo wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 8:19am:

Oi! What about politicians; surgeons; anaesthetists; doctors; lawyers; locksmiths; dentists; plumbers; electricians; roofers; prostitutes ... ?

Being in the medical field is a license to print money.
Same for lawyers.
Locksmiths?  roofers? electricians? plumbers? - nah.

I asked an electrician once why he was working for wages for a company -
he said that when he ran a private business he spent
more time chasing bad debts from loser customers than making money doing jobs.

Roofers charge about $10K to $15K per roof restoration.

Roofers electricians plumbers mechanics

All do useful work

If you give more money to the people at the bottom
They will spend it on tattoos
Mag wheels
Alcohol and drugs
Dominos and McDonald's

You're probably making them more unhealthy

If you give it to pensioners
It will go down the throat of a poker machine
Or to a Norwegian Cruise company

Far better to give it to the movers and shakers and wealth creators

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 9:15am:

Roofers electricians plumbers mechanics All do useful work If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's You're probably making them more unhealthy If you give it to pensioners It will go down the throat of a poker machine Or to a Norwegian Cruise company Far better to give it to the movers and shakers and wealth creators

Oh, you're referring to the ridiculous theory of Trickle Down Economics, aren't you?

Here, let me explain how that actually works with a simple image.

---

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 5:23am:

if australia is to succeed, we are going to need our best and brightest to pull us up. thats not going to be those at the bottom who are surviving , not thriving. thats going to be our movers and shakers. money spent by government on various social welfare projects just makes people dependant infants, always trying to suckle off canberra. its so much better if we give that cash to people who are the risk takers, innovators , entreprenuers , go-getters , the people who have an awesome vibe, that can get stuff done. these people tend to be those earning about 200k to 500 k. we have to give them every resource we can to help them help us. i say double the tax cuts to this noble and wonderful group of "real" australians

Incorrect. We're talking income taxes. Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy.


Quote:

A recent study of all major tax reductions for the rich across 18 OECD countries from 1965 to 2015 found that they increased income inequality. The tax cuts did not increase economic growth or reduce unemployment. The study included the Reagan and Thatcher tax cuts and cuts to the top marginal rates in Australia in 1987. It concluded: Our findings on the effects on growth and unemployment provide evidence against supply side theories that suggest lower taxes on the rich will induce labor supply responses from high-income individuals (more hours of work, more effort, etc.) that boost economic activity… Overall, our analysis finds strong evidence that cutting taxes on the rich increases income inequality but has no effect on growth or unemployment. [p. 541]

Read up:

https://saveourschools.com.au/funding/labor-should-scrap-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-for-the-rich/

Tax cuts for the poor are another matter. They spend a greater portion of tax cuts on essential goods and services, which adds to the economy.

Tax cuts for the rich only increase their savings. If governments keep those tax dollars, they spend that money on the kind of things that, as you say, pull people up.

I know you'll say fat public servants don't pull anybody up, but most government spending goes to the private sector. Most services - health, public housing, child care, employment, vocational education and financial services like superannuation - are outsourced to private contractors, so this is not a question of public versus private.

It's a question of economic investment in innovators, entreprenuers and go-getters. In short, the people who have an awesome vibe.

You?

Carl D wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 9:31am:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:15am: Roofers electricians plumbers mechanics All do useful work If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's You're probably making them more unhealthy If you give it to pensioners It will go down the throat of a poker machine Or to a Norwegian Cruise company Far better to give it to the movers and shakers and wealth creators Oh, you're referring to the ridiculous theory of Trickle Down Economics, aren't you? Here, let me explain how that actually works with a simple image.

Aquascoot's Alpha role models - the "noble Donnie", the "noble Vlad" concur.

Their programs are all about government protection, taxing and spending. Vlad has monopolised goods and services into the hands of his oligarchs. Donnie wanted tariffs, restricted and protected markets - "making America great again". At the end of his term, he proposed massive government cash payouts to achieve economic stimulus. His plans were rejected by the Republicans and Dems alike.

Aquascoot needs to decide whether he wants to be a free-trader or a protectionist. Ultimately, I think you'll find he leans towards the latter.

A thousand pensioners with $100 do more for the economy than one grifter given a million dollars to put into tax havens and shelters .....  social security is a reliable underpinning of economic activity .... greed-centred venture capital is not..... it simply evades the economy in various ways to secure a quick grab at the dollars.

Movers and shakers - they move their political mates to give them more and more while shaking the tree for every apple they can get.... and off it goes to the Bahamas or similar or into a 'business cost' developing their fine mansion................ no tax.

Reality check:

98.4% of Australian businesses are small businesses. The vast majority (93%) of these businesses have a turnover of less than $2 million.

Capitalist societies have existed under "trickle-down" economics for centuries.

Governments do not produce stuff, they tax stuff.

Incorrect thinking yet again

Sure 1000 pensioners can spend more money at ALDI and that creates an increase in the economy

But if you divert that money instead to the right person
He might just start a chip manufacturer
Or some other capital expensive Hi-Tech business
Which is what all the rich countries eventually realise

If you want a Samsung or a Hyundai or a BMW
A caterpillar or a IKEA or a Sony or an apple
You need concentrated capital in the hands of the right people


We had the perfect example of this recently in Queensland
A young man from the western suburbs developed the first rapid antigen test during the pandemic
He tried to set up a business manufacturing these in the suburbs
But due to the restrictive lack of government support
He was induced to go to Texas where he has become a billionaire
And set up a massive plant in Austin
And now exports the rapid antigen tests back to Australia where you get to pay for them

It would have been much more sensible to have supported this fine individual properly in the beginning and the country would be in a better economic situation

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 10:55am:

Incorrect thinking yet again Sure 1000 pensioners can spend more money at ALDI and that creates an increase in the economy But if you divert that money instead to the right person He might just start a chip manufacturer Or some other capital expensive Hi-Tech business Which is what all the rich countries eventually realise If you want a Samsung or a Hyundai or a BMW A caterpillar or a IKEA or a Sony or an apple You need concentrated capital in the hands of the right people We had the perfect example of this recently in Queensland A young man from the western suburbs developed the first rapid antigen test during the pandemic He tried to set up a business manufacturing these in the suburbs But due to the restrictive lack of government support He was induced to go to Texas where he has become a billionaire And set up a massive plant in Austin And now exports the rapid antigen tests back to Australia where you get to pay for them It would have been much more sensible to have supported this fine individual properly in the beginning and the country would be in a better economic situation

Professionals on high incomes don't have the hours to go out and develop covid tests in their own time. They work for a living, like the chodes, who live lives of pure garbage.

Covid test inventors develop their wares with public or private investment. Lowering the income tax rate for high paid workers does not achieve the objective you're seeking.

Rule 1: the Superior Man bounces out of bed with a cunning plan.

Rule 2: he then seeks capital to develop his plan.

Nobody's going off and inventing things in their lunch break, dear. Great Alpha role models like Bruce Wayne, crime-fighting entrepreneur, have their own capital. They own some of Gotham City's biggest factories. They can spare the time to develop bat cars and bat suits, usually at night after all the staff have gone home.

If you want to improve Bruce Wayne's productivity, you need to target other taxes and incentives. You might look at tax write-offs for investment in bat hooks, for example, so that Bruce can get a better grip when he's climbing buildings at night as Batman.

Or you might wish to fund TAFEs and other education facilities to help Robin get better skills as a caped crusader in-training.

I believe Aubrey James is the right person to speak to. Gotham's on a tight budget, but I'm sure he can point you in the right direction at the state and federal levels.

https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City#:~:text=Aubrey%20James%20is%20the%20long,played%20by%20Rupert%20Penry%2DJones.

Karnal wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 1:16pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 10:55am: Incorrect thinking yet again Sure 1000 pensioners can spend more money at ALDI and that creates an increase in the economy But if you divert that money instead to the right person He might just start a chip manufacturer Or some other capital expensive Hi-Tech business Which is what all the rich countries eventually realise If you want a Samsung or a Hyundai or a BMW A caterpillar or a IKEA or a Sony or an apple You need concentrated capital in the hands of the right people We had the perfect example of this recently in Queensland A young man from the western suburbs developed the first rapid antigen test during the pandemic He tried to set up a business manufacturing these in the suburbs But due to the restrictive lack of government support He was induced to go to Texas where he has become a billionaire And set up a massive plant in Austin And now exports the rapid antigen tests back to Australia where you get to pay for them It would have been much more sensible to have supported this fine individual properly in the beginning and the country would be in a better economic situation Professionals on high incomes don't have the hours to go out and develop covid tests in their own time. They work for a living, like the chodes, who live lives of pure garbage. Covid test inventors develop their wares with public or private investment. Lowering the income tax rate for high paid workers does not achieve the objective you're seeking. Rule 1: the Superior Man bounces out of bed with a cunning plan. Rule 2: he then seeks capital to develop his plan. Nobody's going off and inventing things in their lunch break, dear. Great Alpha role models like Bruce Wayne, crime-fighting entrepreneur, have their own capital. They own some of Gotham City's biggest factories. They can spare the time to develop bat cars and bat suits, usually at night after all the staff have gone home. If you want to improve Bruce Wayne's productivity, you need to target other taxes and incentives. You might look at tax write-offs for investment in bat hooks, for example, so that Bruce can get a better grip when he's climbing buildings at night as Batman. Or you might wish to fund TAFEs and other education facilities to help Robin get better skills as a caped crusader in-training. I believe Aubrey James is the right person to speak to. Gotham's on a tight budget, but I'm sure he can point you in the right direction at the state and federal levels. https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City#:~:text=Aubrey%20James%20is%20the%20long,played%20by%20Rupert%20Penry%2DJones.

correct.

there is only so much capital to be invested.

if governments invest it into gonski (which saw our international education rankings fall in direct proportion to the increase in funding)
if they invest it in the NDIS
if they invest it in covid payments
if they invest it in cash splashes for pensioners
if they invest it in subs
if they invest it in dysfunctional public hospitals

then there is less capital to invest in the productive parts of the economy.

reducing taxation may help 'starve the beast"   the beast being government and free up precious cash for our more deserving ventures

Karnal wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 9:40am:

Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy.

The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::)

"Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion."

https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 2:03pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 1:16pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 10:55am: Incorrect thinking yet again Sure 1000 pensioners can spend more money at ALDI and that creates an increase in the economy But if you divert that money instead to the right person He might just start a chip manufacturer Or some other capital expensive Hi-Tech business Which is what all the rich countries eventually realise If you want a Samsung or a Hyundai or a BMW A caterpillar or a IKEA or a Sony or an apple You need concentrated capital in the hands of the right people We had the perfect example of this recently in Queensland A young man from the western suburbs developed the first rapid antigen test during the pandemic He tried to set up a business manufacturing these in the suburbs But due to the restrictive lack of government support He was induced to go to Texas where he has become a billionaire And set up a massive plant in Austin And now exports the rapid antigen tests back to Australia where you get to pay for them It would have been much more sensible to have supported this fine individual properly in the beginning and the country would be in a better economic situation Professionals on high incomes don't have the hours to go out and develop covid tests in their own time. They work for a living, like the chodes, who live lives of pure garbage. Covid test inventors develop their wares with public or private investment. Lowering the income tax rate for high paid workers does not achieve the objective you're seeking. Rule 1: the Superior Man bounces out of bed with a cunning plan. Rule 2: he then seeks capital to develop his plan. Nobody's going off and inventing things in their lunch break, dear. Great Alpha role models like Bruce Wayne, crime-fighting entrepreneur, have their own capital. They own some of Gotham City's biggest factories. They can spare the time to develop bat cars and bat suits, usually at night after all the staff have gone home. If you want to improve Bruce Wayne's productivity, you need to target other taxes and incentives. You might look at tax write-offs for investment in bat hooks, for example, so that Bruce can get a better grip when he's climbing buildings at night as Batman. Or you might wish to fund TAFEs and other education facilities to help Robin get better skills as a caped crusader in-training. I believe Aubrey James is the right person to speak to. Gotham's on a tight budget, but I'm sure he can point you in the right direction at the state and federal levels. https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotham_City#:~:text=Aubrey%20James%20is%20the%20long,played%20by%20Rupert%20Penry%2DJones. correct. there is only so much capital to be invested. if governments invest it into gonski (which saw our international education rankings fall in direct proportion to the increase in funding) if they invest it in the NDIS if they invest it in covid payments if they invest it in cash splashes for pensioners if they invest it in subs if they invest it in dysfunctional public hospitals then there is less capital to invest in the productive parts of the economy. reducing taxation may help 'starve the beast"   the beast being government and free up precious cash for our more deserving ventures

May it?

You still haven't shown how that's possible. Nobody's trying to "starve" government, dear. Not Albo, not Dutto, and certainly not your Alpha role models, Dear Leader and the "noble Vlad".

Dear Leader blew the lot on a failed covid plan and a failed insurrection. Vlad's blown the bank on a failed war. There's no coming back for either of them.

The Superior Man comes up with a plan that works. He doesn't blow the joint up with plans that are doomed from the outset.

You?

lee wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 2:16pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/

I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how:

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/

When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade.

You?

Karnal wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 4:44pm:

The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes.

Some of them.  Not all of them. The higher earners will still pay more than the lower paid.

lee wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 4:54pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 4:44pm: The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Some of them.  Not all of them. The higher earners will still pay more than the lower paid.

And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 7:05pm:

And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course.

You know a way they can avoid tax? There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more.

But I can see you don't like a progressive tax system. Just what system would you like to replace it?

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 9:15am:

If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's

Holy FUCK !

If some BOZO has made a more MORONIC, ill-informed, generalised piece of WAFFLE
on pretty much ANYTHING - I must have MISSED it

It reminds me of one of those totally out of touch members of our Tory Liberal Party that claim unemployment payments are MORE than enough to 'get by' on.



.

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 5:22pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:15am: If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's Holy FUCK ! If some BOZO has made a more MORONIC, ill-informed, generalised piece of WAFFLE on pretty much ANYTHING - I must have MISSED it It reminds me of one of those totally out of touch members of our Tory Liberal Party that claim unemployment payments are MORE than enough to 'get by' on. .

there should be no dole
maccas just announced they have 10,000 vacancies they cant fill.
chode heaven

I have never been asked if i want to scrap or keep tax cuts and nobody i know has been asked.

If you go into the dole bludging drug taking dildo packing Green voting electorates you will probably find a lot of support from people like crook in taxing the well off to increase their dole payments.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 5:24pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 5:22pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:15am: If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's Holy FUCK ! If some BOZO has made a more MORONIC, ill-informed, generalised piece of WAFFLE on pretty much ANYTHING - I must have MISSED it It reminds me of one of those totally out of touch members of our Tory Liberal Party that claim unemployment payments are MORE than enough to 'get by' on. . there should be no dole maccas just announced they have 10,000 vacancies they cant fill. chode heaven

True, true. And we all know how much you value Maccas, no?

Pfizer have jobs too, yes? They're currently hiring IT workers to bump up their Google searches.

You've always praised our fine multinationals, dear. Pepsico, Lays, Proctor and Gamble, the Coca Cola Bottling Company.

Who knows? The Superior Man started out flipping burgers and look at him now. Driving down the freeway in his hot car with his hot babe wife by his side, whinnying.

We'll whinny so much we'll grow tired of whinnying, no?

Dear Leader thought of working at Maccas when he first started out. He changed his mind when he caught bone spurs.

You?

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 2:03pm:

reducing taxation may help 'starve the beast"   the beast being government and free up precious cash for our more deserving ventures

The only "beasts" that need starving are those fat cat billionaires taking for themselves the hard-earned value of other people's labour, to stuff into already over-bulging pockets.

No billionaire ever got rich solely through their own labour.

Taxing greed is good. Tax the rich. Taxing the super-wealthy would raise money for these unfunded tax cuts. More generally, Australia should replace lost income tax revenues with wealth taxes.

The only credible and fair alternative would be making deep cuts to wealthfare: PHI rebates, negative gearing, CGT discounts, private school largesse and other tax breaks and spending that goes mostly to the rich. All of these should have deep cuts or be scrapped altogether.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 9:15am:

Roofers electricians plumbers mechanics All do useful work If you give more money to the people at the bottom Dominos and McDonald's Far better to give it to the movers and shakers and wealth creators

Like this guy?

https://hips.hearstapps.com/esq.h-cdn.co/assets/16/32/1600x800/landscape-1470669200-trump-food.jpg
https://s.abcnews.com/images/Politics/190115_atm_trump_fast_food_hpMain_1x1_992.jpg
https://mediaproxy.salon.com/width/1200/https://media.salon.com/2011/06/donald_trump_eating_pizza.jpg

Baronvonrort wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 5:30pm:

I have never been asked if i want to scrap or keep tax cuts and nobody i know has been asked.

I was never asked - nor were any of my friends - would I be voting for a return of the disgraced Morrison Government.

But the random polling of 1500 people across the country made it very clear who was going to win the last Federal Election

It still ASTOUNDS me the number posters on a political forum that haven't a CLUE how opinion polling works - and how ACCURATE it is

lee wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 7:24pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:05pm: And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course. You know a way they can avoid tax? There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. But I can see you don't like a progressive tax system. Just what system would you like to replace it?

Quote:

There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more.

A very substantial number of the highest earners are not PAYG employees which you seem to ignore. Many pay little if any tax. Even High range PAYG employees most likely have very substantial deductions and other arrangements set up in order to minimise tax.

However the reason increasing top end tax rates is a bad idea in the current economic conditions is that it is neither affordable or needed. It also provides little if any benefit to the economy.

In other words it helps nobody and provides no benefit - in fact it may well damage the economy further and certainly damages the budget bottom line. Throwing away money that could be put to good use in other areas.

Don't know what all the excitement is about.

Who needs taxes anyway, THE MARKET will sort everything out, right?

aquascoot wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 5:24pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 5:22pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:15am: If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's Holy FUCK ! If some BOZO has made a more MORONIC, ill-informed, generalised piece of WAFFLE on pretty much ANYTHING - I must have MISSED it It reminds me of one of those totally out of touch members of our Tory Liberal Party that claim unemployment payments are MORE than enough to 'get by' on. . there should be no dole maccas just announced they have 10,000 vacancies they cant fill.

I would hardly think - with youth depression and suicide at record highs - that the chew-em-up-and-spit-em-out McDonalds Final Solution is desirable for ANY sector of society

McDonald's Australia has been accused of systematically "churning" its workforce and reducing shifts for workers as they grow older in a bid to cut costs and hire younger staff.

The global fast food chain is a major employer in Australia with more than 100,000 workers in stores across the country, which are mostly franchises.

But the company and its franchisees have come under scrutiny for engaging in what has been described as a practice of "churning" staff as they grow older to hire younger and cheaper staff.

Nelio Da Silva started working at a McDonald's store in Melbourne when he was 16.

But as he got older he noticed his roster was changing.

"Over time I started to get less and less shifts … it wasn't straight away, it was over time," he told 7.30.

"I got less shifts because I got older, and definitely more expensive.

Max Beech began working at a McDonald's store in Queensland when he was 16 and moved to a Brisbane store when he was 18.

He says getting rid of older workers was an "unspoken rule" between managers.

"A lot of the time they talked about how they were trying to get rid of certain people for this reason or that reason — a big one was when people were getting too old," he told 7.30.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-09/learn-and-churn-mcdonalds-accused-of-exploiting-young-workers/10342934


If I was the parent of a 16 to 18 year old, I'd have a sense of moral obligation to protect them from this this type of systematic abuse.


.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 5:24pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 5:22pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:15am: If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's Holy FUCK ! If some BOZO has made a more MORONIC, ill-informed, generalised piece of WAFFLE on pretty much ANYTHING - I must have MISSED it It reminds me of one of those totally out of touch members of our Tory Liberal Party that claim unemployment payments are MORE than enough to 'get by' on. . there should be no dole maccas just announced they have 10,000 vacancies they cant fill. chode heaven [/quote] [quote]maccas just announced

If you believe them.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 9:15am:

If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's

All of which are a greater benefit to Australia than investing it tax free on the Cayman's.


Quote:

They will spend it on tattoos

The Tattooist uses his profit on improvements to his rental properties.


Quote:

Mag wheels

The Wheel and tyre company employs a new trainee


Quote:

Alcohol and drugs

The Local bar renovates and increases services to their community.


Quote:

Dominos and McDonald's

Employ another 1000 employees ?

lee wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 7:24pm:

You know a way they can avoid tax?

You didn't get back. Even Director's Fees get taxed.

aquascoot wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 5:23am:

i say double the tax cuts to this noble and wonderful group of "real" australians

He's OBVIOUSLY SH!TSTIRRING !


https://i.redd.it/62s68t4nuso31.jpg



.

Stage three tax cuts to cost seven times more than UK tax cuts: Greens

The Age
October 5,2022

Australia’s stage three tax cuts will cost seven times as much as similar cuts that caused a political storm in Britain when measured as a share of economic output, according to new figures that will be used to urge the federal government to rethink the $243 billion cost.   :(

The Australian cuts are forecast to be worth 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product when they begin in 2024 but will increase in size in the following years, in contrast with British cuts that amounted to only 0.1 per cent of GDP before they were scrapped last week.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers says he will “put the economics before the politics” on stage three tax cuts.


Greens leader Adam Bandt will cite the comparison, done by the Parliamentary Library in recent days, to intensify calls to stop the stage three tax cuts going ahead despite an election promise from Labor to keep them in place.

With Treasurer Jim Chalmers vowing to put economics ahead of politics in tough decisions in the October 25 budget, the government is debating whether to make a swift decision to change the tax package in the wake of the financial turmoil in the UK last week or leave the question for next year.

“We have not changed our position on stage three,” said Finance Minister Katy Gallagher on Wednesday morning.

RELATED ARTICLE
RBA governor Philip Lowe.
National News Live
As it happened: RBA lifts interest rates to 2.6 per cent as treasurer sends warning over global recession; Labor, Liberal MPs defend stage three tax cuts
“But we are finalising a budget and I think the Treasurer and I have been upfront with some of the challenges and some of the changes we’ve been seeing in the economy that are front of mind for us and we can’t ignore those and we won’t ignore them because we are going to do the right thing, not just for the budget but the right thing for the Australian people.”

The opposition’s finance spokeswoman, Jane Hume, said it was “disingenuous” to compare the two tax packages.

“The tax policy debate going on in the UK is not at all analogous to [our] stage three tax cuts. Essentially, tax cuts here have been in legislation for a number of years. That’s not a new addition to our fiscal and economic policy like the UK tax policy was,” Senator Hume told Radio National on Wednesday morning.





“Most importantly, [ours] have already been budgeted for. They’ve been baked in and reflected in our budgets for a number of years. That’s a very, very different experience to the UK....We shouldn’t be comparing one country’s tax policy to another country’s tax policy.”

The analysis from the Parliamentary Library uses the forecast cost of the stage three tax cuts done by the Parliamentary Budget Office and compares the results with the cost of the tax cuts outlined last week by British Prime Minister Liz Truss and Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng when both plans are measured against GDP.

The stage three cuts sacrifice $17.7 billion in revenue in 2024-25 and the cost climbs steadily to $31.4 billion in 2030-31, with continued increases after that. 

The British tax cuts were forecast to cost £2.4 billion in 2022-23 and were due to climb to £4.6 billion the following year before settling at lower costs in subsequent years, although Truss and Kwarteng came under intense political attack for not putting the plan to the Office for Budget Responsibility for a more detailed costing.

The Parliamentary Library calculates the British plan would have cost 0.1 per cent of GDP in its first year and 0.18 per cent in its second year before falling to 0.07 in the final year of the known costings.

The stage three cuts, by contrast, would be equivalent to 0.7 per cent of GDP in their first year and would climb steadily to 0.9 per cent of GDP by the end of the decade. This assumes nominal GDP, the measure of economic output that is central to budget forecasts, grows from $2.5 trillion in 2024-25 to $3.5 trillion in 2030-31.



The comparison heightens the argument over the Australian plan after global financial markets punished the British government for unveiling the tax cuts last year and assuming they could be funded with continued borrowing, leading investors to cut the value of the pound and shy away from buying government bonds.

The Australian package, however, has already been factored into federal budget forecasts. While the government is paying higher interest rates on new bond issues, there has been no similar sign in Australia of a reluctance by investors to buy Commonwealth bonds.

“The UK Tories have looked at the global economic outlook and decided that tax cuts are political poison, but Australian Labor apparently still requires convincing,” said Bandt.

“Continuing ahead with the stage three tax cuts is economic vandalism, moving us closer to a flat tax system, while also risking UK-style economic damage.” 

The stage three tax cuts abolish the 37 per cent tax rate and apply a 30 per cent rate to all income between $45,000 and $200,000.

“Continuing ahead with the stage three tax cuts is economic vandalism, moving us closer to a flat tax system, while also risking UK-style economic damage.”  :(

lee wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 7:20pm:

lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:24pm: You know a way they can avoid tax? You didn't get back. Even Director's Fees get taxed.

Salary sacrificing , Negative gearing -  interest paid on loans on investment - Pay maximum to retirement accounts, Maximise tax claimable expenses. Tax advantaged investments. then some of the shady arrangements for the true high income people. Off shore investment and the like.

whiteknight wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 3:47am:

Surprising group fighting ‘stage 3’ tax cuts revealed in new survey A surprising group of people who are fighting monster “stage three” tax cuts has been revealed. October 2, 2022 News.com.au Almost twice as many Australians want the “stage 3” income tax cuts scrapped as those who want to keep them, a new survey suggests. The Australia Institute has released a poll which found 41 per cent of people support the Albanese government repealing the tax cuts, compared with 22 per cent who are opposed. The progressive think tank enlisted pollster Dyanata to conduct a “nationally representative” online survey of 1409 voters over three days in early September. Nearly half – 46 per cent – of the people surveyed identified that the cuts would benefit high income earners the most. Forty-three per cent of respondents who identified as Labor voters supported the cuts being ditched. The stage 3 tax cuts are the third in a series of cuts introduced by the former Coalition government after the first two tranches offered targeted tax relief to low and middle income taxpayers. The Labor government has come under political pressure to backflip on its election commitment to keep the stage 3 cuts in place, given the economic storm gripping the country. The cuts will kick in from July 2024 and abolish the entire 38 per cent tax bracket, meaning everyone earning between $45,000 to $200,000 will pay only 30 cents of every dollar they earn. The policy means about 95 per cent of Australians will face a marginal tax rate of no more than 30 per cent as well as the 2 per cent Medicare levy. Critics say the stage 3 cuts, which will cost the federal budget more than $20bn a year and an estimated $243bn over a decade, are not affordable or equitable. The Australia Institute’s poll found 61 per cent of Australians thought adapting economic policy to suit changing circumstances was more important than keeping an election promise. Asked what they thought was better for the nation’s long-term interests, 60 per cent of the respondents chose “increased spending on government services like health and education” compared with 15 per cent who selected proceeding with the tax cuts. The poll showed high income Australians were more aware of the stage 3 cuts and more likely to support their repeal than lower income earners. Of the respondents who identified as Greens voters, 54 per cent wanted the cuts scrapped, compared with 46 per cent of independent voters, 35 per cent of Coalition voters and 19 per cent of One Nation voters. The Australia Institute executive director Richard Denniss said more than one third of the survey’s respondents said they were still making up their minds. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has maintained that Labor won’t change or ditch the cuts. Dr Denniss said this “indicated the debate is there to be won or lost, based on the economic evidence and on what is fair”. “Voters expect responsible management of the economy,” he said. “The fact is the economic conditions of 2022 and budget projections over the forward estimates are vastly different to when these tax cuts for high income earners were first announced by Scott Morrison in 2018.” Jim Chalmers has stared down calls to scrap or amend the stage 3 cuts as he prepares to deliver his first budget later this month. The Treasurer told ABC 730 last Thursday: “Our position on the tax cuts hasn’t changed, our policy is as it has been”. “We do need to make sure that the money that we invest in the budget, from the budget, in the Australian people and in their economy, does get maximum bang for buck,” he said. Dr Chalmers told reporters at Parliament House last Wednesday he had no reason to remove the cuts at this stage. “Even if we took some of the steps that people have been urging us to do on stage 3 tax cuts, that would not change the inflationary environment that we confront right now,” he said. “I think the public conversation sometimes doesn’t quite understand that.”

* There are 26 000 000 of us and only 1409 were asked a question about stage 3 tax cuts.

https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/personal-finance/speculation-around-future-of-stage-three-tax-cuts-amid-global-economic-downturn-c-8450639

👆 Please read this article. There's more context (and no silly polls with small sample spaces).

How I see it:

1. These stage 3 tax cuts are an issue given the current state of our economy.

2. IMO the Federal Treasurer might want to rethink passing these tax cuts IN THEIR CURRENT FORMAT.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 8:27pm:

Salary sacrificing , Negative gearing -  interest paid on loans on investment - Pay maximum to retirement accounts, Maximise tax claimable expenses. Tax advantaged investments.

All available to those on lower incomes. ::)


Dnarever wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 8:27pm:

. then some of the shady arrangements for the true high income people. Off shore investment and the like.

Offshore investments? You mean they invest and make money overseas and get taxed in Australia? ::)

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 10:07pm:

https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/personal-finance/speculation-around-future-of-stage-three-tax-cuts-amid-global-economic-downturn-c-8450639 👆 Please read this article. There's more context (and no silly polls with small sample spaces). How I see it: 1. These stage 3 tax cuts are an issue given the current state of our economy. 2. IMO the Federal Treasurer might want to rethink passing these tax cuts IN THEIR CURRENT FORMAT.

The world economy is suffering because of covid lockdowns it's a consequence of government failures worldwide in dealing with covid.

Unemployment is very low you can't tax your way to prosperity.

Labor would be hypocrites if they go back on election promise to keep these cuts after claiming Liberals were the highest taxing government.

Is all this fuss over higher income earners keeping 7 cents in the dollar with this tax cut?

Baronvonrort wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 10:57pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 10:07pm: https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/personal-finance/speculation-around-future-of-stage-three-tax-cuts-amid-global-economic-downturn-c-8450639 👆 Please read this article. There's more context (and no silly polls with small sample spaces). How I see it: 1. These stage 3 tax cuts are an issue given the current state of our economy. 2. IMO the Federal Treasurer might want to rethink passing these tax cuts IN THEIR CURRENT FORMAT. The world economy is suffering because of covid lockdowns it's a consequence of government failures worldwide in dealing with covid. Unemployment is very low you can't tax your way to prosperity. Labor would be hypocrites if they go back on election promise to keep these cuts after claiming Liberals were the highest taxing government. Is all this fuss over higher income earners keeping 7 cents in the dollar with this tax cut?

I understand.

I just think that those earning OVER $150K (TAXABLE income yeah?) should NOT be getting a tax cut. The current stage 3 tax cuts as they stand will be offered to those with a taxable income of up to $200K.

Taxable Income <---- these are the operative words.

Baronvonrort wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 10:57pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 10:07pm: https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/personal-finance/speculation-around-future-of-stage-three-tax-cuts-amid-global-economic-downturn-c-8450639 👆 Please read this article. There's more context (and no silly polls with small sample spaces). How I see it: 1. These stage 3 tax cuts are an issue given the current state of our economy. 2. IMO the Federal Treasurer might want to rethink passing these tax cuts IN THEIR CURRENT FORMAT. The world economy is suffering because of covid lockdowns it's a consequence of government failures worldwide in dealing with covid. Unemployment is very low you can't tax your way to prosperity. Labor would be hypocrites if they go back on election promise to keep these cuts after claiming Liberals were the highest taxing government. Is all this fuss over higher income earners keeping 7 cents in the dollar with this tax cut?

Quote:

Unemployment is very low you can't tax your way to prosperity.

Not applying new unfunded tax cuts is not the same as additional tax to get to prosperity, it is not spending  the rent money to make yourself bankrupt.


Quote:

The world economy is suffering because of covid lockdowns it's a consequence of government failures worldwide in dealing with covid

.

The lockdowns and job losses were always going to tighten the economy just the same as releasing the pressure quickly was going to lead to a bout of inflation.

We may have got the best outcome possible, it could easily have been a lot worse.

No lockdowns may have led to a cycle of world deaths resulting in a 20 year depression.

If they installed bracket creep adjustment there would be no argument.

buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 6:50pm:

aquascoot wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 5:24pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 5:22pm: aquascoot wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:15am: If you give more money to the people at the bottom They will spend it on tattoos Mag wheels Alcohol and drugs Dominos and McDonald's Holy FUCK ! If some BOZO has made a more MORONIC, ill-informed, generalised piece of WAFFLE on pretty much ANYTHING - I must have MISSED it It reminds me of one of those totally out of touch members of our Tory Liberal Party that claim unemployment payments are MORE than enough to 'get by' on. . there should be no dole maccas just announced they have 10,000 vacancies they cant fill. I would hardly think - with youth depression and suicide at record highs - that the chew-em-up-and-spit-em-out McDonalds Final Solution is desirable for ANY sector of society McDonald's Australia has been accused of systematically "churning" its workforce and reducing shifts for workers as they grow older in a bid to cut costs and hire younger staff. The global fast food chain is a major employer in Australia with more than 100,000 workers in stores across the country, which are mostly franchises. But the company and its franchisees have come under scrutiny for engaging in what has been described as a practice of "churning" staff as they grow older to hire younger and cheaper staff. Nelio Da Silva started working at a McDonald's store in Melbourne when he was 16. But as he got older he noticed his roster was changing. "Over time I started to get less and less shifts … it wasn't straight away, it was over time," he told 7.30. "I got less shifts because I got older, and definitely more expensive. Max Beech began working at a McDonald's store in Queensland when he was 16 and moved to a Brisbane store when he was 18. He says getting rid of older workers was an "unspoken rule" between managers. "A lot of the time they talked about how they were trying to get rid of certain people for this reason or that reason — a big one was when people were getting too old," he told 7.30. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-09/learn-and-churn-mcdonalds-accused-of-exploiting-young-workers/10342934 If I was the parent of a 16 to 18 year old, I'd have a sense of moral obligation to protect them from this this type of systematic abuse. .

I am truly lost for words

Two of my three children work at McDonald's whilst at school and what an excellent experience said was

It teaches children valuable lessons
How to set an alarm clock
How to commute to a job
It teaches them humility when they get to clean the toilets
It teaches them the value of a winning smile
It teaches them to be team players
It allows them to see sloppy citizens
Who actually eat the product
And use such sloppy citizens as cautionary tales

I suppose that's why my children turned out strong powerful resourceful and resilient
And yours are probably delicate snowflakes ;D

Karnal wrote on Oct 4^th, 2022 at 4:44pm:

lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 2:16pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/ I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/ When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. You?

To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 5^th, 2022 at 6:30pm:

lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:24pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:05pm: And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course. You know a way they can avoid tax? There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. But I can see you don't like a progressive tax system. Just what system would you like to replace it? Quote: There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. A very substantial number of the highest earners are not PAYG employees which you seem to ignore. Many pay little if any tax. Even High range PAYG employees most likely have very substantial deductions and other arrangements set up in order to minimise tax. However the reason increasing top end tax rates is a bad idea in the current economic conditions is that it is neither affordable or needed. It also provides little if any benefit to the economy. In other words it helps nobody and provides no benefit - in fact it may well damage the economy further and certainly damages the budget bottom line. Throwing away money that could be put to good use in other areas.

If these dudes that you write about pay very little tax then they won't be getting much of a tax cut. Fukk you're dumb.

crocodile wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 2:06pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 6:30pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:24pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:05pm: And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course. You know a way they can avoid tax? There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. But I can see you don't like a progressive tax system. Just what system would you like to replace it? Quote: There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. A very substantial number of the highest earners are not PAYG employees which you seem to ignore. Many pay little if any tax. Even High range PAYG employees most likely have very substantial deductions and other arrangements set up in order to minimise tax. However the reason increasing top end tax rates is a bad idea in the current economic conditions is that it is neither affordable or needed. It also provides little if any benefit to the economy. In other words it helps nobody and provides no benefit - in fact it may well damage the economy further and certainly damages the budget bottom line. Throwing away money that could be put to good use in other areas. If these dudes that you write about pay very little tax then they won't be getting much of a tax cut. Fukk you're dumb.

Yet it is projected to cost over $250 Billion.  Yes as you can see you are wrong once again and you call me dumb.

OH and it has blown out by a further $22 Billion.

And virtually all going into the savings of people who don't need it.

crocodile wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 2:04pm:

Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 4:44pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 2:16pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/ I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/ When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. You? To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place.

Quote:

When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade.

And does it in a tax deductible manner.


Quote:

To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place.

Yes Albert you are sort of right if talking about PAYG tax payers. Not so much for others.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 2:18pm:

crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:06pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 6:30pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:24pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:05pm: And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course. You know a way they can avoid tax? There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. But I can see you don't like a progressive tax system. Just what system would you like to replace it? Quote: There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. A very substantial number of the highest earners are not PAYG employees which you seem to ignore. Many pay little if any tax. Even High range PAYG employees most likely have very substantial deductions and other arrangements set up in order to minimise tax. However the reason increasing top end tax rates is a bad idea in the current economic conditions is that it is neither affordable or needed. It also provides little if any benefit to the economy. In other words it helps nobody and provides no benefit - in fact it may well damage the economy further and certainly damages the budget bottom line. Throwing away money that could be put to good use in other areas. If these dudes that you write about pay very little tax then they won't be getting much of a tax cut. Fukk you're dumb. Yet it is projected to cost over $250 Billion.  Yes as you can see you are wrong once again and you call me dumb. OH and it has blown out by a further $22 Billion. And virtually all going into the savings of people who don't need it.

Allowing people to keep some of their own money is now a cost. Fukkin' Einstein does it again.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 2:45pm:

crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:04pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 4:44pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 2:16pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/ I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/ When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. You? To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Quote: When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. And does it in a tax deductible manner. [quote]To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place.

Yes Albert you are sort of right if talking about PAYG tax payers. Not so much for others.
[/quote]

The tax cuts are targeted at PAYG. Sorry Einstein, no cigar.

crocodile wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 4:29pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:18pm: crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:06pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 5th, 2022 at 6:30pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:24pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 7:05pm: And cry about every cent of it, assuming they pay any tax at all of course. You know a way they can avoid tax? There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. But I can see you don't like a progressive tax system. Just what system would you like to replace it? Quote: There are plenty of PAYE earning $200K or more. A very substantial number of the highest earners are not PAYG employees which you seem to ignore. Many pay little if any tax. Even High range PAYG employees most likely have very substantial deductions and other arrangements set up in order to minimise tax. However the reason increasing top end tax rates is a bad idea in the current economic conditions is that it is neither affordable or needed. It also provides little if any benefit to the economy. In other words it helps nobody and provides no benefit - in fact it may well damage the economy further and certainly damages the budget bottom line. Throwing away money that could be put to good use in other areas. If these dudes that you write about pay very little tax then they won't be getting much of a tax cut. Fukk you're dumb. Yet it is projected to cost over $250 Billion.  Yes as you can see you are wrong once again and you call me dumb. OH and it has blown out by a further $22 Billion. And virtually all going into the savings of people who don't need it. Allowing people to keep some of their own money is now a cost. Fukkin' Einstein does it again.

Cutting tax rates results in money being removed from the budget and in this case being given to people who don't need it and in many cases don't pay their fair share anyway. It takes money away from Education, medical, roads and infrastructure to give it to people who already have enough.

crocodile wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 4:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:45pm: crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:04pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 4:44pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 2:16pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/ I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/ When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. You? To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Quote: When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. And does it in a tax deductible manner. [quote]To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Yes Albert you are sort of right if talking about PAYG tax payers. Not so much for others.

The tax cuts are targeted at PAYG. Sorry Einstein, no cigar.
[/quote]

Say I earn $202K as a self employed and you earn get paid $202K on a PAYG wage. How would you get the tax cut and I wouldn't ?

One argument hitting the media about why it would be good to go ahead with the stage 3 tax cuts goes like this:

Pay rises to go if stage-three tax cut gets the axe
Middle-income Australians would be forced to hand back about 50 per cent of any pay rises earned over the next two years if Labor opts to scrap the stage-three tax cuts.


That is actually a good point.

Albo was all about wage rises in the run up to the election.

Not so great to lose half of any pay rise to the tax man.  ;)

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 7:21pm:

Say I earn $202K as a self employed and you earn get paid $202K on a PAYG wage. How would you get the tax cut and I wouldn't ?

Ok. Now tell us how you avoided tax. Excess super contributions? Overseas Investments? ::)

Middle-income Australians would be forced to hand back about 50 per cent of any pay rises earned over the next two years through higher taxes and “incentive killer” bracket creep if Labor opts to scrap the stage-three tax cuts scheduled for 2024-25.

Analysis by The Weekend Australian shows that dumping stage three would see workers on incomes of $90,000 or above lose at least half of their salary ­increases and bonuses over the next two years, assuming their pay packets increased 7 per cent by the 2024-25 financial year.

Under a scenario where stage three is dropped, a taxpayer who increased their pay from $112,150 to $120,000 by 2024-25 would lose $1875 in income tax cuts and pay an additional $2551 in tax due to the increase in their income. The extra $4426 in tax would claim more than half of the ­worker’s increased wages.

A worker who increased their income from $149,533 to $160,000 would pay an extra $8548 in tax and lose 80 per cent of their ­additional earnings compared with the situation if the tax cuts proceeded.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/pay-rises-to-go-if-tax-cut-gets-the-axe/news-story/55838eed163484553b0e41e47e927444

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7^th, 2022 at 7:21pm:

crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 4:31pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:45pm: crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:04pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 4:44pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 2:16pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/ I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/ When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. You? To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Quote: When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. And does it in a tax deductible manner. [quote]To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Yes Albert you are sort of right if talking about PAYG tax payers. Not so much for others. The tax cuts are targeted at PAYG. Sorry Einstein, no cigar.

Say I earn $202K as a self employed and you earn get paid $202K on a PAYG wage. How would you get the tax cut and I wouldn't ?
[/quote]

Fukkin' dumbarse. Self employed are still PAYG. I'm self employed and I pay my PAYG and GST every quarter.

lee wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 12:47pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 7:21pm: Say I earn $202K as a self employed and you earn get paid $202K on a PAYG wage. How would you get the tax cut and I wouldn't ? Ok. Now tell us how you avoided tax. Excess super contributions? Overseas Investments? ::)

Investments are post tax. There is no deductions for an investment. There are deductions for maintaining an income producing investment. No deductions for a capital gain until the profit is realised.

crocodile wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 2:33pm:

Investments are post tax. There is no deductions for an investment. There are deductions for maintaining an income producing investment. No deductions for a capital gain until the profit is realised.

Try convincing Dna. ;)

As the AI says, the OZ government needs to get more revenue over the next decade, to fund the public services which the community wants. 

Most posters here - greedy, self-interested comfortable conservatives - have no plans to achieve this.

The AI is merely pointing out this is not the time to hand over tax cuts which mostly benefit the wealthy.(eg $9000 for a politician, $500 for a cleaner).

$200 billion (the estimated cost to the budget of stage 3) would come in very handy for eradication the disgusting level of homelessness in Oz, and to increase the pay of age-care workers.

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 2:56pm:

As the AI says, the OZ government needs to get more revenue over the next decade, to fund the public services which the community wants.

Artificial Insemination? Artificial Intelligence? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 4:05pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Oct 8th, 2022 at 2:56pm: As the AI says, the OZ government needs to get more revenue over the next decade, to fund the public services which the community wants. Artificial Insemination? Artificial Intelligence? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Australia Institute whose current CEO worked for Bob Brown for 15 years....   ::) ::)

https://nb.australiainstitute.org.au/scrap_stage_3_tax_cuts

Frank wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 4:33pm:

Australia Institute whose current CEO worked for Bob Brown for 15 years....

Artificial Intelligence then. ;)

lee wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 12:47pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 7:21pm: Say I earn $202K as a self employed and you earn get paid $202K on a PAYG wage. How would you get the tax cut and I wouldn't ? Ok. Now tell us how you avoided tax. Excess super contributions? Overseas Investments? ::)

I don't, I pay my tax and a heap of it too.

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 4:54pm:

Ok. Now tell us how you avoided tax. Excess super contributions? Overseas Investments?

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 4:54pm:

I don't, I pay my tax and a heap of it too.

So you don't claim deductions? Who knew? Tax deductions lead to tax avoided as opposed to tax evaded.

lee wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 9:08pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 8th, 2022 at 4:54pm: Ok. Now tell us how you avoided tax. Excess super contributions? Overseas Investments? Dnarever wrote on Oct 8th, 2022 at 4:54pm: I don't, I pay my tax and a heap of it too. So you don't claim deductions? Who knew? Tax deductions lead to tax avoided as opposed to tax evaded.

I make a few legitimate deductions.

crocodile wrote on Oct 8^th, 2022 at 2:29pm:

Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 7:21pm: crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 4:31pm: Dnarever wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:45pm: crocodile wrote on Oct 7th, 2022 at 2:04pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 4:44pm: lee wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 2:16pm: Karnal wrote on Oct 4th, 2022 at 9:40am: Tax cuts for the rich don't add any extra spending to the economy. The tax cuts start at $45K and you think that is rich? ::) "Stage 3, which delivers the same marginal tax rate of 32.5 cents for all income between $45,000 and $200,000 in 2024-25 was to cost $46 billion. The boost, which would cut that rate to 30 cents from July 2024, would on our estimates cost an extra $85 billion." https://grattan.edu.au/news/stage-3-of-the-tax-cuts-would-return-australia-to-the-1950s/ I most certainly do not. The beneficiaries of the tax cut, however, are those on higher incomes. Here's how: https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/new-data-shows-how-the-stage-3-tax-cuts-massively-favour-the-wealthy/ When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. You? To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Quote: When presented with lemons, the Superior Man makes lemonade. And does it in a tax deductible manner. [quote]To get a tax cut one must have paid some in the first place. Yes Albert you are sort of right if talking about PAYG tax payers. Not so much for others. The tax cuts are targeted at PAYG. Sorry Einstein, no cigar. Say I earn $202K as a self employed and you earn get paid $202K on a PAYG wage. How would you get the tax cut and I wouldn't ?

Fukkin' dumbarse. Self employed are still PAYG. I'm self employed and I pay my PAYG and GST every quarter.
[/quote]

Yes it is called PAYG but it is still very different most employees would not consider a quarterly payment as PAYG even though the Tax office does. It is self assessed for a start and very flexible in your preferred favour. As you say it is paid quarterly (mostly). Also slightly different for a contractor.

Call me old fashioned but I reckon a cleaner would prefer to receive a $500 tax cut than not receive a $500 tax cut.  :)

A $500 tax cut is very different to a $9000 tax cut.   :(

Meanwhile, bending the Albo has again repeated that the tax cuts are going ahead.  ;D

Captain Nemo wrote on Oct 9^th, 2022 at 12:06am:

Call me old fashioned but I reckon a cleaner would prefer to receive a $500 tax cut than not receive a $500 tax cut.  :)

You could give cleaners a $1000 tax cut with under 1% of what this is going to cost and do it without adding as much to the cost increases driven by this being 100% unfunded.

Here is a clue the cleaners will have to pay for this cut likely in additional taxes.

Captain Nemo wrote on Oct 10^th, 2022 at 9:56am:

Meanwhile, bending the Albo has again repeated that the tax cuts are going ahead.  ;D

He was always going to be a disappointment its a shame that Labor politicians only have incentive to be better than Liberal politicians.

I guess 4/10 is better than 2/10 ?

Guardian Essential poll: voters split on whether Labor should ditch the stage-three tax cuts

Bare majority of respondents say Labor should stick with tax cuts despite changed economic situation – but most of those in favour stand to benefit ...

53% said Labor needed to stick with the tax cuts even though the economic situation was different to 2019, while 47% said it was understandable the promise would be broken.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/oct/18/guardian-essential-poll-voters-split-on-whether-labor-should-ditch-the-stage-three-tax-cuts?CMP=share_btn_tw

It's all a shame.  A game.  Media campaign.

The tax cuts will not go ahead as they are.  Labour will have it both ways by leaving some tax cuts then using the savings to do some good for the low income voters.  All the year before the next election.