Andrei.Hicks wrote on Jun 19
th, 2011 at 1:55pm:
There you go again - making wide sweeping assumptions without knowing any of the detail.
Much like your idiotic claim that people in the middle bracket can 'afford to pay more'.
We weren't mortgaged to the hilt. That was a $600k mortgage on a house worth over $1.3m - we paid well over $800k ourselves without the mortgage all up.
Then what are you whining about? You expect others to subsidise your investment choices? Talk about sense of entitlement!
Quote:We didn't 'waste' energy - that was the cost in 2006/7 to fuel the house and the various rooms.
If you can't afford the bills then you obviously bought too big a house. That is your CHOICE that YOU made. No one ASKED you to buy a house that was too big for you to afford the energy bills.
Quote:We actually (being a couple of accountants) budget very well but to have a Government tell us 'we can afford more' when there is actually no reason or additional benefit to us when we do - its arrogance.
Are, so you're making all of this up. You didn't face ANY cost of living pressures? You made choice and lived within your means, you're just trying to score cheap political points that have no basis in reality?
Quote:Yet they give money to others to pay this tax but not our demographic.
Why??
Well, one could argue its the same old story, Labor (for reasons I am not sure) doesn't like the middle class of Australia and never has.
Because anyone living in a $150k household neither requires nor deserves to be subsidised by the taxpayer. We live in a welfare state, we have a social compact that those who need assistance receive and those who don't help to pay for it. If you don't like it you can always stay in America or Engl;and or wherever it is you've decided that you live on any given day