Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Poll Poll
Question: Should Gina Reinhart pay more tax?

yes    
  11 (78.6%)
no    
  3 (21.4%)
not sure    
  0 (0.0%)




Total votes: 14
« Created by: Bobby. on: Sep 15th, 2014 at 9:45am »

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17
Send Topic Print
Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society (Read 17625 times)
cods
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 88048
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #45 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:58am
 
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:50pm:
cods wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 6:00pm:
do you own your own home? your own car.. do you have superannuation..? do you have money in the bank...lovely if you have any of those..

we had not one of those when I was growing up..my mum and dad didnt leave me a thing..nup not even a brass farthing as the old saying went..but I will certainly be leaving my kids my home and car and any money that might be left in the bank..a bit more than I ever got... I worked for it. along with my husband we went without to pay for every day things
didnt occur to us to say how about the so called RICH paying more so I can pay less...today more people own their own homes than ever before...are they rich????????.. should they be penalised because they put their money into their homes and not down the pub....I dont know any more....in my mums day no one owned their own homes it was unheard of...

you sound as if you resent anyone that had frugal parents who invested their money wisely..
OK, is there any chance that if we have this discussion you might do away with the hysterical rant and exaggerated accusations about me wanting to "penalising you for putting money in your home" and how "I must hate frugal parents" and deal with the points that were actually made in the OP. 

You know of course that at the moment we have a progressive taxation system precisely because the belief has been up till now that those who have done better out of the social arrangements should be prepared to put that little bit more back in.  Are you opposed to that completely or not completely and if so why. Having said that there are many in much higher economic brackets then us who pay less and sometimes not even any tax at all. Does that trouble you or not and if so why. Now as I say you can go off hysterically and avoid a rational discussion or we could actually teach each other about why we believe the different things we believe. 





I think you will find that those who have more... tend to spend more .. for instance a larger bigger posher home...in a well off position...

this by its very existence costs a hell of a lot than Mr average would pay.. in the likes of GST/land tax/stamp duty/rates etc etc....

dont forget when you buy a house.. they stamp a piece of paper...the size of the house does not affect the size of the stamp.... so big house little house..work involved the same...yet because the house is bigger therefore costs more they pay a hell of a lot more stamp duty.....

so they are paying more taxes....they are the ones that buy the luxury goods.. like the BMWs..and yachts all costing hell of a lot more in GST...

dont be jealous of someone having a little bit more money....


I was asking you a few questions... as you seem to put all RICH people in the same bracket.

I was just trying to determine who was classed as rich in your little rant. that was all.






Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ImSpartacus2
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6913
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #46 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:14am
 
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:19am:
that is drivel.  do you care to explain how any earner avoids paying tax?


What follows is an article from the SMH in May 2014 And its just the tip of the iceburg.  Google Australia opened new offices in Darling Harbour in mid 2009 and derives revenue of 2 billion but its total tax expense was $466,802. Similar story with Apple. And none of this is to mention the corporate welfare they recieve and Taxpayer $$$ from dirty deals.  Remember $880Million payed out to Abbotts mate Murdoch straight after Abbott won the election.  OH yes it was all above board I'm sure. 

"Budget pain? Not for millionaires who pay no tax

Date
    May 13, 2014 Peter Martin
Economics Editor, The Age

    Federal budget 2014: full coverage
   
“Pain all round” will be the rallying cry of the night. Joe Hockey says his first budget - tonight - will hit everyone from high earners to politicians to Australians too poor to pay to see the doctor. All of us will have to “contribute budget repair”.

Except that we won’t.

The latest tax statistics show 75 ultra-high-earning Australians paid no tax at all in 2011-12. Zero. Zip.
Advertisement

Each earned more than $1 million from investments or wages. Between them they made $195 million, an average of $2.6 million each.

The fortunate 75 paid no income tax, no Medicare levy and no Medicare surcharge, even though 60 of them had private health insurance.

The reason? They managed to cut their combined taxable incomes to $82. That’s right, $1.10 each.

Cutting taxable income that far doesn’t come cheap.

Forty-five of the uber millionaires claimed a total of $64.4 million for the “cost of managing their tax affairs”. That’s a staggering $1.4 million each. (As a point of comparison an entry-level H&R Block consultation costs $49.)

At face value the figures suggest these super-high earners were prepared to spend an unlikely half of their incomes on tax advice. A more likely explanation is that they received far greater incomes than they reported and spent only a portion on tax advice.

It wasn’t wasted.

Animation: Rocco Fazzari

Ten of the millionaires claimed between them $1.3 million in work-related deductions, for things such as car expenses and clothing. Ten claimed a total of $5 million for donations and gifts, a category that includes political as well as charitable donations.

And they ran loss-making businesses.

The 30 who were in business reported total business income of $121 million offset by expenses of $122 million. Those who ran farms carried over $61.5 million in earlier tax losses and lost an extra $3 million in 2011-12.

When it came to investing they bought up big on shares that paid so-called franking credits on which they could claim tax deductions and stayed away from those that did not. They received $18.7 million in franked dividends in 2011-12, and only $565,000 in dividends that were unfranked.

On Tuesday night these  75 will escape the deficit reduction levy applying to taxable incomes of more than $180,000. Their taxable incomes are closer to nil than $180,000 even though they are well off enough to afford outrageously priced tax advice. And they’ll almost certainly escape the extra charge for bulk-billed visits to the doctor. About the only thing they won’t escape is higher petrol prices, although it should be noted that five of them claim work-related car expenses, so they might be able pass those costs on to the Tax Office.

It isn’t only millionaires. Tax Office figures show there are 1095 Australians earning in excess of $150,000 who pay no tax. Half of them sought tax advice and shelled out an impressive total of $98 million, which works out to $223,000 each. Their biggest lurk is negative gearing. Most lose large sums on properties they rent out in order to destroy their taxable incomes, hoping to make it up later when they sell the properties for a lightly taxed profit."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/budget-pain-not-for-millionaires-who-pay-no-tax-20140512-zr9o3.html#ixzz3D9JybNts
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 106008
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #47 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:18am
 
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:35am:
Bobby. wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:28am:
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:25am:
George_Orhell wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:21am:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:57pm:
George_Orhell wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 7:37pm:
As usual leftard hate for anybody who is successful through hard work, either in their own business, at their career, in their professional life, or even in their personal life.

I smacking detest that mentality!


You don't support those who are successful through birth right or just dumb luck and you truly believe that people who are a success should not have to pay their share of taxes ?


It's only unsuccessful people like you who show that mentality. What gives you the right to say they don't "pay their share of taxes". I would imagine if you lived twenty lifetimes you wouldn't pay as much tax as some successful people pay.



the vast majority of people pay their taxes without complaint.  there are very few opportunities for people to minimise tax and even then, not by very much.  the higher earners pay a much larger amount in taxes.  So I really don't get what the problem is here.  Ive not seen anyone on here promote flat tax rates.  high income earners do however get sick of being abused when they are already pay 20-50 times as much tax as a minimum wage earner AND gets no govt beneifts.



Longweekend gets a boner for Gina Winefart.



it would be nice to actually reply to my post instead of this drivel.  and I think we can safely say that NO ONE get s boner for Gina. She makes Christine Milne look sexy and we aren't even really sure she is female!


I dunno Longy -
I think she meets your standards:


...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ImSpartacus2
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6913
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #48 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:46am
 
cods wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:58am:
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:50pm:
cods wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 6:00pm:
do you own your own home? your own car.. do you have superannuation..? do you have money in the bank...lovely if you have any of those..

we had not one of those when I was growing up..my mum and dad didnt leave me a thing..nup not even a brass farthing as the old saying went..but I will certainly be leaving my kids my home and car and any money that might be left in the bank..a bit more than I ever got... I worked for it. along with my husband we went without to pay for every day things
didnt occur to us to say how about the so called RICH paying more so I can pay less...today more people own their own homes than ever before...are they rich????????.. should they be penalised because they put their money into their homes and not down the pub....I dont know any more....in my mums day no one owned their own homes it was unheard of...

you sound as if you resent anyone that had frugal parents who invested their money wisely..
OK, is there any chance that if we have this discussion you might do away with the hysterical rant and exaggerated accusations about me wanting to "penalising you for putting money in your home" and how "I must hate frugal parents" and deal with the points that were actually made in the OP. 

You know of course that at the moment we have a progressive taxation system precisely because the belief has been up till now that those who have done better out of the social arrangements should be prepared to put that little bit more back in.  Are you opposed to that completely or not completely and if so why. Having said that there are many in much higher economic brackets then us who pay less and sometimes not even any tax at all. Does that trouble you or not and if so why. Now as I say you can go off hysterically and avoid a rational discussion or we could actually teach each other about why we believe the different things we believe. 





I think you will find that those who have more... tend to spend more .. for instance a larger bigger posher home...in a well off position...

this by its very existence costs a hell of a lot than Mr average would pay.. in the likes of GST/land tax/stamp duty/rates etc etc....

dont forget when you buy a house.. they stamp a piece of paper...the size of the house does not affect the size of the stamp.... so big house little house..work involved the same...yet because the house is bigger therefore costs more they pay a hell of a lot more stamp duty.....

so they are paying more taxes....they are the ones that buy the luxury goods.. like the BMWs..and yachts all costing hell of a lot more in GST...

dont be jealous of someone having a little bit more money....


I was asking you a few questions... as you seem to put all RICH people in the same bracket.

I was just trying to determine who was classed as rich in your little rant. that was all.



Actually, I think you will find (to use your words) that most economists (if not all) and Mr Warren Buffett (watch the interview) are of the view that one person with a lot of money tends to spend far less then a lot of people with the same amount of money. It really is pretty obvious when you think about it.  The average billionair may pay 10 times more for, lets say, 10 pairs of jeans he buys each year compared to 2 pairs of jeans the average person buys each year. But when you consider that there are 22 million of us compared to what, 20 of them, who spends the most in your opinion.  Go on, take a guess. 

As to who is rich, the interview with Warren Buffet discusses this also.  And its basically that you have a progressive system of taxation that says the more welth benefit you receive from the society the more tax you should pay so that it goes up in increments.  IMO the average Australian pays enough tax but the welthier Australians do not pay enough and they think they are entitled to pay less tax because they put absolutely no value on the benefit they receive from the society that has made their wonderful standard of living possible. If they focused on the true value that they get from being in a society where everyone does everything for them for a pittance I think they would be prepared to pay more and we might defuse a lot of unnecessary tension that has built in this community because these people think they are entitled to even more. 

Do you agree with the 3 propositions set out in the OP, yes or no and why?   



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ImSpartacus2
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6913
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #49 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:49am
 
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:35am:
Bobby. wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:28am:
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:25am:
George_Orhell wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:21am:
Dnarever wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:57pm:
George_Orhell wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 7:37pm:
As usual leftard hate for anybody who is successful through hard work, either in their own business, at their career, in their professional life, or even in their personal life.

I smacking detest that mentality!


You don't support those who are successful through birth right or just dumb luck and you truly believe that people who are a success should not have to pay their share of taxes ?


It's only unsuccessful people like you who show that mentality. What gives you the right to say they don't "pay their share of taxes". I would imagine if you lived twenty lifetimes you wouldn't pay as much tax as some successful people pay.



the vast majority of people pay their taxes without complaint.  there are very few opportunities for people to minimise tax and even then, not by very much.  the higher earners pay a much larger amount in taxes.  So I really don't get what the problem is here.  Ive not seen anyone on here promote flat tax rates.  high income earners do however get sick of being abused when they are already pay 20-50 times as much tax as a minimum wage earner AND gets no govt beneifts.



Longweekend gets a boner for Gina Winefart.



it would be nice to actually reply to my post instead of this drivel.  and I think we can safely say that NO ONE get s boner for Gina. She makes Christine Milne look sexy and we aren't even really sure she is female!
LongLiar, the make up the facts as you go King
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Laugh till you cry
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 16619
In your happy place
Gender: male
Re: Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society
Reply #50 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 11:39am
 
Maybe Lostweekend58 is the reincarnation of Lang Hancock.

The tax laws are always framed to allow latitude to the rich. In the USA former Presidential candidate Mitt Romney paid 11% tax on earnings of $10 million and Warren Buffet claimed his secretary paid higher rate of tax than he did.

It is no secret that the rich don't pay their fair share.
Back to top
 

Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me.
 
IP Logged
 
ImSpartacus2
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6913
Re: Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society
Reply #51 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 11:46am
 
Consider the enormous financial advantages that banks get from their privileged position in our society, advantages that wouldnt even be remotly possible were it not for society and then ask yourself
Why shouldn't banks pay a super profits tax?


What follows is a 2011 article in the SMH

March 5, 2011

Poll: Should the banks pay a super profits tax?

Yes

    72%
No

    28%

Total votes: 516.

Poll closed 8 Mar, 2011

Disclaimer:

These polls are not scientific and reflect the opinion only of visitors who have chosen to participate.

THE COMMENTATOR: RICHARD DENNISS

Last year Australia's banks made more than $1000 in profit from every man, woman and child in the country. In fact, the underlying profits of the big four banks account for nearly $3 out of every $100 earned in Australia. There can be no doubt that the banks make super profits, and there can be no doubt that we need a banking super profits tax.

But it is not just the size of the bank profits that justifies a special tax: the unique source of their market power must also be considered.

First, in a modern economy it is virtually impossible to avoid bank fees and charges. Centrelink and most employers insist on making electronic payments into bank accounts. While a person who believes restaurants are overpriced can choose to cook at home, customers who believe bank fees are too high can no longer choose to be paid in cash. Not only do the banks have a monopoly over the electronic payments system but we are forced to use that system. Banking has become an essential service and needs to be regulated accordingly.

Second, Australian taxpayers provide explicit guarantees to cover bank deposits. And as we have seen overseas, there is also the implicit guarantee that banks that are ''too big to fail'' will be propped up by governments. It is only fair that if taxpayers face the costs of any catastrophic losses then they should receive a share of the enormous profits.

Finally, the banks have told us again and again that it is pointless to try to regulate their excessive fees and their high interest rate margins. If we try to clamp down in one area, they tell us, they will simply increase their fees and charges somewhere else. If that is indeed the case and we can do nothing to prevent these excess profits, then the least we should do is tax some of the excess profit away.

The banks' final argument is that is what is good for them is good for us. The more profits they make and the higher their share prices the better off we all are, because we all have superannuation. By that argument, the dearer our petrol, the more expensive our groceries and the higher our mobile phone bill, the better off we all are.

Dr Richard Denniss is executive director of the Australia Institute.

THE ACADEMIC: ROSS BUCKLEY

The four biggest US banks represent 34 per cent of their market. The top five French banks represent 50 per cent of that market. Yet our big four account for a staggering 92 per cent of our market.

During the global financial crisis, our big banks acquired St George, BankWest, Aussie Home Loans, Wizard, Challenger Financial, RAMS and many smaller firms.

Financial uncertainty also saw many customers move to a big bank.

This concentration confers two huge benefits on the big banks. The first is the pricing opportunities. Less competition means super profits. Bank profits are almost 3 per cent of GDP. That's right: every time you spend $100 on anything, three dollars end up as profits of a bank.

The second benefit is that capital markets know Australia could not now afford to let a big bank fail.

The explicit guarantee introduced in 2008, for which the banks paid a hefty premium, was phased out last year. However, an implicit guarantee remains, and we give it to the banks free. As a result, Australia's big banks, notwithstanding what they say, enjoy distinctly lower borrowing costs abroad because the Australian government assures their solvency.

Just before Christmas the federal government announced that its guarantee of bank deposits was to be permanent, not phased out this year as planned. This was yet another of the free gifts we give our banks.

Our tax system is progressive: high earners pay higher taxes. Company tax rates are flat, because companies are more likely to move if taxed heavily.

Yet our banks benefit enormously from being here.

They enjoy an implicit sovereign guarantee of their solvency that is lowering their borrowing costs abroad and yet pay nothing for it. They enjoy a low-competition environment and the resulting massive profits.

Such government largesse is unavailable abroad. France, Germany, Britain and US are all imposing sizeable levies on their banks to ensure the sector can bail itself out come the next crisis, and to discourage overly risky behaviour.

Australia is out of step internationally by giving

our banks such gloriously generous benefits, and not imposing sector-specific taxes in return.

The main argument for an extra tax on mining companies is because of the bounty nature has bestowed on them.

It is time for an extra tax on banks because of the bounty the Australian government, at our expense, is bestowing upon them.


Ross Buckley is professor of international finance law at the University of NSW.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/should-banks-pay-a-super-profits-tax-20110305-1bih1.html#ixzz3D9gE
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 106008
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society
Reply #52 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 1:14pm
 
Yes -

tax the banks & the mining companies

instead of punishing the unemployed & the most disadvantaged people.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #53 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 4:57pm
 
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:14am:
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:19am:
that is drivel.  do you care to explain how any earner avoids paying tax?


What follows is an article from the SMH in May 2014 And its just the tip of the iceburg.  Google Australia opened new offices in Darling Harbour in mid 2009 and derives revenue of 2 billion but its total tax expense was $466,802. Similar story with Apple. And none of this is to mention the corporate welfare they recieve and Taxpayer $$$ from dirty deals.  Remember $880Million payed out to Abbotts mate Murdoch straight after Abbott won the election.  OH yes it was all above board I'm sure. 

"Budget pain? Not for millionaires who pay no tax

Date
    May 13, 2014 Peter Martin
Economics Editor, The Age

    Federal budget 2014: full coverage
   
“Pain all round” will be the rallying cry of the night. Joe Hockey says his first budget - tonight - will hit everyone from high earners to politicians to Australians too poor to pay to see the doctor. All of us will have to “contribute budget repair”.

Except that we won’t.

The latest tax statistics show 75 ultra-high-earning Australians paid no tax at all in 2011-12. Zero. Zip.
Advertisement

Each earned more than $1 million from investments or wages. Between them they made $195 million, an average of $2.6 million each.

The fortunate 75 paid no income tax, no Medicare levy and no Medicare surcharge, even though 60 of them had private health insurance.

The reason? They managed to cut their combined taxable incomes to $82. That’s right, $1.10 each.

Cutting taxable income that far doesn’t come cheap.

Forty-five of the uber millionaires claimed a total of $64.4 million for the “cost of managing their tax affairs”. That’s a staggering $1.4 million each. (As a point of comparison an entry-level H&R Block consultation costs $49.)

At face value the figures suggest these super-high earners were prepared to spend an unlikely half of their incomes on tax advice. A more likely explanation is that they received far greater incomes than they reported and spent only a portion on tax advice.

It wasn’t wasted.

Animation: Rocco Fazzari

Ten of the millionaires claimed between them $1.3 million in work-related deductions, for things such as car expenses and clothing. Ten claimed a total of $5 million for donations and gifts, a category that includes political as well as charitable donations.

And they ran loss-making businesses.

The 30 who were in business reported total business income of $121 million offset by expenses of $122 million. Those who ran farms carried over $61.5 million in earlier tax losses and lost an extra $3 million in 2011-12.

When it came to investing they bought up big on shares that paid so-called franking credits on which they could claim tax deductions and stayed away from those that did not. They received $18.7 million in franked dividends in 2011-12, and only $565,000 in dividends that were unfranked.

On Tuesday night these  75 will escape the deficit reduction levy applying to taxable incomes of more than $180,000. Their taxable incomes are closer to nil than $180,000 even though they are well off enough to afford outrageously priced tax advice. And they’ll almost certainly escape the extra charge for bulk-billed visits to the doctor. About the only thing they won’t escape is higher petrol prices, although it should be noted that five of them claim work-related car expenses, so they might be able pass those costs on to the Tax Office.

It isn’t only millionaires. Tax Office figures show there are 1095 Australians earning in excess of $150,000 who pay no tax. Half of them sought tax advice and shelled out an impressive total of $98 million, which works out to $223,000 each. Their biggest lurk is negative gearing. Most lose large sums on properties they rent out in order to destroy their taxable incomes, hoping to make it up later when they sell the properties for a lightly taxed profit."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/budget-pain-not-for-millionaires-who-pay-no-tax-20140512-zr9o3.html#ixzz3D9JybNts


there are 15million tax payers in Australia.  do you think that whinging about 75 of them somehow means anything?  and in NONE of these cases was the tax minimisation illegal.  how about concentrating on the vast, vast majority of people who pay all their tax and at huge rates compared to average-or-below earners.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #54 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 5:02pm
 
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:46am:
cods wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:58am:
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:50pm:
cods wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 6:00pm:
do you own your own home? your own car.. do you have superannuation..? do you have money in the bank...lovely if you have any of those..

we had not one of those when I was growing up..my mum and dad didnt leave me a thing..nup not even a brass farthing as the old saying went..but I will certainly be leaving my kids my home and car and any money that might be left in the bank..a bit more than I ever got... I worked for it. along with my husband we went without to pay for every day things
didnt occur to us to say how about the so called RICH paying more so I can pay less...today more people own their own homes than ever before...are they rich????????.. should they be penalised because they put their money into their homes and not down the pub....I dont know any more....in my mums day no one owned their own homes it was unheard of...

you sound as if you resent anyone that had frugal parents who invested their money wisely..
OK, is there any chance that if we have this discussion you might do away with the hysterical rant and exaggerated accusations about me wanting to "penalising you for putting money in your home" and how "I must hate frugal parents" and deal with the points that were actually made in the OP. 

You know of course that at the moment we have a progressive taxation system precisely because the belief has been up till now that those who have done better out of the social arrangements should be prepared to put that little bit more back in.  Are you opposed to that completely or not completely and if so why. Having said that there are many in much higher economic brackets then us who pay less and sometimes not even any tax at all. Does that trouble you or not and if so why. Now as I say you can go off hysterically and avoid a rational discussion or we could actually teach each other about why we believe the different things we believe. 





I think you will find that those who have more... tend to spend more .. for instance a larger bigger posher home...in a well off position...

this by its very existence costs a hell of a lot than Mr average would pay.. in the likes of GST/land tax/stamp duty/rates etc etc....

dont forget when you buy a house.. they stamp a piece of paper...the size of the house does not affect the size of the stamp.... so big house little house..work involved the same...yet because the house is bigger therefore costs more they pay a hell of a lot more stamp duty.....

so they are paying more taxes....they are the ones that buy the luxury goods.. like the BMWs..and yachts all costing hell of a lot more in GST...

dont be jealous of someone having a little bit more money....


I was asking you a few questions... as you seem to put all RICH people in the same bracket.

I was just trying to determine who was classed as rich in your little rant. that was all.



Actually, I think you will find (to use your words) that most economists (if not all) and Mr Warren Buffett (watch the interview) are of the view that one person with a lot of money tends to spend far less then a lot of people with the same amount of money. It really is pretty obvious when you think about it.  The average billionair may pay 10 times more for, lets say, 10 pairs of jeans he buys each year compared to 2 pairs of jeans the average person buys each year. But when you consider that there are 22 million of us compared to what, 20 of them, who spends the most in your opinion.  Go on, take a guess. 

As to who is rich, the interview with Warren Buffet discusses this also.  And its basically that you have a progressive system of taxation that says the more welth benefit you receive from the society the more tax you should pay so that it goes up in increments.  IMO the average Australian pays enough tax but the welthier Australians do not pay enough and they think they are entitled to pay less tax because they put absolutely no value on the benefit they receive from the society that has made their wonderful standard of living possible. If they focused on the true value that they get from being in a society where everyone does everything for them for a pittance I think they would be prepared to pay more and we might defuse a lot of unnecessary tension that has built in this community because these people think they are entitled to even more. 

Do you agree with the 3 propositions set out in the OP, yes or no and why?   






no I don't.  your entire argument is that because someone has something, then they should have large amounts of it taken from them.  your position is little more than wanting the taxation system to punish people for success and wealth.  do you deny it?  Your type of argument ALWAYS flows from the mouths of the low paid who are already not merely subsidies but have their lives paid for by others.  40% of earners in this county pay ZERO net tax.  who do you think pays the rest?  those high earners or wealth y people you hate so much.

you are just a greedy lazy bugger who wants what everyone has but is unprepared to work for it.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 106008
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society
Reply #55 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 5:06pm
 
Longweekend,
you forget that the rich get their wealth by exploiting the poor.

Banks rip off customers with high interest rates & fees -
& pay themselves high salaries at our expense.
Mining companies rape the land & the profits mostly go overseas.

You're such a fool that you can't see the obvious.

forgiven

namaste
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society
Reply #56 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 5:48pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 5:06pm:
Longweekend,
you forget that the rich get their wealth by exploiting the poor.

Banks rip off customers with high interest rates & fees -
& pay themselves high salaries at our expense.
Mining companies rape the land & the profits mostly go overseas.

You're such a fool that you can't see the obvious.

forgiven

namaste


only a true fool believes that - which is why you do.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
ImSpartacus2
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6913
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #57 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 7:15pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 4:57pm:
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:14am:
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:19am:
that is drivel.  do you care to explain how any earner avoids paying tax?


What follows is an article from the SMH in May 2014 And its just the tip of the iceburg.  Google Australia opened new offices in Darling Harbour in mid 2009 and derives revenue of 2 billion but its total tax expense was $466,802. Similar story with Apple. And none of this is to mention the corporate welfare they recieve and Taxpayer $$$ from dirty deals.  Remember $880Million payed out to Abbotts mate Murdoch straight after Abbott won the election.  OH yes it was all above board I'm sure. 

"Budget pain? Not for millionaires who pay no tax

Only some parts of this article are reproduced here to allow me space to respond to LongLiar. Check earlier version for the complete article

“Pain all round”....

The latest tax statistics show 75 ultra-high-earning Australians paid no tax at all in 2011-12. Zero. Zip.

Each earned more than $1 million from investments or wages. Between them they made $195 million, an average of $2.6 million each.

The fortunate 75 paid no income tax, no Medicare levy and no Medicare surcharge, even though 60 of them had private health insurance.

The reason? They managed to cut their combined taxable incomes to $82. That’s right, $1.10 each.

Cutting taxable income that far doesn’t come cheap.

Forty-five of the uber millionaires claimed a total of $64.4 million for the “cost of managing their tax affairs”. That’s a staggering $1.4 million each. (As a point of comparison an entry-level H&R Block consultation costs $49.)

At face value the figures suggest these super-high earners were prepared to spend an unlikely half of their incomes on tax advice. A more likely explanation is that they received far greater incomes than they reported and spent only a portion on tax advice.

....
n work-related deductions, for things such as car expenses and clothing. Ten claimed a total of $5 million for donations and gifts, a category that includes political as well as charitable donations.

And they ran loss-making businesses.

The 30 who were in business reported total business income of $121 million offset by expenses of $122 million. Those who ran farms carried over $61.5 million in earlier tax losses and lost an extra $3 million in 2011-12.

When it came to investing they bought up big on shares that paid so-called franking credits on which they could claim tax deductions and stayed away from those that did not. They received $18.7 million in franked dividends in 2011-12, and only $565,000 in dividends that were unfranked.

On Tuesday night these  75 will escape the deficit reduction levy applying to taxable incomes of more than $180,000. Their taxable incomes are closer to nil than $180,000 even though they are well off enough to afford outrageously priced tax advice. And they’ll almost certainly escape the extra charge for bulk-billed visits to the doctor. About the only thing they won’t escape is higher petrol prices, although it should be noted that five of them claim work-related car expenses, so they might be able pass those costs on to the Tax Office.

It isn’t only millionaires. Tax Office figures show there are 1095 Australians earning in excess of $150,000 who pay no tax. Half of them sought tax advice and shelled out an impressive total of $98 million, which works out to $223,000 each. Their biggest lurk is negative gearing. Most lose large sums on properties they rent out in order to destroy their taxable incomes, hoping to make it up later when they sell the properties for a lightly taxed profit."


there are 15million tax payers in Australia.  do you think that whinging about 75 of them somehow means anything?  and in NONE of these cases was the tax minimisation illegal.  how about concentrating on the vast, vast majority of people who pay all their tax and at huge rates compared to average-or-below earners.

Oh dear. Do you ever set out to have a clean honest debate.  Look at your post I responded to; Quote:"do you care to explain how any earner avoids paying tax?" Now if you were being honest i think you would find from what I posted the mechanisms by which some people avoid paying tax. Your question answered.  Now as to how many wealthy people are out there who go from paying no tax, to hardly any tax, to some but insufficient amounts of tax, to less tax proportionately to the % of tax that the average PAYE tax payer pays, I shudder to think of the numbers. 

Why did I only refer to legal non tax payers. Because i was being honest. Its the tax laws that I have a problem with.  There will always be those who will break the law and provided the law does not deliberately have loopholes (and I believe many do have deliberate loopholes) to allow them to escape paying their fair share, I'm not for the moment criticising the govt for that. Its where the laws dont tax them fairly in the first place that I have an issue with and I reproduced an article that shows just the tip of the iceburg on how that happens. And of course there are many, many more corporate examples such a google which I refer to.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Andrei.Hicks
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 23818
Carlsbad, CA
Gender: male
Re: Time The Rich Paid Their Huge Debt To Society
Reply #58 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 7:45pm
 
Ah Comrade - squeeze the "rich" for all they have right?
Back to top
 

Anyone who lives within their means suffers from a lack of imagination - Oscar Wilde
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: The Rich Owe Us And Should Pay Their Taxes
Reply #59 - Sep 13th, 2014 at 7:57pm
 
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 7:15pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 4:57pm:
ImSpartacus2 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:14am:
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:19am:
that is drivel.  do you care to explain how any earner avoids paying tax?


What follows is an article from the SMH in May 2014 And its just the tip of the iceburg.  Google Australia opened new offices in Darling Harbour in mid 2009 and derives revenue of 2 billion but its total tax expense was $466,802. Similar story with Apple. And none of this is to mention the corporate welfare they recieve and Taxpayer $$$ from dirty deals.  Remember $880Million payed out to Abbotts mate Murdoch straight after Abbott won the election.  OH yes it was all above board I'm sure. 

"Budget pain? Not for millionaires who pay no tax

Only some parts of this article are reproduced here to allow me space to respond to LongLiar. Check earlier version for the complete article

“Pain all round”....

The latest tax statistics show 75 ultra-high-earning Australians paid no tax at all in 2011-12. Zero. Zip.

Each earned more than $1 million from investments or wages. Between them they made $195 million, an average of $2.6 million each.

The fortunate 75 paid no income tax, no Medicare levy and no Medicare surcharge, even though 60 of them had private health insurance.

The reason? They managed to cut their combined taxable incomes to $82. That’s right, $1.10 each.

Cutting taxable income that far doesn’t come cheap.

Forty-five of the uber millionaires claimed a total of $64.4 million for the “cost of managing their tax affairs”. That’s a staggering $1.4 million each. (As a point of comparison an entry-level H&R Block consultation costs $49.)

At face value the figures suggest these super-high earners were prepared to spend an unlikely half of their incomes on tax advice. A more likely explanation is that they received far greater incomes than they reported and spent only a portion on tax advice.

....
n work-related deductions, for things such as car expenses and clothing. Ten claimed a total of $5 million for donations and gifts, a category that includes political as well as charitable donations.

And they ran loss-making businesses.



It isn’t only millionaires. Tax Office figures show there are 1095 Australians earning in excess of $150,000 who pay no tax. Half of them sought tax advice and shelled out an impressive total of $98 million, which works out to $223,000 each. Their biggest lurk is negative gearing. Most lose large sums on properties they rent out in order to destroy their taxable incomes, hoping to make it up later when they sell the properties for a lightly taxed profit."


there are 15million tax payers in Australia.  do you think that whinging about 75 of them somehow means anything?  and in NONE of these cases was the tax minimisation illegal.  how about concentrating on the vast, vast majority of people who pay all their tax and at huge rates compared to average-or-below earners.

Oh dear. Do you ever set out to have a clean honest debate.  Look at your post I responded to; Quote:"do you care to explain how any earner avoids paying tax?" Now if you were being honest i think you would find from what I posted the mechanisms by which some people avoid paying tax. Your question answered.  Now as to how many wealthy people are out there who go from paying no tax, to hardly any tax, to some but insufficient amounts of tax, to less tax proportionately to the % of tax that the average PAYE tax payer pays, I shudder to think of the numbers. 

Why did I only refer to legal non tax payers. Because i was being honest. Its the tax laws that I have a problem with.  There will always be those who will break the law and provided the law does not deliberately have loopholes (and I believe many do have deliberate loopholes) to allow them to escape paying their fair share, I'm not for the moment criticising the govt for that. Its where the laws dont tax them fairly in the first place that I have an issue with and I reproduced an article that shows just the tip of the iceburg on how that happens. And of course there are many, many more corporate examples such a google which I refer to.    


despite your conspiracy-based beliefs very few avoid paying legal tax or even reasonable tax.  just because YOU think negative gearing is wrong doesn't make it so.  Just because you find some tax minimisation scheme wrong doesn't make it so.  at the end of the day these people you despise pay 20-1000 times the tax YOU pay and receive none of the welfare.  your complaints are envy-based and nothing more.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 17
Send Topic Print