Australian Politics Forum - Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75137
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #60 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 7:29pm

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 6:17pm:

What about 1.2 million kids?

to answer that I think you first have to know how many will switch to the public system if funding is pulled. The govt spends many hundreds of millions subsidising private schools. Many of these kids could go to existing schools without a huge increase in funding to those schools

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #61 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 2:00pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:23pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 12:41pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 12:30pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 10:57am:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/crazxy-carnal_004.jpg

45.9% of income earners pay 3.7% of tax
and then whinge because 'their' services are being cut and the 'rich' are getting a few miserly tax rebates?

Why do you insist on posting lies?

As usual you ignore all indirect taxes, and keep wilfully misrepresenting "income tax" as being the same as "all tax" when you know full well that isn't the case, not by a long shot.

Stop lying.

Lying?

the figures quoted are the ATO's data from actual tax returns.

And that's why it's a lie. You're crapping on about "tax" but totally failing to mention that "tax" includes indirect tax - a lie by omission.

since it was an argument on INCOME TAX and not total tax then you are wrong.

It is you who are wrong, and you should learn to read.

Quote:

45.9% of income earners pay 3.7% of
tax

"Tax". Not "Income tax".

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #62 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:23pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:19pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:18pm:

Ok, let's abolish negative gearing, FBT concessions, capital gains tax concessions, dividend imputation, concessions on superannuation and other similar expenditure. Then we go after all the tax concessions and loopholes that companies use to lower their tax, especially foreign multinationals

now longie will come out and say that you are targetting the rich, and those measures aren't 'fair'. Cheesy

of COURSE he is targetting the 'rich'. do you see a SINGLE proposal there that is not purely targeted at them?

Your point being?

People on more modest incomes have been targeted for years, whenever the conservatives decide to cut spending they chop at the bottom, and when they spend - as they always do - they give it to the top. Even when Labor governments make modest cuts at the top - like the means test for private health insurance rebate - how the Liberals howl! And as soon as the Liberals got back in, they promptly bring the measures back even though it is funded with borrowed money. Budget emergency, oh really?

What we really need in this country is a horror budget brought down by a Labor government to rein in some of the largesse handed out at the top by conservative governments over the past 20 years, especially to corporations. Some of this money can then be used to simplify the tax system and bring tax cuts. I doubt we would see this; the Labor party are not much less beholden to corporate vested interests than the Coalition. They're going to need a massive landslide win before they have the courage to act in the national interest.

I also notice that I was quoted out of context and the bit where I specifically said tax cuts was deleted; obviously the full argument was too hard to refute.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #63 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:48pm

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

"Tax". Not "Income tax".

The linked table and therefore commentary was obviously all about 'income tax' returns.

There's no denying the 'income tax' data. 45.9% of income earners pay only 3.7% of total income tax.

I'm still waiting on your indirect tax data backing up your counter claims Bam?

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 59253 Here Gender:	Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food Reply #64 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:22pm longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 4:46pm: and DNA runs away yet again... Made dinner took the dog for a walk and watched some TV then my wife was on my computer for a while, didn't realise that you had me on a clock.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:31pm by Dnarever » IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59253
Here
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #65 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:28pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 3:43pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 2:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:09pm:

so just to sum up...

DNA rejects the ATOs figures on tax receipts.

I wonder how anyone proves anything to a person who doesn't believe any figures unless he personally agrees with them?

Nothing wrong with the data just how it is interpreted to get the desired results.

so saying 16% of people pay 63% of income tax is wrong??? it is a very simple interpretation. In fact, it isn't even an interpretation at all it is simple reading off a table.

Saying that people who earn $80K are the wealthy is wrong.

People who earn 80K and above pay 63% of the tax means that many middle income earners need to be included to get that number which makes the claim that the wealthy pay all the tax clearly incorrect. Further the fact that many of the truly wealthy end up being defined as among the poor for the purposes of this data further distorts the picture.

The number you quote is the number from the table - what it really means is not much.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59253
Here
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #66 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:41pm

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:48pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

"Tax". Not "Income tax".

The linked table and therefore commentary was obviously all about 'income tax' returns.

There's no denying the 'income tax' data. 45.9% of income earners pay only 3.7% of total income tax.

I'm still waiting on your indirect tax data backing up your counter claims Bam?

45.9% of income earners pay only 3.7% of total income tax.

$6,000 or less pay no tax - almost a million people.

up to $37,000 pay 15c in the Dollar over $6000. 4.8 million

About 5.7 Million low income earners make up about 45.9% of PAYE tax payers.

Does this fact really have much meaning except that we have way too many people earning way too little money.

If you want to tax them more it is really simple just pay them more.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jan 9^th, 2015 at 5:38am by Dnarever »

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #67 - Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:57pm

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:28pm:

The number you quote is the number from the table - what it really means is not much.

It means that 16% of income earners pay a whopping 63% of income tax. That's not "not much".

Whether one brands them 'rich' or not is irrelevant. Whatever you call them it doesn't alter the fact that they pay way over their fair share of tax.

The other 84% of income earners shouldn't be whinging about 'wealth-fare' or 'private health insurance rebates' or 'private school funding' and the budget because they are already getting the lion's share of the government benefits. They should be kissing the 16%'s bum not bashing them with insults.

All you Lefties carrying on like pork chops about the 'unfairness' of the budget are a friggin joke. The actuality is that the 84% are unfairly ripping off the 16% who cannot do anything about it because they are a minority and virtually unrepresented in Parliament. They are slaves of the mob. Forced to work and pay for the Mob's expenses by the rigged ballot box, our warped democracy. Angry

Back to top

IP Logged

Bam

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #68 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 10:54am

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:48pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

"Tax". Not "Income tax".

The linked table and therefore commentary was obviously all about 'income tax' returns.

There's no denying the 'income tax' data. 45.9% of income earners pay only 3.7% of total income tax.

I'm still waiting on your indirect tax data backing up your counter claims Bam?

This is why wealthy conservatives LOVE to talk about increasing the GST. The poor would be hardest hit by any increase to the GST. It is a regressive tax.

Back to top

You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.

IP Logged

Swagman

Gold Member

Offline

Beware of cheap imitations......

Posts: 15095
Illawarra NSW
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #69 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 11:03am

Bam wrote on Jan 9^th, 2015 at 10:54am:

This is why wealthy conservatives LOVE to talk about increasing the GST. The poor would be hardest hit by any increase to the GST. It is a regressive tax.

The poor receive the benefits from taxation.

We have taxation so that income is redistributed to the poor.

Any taxation regressive or progressive benifits the poor.

Regressive taxes also collect revenue from criminals, black marketeers, tax cheats (AKA The Black Economy) to the benefit of income tax payers.

Regressive taxes benefit all citizens.

The MYTH that regressive taxes are bad is extreme Leftist propaganda.

Proportion of income? What proportion of the income of the poor is redistributed tax?

At the end of the day the only thing "poor" is your argument.... Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #70 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 11:45am

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 2:00pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:23pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 12:41pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 12:30pm:

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 10:57am:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/album/forum-attachments/crazxy-carnal_004.jpg

45.9% of income earners pay 3.7% of tax
and then whinge because 'their' services are being cut and the 'rich' are getting a few miserly tax rebates?

Why do you insist on posting lies?

As usual you ignore all indirect taxes, and keep wilfully misrepresenting "income tax" as being the same as "all tax" when you know full well that isn't the case, not by a long shot.

Stop lying.

Lying?

the figures quoted are the ATO's data from actual tax returns.

And that's why it's a lie. You're crapping on about "tax" but totally failing to mention that "tax" includes indirect tax - a lie by omission.

since it was an argument on INCOME TAX and not total tax then you are wrong.

It is you who are wrong, and you should learn to read.

Quote:

45.9% of income earners pay 3.7% of
tax

"Tax". Not "Income tax".

since you want to play the pedantic game, the term 'income' was used in the sentence thus very strongly implying that the tax being referred to was income tax. In fact if he were referring to anything other than income tax basic literacy would demand that he say that.

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: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #71 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 11:47am

Bam wrote on Jan 9^th, 2015 at 10:54am:

Swagman wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:48pm:

Bam wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 8:09pm:

"Tax". Not "Income tax".

The linked table and therefore commentary was obviously all about 'income tax' returns.

There's no denying the 'income tax' data. 45.9% of income earners pay only 3.7% of total income tax.

I'm still waiting on your indirect tax data backing up your counter claims Bam?

http://i.imgur.com/LRqbZI0.png
This is why wealthy conservatives LOVE to talk about increasing the GST. The poor would be hardest hit by any increase to the GST. It is a regressive tax.

and if the y axis was in dollars the result would be the complete opposite. and GST is collected in dollars. welfare is distributed in dollars not % of income.

great statistic as long as you use it properly - which you do not.

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: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #72 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 11:48am

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 3:43pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 2:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:09pm:

so just to sum up...

DNA rejects the ATOs figures on tax receipts.

I wonder how anyone proves anything to a person who doesn't believe any figures unless he personally agrees with them?

Nothing wrong with the data just how it is interpreted to get the desired results.

so saying 16% of people pay 63% of income tax is wrong??? it is a very simple interpretation. In fact, it isn't even an interpretation at all it is simple reading off a table.

Saying that people who earn $80K are the wealthy is wrong.

People who earn 80K and above pay 63% of the tax means that many middle income earners need to be included to get that number which makes the claim that the wealthy pay all the tax clearly incorrect. Further the fact that many of the truly wealthy end up being defined as among the poor for the purposes of this data further distorts the picture.

The number you quote is the number from the table - what it really means is not much.

its not about 'wealthy', it is saying the top 16% pay 63% of tax and you abject refusal to even accept 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

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #73 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 12:25pm

Swagman wrote on Jan 9^th, 2015 at 11:03am:

Bam wrote on Jan 9^th, 2015 at 10:54am:

This is why wealthy conservatives LOVE to talk about increasing the GST. The poor would be hardest hit by any increase to the GST. It is a regressive tax.

The poor receive the benefits from taxation.

We have taxation so that income is redistributed to the poor.

Any taxation regressive or progressive benifits the poor.

Regressive taxes also collect revenue from criminals, black marketeers, tax cheats (AKA The Black Economy) to the benefit of income tax payers.

Regressive taxes benefit all citizens.

The MYTH that regressive taxes are bad is extreme Leftist propaganda.

Proportion of income? What proportion of the income of the poor is redistributed tax?

At the end of the day the only thing "poor" is your argument.... Grin

the other myth is that GST is regressive. Progressive taxes have progressively increasing rates as dollar value increase. Regressive taxes have LOWER rates as dollar value increase. the GST is neither. it is a FLAT TAX ie neither progressive nor regressive.

Now watch the mathematically ignorant lefties claim otherwise.

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

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59253
Here
Gender: male

Re: Put GST On Private Health Insurance Not Fresh Food
Reply #74 - Jan 9^th, 2015 at 1:03pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 9^th, 2015 at 11:48am:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 9:28pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 3:43pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 2:36pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2015 at 1:09pm:

so just to sum up...

DNA rejects the ATOs figures on tax receipts.

I wonder how anyone proves anything to a person who doesn't believe any figures unless he personally agrees with them?

Nothing wrong with the data just how it is interpreted to get the desired results.

so saying 16% of people pay 63% of income tax is wrong??? it is a very simple interpretation. In fact, it isn't even an interpretation at all it is simple reading off a table.

Saying that people who earn $80K are the wealthy is wrong.

People who earn 80K and above pay 63% of the tax means that many middle income earners need to be included to get that number which makes the claim that the wealthy pay all the tax clearly incorrect. Further the fact that many of the truly wealthy end up being defined as among the poor for the purposes of this data further distorts the picture.

The number you quote is the number from the table - what it really means is not much.

its not about 'wealthy', it is saying the top 16% pay 63% of tax and you abject refusal to even accept it.

I never said that I don't accept it just that it does not mean a lot. It isn't difficult to work out that the people who earn the most will pay the most tax, its not rocket science just look at the tax tables.
The concerning thing about the data is that about 5 Million people earn under $37K. which is around 45%.

The reason that the top 16% pay so big a percentage of tax is because the bottom 45% don't earn enough to pay a very significant amount of tax and yet the big effort by business and government is to restrict the wage growth for the lowest paid. As shown by these numbers the wage moderation at the low end has been a huge success.

45% of employees earn under $37K.

Do you think that the lowest paid should pay more tax ?

Back to top

IP Logged