Anthony Albanese - How long? -3-

Remove this Banner Ad

Carn The Berries said:
You actually said handouts to the poor, which could reasonably be assumed to mean welfare...
Click to expand...
it was a comment about what other posters were saying about the budget

but I'm not really too fussed about continuing this with you, I know where you stand and you know where I stand and we're not going to agree on very much
 
SaintsSeptember said:
I work for a company, owned by a multi-national , and manufacturing in Australia.
We make profit, and pay tax on that profit. You can't really hide the profit, and unlike tradies, you can't do fun things like buy a new off road vehicle and claim it as a work vehicle.
If the company tax went up significantly, i'm pretty sure we'd cease to be a manufacturer and become an importer.

Other companies less so, but somehow we want to motivate companies to invest in Australian operations.
Click to expand...
Exactly, the big tech companies like Facebook and stuff get around tax by having their Australian ops charge their Ireland office service / licensing fees, but anything that does physical trade in Australia pays tax here.

People who want to increase tax think it works in a vacuum, that by changing the number it will magically generate more revenue, but it doesn't work that way (other than charging income tax on working people who can't control it), it has vast economic consequences.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

FlowersByIrene said:
Why would anyone take you seriously with the above? Australians pay one of the highest tax rates in the world for a country that doesn't have semi-socialism, and you think the answer is to tax more? It's why this thread is always so laughable.
Click to expand...
So this sentence can be summarised as:

We pay more tax than all the countries other than the ones which pay more tax (semi-socialist.)?

Australia's overall tax is far below the OECD average, but is overly-reliant on income tax. There's only 7 OECD countries who pay less tax than Australia and 29 who pay more.

Facts get in the way of your hypothesis.

Total tax revenue as a share of GDP in OECD countries | IFS Taxlab

ifs.org.uk
 
FlowersByIrene said:
Exactly, the big tech companies like Facebook and stuff get around tax by having their Australian ops charge their Ireland office service / licensing fees, but anything that does physical trade in Australia pays tax here.

People who want to increase tax think it works in a vacuum, that by changing the number it will magically generate more revenue, but it doesn't work that way (other than charging income tax on working people who can't control it), it has vast economic consequences.
Click to expand...

Same thing works for income tax and the tax free threshold, if someone is on the dole, they are unlikely to do a bit of work if they are going to work 3 hours and pay one to the government.
Of course if its somewhere that doesn't have the dole, you get more desperate.
 
Saint said:
So this sentence can be summarised as:

We pay more tax than all the countries other than the ones which pay more tax (semi-socialist.)?

Australia's overall tax is far below the OECD average, but is overly-reliant on income tax. There's only 7 OECD countries who pay less tax than Australia and 29 who pay more.

Facts get in the way of your hypothesis.

Total tax revenue as a share of GDP in OECD countries | IFS Taxlab

ifs.org.uk
Click to expand...
That graph is total tax revenue... which is a product of population Saint. If you're argument is other OECD countries are bigger than Australia bravo you won a point no one was arguing. The point is, and was, tax rate, and for the record my point is in regards to the top tax rate, which was the point of discussion in this thread about the 'rich' paying more tax.
 
FlowersByIrene said:
That graph is total tax revenue... which is a product of population Saint. If you're argument is other OECD countries are bigger than Australia bravo you won a point no one was arguing. The point is, and was, tax rate, and for the record my point is in regards to the top tax rate, which was the point of discussion in this thread about the 'rich' paying more tax.
Click to expand...

OECD top marginal tax rate 2022 - Australia 47% beaten only by Austria, Canada, France, Israel, Japan and the semi-socialist countries Denmark, Finland etc
 
FlowersByIrene said:
Why would anyone take you seriously with the above? Australians pay one of the highest tax rates in the world for a country that doesn't have semi-socialism, and you think the answer is to tax more? It's why this thread is always so laughable.
Click to expand...

Except when we look at actual facts rather than your shit take feels, they show Australia is amongst the lowest taxing countries in the world.

This is why your ill-informed posts are always so laughable.
 
Donakebab said:
Except when we look at actual facts rather than your shit take feels, they show Australia is amongst the lowest taxing countries in the world.

This is why your ill-informed posts are always so laughable.
Click to expand...
On what basis? When you take into account how little we tax the lower tax brackets? But no one here is arguing that we should be raising those taxes right? Everyone is talking about how we should be raising taxes on 'the rich' which already pay one of the highest tax rates in the world, as evidenced above. So whose ill-informed? Laughable post, typical of this thread of Labor sycophants
 
FlowersByIrene said:
On what basis? When you take into account how little we tax the lower tax brackets? But no one here is arguing that we should be raising those taxes right? Everyone is talking about how we should be raising taxes on 'the rich' which already pay one of the highest tax rates in the world, as evidenced above. So whose ill-informed? Laughable post, typical of this thread of Labor sycophants
Click to expand...
My tax rate was as a % of GDP, we're well below average. I'm guessing you didn't click on the link to see that. So here it is (Look at us down there with Switzerland and the USA, hardly known for their socialism.:
1742958249028.png


The top tax bracket at 47% makes up just a small component of taxes. That tax rate only applies to people earning over $200k per year. It's also not the effective tax rate, which is far lower than 45% because most earners who make a lot more than $200k per year have trusts and business accounts and other ways of shifting their earnings.

Overall, we're a very low-tax nation. Compared to many countries, we do have a higher top tax rate and income taxes generally, but we also have far lower GST/VAT rates.
 
Saint said:
My tax rate was as a % of GDP, we're well below average. I'm guessing you didn't click on the link to see that. So here it is (Look at us down there with Switzerland and the USA, hardly known for their socialism.:
View attachment 2261655


The top tax bracket at 47% makes up just a small component of taxes. That tax rate only applies to people earning over $200k per year. It's also not the effective tax rate, which is far lower than 45% because most earners who make a lot more than $200k per year have trusts and business accounts and other ways of shifting their earnings.

Overall, we're a very low-tax nation. Compared to many countries, we do have a higher top tax rate and income taxes generally, but we also have far lower GST/VAT rates.
Click to expand...
Again, thanks for reiterating my point. That is not the point I was arguing, nor that was being discussed. The discussion was "taxing the rich" more, of which Australia already taxes them very very highly.
 
QuietB said:
Serious question - what is going wrong with the economy under this government?

Yes, cost of living is crazy but that is a global phenomenon and unless Australia wants to unhook its self from the global market - which is the source of whatever prosperity we have - then that is something we need to suck up.

Yes there needs to be much more tax reform - but that means taxing the rich - not tax cuts for the rich. So the Liberals are not a viable option there.

Yes there needs to be housing reform - but again it needs to be reform against the interests of the rich so the Liberals are not going to do it.

Inflation is under control now. Yes the higher prices are baked in but that is not going to change.

Interest rates are falling.

Government deficit is somewhat under control.

Unemployment is low.

The current Labor government is a perfectly competent and reasonable performing government. Why on earth would anyone prefer the corpse of the Morrison government with Dutton leader instead?

How many chances are the Liberals actually going to get.

Click to expand...

Well said. I mean, I'm praying for a Labor minority govt, not majority, but I can't imagine anything more stupid than a Coalition govt of any sort right now.
 
SBD Gonzalez said:
Well said. I mean, I'm praying for a Labor minority govt, not majority, but I can't imagine anything more stupid than a Coalition govt of any sort right now.
Click to expand...

So you want a government , who have already been shown not to be doing much, to be actually unable to do anything , unless they pander to the whims of a few minorities?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Gough said:
One thing to consider in the next term of government is the potential passing of Murdoch and the change that could bring to our political dynamic.
Click to expand...
Rupert Murdoch is too stubborn to die LoL.

He has lots of money. He could use money to transform his body to line Arnold Schwarzenegger in the terminator movies. Cyberdine 101. Have a couple of nuclear power cells that can last him up to 120 years lol
 
QuietB said:
But if Dutton builds nuclear they will have to subsidise it - because electricity prices will literally quadruple or worse if they don't.

Nuclear is going to cost over $600 billion and probably close enough to $1 trillion which means doubling the national debt just for electricity.

It is literally insane.
Click to expand...
Yep.... It's a massive costly plan.

I told you on the Dutton thread on how close the 2010, 2013 and 2019 elections were close.

2019 Labor were slight favourites but some how stuffed up and choked shortly before the election.

Dutton and the liberals looked like likely winners in the 2025 election. But I think liberals will drop the all just like Labor in 2019.

I still think Labor will just get enough seats, I reckon they will get the 76 seats regardless
 
Todman you stopped posting the election odds pal, what's happening?
 
FlowersByIrene said:
Again, thanks for reiterating my point. That is not the point I was arguing, nor that was being discussed. The discussion was "taxing the rich" more, of which Australia already taxes them very very highly.
Click to expand...
You said that graph was total tax revenue. They pointed out you were wrong.

Happy for you to move to another topic, but you gotta cop it on the chin when you get it wrong.
 
aCunningPlan said:
You said that graph was total tax revenue. They pointed out you were wrong.

Happy for you to move to another topic, but you gotta cop it on the chin when you get it wrong.
Click to expand...
It was total tax revenue, as a portion of GDP. Good lord, how many times do I have to be told I'm wrong by people who are, themselves, wrong
 
FlowersByIrene said:
Why would anyone take you seriously with the above? Australians pay one of the highest tax rates in the world for a country that doesn't have semi-socialism, and you think the answer is to tax more? It's why this thread is always so laughable.
Click to expand...
You think America should be under trump authoritarianism, your opinions are valueless matey!🤓
 

Anthony Albanese - How long? -3-


Write your reply...

Similar threads

M
How the coalition can win the next Victorian election
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
128
Views
7K
Ice-Wolf
Ice-Wolf
nut
Stage 3 tax cuts
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
Caesar
Caesar
anchor man
7:30.. a LNP weakness.
Replies
0
Views
433
anchor man
anchor man
K
Power prices 30.6.2023 as a means to measure
Replies
2
Views
474
Harro59
H
Back
Top