Talking Politics

[tigerman]

It's been said before.......tax the Multi nationals who are all but stealing all our resources, a lower tax for Australian businesses, and workers could then be applied.

 

[Sintiger]

My favorite misreporting is the average income of a property investor. This is so artificially low because it's reported after all the negative gearing and tax credits investors get. A report showing average income without any negative gearing would be more realistic and show that the average property investor does make more than 60k a year

Any reporting of income through the tax records is by definition wrong because it is taxable income that gets reported.

I remember when changes to negative gearing were being mooted there was this stat that x% of those claiming interest on a negatively geared property were earning $80k or less. Of course part of the reason was that their income was reduced because of that negative gearing !!

 

[tigertime2]

I made a post about the US President thread being overwhelmed or spammed with so many pointless (and often baseless) videos/articles and it being kinda pointless.

I haven't sent any private messages to mods complaining about anyone. I have had some private message conversations with posters but no more.

You made a very poor taste post about Indians/Kamala (and one other person).

The main fears I hold invove religious extremism. Both Catholic & Muslim. Extreme beliefs are associated with intolerance and often violence. Funny you mention hypocrisy, religious belief and hypocrisy often go hand in glove.

A lot of intolerance in this site from non religious people.
If you look at the failed non religious societies of Marxist communism. The people dont kill each other. However if you disagree with the government then you end up in the gulags or executed.

I agree that Catholic and Muslims have shown intolerance and have a history of ethnic cleansing. England and the USA are neither Catholic nor Muslim and have shown more religious tolerance than most countries.

 

[tigertime2]

Leaving a footy forum because Trump has publicly said he has a penchant for his daughter? Seriously get a grip.

Never said this. I said the debate is one sided. Which it is.

 

[tigertime2]

Right wingers are such snowflakes.

I have been on a few forums over the years, have never once reported a post. Dish it out, expect it back.

DS

Too much discussion these days is hyperbolic, views are at the extreme whatever the side they represent.
The reality is that the world isn’t so black and white of course, there is always room for views that are not so polarised.
What I find now is that those who have an extreme right wing view of the world are less likely to have flexibility in their thinking and of course there is often a denial of science. But I don’t think inflexibility of thinking is unique to them, there are those on the other side who are like that as well.

The part I will never understand is that link between Christianity and extreme right wing views. I don’t get it, I know it is a real thing but I don’t think I will ever understand it. It’s like the crusades, wiping out the infidels.

I find Left wing people far more intolerant. Even to the point of silencing any views other than there own view.

 

[TT33]

I find Left wing people far more intolerant. Even to the point of silencing any views other than there own view.

I think you've been looking in the mirror.

 

[DavidSSS]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the commissioning of the report was bipartisan.



One of the biggest issues is that the politicians themselves will be impacted as most are real estate investors with trusts.

The boom in property prices made Australian homeowners feel rich. Easy to draw down on the house to buy a new boat, go on a massive holiday, buy that Mercedes SUV that seems to have replaced the Holden Station wagon as the goto family car.

I'm not sure how we get out of this mess we're in with ridiculous property prices without causing some real grief. Property investors have this sense that their investment should never be at risk or depreciate, especially with the over generous government subsidies. Property is one form of investment and it should be treated like other forms where the higher the return, the higher the risk.

I think a lot of people don't think of real estate as an asset. It is a large minority who think this way. Yes, rising house prices do mean you can borrow against equity, but we all realise that you still end up having to pay it back.

But the way the media talk, everyone is obsessed with the value of their house, if they have one. When I get asked what our house is worth my usual reply is that it is worth living in. This exposes an issue - the idea that houses are an investment not a dwelling. This attitude, at least for those who do consider a house an investment as opposed to a dwelling, and also those who promote this way of thinking, has a fair bit to do with the problems we have. Decades ago, say, our parents' generation, it was rare to be looking at the capital gains aspect of buying a house, unless you were very wealthy you bought a house and the only relevance of its market value was if you wanted to move.

Houses need to go back to being a dwelling.

As for the tax review, a lot of it was good but what drives me crazy about the tax reform agenda is the constant argument that we need more consumption taxes. Consumption taxes are regressive. An increase in consumption tax on a purchase is a set amount, so the lower your income the higher the proportion of your income a consumption tax is. Increasing the GST increases a regressive tax.

What we need to do is to get rid of tax breaks for owning capital: this means getting rid of capital gains tax discounts, negative gearing and the like. I would not just get rid of getting franking credits back even if you pay no tax, I would get rid of franking credits. Very few countries have franking credits. Companies a limited liability, in order to have this they are considered legal persons. The company pays their tax, and the person who receives a payout (eg: dividend) is a separate person, so they can pay their tax on the income they receive from the company. I cannot agree with owning capital getting a tax discount over providing labour.

The other travesty of course is the royalties from mining which are much lower in Australia. Companies profit from digging stuff up here, they can pay for the privilege.

DS

 

[DavidSSS]

I find Left wing people far more intolerant. Even to the point of silencing any views other than there own view.

Nice attempted diversion, but, and I'm sure you realise this, I was talking about how right wingers whinge and moan when people challenge them . . . and, what can I say . . . see the post I am quoting!

DS

 

[tigertime2]

Nice attempted diversion, but, and I'm sure you realise this, I was talking about how right wingers whinge and moan when people challenge them . . . and, what can I say . . . see the post I am quoting!

DS

The attempt to control any conversation is like water off a ducks back to me.
How is Albo's reduction of the cost of living working out?
A lot of Labor voters I know are more than whining, they are totally angry at him.

 

[tigertime2]

I think a lot of people don't think of real estate as an asset. It is a large minority who think this way. Yes, rising house prices do mean you can borrow against equity, but we all realise that you still end up having to pay it back.

But the way the media talk, everyone is obsessed with the value of their house, if they have one. When I get asked what our house is worth my usual reply is that it is worth living in. This exposes an issue - the idea that houses are an investment not a dwelling. This attitude, at least for those who do consider a house an investment as opposed to a dwelling, and also those who promote this way of thinking, has a fair bit to do with the problems we have. Decades ago, say, our parents' generation, it was rare to be looking at the capital gains aspect of buying a house, unless you were very wealthy you bought a house and the only relevance of its market value was if you wanted to move.

Houses need to go back to being a dwelling.

I agree with this, its a huge social problem. I know you think I am right wing however I am more for helping those in need tbh. We had a lot of social housing and Government work related housing for many years until the government started selling most of the houses.
Rather than print money and give it away for consumption, we should be building affordable housing right across Australia. It's a very serious social problem.

As for the tax review, a lot of it was good but what drives me crazy about the tax reform agenda is the constant argument that we need more consumption taxes. Consumption taxes are regressive. An increase in consumption tax on a purchase is a set amount, so the lower your income the higher the proportion of your income a consumption tax is. Increasing the GST increases a regressive tax.

What we need to do is to get rid of tax breaks for owning capital: this means getting rid of capital gains tax discounts, negative gearing and the like. I would not just get rid of getting franking credits back even if you pay no tax, I would get rid of franking credits. Very few countries have franking credits. Companies a limited liability, in order to have this they are considered legal persons. The company pays their tax, and the person who receives a payout (eg: dividend) is a separate person, so they can pay their tax on the income they receive from the company. I cannot agree with owning capital getting a tax discount over providing labour.

Negative gearing was the answer for housing in the 70's,80's 90's however it has outlived its purpose, and one wonders if the government would have been better served investing more money into social housing, rather than selling its housing stock.

The other travesty of course is the royalties from mining which are much lower in Australia. Companies profit from digging stuff up here, they can pay for the privilege.

DS

Its a huge investment to setup a mine and make it profitable, so incentives still need to exist to make exploration enticing - however in the case of some of the very large scale successful mines I think you are correct we have required too little on the mega volumes taken from Australian soil.

 

[Sintiger]

I think a lot of people don't think of real estate as an asset. It is a large minority who think this way. Yes, rising house prices do mean you can borrow against equity, but we all realise that you still end up having to pay it back.

But the way the media talk, everyone is obsessed with the value of their house, if they have one. When I get asked what our house is worth my usual reply is that it is worth living in. This exposes an issue - the idea that houses are an investment not a dwelling. This attitude, at least for those who do consider a house an investment as opposed to a dwelling, and also those who promote this way of thinking, has a fair bit to do with the problems we have. Decades ago, say, our parents' generation, it was rare to be looking at the capital gains aspect of buying a house, unless you were very wealthy you bought a house and the only relevance of its market value was if you wanted to move.

Houses need to go back to being a dwelling.

As for the tax review, a lot of it was good but what drives me crazy about the tax reform agenda is the constant argument that we need more consumption taxes. Consumption taxes are regressive. An increase in consumption tax on a purchase is a set amount, so the lower your income the higher the proportion of your income a consumption tax is. Increasing the GST increases a regressive tax.

What we need to do is to get rid of tax breaks for owning capital: this means getting rid of capital gains tax discounts, negative gearing and the like. I would not just get rid of getting franking credits back even if you pay no tax, I would get rid of franking credits. Very few countries have franking credits. Companies a limited liability, in order to have this they are considered legal persons. The company pays their tax, and the person who receives a payout (eg: dividend) is a separate person, so they can pay their tax on the income they receive from the company. I cannot agree with owning capital getting a tax discount over providing labour.

The other travesty of course is the royalties from mining which are much lower in Australia. Companies profit from digging stuff up here, they can pay for the privilege.

DS

Don’t agree on ditching franking credits, as they were originally, not with the additional Howard/Costello rort.

Without franking credits income that is already taxed would be fully taxed again, double taxation. Franking credits were brought in as a mechanism to ensure all profits were finally taxed at the higher of the company tax rate or the marginal tax rate of the recipient of any dividends paid out of profits. They are logical and fair imo as they were introduced by Hawke/Keating

 

[Baloo]

I think a lot of people don't think of real estate as an asset. It is a large minority who think this way. Yes, rising house prices do mean you can borrow against equity, but we all realise that you still end up having to pay it back.

Over night millionaires + Ridiculously low interest rates = Unprecedented dept levels

To correct housing will involve and 20 year plan, which won't happen, or a lot of hurt for many Australians, again it wont happen unless we get unprecedented bipartisan support.

 

[tigerman]

I agree with this, its a huge social problem. I know you think I am right wing however I am more for helping those in need tbh. We had a lot of social housing and Government work related housing for many years until the government started selling most of the houses.
Rather than print money and give it away for consumption, we should be building affordable housing right across Australia. It's a very serious social problem.

I don't mind governments selling public housing as it gives people a permanent house of their own, logic would say that those houses need to be replaced.

It doesn't help when Coalition governments don't believe in helping the less fortunate. The Hawke Government built an average of 12,563 social houses in each of it's 8 years in government (100,504).
The average number of public housing dwellings built annually by the Keating Government was 8,514. Through the Howard years, this dropped to 4,346. The Rudd and Gillard period, most of which was impacted by the GFC, averaged 6,402.
In stark contrast to these, the average under the Coalition – during an unprecedented global building boom – is just 3,060.

Homes Alone: despite record rates, Australia lags world as housing crisis grips - Michael West

Thinking of building a new house? Well, you are among millions worldwide doing exactly that right now. But you are probably not an Australian. Alan Austin reports.

michaelwest.com.au

Public housing is central​

Providing moderately-priced public or social housing has been a key government responsibilitysince the reconstruction period following World War I. Some administrations have achieved more than others. Few have failed as badly as the Coalition from 2015 onwards.

Last week the Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released data on housing starts in the private and public sectors, from 1983 to September 2021. Bob Hawke’s Government built an average of 12,563 houses for low-income Australians to rent or buy in each of its eight years. This collapsed to an appalling 4,399 per year through the hapless Howard period when the rich did very nicely while the poor were neglected. The Rudd Government almost doubled that to 8,615. It has been downhill from there.

Abject Coalition failure​

The ABS home starts data and population records enable us to calculate the number of affordable houses built per year by each government. Comparing all prime ministerships over the last 30 years, we find the Coalition has consistently failed in this area, with the Turnbull and Morrison period by far the worst.



"The Coalition Government could easily have alleviated the housing shortage which is the fundamental cause of the price hikes. Estimates of the sums the Coalition allowed wealthy enterprises to rort through the shonky JobKeeper scheme are now around $27 billion. That could have provided 300,000 low-cost homes and greatly boosted employment in the process."

House prices skyrocket and social housing collapses under the Coalition

Under the current Coalition Government, provision of public housing has fallen to a nadir and house prices are soaring, as Alan Austin reports.

independentaustralia.net

 

[Ian4]

So Ralph Babet’s loony “excess deaths” senate inquiry has spectacularly backfired as expected. Not only did the findings predictably go against what he was hoping for, but he is likely to get himself into legal trouble for heavily editing his senate inquiry questions and posting them on twitter.

This crazy cooker is not fit to serve parliament and there needs to be some trigger to expel people like him. He’s turning the senate into a laughing stock and it’s not good for the credibility of Australian politics.

On another note, after beating cancer 3 times in 2 years, the brilliant Fiona Patten is making a comeback and will be standing for the Legalise Cannabis Party in the next federal election. She will help bring back integrity to the Senate. Happy days

 

[Tigaman]

One of the main causes housing backlog is what they are building. Two storeys, three/ four bedroom ,two bathroom ensuites, games room ,double garage which take twice the time of single storey three bedroom one shower one dunny.

 

[tigertime2]

I don't mind governments selling public housing as it gives people a permanent house of their own, logic would say that those houses need to be replaced.

It doesn't help when Coalition governments don't believe in helping the less fortunate. The Hawke Government built an average of 12,563 social houses in each of it's 8 years in government (100,504).
The average number of public housing dwellings built annually by the Keating Government was 8,514. Through the Howard years, this dropped to 4,346. The Rudd and Gillard period, most of which was impacted by the GFC, averaged 6,402.
In stark contrast to these, the average under the Coalition – during an unprecedented global building boom – is just 3,060.

Homes Alone: despite record rates, Australia lags world as housing crisis grips - Michael West

Thinking of building a new house? Well, you are among millions worldwide doing exactly that right now. But you are probably not an Australian. Alan Austin reports.

michaelwest.com.au

Public housing is central​

Providing moderately-priced public or social housing has been a key government responsibilitysince the reconstruction period following World War I. Some administrations have achieved more than others. Few have failed as badly as the Coalition from 2015 onwards.

Last week the Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released data on housing starts in the private and public sectors, from 1983 to September 2021. Bob Hawke’s Government built an average of 12,563 houses for low-income Australians to rent or buy in each of its eight years. This collapsed to an appalling 4,399 per year through the hapless Howard period when the rich did very nicely while the poor were neglected. The Rudd Government almost doubled that to 8,615. It has been downhill from there.

Abject Coalition failure​

The ABS home starts data and population records enable us to calculate the number of affordable houses built per year by each government. Comparing all prime ministerships over the last 30 years, we find the Coalition has consistently failed in this area, with the Turnbull and Morrison period by far the worst.

View attachment 24196

"The Coalition Government could easily have alleviated the housing shortage which is the fundamental cause of the price hikes. Estimates of the sums the Coalition allowed wealthy enterprises to rort through the shonky JobKeeper scheme are now around $27 billion. That could have provided 300,000 low-cost homes and greatly boosted employment in the process."

House prices skyrocket and social housing collapses under the Coalition

Under the current Coalition Government, provision of public housing has fallen to a nadir and house prices are soaring, as Alan Austin reports.

independentaustralia.net

This just shows that ALL governments have not addressed the issue. These numbers are a pathetic response by ALL parties to address this basic need.

 

[tigerman]

This just shows that ALL governments have not addressed the issue. These numbers are a pathetic response by ALL parties to address this basic need.

The Hawke govt built over 100,000 social houses, the Howard govt just over 40,000. The Keating Govt built more social houses in 4 yours than Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison govt's combined !!!!
If the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison coalition govt's built as many houses a year that the Hawke govt' did there would be another 100,000 odd social houses.
And then the Morrison wasted 27 billion dollars giving shonky big businesses JobKeeper payments.

 

[AngryAnt]

This just shows that ALL governments have not addressed the issue. These numbers are a pathetic response by ALL parties to address this basic need.

We see that your struggle with understanding numbers is real.

 

[Brodders17]

So Ralph Babet’s loony “excess deaths” senate inquiry has spectacularly backfired as expected. Not only did the findings predictably go against what he was hoping for, but he is likely to get himself into legal trouble for heavily editing his senate inquiry questions and posting them on twitter.

This crazy cooker is not fit to serve parliament and there needs to be some trigger to expel people like him. He’s turning the senate into a laughing stock and it’s not good for the credibility of Australian politics.

On another note, after beating cancer 3 times in 2 years, the brilliant Fiona Patten is making a comeback and will be standing for the Legalise Cannabis Party in the next federal election. She will help bring back integrity to the Senate. Happy days

People voted for Babet knowing what he is. It would be undemocratic to not let those people have their representation.

 

[frickenel]

I think a lot of people don't think of real estate as an asset. It is a large minority who think this way. Yes, rising house prices do mean you can borrow against equity, but we all realise that you still end up having to pay it back.

But the way the media talk, everyone is obsessed with the value of their house, if they have one. When I get asked what our house is worth my usual reply is that it is worth living in. This exposes an issue - the idea that houses are an investment not a dwelling. This attitude, at least for those who do consider a house an investment as opposed to a dwelling, and also those who promote this way of thinking, has a fair bit to do with the problems we have. Decades ago, say, our parents' generation, it was rare to be looking at the capital gains aspect of buying a house, unless you were very wealthy you bought a house and the only relevance of its market value was if you wanted to move.

Houses need to go back to being a dwelling.

As for the tax review, a lot of it was good but what drives me crazy about the tax reform agenda is the constant argument that we need more consumption taxes. Consumption taxes are regressive. An increase in consumption tax on a purchase is a set amount, so the lower your income the higher the proportion of your income a consumption tax is. Increasing the GST increases a regressive tax.

What we need to do is to get rid of tax breaks for owning capital: this means getting rid of capital gains tax discounts, negative gearing and the like. I would not just get rid of getting franking credits back even if you pay no tax, I would get rid of franking credits. Very few countries have franking credits. Companies a limited liability, in order to have this they are considered legal persons. The company pays their tax, and the person who receives a payout (eg: dividend) is a separate person, so they can pay their tax on the income they receive from the company. I cannot agree with owning capital getting a tax discount over providing labour.

The other travesty of course is the royalties from mining which are much lower in Australia. Companies profit from digging stuff up here, they can pay for the privilege.

DS

Some very interesting opinions there DSSS.

Agree in relation to real estate, If you're living in it, and have to maintain it while labour and material costs go through the roof, it's very hard to view it as an asset.

A few weeks back, just after the markets got the wobbles, things picked up when the job fugures were released in the USA. I posted on here that i couldn't possibly see those figures as being accurate. Lo and behold, 4 or 5 days later, we find that the Biden / Harris figues had 890,000 jobs that didn't even exist. This happens a lot with any administration, but not to THAT degree.

Lots of people jumped in to buy the dip, and now we had a nice little sell off last night, which i predicted would start happening last week, my bad!!

The data ive been watching is :
Capacity Utilisation Index relative to
1) Manufacturers New Orders for Durable Goods
2) Advance Retail Sales
3) Retailers Inventories


All of this data is showing massive job losses about to start rolling through. Many pundits are suggesting that this is due to election uncertainty, but it is clearly not, from what i'm looking at in the data. Many are also holidng out for interest rate cuts to save the day. Rate cuts WILL NOT, and hasn't in the past.

Equities had a sell off over night and bond markets rallied so the penny is dropping with the latest figures that there isn't going to be a soft landing. TBH the markets should have crashed 2 years ago, and as hard a pill as it will be for many to swallow, its medicine we need desperately. The Inflation Reduction Act, which really was just further economic stimulation when inflation is already out of control kicked the can down the road. It's a lesson Chalmers should be learning right now instead of blaming everyone else for his stupidity. Before all the lefties jump on me, Chalmers and Albanese are IDIOTS, but yes, so was Scott Morrison, but not to this extent, but an idiot none the less.

I'm at polar opposites to you on Capital Gains, Franking credits and consumption tax simply because you're never going to tax an economy into prosperity. We'd be better off flattening the tax system which would encourage those who have their back to the economic wheel to push harder. Franking credits, as i think Sintiger pointed out is ensuring income isn't taxed twice. I wouldn't call a company a seperate person, or you might have Albanese and Chalmers up for man slaughter. I'm guessing yopu meant separate legal entity. You have to remember that any company that's making money is doing so because someone put their own money down and took a risk. If their risk is paying off, then they are emplying others who are also therefore gaining wealth. If government keeps making the risk / reward equation look less positive, less people will take a risk, less companies will exist, and less people will have jobs.

I was talking to a client on the weekend whose in the manufacturing sector (not many of them left now). He's doing it hard, and his main manufacturing material is steel. He currently uses Bluescope but he's been looking at Chinese steel and can't believe how low the prices are getting over there.

I made a call to a gentleman who sells scrap to India and China and he told me they have a massive glut of steel over nChina and don't know what to do with it all, which i guess is a massive indicator as to their current economic prosperity.

It's all great for anyone day trading the US markets. Nothing like taking a short position on a stock thats falling off a cliff.