Talking Politics

[Sintiger]

For a start there was the introduction, but only for a limited period, of the low and middle income tax offset. Seems it is ok to make tax breaks only temporary when it is for wage earners.

Lot's of changes around working from home expenses over the last few years.

There are changes in industrial relations laws which happen quite often, possibly the biggest change was under Howard when we lost the right to take industrial action except under limited circumstances. These things get altered often.

Given all of this I don't know how anyone works in the workforce given the uncertainty, or maybe it is just that employees are bit more resilient to change than investors!

If you invest, as we all do via our super, then you invest in an environment where the government of the day can change the rules. This is reality and part of the risk of investing. I don't have a problem with changes being phased in. I do have a problem when investors cry foul if any changes adversely affect them, they need to suck it up, especially when the changes are to get rid of what are clearly bad policies such as negative gearing and somehow getting taxed less if your income is derived from appreciating assets (ie: economic rent).

DS

The low and middle income tax offset was a positive for wage earners, not sure why anyone would be worried about that. So are WFH claims a positive but it’s very minor in the end. The context was introducing a major change in taxation around investments.

Industrial action regulations are a completely different subject to taxation laws around income and investment.

Things change around investment and I wasn’t suggesting no change, I was suggesting that if changes so significant to the economics of an investment were introduced like massive increases in land taxes, abolition of CGT discount and changes to negative gearing that they would need to be done very gradually so that the market had time to adapt to that change gradually.

The interesting thing about the CGT discount is that it was introduced to replace the indexation of the purchase price by inflation based on the argument that if an asset only increased by inflation then there had been no gain. That argument is certainly part of any discussion on CGT.

 

[eZyT]

We all get why they are protesting, hell most of us agree with them, but I think this is the issue that people mistake, is the role that the police need to take here. They need to take an impartial position with the sole focus to protect people and property.

No doubt protestors think they are non violent when they try to break past lines and get into the convention centre, but thats exactly what the police are there to protect and then when they do what they are supposed to do, they are claled heavy handed and people say "but we did nothing wrong". The whole emphasis of the protests out of the mouths of their leaders was to "disrupt" the convention. Thats not a peaceful process, thats trying to force your way in and push the limits of what you can get away with.

Who knows what the police think, I'd hazard a guess with protests like this, a lot of them probably think along similar lines to the protestors, but thats where having the job of being a cop means you have to essentially push your opinions to the side, and do the job that you are employed to do.

Many of those pictured at the protests were wearing some form of eye protection, if they weren't expecting to get violent and push the cops (again independent news sources have stated that the crowd were goading the cops for at least an hour) into action when they would need to fire out capsicum scrap, then why would they have needed eye protection?

yeah I get all that and largely agree.

im against The State turning guns and grenades on unarmed protesters

 

[TigerMasochist]

But that's not old school, it's reactionary, which is different.

If protestors through the ages just stood around, not much would have changed.

People do realise the protests were against arms dealers and the arms trade right?

Haaaaarrrrgh.

 

[Sintiger]

There's always a lot of talk about how "it was different in the old days".

They tend not to be true.

On July 4 1968 4,000 protesters at the US Consulate were involved in major confrontations with police and the police horses were ridden in to the demonstration.

There was draft resistance, which of course was illegal and accompanied with the usual claims about how the draft resisters were threatening the security of Australia. Some draft resisters were gaoled for 2 years.

There were sit-ins at recruiting offices and national service offices.

They stopped traffic which seems to be an issue with some.

Of course, they were constantly accused of being communists, whether they were or not.

The heirs to the moratoriums are the protesters on the streets of Melbourne, not those who seem to be upset about the protests but relaxed about weapons being marketed in Jeff's Shed. I know which side I'm on.

DS

Yes now that you mention that it comes back. I was pretty young then but I remember there being levels of violence around the anti war movement especially related to arrest of conscientious objectors for not registering for the draft. There was some violence on university campuses.

I guess my memory was going back to the actual moratorium marches which were led by Jim Cairns and others. I went to one, taken by my elder brother. I was young but I was safe and I remember it being incredible. Huge of course, thousands of people.

I get why people are protesting at that event. My question is whether it is productive or counter productive protest?

 

[eZyT]

I get why people are protesting at that event. My question is whether it is productive or counter productive protest?

I did my share of protesting back in the days.

its a lot like a game of footy.

to win, you need a diverse skill set, a tight well rehearsed game plan, everyone playing their predetermined role with steadfast discipline, off field stability

and the crowd on your side really helps too.

of course there are exceptions of organic, spontaneous, chaotic uprisings being effective.

Unfortunately, the arms dealer protesters were a bit like Norf from what I saw in the media?

 

[Sintiger]

I did my share of protesting back in the days.

its a lot like a game of footy.

to win, you need a diverse skill set, a tight well rehearsed game plan, everyone playing their predetermined role with steadfast discipline, off field stability

and the crowd on your side really helps too.

of course there are exceptions of organic, spontaneous, chaotic uprisings being effective.

Unfortunately, the arms dealer protesters were a bit like Norf from what I saw in the media?

yes great analogy

I said that I had been at a moratorium march but I was a kid, a spectator really. My first real protest was against John Kerr after the dismissal of the Whitlam government. I was still pretty young, couldn't even vote, but I remember being disgusted and angry about the dismissal. However I also remember coming away disillusioned because all they were doing was throwing eggs at him and shouting abuse and my overwhelming feeling was that doing that was not going to change anything.

To be honest I have never lost that feeling. I don't see the logic in fighting injustice and violence with anger and violence. Maybe it is the inner Mahatma Gandhi in me . I understand why people are angry and want to strike back on many issues, including arms dealers, but to me there is a difference between understanding motivation for actions and supporting the actions. (something that others who posted on another thread since closed failed to understand)

 

[eZyT]

yes great analogy

I said that I had been at a moratorium march but I was a kid, a spectator really. My first real protest was against John Kerr after the dismissal of the Whitlam government. I was still pretty young, couldn't even vote, but I remember being disgusted and angry about the dismissal. However I also remember coming away disillusioned because all they were doing was throwing eggs at him and shouting abuse and my overwhelming feeling was that doing that was not going to change anything.

To be honest I have never lost that feeling. I don't see the logic in fighting injustice and violence with anger and violence. Maybe it is the inner Mahatma Gandhi in me . I understand why people are angry and want to strike back on many issues, including arms dealers, but to me there is a difference between understanding motivation for actions and supporting the actions. (something that others who posted on another thread since closed failed to understand)

yeah agree.

as difficult and counter intuitive as it can sometimes feel,

well organised non-violent protest by far works best in democracies.

and yes, the looney goose or two going off script at a protest is infuriating and can sabotage the whole operation; much in the same way as workers crossing a picket line.

different proposition in dictatorships I imagine?

its not rocket science; protest, footy, war, politics, family ...... steadfast solidarity wins

 

[Ian4]

Probably depends what the protest is about. And how immediate it is to the protest.

would be interested to know if people think cookers doing the Nazi salute, pIssing on the shrine and walking the streets with a set of gallows is worthy of rubber bullets...

 

[Ralphie]

Not sure where the stories of throwing acid come from (Daily Mail? Murdoch Media?) but I haven't seen reports of that.

I think the main irony is rubber bullets against protesters who are against arms, sort of makes the point really.

And as for a few people being jostled etc, hey, they're selling tanks, missiles etc - lots of things with one design criteria: how many people they can kill. They can go jump.

DS

Reports this morning on the news that some of the horses have come up with skin irritations as well

Live updates: Low-level acid thrown at police officers, horses punched

www.9news.com.au

 

[Tigaman]

yes great analogy

I said that I had been at a moratorium march but I was a kid, a spectator really. My first real protest was against John Kerr after the dismissal of the Whitlam government. I was still pretty young, couldn't even vote, but I remember being disgusted and angry about the dismissal. However I also remember coming away disillusioned because all they were doing was throwing eggs at him and shouting abuse and my overwhelming feeling was that doing that was not going to change anything.

To be honest I have never lost that feeling. I don't see the logic in fighting injustice and violence with anger and violence. Maybe it is the inner Mahatma Gandhi in me . I understand why people are angry and want to strike back on many issues, including arms dealers, but to me there is a difference between understanding motivation for actions and supporting the actions. (something that others who posted on another thread since closed failed to understand)

Great Australian John Kerr not deterred by the Power of Government.

 

[MD Jazz]

In general, I support the protests. I'm sure I would have attended if I was free to attend.

But of course, I hate the way they conducted themselves... if it’s true they threw acid and horse poo, that's unacceptable. Its's also unacceptable they disrupted peak hour traffic for people coming from the west. I'm OK with people disrupting CBD traffic as there are always other means to get around. But stuffing people coming from the burbs is crap behaviour.

Probably the most frustrating thing about this is that we will never know the truth of what happened because its impossible to know what the real truth is nowadays. The protesters goaded the police. The police goaded protesters. Acid. horse poo. rubber bullets. Who knows where the truth lies.

I will give you a cast iron guarantee, police do not goad protestors. Have a sister in the force, you have no idea the *smile* they have to tolerate. It's why many protestors behave the way they do. They know the limits they can go to and the restraint police have to show.

Love it how you say unfair to disrupt traffic from the west - why just the west? Eastern suburbs fair game?

All for protesting. And it's a great event to be protesting at, the war machine throughout the world (supported by politicians on both sides) is responsible for so much misery.

But spend some time in a cops shoes and you may have a different perspective about tolerance.

 

[MD Jazz]

Excellent article by Greg Jericho about house prices and household disposable income:

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...errace-house-22m-listing-average-house-prices

Here's a flavour of the article:



Some good graphs in the article but the above gives the gist of it.

DS

Great article DS. You read so much garbage from pollies about how its regular taxpayers that will suffer if there are changes to negative gearing/CGT.

People need to wake up to who really benefits most and demand change.

 

[MD Jazz]

yeah I get all that and largely agree.

im against The State turning guns and grenades on unarmed protesters

Agree - using guns/grenbades etc is crazy. Should never happen here.

The only rider is how do they deal with protestors armed with potentially dangerous substances like acid - should the police be able to throw them back or?

Lets hope the end result is no more farking war/weapon expos, leave that to the yanks.

 

[eZyT]

Agree - using guns/grenbades etc is crazy. Should never happen here.

The only rider is how do they deal with protestors armed with potentially dangerous substances like acid - should the police be able to throw them back or?

Lets hope the end result is no more farking war/weapon expos, leave that to the yanks.

if it was 100% sulphuric that was gonna melt their face off, id be fine with them shooting the attacker in the throat with a cannon.

but the boss cop confirmed it was lemon juice,

which my wife tells me is very good for your skin

it was a disproportionate response, and most certainly related to the fact that some of the nastiest and most powerful proponents of capitalism on the planet were in the building

 

[Brodders17]

would be interested to know if people think cookers doing the Nazi salute, pIssing on the shrine and walking the streets with a set of gallows is worthy of rubber bullets...

Probably not rubber.

 

[tigersnake]

would be interested to know if people think cookers doing the Nazi salute, pIssing on the shrine and walking the streets with a set of gallows is worthy of rubber bullets...

great point. The riot squads and swat teams globally tend to have a hair trigger reaction when it comes to left wing protests and not so much on the right wingers.

 

[Sintiger]

Great article DS. You read so much garbage from pollies about how its regular taxpayers that will suffer if there are changes to negative gearing/CGT.

People need to wake up to who really benefits most and demand change.

It is a very good article.

i remember back to when the campaign against negative gearing was going on around the 2019 election there were stats produced by the then LNP government that a fair proportion of those accessing negative gearing had incomes that weren't that high. Of course in itself that number was distorted because it was taxable income they were quoting which was reduced because of negative gearing itself.

However, I wrote to my local member who happened to be the Treasurer at that time, Josh Frydenberg. I suggested that if that was the concern then they could put a cap on interest deductions. For instance no single tax payer could claim interest on an investment property of more than (say) the interest on a $500,000 loan and any further interest would be non deductible. That would mean the "mum and dad" investor would still access negative gearing but the owner of the $22 million investment property would have extremely limited access. The numbers could change (it could be $700,000 not $500,000) but the ATO should have access to that information, but with an aim to have the rich opportunistic investors cut out. I didn't get a reply.

At the time there were suggestions that it be one property only but to me that doesn't really solve the problem. Someone might have a negatively geared property worth $500k and someone else has one worth $22 million and they be treated the same.

As far as the CGT discount is concerned I fully agree it is excessive however we need to remember it didn't replace nothing, there used to be indexation on cost allowable before calculating CGT. If I buy a property for $1 million and sell it 5 years later for $1.2 million have I really made a $200k gain or should the gain be reduced by the inflation rate ( real CPI not property inflation) over that 5 year period? It is worth debating because that argument has some logic to it. There is also the question of the taxation rate used. If I had a marginal tax rate lower in the first 4 years of the gain why am I being taxed at this year's marginal tax rate which may be higher because all the gain is in this year?

 

[DavidSSS]

None of the above explains why capital gains get a tax concession when tax on wages don't.

We all know that wealth inequality is greater than income inequality and we all know, and that article pointed out, that the vast majority of income from capital gains goes to the very wealthy.

As for the notion that you get to offset inflation, again, why not allow wage earners to do the same?

While we're at it, if we are going to tax capital gains across the years of the gains at the marginal tax rates for the person in question (doubt those making the most from capital gains would agree as it would make it harder for them to manage their tax affairs, but that is a digression) then they might as well pay as they go, pay as the income is accumulated . . . like wage earners.

All I ask is for capital gains to be taxed the same as wages - no concessions.

DS

 

[Tigaman]

Yes now that you mention that it comes back. I was pretty young then but I remember there being levels of violence around the anti war movement especially related to arrest of conscientious objectors for not registering for the draft. There was some violence on university campuses.

I guess my memory was going back to the actual moratorium marches which were led by Jim Cairns and others. I went to one, taken by my elder brother. I was young but I was safe and I remember it being incredible. Huge of course, thousands of people.

I get why people are protesting at that event. My question is whether it is productive or counter productive protest?

All the wannabees got on the left wing loonies from Uni & after the demos they targeted the Australian servicemen& their families. They call themselves heroes.

 

[TigerMasochist]

None of the above explains why capital gains get a tax concession when tax on wages don't.

We all know that wealth inequality is greater than income inequality and we all know, and that article pointed out, that the vast majority of income from capital gains goes to the very wealthy.

As for the notion that you get to offset inflation, again, why not allow wage earners to do the same?

While we're at it, if we are going to tax capital gains across the years of the gains at the marginal tax rates for the person in question (doubt those making the most from capital gains would agree as it would make it harder for them to manage their tax affairs, but that is a digression) then they might as well pay as they go, pay as the income is accumulated . . . like wage earners.

All I ask is for capital gains to be taxed the same as wages - no concessions.

DS

But there is a tax concession on wages. Highly inaccurate generalisation but.
First $20 grand wages no tax.
$20 grand to $40 grand at 17% tax
$40 grand to $60 grand at 30% tax
$60 grand to whatever amount at 38% tax.
Or some such foolish numbers, but the concession is there.