Your sources are less than credible to say the least... one of them being a news article from the ABC? lol...surely you can do better than that.

My father used to work in the Australian Bureaus of Stats for many years and my brother works in banking and they both conclude Australia is one of the highest taxing in the world. I know a friend who moved to Hong Kong for work and he says their tax rate is like 15 percent or something like that and he can save more personally.


Ask yourself the question...how many countries outside of Europe around the world have a welfare system not to mention a public health system.?


Fuck all...so your links to articles mean fuck all...


Why do you think Aslyum seekers (or even economic refugees) want to go to Australia, UK and the Scandanavian countries? Its because there is a safety net to provide them with the basic essentials to survive.

Ask yourself the question...what subsides and pays for the public health system and welfare?

Taxes...

Im not against welfare and I disagree with Rusty on the medicare thing, but don't tell me Australia is a low taxing country because thats bullshit.


Edited by SocaWho: 17/5/2014 11:06:13 AM

If my links are bullshit that's fine but you should refute them with your own facts otherwise your opinion isn't worth a pinch of shit. (Newsflash: Australian government website, now under the auspices of the Liberal Party, is a crock. Read all about it.)

It seems because the FACTS don't agree with your preposition you are unhappy.

Yes Hong Kong rates of tax are low. Singapore, where I lived for 3 years, are even lower. (I think I paid about 6% of my gross income when I was there.) These countries are the exceptions not the rule. You may as well tell me Monaco is a great place to live and it's better than Australia because it's tax free.

The FACTS are Australia is a low taxing country.

The fact that you are yelling, shouting and screaming like an infantile child without providing any links to support your position just reinforces your "non" credibility.

SocaWho "Taxes are high in Australia because ummmm.... I know a bloke and someone told me so".

Cheers for the in depth analysis.

Ok you want me to use stats.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates

Australia individual tax rate 45% + 1.5% medicare levy. Compare it to most other countries...Australia ranks pretty high.

You're definition of LOW TAXES is clearly subjective....

So your argument falls flat.

Edited by SocaWho: 17/5/2014 11:49:33 AM

Criticizes someones sources for not being credible then uses wikipedia. :-& :-& :lol: :lol:

Socawho sadly like majority of people believe what the media and what the government has told them . The government has basically talked down the economy so they can make stupid decisions and make people happy that they are apparently try fixing up "labour's mess "

Criticizes someones sources for not being credible then uses wikipedia. :-& :-& :lol: :lol:

fucks sake. i promised paulbagz id post in this thread but i dont ufcking want to. ive had a lotta goon and i dont want to; sober i'd want to even less. fuck you. i promised him i would tho. the c*** (used some astrixes cuz i cunt rmemeber what the swearing pollicy is on this faggot forum).

anyway. im gonna lay down some econ 101. i havent read any of the posts on this pathetic thread, except what paul copypasted to me which was the post by---hang on, checking.... jesus that just coisst me 20 s of my life ill never get back--"rusty" (original name fuckhead) about the debt. so yeh listen up nerds cause im gonna teach u how it works IRL. i also want to mention befoe i start, socer is the gayest sport known to mankind, even gayer michael jackson. if you follow soccer you have an overt or covert desire to suck a man;s cock. without further adieu, to the lecture:



jk thats not the lecture it's a pic of a male model. anyway 2 da lecture:



ECON 101

consider the following basic accounting identity. this isn't theory; it's what you call a truism in mathematics--it's true because of how we define the terms.

public sector financial balance + private sector financial balance + foreign sector financial balance = 0

ignore the foreign sector for the moment as it's just clutter and doenst affect the analysis. the above equation means, in simple terms even a downy like rusty could understand: the financial bal of the public sector + the financial bal of the pvt sector = 0. Imagine me and rustvirgen on a desert island. say im the pvt sector and hes the public sector. In our little mini economy, us 2 produce the goods andservices; everything from coconuts, palm tree houses and blowjobs (an exclusive service rusty produces, and specialises in). If I want to borrow, that is run a deficit (spend more than i produce) then rusty has to run a surplus (save more than he produces). There is literally no other way. Likewise, if I want to save (aka run a surplus, and consume less than i produce) then rusty has to run a deficit of the same amount. I can only borrow his savings, and i can only save what he borrows. all borrowings come from savings, and all savings must be borrowed. this is classical econ 101

u with me soccer nerds? (shit sport btw). IRL, the private sector likes to run a surplus aka save, 99% of the time. that';s because ppl like to acquire financial assets and save for their retirement. the private sector in a market economy drive the bus; it is the vast majority of economic activity and so it should be. if you disagree with this ur a commie. so the pvt sector likes to run a surplus; the only way it can do that is if the public sector runs a deficit. this is why, if you look at an historical graph of govt balance (i.e surplus or deficit) as a % of gdp for any developed rich economy, you will see trhe same thing: nonstop govt deficits with the occasional surplus, which is rarer than th eemergence of a legendary super saiyan. wanna see for yourself? head over to tradingeconomics.com and check the government budget stat for any rich economy you choose, and set the date back to as far as it goes. Here's a link for the richest, most high tech and incredible economy known to man:

USA USA USA

check it for any developed eocnomy u liek: germany, uk, australia, canada, france, norway, etc. u see the trend retards? the natural state of the universe is govt deficits. it all comes back to that equation i gave you earlier, which, again, isnt "thoery" but is an truism.

so u can see from the education i just gave you, that the private sector is god. it is king. it decides the economy;s saving and borrowing decisions. it follows from this that is a government tries to jam the govt budget (i.e the public sector financial balance) into surplus, then this forces the private sector into deficit (aka borrowing aka debt). in reality, governments dont decide (besides temporarily) whteher the govt runs a surplus or deficit. the private sector decides. if the pvt sector wants to run a surplus, the govt sector must run a deficit. there is literally no other way. so if the pvt sector wants to save and run a surplus, and the govt decides to run a surplus, this means the govt has decided "hey guys, we r the govt, we are king, we dont trust private individuals to make their own spending and saving decisions correctly, so we will make it for you". it is the most anti free market attitude u could possibly have.

in summary, governments who want to "balance the budget" or run surpluses is literally communism. there is no greater intervention in the lives of individuals than a government deciding en masse their ultimate financial decisions. which is exactly what tryingto get "muh surplus" equates too--a distrust of the private sector and a hatred for australia.

if you support budget surpluses, you are commie control freak anti-market scum.

p.s "money" is just digital 1s and 0s created and destroyed by the central bank at a keystroke in infinite amounts, not gold. fucktards

p.p.s soccer is a shit sport

Better than the ABC.

Why as a taxpayer do I pay the ABC to represent a point of view to which I sometimes don't agree with.

Edited by SocaWho: 17/5/2014 03:24:53 PM

well this thread got weird

Freedom of speech?

Because you can always flick over to Channel 9 to find things that match your views?

-PB

Jesus what a load of garbage.:lol: You just can't dumb the economy down to an island with two people on it. Your example is flawed because in reality governments and private markets don't borrow directly from each other, everything is channeled through private debt markets, including overseas ones. So it's entirely possible for a government to be in deficit at the same time as the domestic private market, if the owners of your debt are overseas banks and governments. This what happened in places like Greece whose net debt exceeds their ENTIRE GDP, which includes all government and private spending. If your "truism" were indeed true we should expect to see Greeces private sector burgeoning, rather is it a bit retarded at the moment, a lot like your rationale.

Cancel all public education funding, I'll never use a public school or high school ever again.

My dollars don't go towards channel 9 , 10 nor channel 7 though.

Even if the ABC did happen to sprout political stuff that would match my own ideals, I still don't agree thats what it should be used for. It should be a public utility that benefits everyone and that shouldn't include being a voice piece for a political persuasion regardless of whether it is left or right. As a matter of fact it should stick to showing documentaries and kids channels. Q+A for example is a show which highlights a distortion of the highest order....its always loaded with left wing commentators and an audience. Im dead centre in terms of my views, and its a disgrace how its used to suit a cross section of people when the taxpayer funds it....maybe my dollars should go towards joining a union instead...but ill probably find that some of that money is used to go to brothels.

On q and a you hardly ever hear any hard questions thrown at labor or green minsters. No questions asking them to morally justify the 1,100+ asylum seekers who died en route to Australia. No one asking labor what their economic strategy is to address the spending deficit. It's basically just an hour of the public broadcaster and their handpicked "diverse" audience doing their best to bash liberal party policies. The main problem with q and a is you're giving panelists just a few seconds to answers highly complex questions and scenarios. It's lot easier to use those few seconds to call the government mean and nasty get a rousing applause than talk about boring complex stuff like the economy and structural problems in the deficit.

On q and a you hardly ever hear any hard questions thrown at labor or green minsters. No questions asking them to morally justify the 1,100+ asylum seekers who died en route to Australia. No one asking labor what their economic strategy is to address the spending deficit. It's basically just an hour of the public broadcaster and their handpicked "diverse" audience doing their best to bash liberal party policies. The main problem with q and a is you're giving panelists just a few seconds to answers highly complex questions and scenarios. It's lot easier to use those few seconds to call the government mean and nasty get a rousing applause than talk about boring complex stuff like the economy and structural problems in the deficit.

Possibly has a lot to do with Gen Y being so vocal and mainly so left leaning as it is, they're usually the ones that fill the crowd.

Older demographics don't have the time to go and sit in on shit like Q&A.

-PB

Also, its full of uni students with a massive HECS debt that are doing their 5th degree and have been unemployed for years but have time to sit around the uni quadrangle bludging all day.

Also, its full of uni students with a massive HECS debt that are doing their 5th degree and have been unemployed for years but have time to sit around the uni quadrangle bludging all day.

Didn't the Young Liberals come out in force on Q&A a few weeks ago? Shouldn't they all have been managing the atom smashing factories?