notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:thupercoach wrote:
Secondly, so Abbott winked when she said she worked on a sex line. Rudd was dragged out of a strip joint. Not a creep I guess?
They're both twats. One a former and one a current. Can't Turnbull make a run at the leadership. Fucking Abbott. Why would anyone want to touch Turnbull with a 100ft pole after his NBN fucktardery?
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:I didn't think "mong" was a good word to use but didn't make a big deal of it. Still, I agree we can do better than "mong". Like what? Ranga? Bogan Bitch? Ronald McDonald? Ju-LIAR?
|
|
|
thupercoach
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:thupercoach wrote:I didn't think "mong" was a good word to use but didn't make a big deal of it. Still, I agree we can do better than "mong". Like what? Ranga? Bogan Bitch? Ronald McDonald? Ju-LIAR? Wow. You're silly.
|
|
|
thupercoach
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:thupercoach wrote:
Secondly, so Abbott winked when she said she worked on a sex line. Rudd was dragged out of a strip joint. Not a creep I guess?
They're both twats. One a former and one a current. Can't Turnbull make a run at the leadership. Fucking Abbott. Why would anyone want to touch Turnbull with a 100ft pole after his NBN fucktardery? Why would anyone want to touch Turnbull with a 100ft pole period? I've little respect for the man, no substance. He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia.
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia. Nothing ballsy about targeting the portion of the electorate that don't usually vote LNP while doing things like scrapping the mining tax and the transition to an ETS that pander to those that do.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia. I know you haven't explicitly said it yet, but are you suggesting that Abbott's budget is "right", as in "correct", for Australia?
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
Abbott can't be a misogynist, he clearly believes in jobs for the girls too. https://newmatilda.com/2014/05/23/whitehouse-staff-register-reveals-no-role-frances-abbottQuote:Whitehouse Staff Register Reveals No Role For Frances Abbott
First it was a secret scholarship. Now it appears to be a job with no role. Chris Graham brings you the latest on 'Whitehousegate'
Growing community anger over the awarding of a secret scholarship worth $60,000 to Frances Abbott is unlikely to abate amid fresh revelations that the daughter of the Prime Minister appears to have been employed by the college in a job with no defined role.
Media have widely reported that Tony Abbott’s middle daughter was also rewarded with a job at the Whitehouse Institute of Design. The Prime Minister and Whitehouse have maintained that Frances’ seemingly favourable treatment by the college has been based on merit.
But documents obtained by New Matilda suggest that the circumstances leading up to Ms Abbott’s employment bear a striking resemblance to those around the awarding of her secret scholarship.
An internal staff register from Whitehouse Institute details 74 employees at the college, spread across two campuses – Sydney and Melbourne.
Every single member of staff has a role allocated to them in the register, with one exception — Frances Abbott.
Under the heading ‘Role’ her entry is blank – it simply lists her name, and a private email address.
A spokesperson for the Prime Minister told New Matilda: "Questions regarding Frances’ employment should be directed to Whitehouse. I have no further comment."
Whitehouse Institute has been contacted repeatedly for comment, but has yet to respond to questions.
Classmates and Whitehouse staff have told New Matilda that Ms Abbott was a good student, and well liked by her colleagues.
The revelations come after New Matilda revealed on Wednesday that Frances paid just $7,546 for the $68,182 Bachelor of Design degree at Whitehouse Institute.
Internal documents from the school contradicted claims by the Prime Minister that he failed to declare the $60,636 benefit to his daughter because the scholarship was awarded on the basis of merit.
It emerged on Wednesday that rather than competing for a scholarship, Ms Abbott was pursued.
Chairman of the Whitehouse Institute, Les Taylor — a long-time friend of the Abbott family — urged her to attend the college after Whitehouse became aware she was thinking of enrolling with a competitor.
It also emerged that the General Manager’s Scholarship awarded to Ms Abbott has never been publicly advertised by the Whitehouse Institute, its existence was kept secret from senior staff, and it was awarded to Ms Abbott after just one meeting with the school’s owner, Leanne Whitehouse, in apparent contravention of Whitehouse’s publicly stated scholarship selection criteria.
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
mcjules wrote:thupercoach wrote:He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia. Nothing ballsy about targeting the portion of the electorate that don't usually vote LNP Didn't his approval rating just plummet to like below 40%? Practically everyone was stiffed by this budget, including myself as the pension age was raised to 70, and wont look forward to as much middle class welfare when I have a family, but then again I'm not going to pin my family needs and retirement hopes on government providing for me.
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
Interesting. My two former federal and state MP's, to boot. http://www.theage.com.au/national/libs-take-money-of-mafia-man-20140522-38rrq.htmlQuote:Libs take money of Mafia man
The suspected Mafia godfather of Melbourne helped bankroll a Liberal Party marginal federal seat campaign in the 2013 election, raising the prospect that the proceeds of crime have flowed into Liberal coffers.
The alleged crime figure's fundraising occurred despite Liberal politicians knowing of his suspected involvement in organised crime and in a previous political donation scandal investigated by federal police.
A Fairfax Media investigation can reveal the alleged Mafia boss helped host the "Bruce Campaign Fundraising Dinner", which a Liberal Party memo later described as a "very successful" event, at his Docklands reception centre on March 1 last year.
Federal Liberal MP Russell Broadbent, who has known about the donor's alleged crime ties for several years having been implicated in the 2009 donations scandal, was at the Docklands event with the suspected Mafia boss. The guest speaker at the event was Victorian Planning Minister Matthew Guy.
Also at the fund-raiser was Liberal candidate for Bruce Emanuele Cicchiello, long-time Liberal operative and former Bass Coast mayor Neville Goodwin and state Liberal MP for Hastings Neale Burgess.
The alleged Mafia boss has been previously described by police in court as a person allegedly involved in "murder, gunshot wounding and arson". He has been named as a suspected hitman in two coronial inquests in the 1990s and identified in a recent police intelligence briefing as the leader of a ''well established'' Calabrian Mafia cell in Melbourne that remains a powerful presence at Victoria's wholesale fruit and vegetable market.
The Liberal donor has close associations with Melbourne's senior Italian organised crime identities, including an alleged drug trafficker who co-owns the Docklands function complex where the Liberal event was held, Waterfront Venues Melbourne.
This alleged drug trafficker was given a visa in 2005 after the suspected Mafia boss lobbied and donated to the Liberal Party as part of a campaign to have the Howard government overturn its decision to deport the man on character grounds. Allegations from a Liberal insider that the donations amounted to a bribery attempt were investigated by the federal police in 2009 in a probe that generated significant publicity.
The alleged Mafia boss and his associate who was granted a visa cannot be named due to a criminal court suppression order.
Liberal sources confirmed that hire of Waterfront Venues Melbourne was donated by the alleged Mafia boss for the $250-a-head dinner. Food and drink was also heavily subsidised. Expensive items were also auctioned off at the event, including a helicopter ride for two and a dinner.
No specific records of the fund-raiser have been lodged with the Australian Electoral Commission, with Liberal sources saying the individual donations made as part of the event were under the $12,100 disclosure threshold.
Despite being the subject of numerous organised crime probes, the alleged mob boss has never been charged with a criminal offence and denies any involvement in organised crime or political bribery. The federal police bribery probe was closed after gathering insufficient evidence.
The revelations come as the Independent Commission Against Corruption probes donations by colourful business identities to Liberal politicians in NSW. Mr Broadbent declined to respond to repeated requests from Fairfax Media for comment. The Liberal MP previously lobbied the Howard government to give the suspected Mafia figure's associate a visa, despite authorities arguing he should be deported because he was a criminal.
The figure was issued a visa on humanitarian grounds in 2005. Mr Broadbent was one of four Liberal MPs who lobbied to overturn the man's deportation who were investigated by federal police in their 2009 probe.
In 2012, the crime figure and the suspected Mafia boss took over the Docklands venue where the Bruce campaign fund-raiser was later held. A third owner of Waterfront Venues Melbourne is a relative of late Mafia godfather Rosario Gangemi, who died in 2008 and was previously identified by police as a top Mafia leader allegedly involved in murder and racketeering at Melbourne's fruit and vegetable wholesale market.
Fairfax first sought to question Mr Broadbent in 2009 about why he had attended fund-raisers with the alleged Mafia figure and his associates. It is believed that Mr Broadbent's relationship with the alleged Mafia figure is more extensive than publicly known.
The pair are believed to have met on several occasions in the company of a small number of other donors, with Mr Broadbent having facilitated meetings between the man and senior state and federal Liberal Party figures, including Bruce Billson and Amanda Vanstone.
State Liberal MP and former lower house Speaker Ken Smith, and his former electorate staffer and ex-Bass Coast mayor Neville Goodwin have also previously been involved in fund-raising and charity events with the alleged Mafia boss dating back to the mid 1990s.
The alleged Mafia figure has helped raise thousands of dollars for the Liberals in Melbourne's outer south-east, where he is perceived to hold influence over voters of Calabrian heritage.
Asked about his association with the alleged Mafia boss, Mr Smith said: "He's never asked me for anything. I take people as I find them.'' The suspected Mafia boss has a business empire spanning Victoria, including stalls at the wholesale fruit and vegetable market, property developments, supermarkets and involvement in the nationwide La Porchetta pizza chain. He has also had dealings with NSW Liberal Party donors, including real estate agent Pat Sergi. Mr Sergi, named in a 1979 royal commission as a money launderer for the Mafia, was recently called as a witness at the NSW ICAC hearings into Liberal Party fund-raising.
A spokeswoman for Mr Guy said the minister "was invited to attend the [Docklands] function by the Liberal campaign for Bruce. The minister had no role in organising the event or its guest list."
Mr Goodwin confirmed he has known the owner of the venue for several years, while Mr Burgess said he attended the Docklands function as a guest of a prominent market gardener in his electorate who had taken a table at the event, and did not know who owned the venue.
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote:mcjules wrote:thupercoach wrote:He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia. Nothing ballsy about targeting the portion of the electorate that don't usually vote LNP Didn't his approval rating just plummet to like below 40%? Practically everyone was stiffed by this budget, including myself as the pension age was raised to 70, and wont look forward to as much middle class welfare when I have a family, but then again I'm not going to pin my family needs and retirement hopes on government providing for me. How old are you? When are you retiring?
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
A bit dramatic and overstating the facts (really, the truth is bad enough without the overstatements - can the left stop this pls), but points for production value I guess.
[youtube]AFWXGvFLq70[/youtube]
Edited by notorganic: 23/5/2014 10:31:13 AM
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:notorganic wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:thupercoach wrote:
Secondly, so Abbott winked when she said she worked on a sex line. Rudd was dragged out of a strip joint. Not a creep I guess?
They're both twats. One a former and one a current. Can't Turnbull make a run at the leadership. Fucking Abbott. Why would anyone want to touch Turnbull with a 100ft pole after his NBN fucktardery? Why would anyone want to touch Turnbull with a 100ft pole period? I've little respect for the man, no substance. He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia. For one he's a republican, secondly he's not Abbott and thirdly he's for the NBN even though the poor bastard has to argue against it in his portfolio. Another plus he has going for him is that he's a self-made multi millionaire who is obviously not in parliament to have his nose in the trough. I would have though Turnbull suits those Libs that believe that government could learn a thing or 2 from business down to a tee.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/davis-says-no-to-donation-threshold-rise-20140522-zrljh.html Now you can donate $12399.00 (and multiples thereof) to Campbell and not have to declare it. Under laws passed by Campbell If you donate $500 to a Union it has to be declared in real time and available on the web. It’s Fitzgerald time all over again. If $5.5k can get you a $2 million contract (double the preferred tenderer) what’s multiples of $12399.00 going to get you. Fucking corruption. What a joke.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote:mcjules wrote:thupercoach wrote:He certainly wouldn't have the balls to do what's unpopular but right for Australia. Nothing ballsy about targeting the portion of the electorate that don't usually vote LNP Didn't his approval rating just plummet to like below 40%? Practically everyone was stiffed by this budget, including myself as the pension age was raised to 70, and wont look forward to as much middle class welfare when I have a family, but then again I'm not going to pin my family needs and retirement hopes on government providing for me. And? His approval rating would have dropped regardless of what measures the government put in to either increase revenue or cut spending. The fact is this budget panders to the Liberal party's main financial supporters and goes after the portion that would rarely vote Liberal. They just went to hard with it thinking they had plenty of margin to sacrifice. Raising the pension age to 70 won't affect the middle class unless they raise the superannuation age as well. I'd like to think most (myself included) would have at least 5 years worth of income out of my super to cover me after 40+years of contributing! Cutting middle class welfare is something I support anyway. P.S. Almost no one plans to have the government provide for them. It's called a safety net because it's there when you fall on hard times.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
thupercoach wrote:In fact, as the Aussie public are starting to wake up to what's going on and realising that the budget isn't remotely as draconian as it's been painted by the lefties Yes that's why satisfaction ratings and other polls are way down across the board :lol: Love the wink defense you've got going there as well. You are literally a one trick pony. Why can't you just say, "yeah he's a bit creepy and he fucked up here @ x, y and z but he is still our best leader going forward". That's the thing about blind political supporters, they can't ever accept when things have gone wrong, just keep deflecting to what the "other mob" did :lol: -PB
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/davis-says-no-to-donation-threshold-rise-20140522-zrljh.html
Now you can donate $12399.00 (and multiples thereof) to Campbell and not have to declare it.
Under laws passed by Campbell If you donate $500 to a Union it has to be declared in real time and available on the web.
It’s Fitzgerald time all over again.
If $5.5k can get you a $2 million contract (double the preferred tenderer) what’s multiples of $12399.00 going to get you.
Fucking corruption. What a joke. QLD politics are fairly shot atm. Can't wait to get rid of this knob next election. Sucks only have the one house of parliament too. Let Katter in I reckon, then we can have a state run bank again :D -PB
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:Why can't you just say, "yeah he's a bit creepy and he fucked up here @ x, y and z but he is still our best leader going forward" The whole thing would die down pretty quick if this happened, cards are already on the table that he's like this. The ones that are pissed off about it will stay pissed off, the rest will forget.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/davis-says-no-to-donation-threshold-rise-20140522-zrljh.html
Now you can donate $12399.00 (and multiples thereof) to Campbell and not have to declare it.
Under laws passed by Campbell If you donate $500 to a Union it has to be declared in real time and available on the web.
It’s Fitzgerald time all over again.
If $5.5k can get you a $2 million contract (double the preferred tenderer) what’s multiples of $12399.00 going to get you.
Fucking corruption. What a joke. QLD politics are fairly shot atm. Can't wait to get rid of this knob next election. Sucks only have the one house of parliament too. Let Katter in I reckon, then we can have a state run bank again :D -PB The ironic thing about Katter is that most of the people who vote for him would be as far from the left as you can imagine and yet if you look closely at Katter's policies he's more socialist than the Labour party. (Wants tariffs reintroduced, state banks, import restrictions, foreign investment reined in and on and on.) He's clearly off his chops but he has the luxury of knowing that he'll never have to implement any of his policies so he can just go around shaking hands with old cow cockies and agreeing with them about how good the old days were.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:he's for the NBN even though the poor bastard has to argue against it in his portfolio. If this is true, he's an excellent debater. He's extremely convincing as a fucking moronic vindictive cu ntmong when it comes to the NBN.
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
mcjules wrote: And? His approval rating would have dropped regardless of what measures the government put in to either increase revenue or cut spending. The fact is this budget panders to the Liberal party's main financial supporters and goes after the portion that would rarely vote Liberal. They just went to hard with it thinking they had plenty of margin to sacrifice.
Raising the pension age to 70 won't affect the middle class unless they raise the superannuation age as well. I'd like to think most (myself included) would have at least 5 years worth of income out of my super to cover me after 40+years of contributing! Cutting middle class welfare is something I support anyway.
P.S. Almost no one plans to have the government provide for them. It's called a safety net because it's there when you fall on hard times.
That the budget panders to the Liberals financial supporter base is just rhetoric and spin. Company tax in Australia is already among the highest in the world, much higher than the OECD average of 25%. If we want to be competitive in Asia we have to be competitive with our taxes, or we will lose investment, talent and tax revenue to other countries. We understand it's counter intuitive because it means giving tax cuts to some businesses while an increasing burden is shifted on lower income groups and the middle class, but the heavy lifting and GDP growth comes from 'growth' sectors such as business not from welfare groups, so it's vitally important we support business and remain competitive if we are ever able to get back into surplus and sustain those welfare programs. Of course it's populist to entertain conspiracy theories such as Tony and Joe and reforming the economy to help out their mates but it just isn't true. The liberal parties main financial supporters would make up a tiny % of their voter base so to say it goes after those who don't vote Liberal is a furphy when pensioners and the working class are often considered Liberals bread and butter.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:
Why can't you just say, "yeah he's a bit creepy and he fucked up here @ x, y and z but he is still our best leader going forward".
That's the thing about blind political supporters, they can't ever accept when things have gone wrong, just keep deflecting to what the "other mob" did :lol:
-PB
I agree with this. A bit of "yeah, that was a bit ordinary " from both sides here wouldn't go astray. "Creepy" is an adjective that comes up a bit about Tone. Quite a few women I know reckon he makes their skin crawl. The irony being he's the Minister for Women's Affairs is not lost on most.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote:mcjules wrote: And? His approval rating would have dropped regardless of what measures the government put in to either increase revenue or cut spending. The fact is this budget panders to the Liberal party's main financial supporters and goes after the portion that would rarely vote Liberal. They just went to hard with it thinking they had plenty of margin to sacrifice.
Raising the pension age to 70 won't affect the middle class unless they raise the superannuation age as well. I'd like to think most (myself included) would have at least 5 years worth of income out of my super to cover me after 40+years of contributing! Cutting middle class welfare is something I support anyway.
P.S. Almost no one plans to have the government provide for them. It's called a safety net because it's there when you fall on hard times.
That the budget panders to the Liberals financial supporter base is just rhetoric and spin. Company tax in Australia is already among the highest in the world, much higher than the OECD average of 25%. If we want to be competitive in Asia we have to be competitive with our taxes, or we will lose investment, talent and tax revenue to other countries. We understand it's counter intuitive because it means giving tax cuts to some businesses while an increasing burden is shifted on lower income groups and the middle class, but the heavy lifting and GDP growth comes from 'growth' sectors such as business not from welfare groups, so it's vitally important we support business and remain competitive if we are ever able to get back into surplus and sustain those welfare programs. Of course it's populist to entertain conspiracy theories such as Tony and Joe and reforming the economy to help out their mates but it just isn't true. The liberal parties main financial supporters would make up a tiny % of their voter base so to say it goes after those who don't vote Liberal is a furphy when pensioners and the working class are often considered Liberals bread and butter. You didn't answer my question. In which year are you going to be retiring?
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:he's for the NBN even though the poor bastard has to argue against it in his portfolio. If this is true, he's an excellent debater. He's extremely convincing as a fucking moronic vindictive cu ntmong when it comes to the NBN. I think he's "grown" into the role. Initially, when Tone gave him the portfolio, you could see how uncomfortable he was about the whole thing. I remember when he was on stage with Tony trying to argue against it when he was first given the brief and he looked very sketchy.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote: QLD politics are fairly shot atm. -PB
They are but as with the Libs federally it's their turn and people did vote for them so they're entitled to have a crack. I just can't believe that the corruption aspects of the Liberal government here (likely the same when Labour was in) are made into a much bigger deal. Corruption is corruption no matter who's doing it. Would love to see Soca, Thuper or Rusty try and defend the changes to the donation laws here. If they're fair dinkum they'll have a go. (And don't sidestep the issue by saying it brings it into line with Federal rules. We all know it's state governments that approve developments in general. Or mumbling something about the unions. Yes, they're cnuts too.) Russ? Thuper? Soca?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:rusty wrote:mcjules wrote: And? His approval rating would have dropped regardless of what measures the government put in to either increase revenue or cut spending. The fact is this budget panders to the Liberal party's main financial supporters and goes after the portion that would rarely vote Liberal. They just went to hard with it thinking they had plenty of margin to sacrifice.
Raising the pension age to 70 won't affect the middle class unless they raise the superannuation age as well. I'd like to think most (myself included) would have at least 5 years worth of income out of my super to cover me after 40+years of contributing! Cutting middle class welfare is something I support anyway.
P.S. Almost no one plans to have the government provide for them. It's called a safety net because it's there when you fall on hard times.
That the budget panders to the Liberals financial supporter base is just rhetoric and spin. Company tax in Australia is already among the highest in the world, much higher than the OECD average of 25%. If we want to be competitive in Asia we have to be competitive with our taxes, or we will lose investment, talent and tax revenue to other countries. We understand it's counter intuitive because it means giving tax cuts to some businesses while an increasing burden is shifted on lower income groups and the middle class, but the heavy lifting and GDP growth comes from 'growth' sectors such as business not from welfare groups, so it's vitally important we support business and remain competitive if we are ever able to get back into surplus and sustain those welfare programs. Of course it's populist to entertain conspiracy theories such as Tony and Joe and reforming the economy to help out their mates but it just isn't true. The liberal parties main financial supporters would make up a tiny % of their voter base so to say it goes after those who don't vote Liberal is a furphy when pensioners and the working class are often considered Liberals bread and butter. You didn't answer my question. In which year are you going to be retiring? I plan to work as long as I have to.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote: That the budget panders to the Liberals financial supporter base is just rhetoric and spin. Company tax in Australia is already among the highest in the world, much higher than the OECD average of 25%. If we want to be competitive in Asia we have to be competitive with our taxes, or we will lose investment, talent and tax revenue to other countries. We understand it's counter intuitive because it means giving tax cuts to some businesses while an increasing burden is shifted on lower income groups and the middle class, but the heavy lifting and GDP growth comes from 'growth' sectors such as business not from welfare groups, so it's vitally important we support business and remain competitive if we are ever able to get back into surplus and sustain those welfare programs.
Rusty do you know what happens when you let capitalism off it's leash? You get the GFC. You get Lehmann Brothers, you get Enron. Company taxes are low in the US. How's that working out for them? Capitalism is a fine system but it's a system that needs controls, check and balances. You see company tax as a hindrance to capitalism, I see it as a good thing. You would well know that companies like Rio Tinto, BHP and the like pay no where near 30%. In fact if most of these big companies paid the actual 30 cents in the dollar you are talking about there wouldn't be a "budget emergency". And that includes companies like Apple and Google who sidestep our tax laws to get off paying their fair share in Australia. You talk about fairness and sharing the load. Fine. Let's just make that sharing the load across the board rather than something that can be avoided if you've got a good accountant.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-06/tax-expert-explains-how-apple-pays-193m-tax-on-27b-revenue/5303426Apple pays $193m tax in Australia on $27b revenue as Federal Government vows to capture lost taxes. http://www.afr.com/p/technology/how_ireland_got_apple_bn_profit_erlmHONvoHJGixwLUpFckN$9 billion dollars shifted off-shore to avoid tax. 30cents in the dollar equals $2.7 billion in the old sky rocket. There's a step towards restoring the balance sheet.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz, both of your posts above are spot on and well written. Corruption should always be called for what it is. And speaking of which, things with Gillard's spouse and that union/corruption case seem to have gone quiet? Anyone see anything more recently? Was all over the news about 2-3 weeks ago then nothing. -PB
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote:notorganic wrote:rusty wrote:mcjules wrote: And? His approval rating would have dropped regardless of what measures the government put in to either increase revenue or cut spending. The fact is this budget panders to the Liberal party's main financial supporters and goes after the portion that would rarely vote Liberal. They just went to hard with it thinking they had plenty of margin to sacrifice.
Raising the pension age to 70 won't affect the middle class unless they raise the superannuation age as well. I'd like to think most (myself included) would have at least 5 years worth of income out of my super to cover me after 40+years of contributing! Cutting middle class welfare is something I support anyway.
P.S. Almost no one plans to have the government provide for them. It's called a safety net because it's there when you fall on hard times.
That the budget panders to the Liberals financial supporter base is just rhetoric and spin. Company tax in Australia is already among the highest in the world, much higher than the OECD average of 25%. If we want to be competitive in Asia we have to be competitive with our taxes, or we will lose investment, talent and tax revenue to other countries. We understand it's counter intuitive because it means giving tax cuts to some businesses while an increasing burden is shifted on lower income groups and the middle class, but the heavy lifting and GDP growth comes from 'growth' sectors such as business not from welfare groups, so it's vitally important we support business and remain competitive if we are ever able to get back into surplus and sustain those welfare programs. Of course it's populist to entertain conspiracy theories such as Tony and Joe and reforming the economy to help out their mates but it just isn't true. The liberal parties main financial supporters would make up a tiny % of their voter base so to say it goes after those who don't vote Liberal is a furphy when pensioners and the working class are often considered Liberals bread and butter. You didn't answer my question. In which year are you going to be retiring? I plan to work as long as I have to. Still doesn't answer my question. I'm shocked.
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:Munrubenmuz, both of your posts above are spot on and well written.
Corruption should always be called for what it is.
And speaking of which, things with Gillard's spouse and that union/corruption case seem to have gone quiet?
Anyone see anything more recently?
Was all over the news about 2-3 weeks ago then nothing.
-PB Perhaps there was as much there are there ever was - nothing.
|
|
|