Abbott in Government

[serfty]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Not their own facts.

Of course, all seem entitled to interpret facts any way they wish to. This thread proves it.

 

[Pukka]

Basically he is incapable if making the hard/unpopular decisions that are required to address a "budget emergency". That makes him unfit to govern.

Oh I think he's very capable of making unpopular decisions but I think they will be unpopular with those whose politics is left of centre.

The fact that you voted for him, speaks volumes, as does your continuing support as he tries to disown everything he said as opposition leader.

I don't think he's trying to disown everything he said in opposition at all. He's more popular than ever.

As for the welfare question what your taking about is welfare to the top 10% of income earners. That certainly needs to stop.

Well I disagree the top 10% pay too much anyway they should spread the burden by increasing GST & crack down on those who avoid paying tax I.e. The cash economy.

In any case, you comment betrays you, given it's support for buying votes. Ignoring the so-called budget emergency to buy votes is not the action of a competent government. It is the action of someone who will do anything to grab power.

You mean like letting a few independents hold the whole country to ransom.

You have voted for an incompetent government.

No I've voted for the party that is the government

He lied to the public for 3 years just to gain power. Now he has the power everything he said gets thrown out.

Well perhaps we should all aspire to the Julia Gillard gold standard of honesty lol

 

[JohnK]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Not their own facts.

Did I mention somewhere I was quoting fact? If I did then I wouldn't be out of place in this thread. Would I?

 

[drsmithy]

Two different sentences.

You believe the statistics thrown at you about "genuine" asylum seekers. I dont.

I haven't seen any reason - factual or hypothetical - not to believe them.

I did not make up the story about "genuine" asylum seekers wishing to return to the country persecuting them instead of the safe havens crossed. It wasnt that long ago.

Are you defining "genuine" to be "were found by refugee processing to have a claim to asylum" or to be "arrived on a boat" ?

Because no-one is saying the latter is synonymous with being a "genuine" refugee.

Story is not true? Just like you choose which statistics to believe I choose which stories to believe.

I never said the story wasn't true. I said drawing a conclusion about refugees based on what people who weren't refugees did, is invalid.

And at the same time I can also have an opinion and say that I believe the overwhelming majority are not "genuine" asylum sedkers.

The problem is your opinion isn't based on anything factual.

 

[drsmithy]

Of course, all seem entitled to interpret facts any way they wish to. This thread proves it.

No facts have yet been presented that would facilitate "interpreting" a conclusion that "the overwhelming majority are not "genuine" asylum seekers".

 

[drsmithy]

Well I disagree the top 10% pay too much anyway they should spread the burden by increasing GST & crack down on those who avoid paying tax I.e. The cash economy.

I see you have another disconnect from reality.

The tax take from the top 10% (especially the top few %) has been steadily decreasing for decades. The tax burden is falling more and more onto wage earners instead of wealth holders.

It's a fundamental reason behind our broken economy.

You mean like letting a few independents hold the whole country to ransom.

How do you propose that can happen ?

 

[medhead]

Did I mention somewhere I was quoting fact? If I did then I wouldn't be out of place in this thread. Would I?

Yes you did. You said the majority were not real as a statement of fact. That is contradicted by the reported number of total arrivals by boat and the number if that total who are granted asylum. Before banging on about statistics it is worth remembering that underlying the reported percentages are a simple count of the number of people.

 

[JohnK]

The problem is your opinion isn't based on anything factual.

It is factual. You choose to discount it.

Accounts from other refugees is fact or do you call that speculation? Interviewing asylum seekers sent back and asking them why they want to return back to their own country instead of one of the safe havens crossed is factual.

By the way opinion does not require fact. Personal observations are sufficient.

Next thing you are going to tell me UK, France and Germany dont have a serious problem with immigration. In fact, there is that word again, the UK is in danger of being overrun.

No one needs to invade anymore when you are being welcomed with open arms.

 

[Pukka]

I see you have another disconnect from reality.

The tax take from the top 10% (especially the top few %) has been steadily decreasing for decades. The tax burden is falling more and more onto wage earners instead of wealth holders.

Well not from my perspective I paid a big lump yesterday so I'm not feeling very charitable


How do you propose that can happen ?[

I'm talking about the last government been held to ransom by the gang of three.

 

[drsmithy]

It is factual. You choose to discount it.

Accounts from other refugees is fact or do you call that speculation? Interviewing asylum seekers sent back and asking them why they want to return back to their own country instead of one of the safe havens crossed is factual.

You seem to be confused. At least, that's what I have to conclude since you've already explicitly stated you aren't trying to connect two otherwise unrelated things.

No-one is disagreeing with your assertion that some asylum seekers are refused entry because they are not "genuine".

What they are disagreeing with is your conclusion that this means the majority of all asylum seekers are not "genuine".

It is this latter opinion that is not supported by any factual data. At least none yet provided in this discussion.

Next thing you are going to tell me UK, France and Germany dont have a serious problem with immigration. In fact, thete is that word again, the UK is in danger of being overrun.

No one needs to invade anymore when you are being welcomed with open arms.

Is that you, Miss Hanson ?

 

[drsmithy]

Well not from my perspective I paid a big lump yesterday so I'm not feeling very charitable

That does not change that you pay a lot less than you would have in the past (and than you would in most other countries).

If you think you can fund a civilised society without taxation, then I'm interested to hear how.

I'm talking about the last government been held to ransom by the gang of three.

You'll need to be more specific. When did a "few" independents manage to defeat attempts at passing legislation supported by both major parties ?

 

[medhead]

It is factual. You choose to discount it.

Accounts from other refugees is fact or do you call that speculation? Interviewing asylum seekers sent back and asking them why they want to return back to their own country instead of one of the safe havens crossed is factual.

By the way opinion does not require fact. Personal observations are sufficient.

Next thing you are going to tell me UK, France and Germany dont have a serious problem with immigration. In fact, there is that word again, the UK is in danger of being overrun.

No one needs to invade anymore when you are being welcomed with open arms.

Usually Opinion is formed by reviewing facts. One leads from the other. You have made a statement that is wrong and then stated your opinion based on that incorrect fact.

The personal observations of an individual are not fact, even if they are opinion. They only represent what happened within the observation of that individual. They are not representative of the totality.

 

[medhead]

Well I disagree the top 10% pay too much anyway they should spread the burden by increasing GST & crack down on those who avoid paying tax I.e. The cash economy.

You need to learn how to quote properly.

Sorry to say but the top 10% pay according to their means in order to fund a civilised society. That is the price of an ordered, civilised society. Perhaps you would prefer an alternative whereby there is no government imposed order, you pay no taxes and then I can hit you on the head and take your wealth.

As for the fat being the answer. What a joke. Anyone who has seen a single episode of Minder must realise value added taxes increase the cash economy. They also place an excessive burden on t low income earners, who spend may spend most of their income just to live, with no discretionary spending ability.

I was at a cafe the other week and the person at the next table was arguing try should not pay Medicare as they have private health and will never use a public hospital. What this person forgets is when they fall over with a heart attack the ambulance takes them directly to a public hospital. This sounds like you claim to pay too much tax.

You mean like letting a few independents hold the whole country to ransom.

Negotiating with people who have been elected to represent their electorate is nothing like paying the electorate or their vote. Your analogy is laughable.

 

[Pukka]

You need to learn how to quote properly.

Sorry to say but the top 10% pay according to their means in order to fund a civilised society. That is the price of an ordered, civilised society. Perhaps you would prefer an alternative whereby there is no government imposed order, you pay no taxes and then I can hit you on the head and take your wealth.

As for the fat being the answer. What a joke. Anyone who has seen a single episode of Minder must realise value added taxes increase the cash economy. They also place an excessive burden on t low income earners, who spend may spend most of their income just to live, with no discretionary spending ability.

I was at a cafe the other week and the person at the next table was arguing try should not pay Medicare as they have private health and will never use a public hospital. What this person forgets is when they fall over with a heart attack the ambulance takes them directly to a public hospital. This sounds like you claim to pay too much tax.




Negotiating with people who have been elected to represent their electorate is nothing like paying the electorate or their vote. Your analogy is laughable.

Lol yes let's base economic policy on Arfur Daley

The UK put VAT up to 20% but they have a far more efficient tax office. If Australia actually invested in collection by doing lifestyle assessments etc everyone would need to pay less tax except the cash in hand brigade.

I do take your point though, I wouldn't want to be car jacked!! overall I think the tax here is reasonable but surely even you must admit that France's 75% top rate is ridiculous or do you think we should have that here?

 

[drsmithy]

The UK put VAT up to 20% but they have a far more efficient tax office. If Australia actually invested in collection by doing lifestyle assessments etc everyone would need to pay less tax except the cash in hand brigade.

Given, as I pointed out earlier, the tax take from the well-off and wealthy has dropped substantially over the last few decades as taxation has shifted from wealth and assets to income, the idea we can make it up by scrounging up some money from the cash economy is simply laughable.

I do take your point though, I wouldn't want to be car jacked!! overall I think the tax here is reasonable but surely even you must admit that France's 75% top rate is ridiculous or do you think we should have that here?

The 75% rate doesn't kick in until a taxable income of ~1.25 million USD. I might just have to dig up my tiny violin and play a song.

The countries of Northern Europe demonstrate quite handily it's possible to have tax rates much higher than ours, while maintaining vibrant, innovative, entrepreneurial economies and the highest livings standards and levels of equality in the world.

America demonstrates what happens when you follow the neoliberal religion of "taxes are always too high and must be reduced", "worship the rich" and "blame the poor for everything".

 

[drron]

And Japan has lower tax rates than Australia yet has a more equitable distribution of income than Europe.
Yes their economy maybe in for severe turbulence but then several European economies are not that strong.

 

[drsmithy]

And Japan has lower tax rates than Australia yet has a more equitable distribution of income than Europe.

On what data is this statement based ?

 

[drron]

Equitable distribution of income is from the UN Development Programmes list.
Tax tables are easily searched.

 

[Pukka]

Given, as I pointed out earlier, the tax take from the well-off and wealthy has dropped substantially over the last few decades as taxation has shifted from wealth and assets to income, the idea we can make it up by scrounging up some money from the cash economy is simply laughable.


The 75% rate doesn't kick in until a taxable income of ~1.25 million USD. I might just have to dig up my tiny violin and play a song.

The countries of Northern Europe demonstrate quite handily it's possible to have tax rates much higher than ours, while maintaining vibrant, innovative, entrepreneurial economies and the highest livings standards and levels of equality in the world.

America demonstrates what happens when you follow the neoliberal religion of "taxes are always too high and must be reduced", "worship the rich" and "blame the poor for everything".

Sometimes you can sound quite caring and reasonable but the idea that anyone should pay 75% is absolutely ludicrous looney socialism. I don't care if they earn a billion a year they should be allowed to keep the majority. Once the government takes a bigger percentage than you it's time to move countries which is what people do.

Do you know that the French are responsible for making the house prices in Chelsea & Kensington sky rocket even further because they've decided they don't want to live in France anymore? So instead of getting 50% of a lot they get absolutely sweet FA which is why France is screwed.

Anyway back to Tony I'm confident that he will make the tough decisions necessary to sort the country out without resorting to jacking up taxes on those that already contribute more than their fair share to society, and while we are on the subject of TA how come when Rudd splashed all those $900 JB Hifi vouchers around like confetti it was called stimulating the economy but if Tony wants to keep the ludicrously named "middle class welfare" that just bribing the electorate.

The sheer hypocrisy and double standards on this thread Is breathtaking at times.

 

[JohnK]

Yes you did. You said the majority were not real as a statement of fact. That is contradicted by the reported number of total arrivals by boat and the number if that total who are granted asylum. Before banging on about statistics it is worth remembering that underlying the reported percentages are a simple count of the number of people.

In my opinion the majority of asylum seekers arriving by boat onto our shores are not "genuine" asylum seekers.

Is that better for you? I dont care about the numbers quoted by the those who process the "genuine" asylum seekers.