Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[tgh]

however it is spun.. the interview on t730rep.. was pretty compelling.
No consultation ( surprise surprise)... no business (did you actually listen to what he said smith_eee).. and no more orders for 'Oz assembled cars.
After the libs win .. a new company may well be able to fill the void... but IMHO ..it was (another) sign that running hard and fast ( whats new kevvie).. has consequences

 

[drsmithy]

First the scheme was introduced by Paul Keating.

I'm pretty sure Keating introduced the FBT to _catch_ people rorting the system.

Second it was reviewed by the Henry Tax inquiry who suggested changes but much less than the policy on the run announced by the Government.

Just because something is announced for the first time doesn't mean it's "policy on the run" (whatever "policy on the run" is even supposed to mean).

I hope you were watching the 7.30 report tonight on the ABC.The owner of a car leasing business in Melbourne is now having to sack 80 of his 145 staff as business this week is only a third of normal levels.

Indeed I was, and I found him similarly (un)believable.

If one day of low volume means you have to let half of your workforce go, your business model is broken.

And despite the old class warfare theme sprouted here [...]

Hypocrite.

[...] the average income of his customers is $74000 per year and 70% of the cars leased are Australian built.

That number gets lower every time it gets quoted. It started at $80k this morning.

Firstly, assuming it's even true - big assumption - the median income in Australia is something around $55k. So his "average" customer is already earning quite a bit more than half of Australia's working population.

Secondly, that's guaranteed to be a taxable income figure. Which is, of course, what you get after all those tax deductions like vehicle salary sacrificing.

Thirdly, a tax rort is a tax rort, regardless of the rorter's income level. Somehow I doubt you're so sympathetic towards dole bludgers, despite the identical principle in play.

 

[drsmithy]

Forget it drron. Rudd has whipped these people into thinking its a rich boys perk and they have no interest in the reality of it all.

The reality is vehicle salary sacrificing by people who aren't using their vehicles mostly for work purposes, is a tax rort.

I've thought it was absurd from the day I found out just about anyone could do it regardless of their actual vehicle usage.

I'd be astounded if anything even remotely close to a majority of people leasing their vehicles are using them primarily (if at all !) for work purposes.

Note that commuting is *not* considered "work".

*Every* single person I work with who salary sacrifices their vehicle lease, has zero need to use their vehicle for work purposes. Not only do their jobs not require driving anywhere as a general rule, but the company hands out Cabcharge vouchers at will to anyone that has to get from one place to another.

 

[Hvr]

The reality is vehicle salary sacrificing by people who aren't using their vehicles mostly for work purposes, is a tax rort.

I've thought it was absurd from the day I found out just about anyone could do it regardless of their actual vehicle usage.

I'd be astounded if anything even remotely close to a majority of people leasing their vehicles are using them primarily (if at all !) for work purposes.

Note that commuting is *not* considered "work".

Exactly. Now lets crack down on family trusts used to avoid taxes.

 

[SQ421]

Exactly. Now lets crack down on family trusts used to avoid taxes.

And tweak Negative Gearing so if it exists, its restricted to new properties only.

 

[drsmithy]

It's like when Rudd brought in the luxury car tax and stood up in parliament raging that it was a tax on Porsches & Ferrari's, rubbish it kicks in about $57k the vast majority of the tax it generates is on "normal cars" not super cars.

I think the LCT kicks in too low as well, but let's keep it real. Of the top ten vehicles sold in Australia last year, none of them cost more than $57k. Indeed, from eyeballing those lists, the only vehicle that sold more than 10,000 units and costs over $57k is the Prado, and quite frankly reducing the needless number of land yachts on the road would be a great thing.

I don't think the car industry is a major fan of Mr Rudd

The car industry has been suckling at the teat of Government for over a decade. Particularly the "Australian" car industry which is woefully unproductive. Usually you Liberal voters get pretty tetchy about that sort of dole bludging.

 

[Hvr]

<snip>


The car industry has been suckling at the teat of Government for over a decade. Particularly the "Australian" car industry which is woefully unproductive. Usually you Liberal voters get pretty tetchy about that sort of dole bludging.

I'll disagree with you here drsmithy, the Liberal party only disapproves of welfare for poor people. Rich people welfare such as the corporate welfare received by car companies is considered essential. If you're poor it's your fault. If you're rich and incompetent enough to require subsidies (aka corporate welfare) you're considered an essential part of the free economy.

 

[drsmithy]

And tweak Negative Gearing so if it exists, its restricted to new properties only.

Ideally it would be eliminated entirely, but that would certainly be a good start.

 

[Pukka]

And tweak Negative Gearing so if it exists, its restricted to new properties only.

And if you do that rents go through the roof and property prices plummet, sure you bash a few "rich people" but the people that are renting aren't usually rich and ultimately those are the ones that will suffer. Landlords aren't charities and if they can't negatively gear they need to make a profit so rent has to go up.

Labor won't go there.

 

[drsmithy]

however it is spun.. the interview on t730rep.. was pretty compelling.

I'm sure it was if you'd already made up your mind.

No consultation ( surprise surprise)... no business (did you actually listen to what he said smith_eee).. and no more orders for 'Oz assembled cars.

I think you need to have a look at how Australian assembled cars have been faring in the marketplace for the last, oh, I don't know, half a decade or so.

Here's a hint: not well.

After the libs win .. a new company may well be able to fill the void... but IMHO ..it was (another) sign that running hard and fast ( whats new kevvie).. has consequences

Clearly I need to link to the Parable of the Broken Window again.

The hypocrisy of crying about the loss of jobs in an industry built around tax rorting, by people who can't wait to vote in the party promising to cut tens of thousands of jobs (to say nothing of their contractionary economic policies), is monumental.

 

[Pukka]

I'm sure it was if you'd already made up your mind.


I think you need to have a look at how Australian assembled cars have been faring in the marketplace for the last, oh, I don't know, half a decade or so.

Here's a hint: not well.


Clearly I need to link to the Parable of the Broken Window again.

The hypocrisy of people crying about the loss of jobs in an industry built around tax rorting, by people who can't wait to vote in the party promising to cut tens of thousands of jobs (to say nothing of their contractionary economic policies), is monumental.

I'm guessing that's an old parable 6 Francs!!! I paid $347 to obrien this morning to replace a window 33" x 24" and that's even after I explained it wasn't an insurance job

 

[drsmithy]

Should have known better. No attempt to think about issues and consequences at all. No point in discussing further.

Careful, you could take someone's eye out waving your irony around like that.

 

[drsmithy]

And if you do that rents go through the roof and property prices plummet, sure you bash a few "rich people" but the people that are renting aren't usually rich and ultimately those are the ones that will suffer. Landlords aren't charities and if they can't negatively gear they need to make a profit so rent has to go up.

Rents are determined by people's ability to pay, and they're already near the top of the spectrum. Landlords can try to charge more, but they'll simply find their properties vacant, and probably not long after that repossessed.

Plummeting property prices would be short term pain for some, but a huge long term benefit for nearly everyone.

After that reset, landlords would no longer need to negative gear for their properties to be economical. Like in most places on Earth.

Labor won't go there.

Neither major party will go there. Way, WAY too much baby boomer vested interest.

 

[drron]

I'm sure it was if you'd already made up your mind.


I think you need to have a look at how Australian assembled cars have been faring in the marketplace for the last, oh, I don't know, half a decade or so.

Here's a hint: not well.


Clearly I need to link to the Parable of the Broken Window again.

The hypocrisy of crying about the loss of jobs in an industry built around tax rorting, by people who can't wait to vote in the party promising to cut tens of thousands of jobs (to say nothing of their contractionary economic policies), is monumental.

That really made me laugh drsmithy.You mean you haven't already made up your mind already?
The biggest hypocrite around here is not the one that you mentioned.

 

[drsmithy]

That really made me laugh drsmithy.You mean you haven't already made up your mind already?

Yes, but that's because I've had the same opinion about salary sacrificed vehicle leases for years, not because I'm mindlessly parroting Liberal party end-of-world rhetoric.

Someone who says his business went from successful to being forced to fire half his employees after a day of low volumes, is either not telling the whole story, or has a broken (or highly risky) business model. So, yeah, it sucks to be someone who has lost their job, but so does the taxpayer subsidising broken businesses that provide zero benefits. At least farm and manufacturing subsidies provide something tangible and useful rather than offices of ticket clippers.

 

[medhead]

Should have known better. No attempt to think about issues and consequences at all. No point in discussing further.

Firstly, the benefit is still available. Second I can't believe that you and so many others here are defending people ripping off other taxpayers money.

 

[Pushka]

Meh. Why should I care. I don't lease cars so it has no impact on me. That seems to be the way to think these days.

Rudd certainly doesn't worry about the long term impacts of decisions he makes as all he wants are the headlines "I've done away with the carbon tax AND the battlers get to keep the bribe money". Speaking of rorts.

Sometimes I want labor to win so they have to deal with the consequences. And you lot deserve another term of them.

 

[Skyring]

Rudd certainly doesn't worry about the long term impacts of decisions he makes as all he wants are the headlines "I've done away with the carbon tax AND the battlers get to keep the bribe money". Speaking of rorts.

I've wondered how Abbott was going to do away with the Carbon Tax, not having control of the Senate at all. And the Mining Tax and the NBN and a few other things. Double dissolution election, maybe, but that takes time, given the Senate has to knock back the same bill twice over with three months intervening and then you have all the other necessary times for debate and writs and all. Can be done, of course, but a PM has to be pretty confident before calling a DD election.

And now Rudd's gotten himself into the same problem, but worse. He doesn't have control of the Senate either and won't. He - like Abbott - would have to deal with the Greens or call a DD election with all the problems that entails. More to the point, if Rudd wants the change to happen on 1 July 2014, that's not enough time under the Constitution, the Electoral Act and Parliament's own procedures to hold two elections, return both writs, debate fresh legislation, have it rejected twice and get it implemented. He's run out of time in this term - not that he's showing any desire to recall Parliament anyway.

So how does Rudd propose to abolish the Carbon Tax by bringing it forward a year? The Greens have made plain that they are not having a bar of this, and Rudd needs to pass legislation to do it. He can't do it by speechifying or media release. He's promising something he can't deliver.

But that's easy, compared to Rudd's latest thought bubble. Change the UN Refugee Convention. That's something which would be:
A. Difficult to do. It would take a majority vote in the UN and survive a Security Council veto.
B. Take years.

That's not going to solve any problems for Australia in the next term of Parliament. Rudd makes another empty promise.

Why doesn't he admit that he caused the problem, he put the people-smugglers back in business, he's responsible for the appalling death toll?

 

[medhead]

But being on the security council at least Australia has a chance to lobby for change. I can't see the permanent members being resistant to changing the convention. Yeah it's going to take years and its only a very slim chance of making change. But it should still be an option to pursue.

 

[SQ421]

Why doesn't he admit that he caused the problem, he put the people-smugglers back in business, he's responsible for the appalling death toll?

Well I guess there is a way to stem the tide. Show the refugees Australia is a less desirable place than the one they are fleeing.

How does Abbott intend to stem the tide?