The totally off-topic thread

[Cruiser Elite]

First time I have ever seen this: CatchOfTheDay.com.au | PowerCube Extended USB 1.5m - Red

Anybody seen better alternative?

 

[medhead]

I don't doubt that it is tax free. I just question the implication that the return of dividends is additional to being tax free. With the current dividend imputation system that payment is part and parcel of being tax free, not an extra.

I thought the system automatically gave back the dividends if you didn't have to lodge a return. Of course, I do a return for SWMBO anyway, because I don't trust this new new fangled automatic payment thing.

He could be right. Super & retirement income streams (account based pensions and annuities) are tax free after age 60, for income or lump sum withdrawals.

What I think is crazy is the ability to access the Commonwealth Senior Health Card. The maximum thresholds are easy to stay under ($51,700 for single person and $82,400 for married couple). But this is adjusted taxable income. Retirement income steams purchased prior to 31/12/14 are excluded.

I have some clients who lodge the abridged tax return for refund of franking credits as they have insufficient taxable income to lodge a normal tax return. They love the system

 

[Bindibuys]

First time I have ever seen this: CatchOfTheDay.com.au | PowerCube Extended USB 1.5m - Red

Anybody seen better alternative?

So, do you buy from CatchoftheDay @ $39.38 (incl postage) or Ebay @ $44.95 and go via the Qantas mall to get 88 QFF points?
(points from paying via CC is a given )

 

[drron]

Great system...no changes thank you

Unfortunately I think you are out of luck.Many comments coming from the Super funds about changing the system so it is fairer.But the real reason is to keep the money in their funds so they can continue getting their billions of dollars fees.

Then there is all the talk about extra taxes for the rich on their super.Those that are really rich dont have super as their main wealth accumulation vehicle-the most you can contribute to super and get the tax concessions is $35000 per year if you are over 50.
Doesn't matter what political party you support they are all talking about "making it fairer".When you analyse what they say there seems to be agreement that those earning over $100,000 are classed as rich.

 

[medhead]

Unfortunately I think you are out of luck.Many comments coming from the Super funds about changing the system so it is fairer.But the real reason is to keep the money in their funds so they can continue getting their billions of dollars fees.

Then there is all the talk about extra taxes for the rich on their super.Those that are really rich dont have super as their main wealth accumulation vehicle-the most you can contribute to super and get the tax concessions is $35000 per year if you are over 50.

The super rich can also take advantage of the $300000 to $450000 every 3 years non concessional contribution. While I agree that things like family trusts are used. The earnings in super are taxed at 15% making super attractive for those that can get the balance into them. 300000 compounding at 5% per year, taking out the 15% tax on earnings, turns into $454000 after 10 years. Super is an attractive vehicle for the super rich because of the concessional tax treatment of the earnings.

By comparison earning @5% compounding, outside super paying the top marginal tax rate (plus medicare) the balance after 10 years is about $387000.

Doesn't matter what political party you support they are all talking about "making it fairer".When you analyse what they say there seems to be agreement that those earning over $100,000 are classed as rich.

The number is more around $150000, twice the AWOTE and around something like the top 8 to 12% of incomes.

 

[JohnK]

I hate public transport....

 

[alieninperth]

Re: Best Status Run Options - A quick overview!

totally OT but when did you become a Mod Jess?

and congratulations

 

[drron]

The number is more around $150000, twice the AWOTE and around something like the top 8 to 12% of incomes.

Though the Greens say the government can save $10 billion by increasing the contribution tax on the rich to 30 cents in the dollar.To do that the cut off would have to be ~ $120000.
Bill Shorten with Jon Faine on radio says that when a superfund account reaches 6 figures they are rich enough to pay extra tax on the fund earnings.
So the definition of "rich" seems to be changing.

 

[medhead]

Though the Greens say the government can save $10 billion by increasing the contribution tax on the rich to 30 cents in the dollar.To do that the cut off would have to be ~ $120000.
Bill Shorten with Jon Faine on radio says that when a superfund account reaches 6 figures they are rich enough to pay extra tax on the fund earnings.
So the definition of "rich" seems to be changing.

The only numbers I've heard have been for the earnings in the fund. I haven't followed it in any detail. But if that is the case then it would be when the super fund is earning $120000/6 figures per year not the person's income. Like I said, I don't know what is being proposed by the people you've quoted. But it would be nonsense to increase the super tax for someone with an income of $120000 per year. However, it makes more sense to increase it if the super fund itself is earning more than something like that amount per year.

also nonsense to impose higher tax on a 6 figure super fund balance, given most advice is that a normal person needs to accumulate about $500000 to be comfortable in retirement.

 

[rogerkambah]

I hate public transport....

Easy - don't use it! However, airline travel is public transport too.

 

[rogerkambah]

Baby boomers that are about to, or have recently retired at age 65, have a life expectancy of only 6 - 7 years on average. So $500K should provide a quality of life for this short period. However, there could be a problem if one lives longer.

http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129550394)

 

[JohnK]

Easy - don't use it! However, airline travel is public transport too.

Hahaha. Stay away from the public as much as possible.

I have in the waiting room at the hospital clinic for ~1h 45m. I was given a 10:45am appointment. There looks like at least 8 people still to be seen. I'd bet a portion of my life savings that I'll be last to be seen again. Why me again? Last time I walked out after waiting 2h 15m. Getting close to breaking point again.

 

[medhead]

Baby boomers that are about to, or have recently retired at age 65, have a life expectancy of only 6 - 7 years on average. So $500K should provide a quality of life for this short period. However, there could be a problem if one lives longer.

http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=60129550394)

slightly confusing presentation in that table. But as best I can read it someone who was 65 in 2011-2013 is expected to die when they're 84.2. At least as I read it. But the interesting bit is that a 45 year old is expected to die at 81.8 years. That doesn't really support the idea of an increasing life expectancy.

Also looking access the age spread, while life expectancy of younger people has increased there is still a limiting factor at the older end. Life expectancy of 95 year olds is basically unchanged. This doesn't really support the suggestion of a drastic increase in life expectancy beyond 100 years, into the 150 year region.

 

[Pushka]

Grandmother lived to 95 (born in 1900) and mother still alive at 87. I'm going to need a lot of super.

 

[OATEK]

slightly confusing presentation in that table. But as best I can read it someone who was 65 in 2011-2013 is expected to die when they're 84.2. At least as I read it. But the interesting bit is that a 45 year old is expected to die at 81.8 years. That doesn't really support the idea of an increasing life expectancy.
<Snip>

When I was doing demography at Uni, the lecturer had a pet saying:

"the longer you live, the longer you live"

What he was saying was that your life expectancy increases with age, so it is lower at birth than at say age 75, given that if you are about to turn 75 your life expectancy at birth was probably quite a few years less than 75.

So I take it to mean that your life expectancy at 45 could be lower than at 65.

 

[blackcat20]

Grandmother lived to 95 (born in 1900) and mother still alive at 87. I'm going to need a lot of super.

My great grandma was born in 1899 and made it to 99.

 

[JohnK]

And I was last to be seen. :mrgreen: You'd think there was a conspiracy against me!

Now waiting for blood test while I'm here. What does "Out to lunch back at 1:35" mean? Back at 1:41? I love waiting. It's fun. And haven't been to work yet.

I can just about taste that beer at Irish Murphy's....

 

[medhead]

When I was doing demography at Uni, the lecturer had a pet saying:

"the longer you live, the longer you live"

What he was saying was that your life expectancy increases with age, so it is lower at birth than at say age 75, given that if you are about to turn 75 your life expectancy at birth was probably quite a few years less than 75.

So I take it to mean that your life expectancy at 45 could be lower than at 65.

That's true.

But it doesn't really change my comment about an increasing life expectancy. The numbers in the table are an average. but there is still a limiting age/life expectancy for the 95 year old, which is relatively the same since 1890. More people might make it to 95 but they are still expected to not pass 97-ish. I also did a graph of the trend for each of the ages the change is tapering to about 85 for each of each of the ages. Projecting the trend might point to the 120 year life expectancy in the middle of this century, except for the 95 year olds. Their trend is basically flat.

If we have this great demographic shift, I'd also expect the 45 year olds to start to have a similar age of dead as old groups. e.g. around the 84 years of the 65 year olds not 81 years.

Anyway, it's only one set of numbers. Just at the end of the day if you're going to get to 95 and only have a couple more years and it's been like that for 120 years. I can't see how we're all going to start living until 120 or 150.

 

[OATEK]

That's true.

<Snip>
Anyway, it's only one set of numbers. Just at the end of the day if you're going to get to 95 and only have a couple more years and it's been like that for 120 years. I can't see how we're all going to start living until 120 or 150.

SWMBO has an Uncle who has reached 103, just to break the rule. But you are right, not too many re going to make it past 100 for some time to come.

 

[DC3]

Re: Best Status Run Options - A quick overview!

.... when did you become a Mod Jess? ....

Ah, yes, mods. Somewhat O/T, I know, but that term always reminds me of mods and rockers.


Mods and rockers From Wikipedia:

mods and rockers were two conflicting British youth subcultures of the early to mid-1960s. Media coverage of mods and rockers fighting in 1964 sparked a moral panic about British youths, and the two groups became labelled as folk devils.