|
Budget 2004: Your feedback (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| eRRaTiK |
screw all u kants i'm voting ONE NATION.
pauline an the bomb. |
|
|
| starsurfer |
Bragi, I totally agree with you mate. It's not your fault or problem when it comes to how much you earn or pay in tax.
I also agree that the people making loads on investments and shares and pretty much anyone earning $200k or more need to have their own upper crust tax bracket.
It's suffice to say that there are a LOT.. and I mean a LOT of people making $80k even $500k a year... and taxing them more to give to the lower end of the earners isn't such a bad thing. It wouldn't event affect the rich people's quality of life.
Me personally I am reasonably happy coz I get an ok tax cut. But I am still dissapointed in the parenting scehemes.
Yeah it's good to get that $3000 pay off... but really.. most people have terrible spending habbits.. that money will go on other apart from the baby.
What should have been done is maybe less of a payout.. but more support from the government to help finance day care places.. .. so that day care costs coule be less.... coz the day care costs are what make parenting the hardest... especially when both the husband and mother are working full time or close to full time. Day care, depending on where you live, can cost hundreds of dollars a week.
So while the $3000 is nice.. I think it could have been slightly better spent.
I also think that a tax cut for the low income earners should have been a bloody given. In fact that tax free threshold should have gone up by 20 - 30%. But thath's just me.
Scottie |
|
|
| gumble |
I havent seen or heard the budget, but i think its ed how we have contributed so much to weapons and sending military into the middle east - which has nothing to do with us - and we are cutting much needed funds for things like health and education.
social security is a bit weird sometimes, giving amounts of money to people that just work the system, and disadvantaging others
that really might need it. maybe a few changes need to take place, but i reckon ppl might just get around them.
to me it always seems as the average guy gets slumped with having to pay this countries debts - the rich get richer, we look after the poor pretty well (maybe too well in some cases); but the middle man, the guy with the family and the mortgage seems to always cop it.
thats my opinion anyway.
*brings this back to normal TA level*
OMG WHY CANT ARMIN BE IN THE BUDGET. |
|
|
| matt_a |
| quote: | Originally posted by lethal
The sort of discussions were all having now are what happens in a good democracy, because as people talk about political decisions HOPEFULLY the views of the people will reach the ears of members of parliament (thats what their there for!) and hopefully if theres an issue such as education or health funding in the budget that the people are unhappy with that gets back to the members and they vote no to the budget and the budget changes slightly to reflect the views of the people before getting passed.
I hope you dont think im talking down to you matt but you dont seem to realise just how important good political debate is
I will say one positive thing about this budget after the very quick perousal ive given it - im glad theres no major increase in funding for the defense forces - until they learn how to spend the money theyve got efficiently i dont think they should be given more!!! :mad: |
Maybe you didnt get what I was saying sorry. In your first point, you say they should change it to reflect the views of the people. I know that people in this forum have been saying how the government is 'trying to win votes' with this budget. Doesn't that imply that they are doing what the majority want. As if they were not doing what people wanted, they would be suiciding votes wouldn't they. So by 'trying to win votes', they are doing what the majority want.
Don't worry, I enjoy good political debate . . just ask my legal studies class. I just don't think that by people going "Oh this, stupid government wankers, didn't give me a tax cut, politicians are all bastards" is any kind of good political debate, but rather they are lessening their chances of anyone taking them seriously because they are acting so immaturely. If they actually wanna do something why don't they activiely go about it, write letters or something, and not just sit back and expect things to go their way.
Haha, love your last point, very true, we are really gonna do well against other nations in wars with Diesel submarines, and old ass planes. But of course we need to put lots of money into ASIO, as they are so good at what they do :haha: :haha:
Pray to god we never get invaded. |
|
|
| Romp |
| quote: | Originally posted by escee
The amount of idiocy in this thread is astounding.
Voting at the election will be as easy or hard as it was last term.
Good economic conditions = Liberal.
Good welfare system, health system, uni system = Labour.
Wasted votes = Greens, democrats, etc.
Personally, ill be voting liberal. Mark latham needs another term as the opposition before he is ready imo. |
well if there is a large amount of idiocy in this thread your post probably added to it :rolleyes:
what you say about liberal and labour is a simplification at best, theres no reason why the economy cant do well under labour for example.
a vote for the Greens or anyone else isnt wasted since we have a preferential system plus they can do valuable work in the senate. |
|
|
| Romp |
| quote: | | Maybe you didnt get what I was saying sorry. In your first point, you say they should change it to reflect the views of the people. I know that people in this forum have been saying how the government is 'trying to win votes' with this budget. Doesn't that imply that they are doing what the majority want. As if they were not doing what people wanted, they would be suiciding votes wouldn't they. So by 'trying to win votes', they are doing what the majority want. |
It doesnt imply they are doing what the majority want, they are trying to win votes from a small minority - swinging and undecided voters, the ones that are going to decide the next election. |
|
|
| escee |
:rolleyes: 3 lines summing up our entire political system a simplification? NEVER?!?!
ps: im well aware of greens and democrats holding the balance of power in the senate, Im also aware of the fact that people tend to vote for what name they see on the tv the most, andrew bartlett, bob brown? |
|
|
| eRRaTiK |
| quote: | Originally posted by matt_a
If they actually wanna do something why don't they activiely go about it, write letters or something, and not just sit back and expect things to go their way. |
wait.. are we talking about the same (sit on your ass and watch tv with a stubbie in your hand or cbf'd) australian people here? ;) |
|
|
| webmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by gumble
*brings this back to normal TA level*
OMG WHY CANT ARMIN BE IN THE BUDGET. |
LOL that just made my day :D |
|
|
| Ves |
| quote: | Originally posted by eRRaTiK
screw all u kants i'm voting ONE NATION.
pauline an the bomb. |
no way!!
communist party of australia all the way, baby!
marxist-leninism...the way of the future! the collapse of the USSR was a mere anomaly, dearest comrade.
harharhar..so says the idealistic, private school educated armchair revolutionary.
(people like me probably shouldn't be allowed to vote :nervous: )
anyway, in response to the budget not really affecting our lives- hmmm! I'd say the budget is actually rather influential! i think if you were earning around $70K and your tax was equal to the salary of a low income earner you'd be more than just a tad disturbed...
there should be another tax bracket round $250K. there's a significant difference between that and $80K, and I would hardly call 80K "rich". but at least theyre attempting to combat bracket creep.
hmmmm, i'm really not sure what to think about the whole family focus of it. but i suppose family related policies are not really going to affect me for a long time (i hope!!) |
|
|
| Vigilante |
Some people really have short memories when it comes to voting at the federal election.
Do you guys remember:
- The Ethanol/Manildra Situation
- Children Overboard
- War in Iraq
- GST
- Gay Marriages
- Stem Cell Research
- Australian Broadcasting Authority
- Australia's treatment of Refugees with the Pacific solution or whatever its called
- Mark Latham's proposed superannuation changes, which Howard chose to adopt
- Howard's poor handling of the Governer-General affair
- Howard's refusal to say "sorry"
- Inflated defence spending - dud projects like the Collins submarines
- John Howard wearing that stupid Vodafone tracksuit all the time:D
- Howard's "buttkissing" of the USA and George Bush
For me there is no choice.....i can't sit back and continue to be consistently lied to and misled over national issues like the Children Overboard affair and The War In Iraq.
Do you really think that the Howard government has acted in Australia's best interests in dealing with all of these issues??? |
|
|
|
|
