don/quote..<<..It's easy to see..that the top 25 per cent of taxpayers..>>

ie you have a graph..of tax payers
[some seems to be paying..60 percent income tax
[i thought that height of tax went away long ago''[or are you saying the top quarter pay 60%/well so they should/that seems fair/considering their mostly/the fruit..of private/higher education/privledge..[what actually peeves me..is multinationals/getting all that aussies are supposed to get.

<<in terms of their taxable income;..contribute about two thirds of all the income taxation revenue..>>

funny..two thirds to me =66..but so what?
fair is fair[i recall another link/said top tax payers get back..1.point six dollars/for every dollar/taxed..[middle class 10$..for/thier dollar..and the bludgers..300/for their dollar

i just hate how smokers pay 3000 to get zip/representation/yet the sin tax punitive taxation/no one cares its indexed at 3000 extra each year-

<<..and that in general their share has been rising over time,>>

ohhh you did notice don
well not really..ok poor you..us smokers spend 25%/on our smokes

<<>. while the poor pay very little.>>
vulldust..[poor smokers out pay what you are paying don

<<. Sure, you say, but that is because ..we have a progressive income taxation system.>>

no its because sin taxation/is too clever[induce guilt/then say carbon credits will save you]

<<.. As it happens, I agree...>>..[progressive/taxation]..*[but note..<<<..But surely the better off..are already doing a lot of heavy lifting, aren't they?>>

yeah...lets tax wine/diesal/and luxuries tax/tramnsaction tax..and undo the debasement..of the queens coin.

<<..There's some real inequality here.>>

because once/the rich/payed..for everything when they spent
[i recall paying two grand for a vidio recpording device/but know 1000 of that went.to making the luckey cuntry.

<<>.As I said, talking about inequality gets you into a semantic swamp very quickly...I try to avoid it if I can.>>

think/about the poor smokers
justice will demand/we do the same..for cell phones causing brain tumours/for booze hounds and lolly eaters/a suger sin tax//a sin tax on booze[tripple the cost of the tipple..

done/index it..and watch the sin taxes roll in
and if they complain/make them put evil pictures on their lollies.

Trolls eventually are caught out as they really are "Bulldusters".
They may enjoy a free start and put down others, with the assumption they had some sort of "False" talent.
Hasbeen mate you appear to live in a sense of delusions of grandeur, that indicate that you never had a proper job in your life !!

Don, this is not my area, but there are three things that struck me about your article.

1. The first was that figure from Davidson I wondered whether the reason that the share of total tax paid by the rich was going up was because the rich were in fact getting richer at a faster rate than everyone else. So I went to the RBA Hilda survey to check http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2012/mar/3.html and lo and behold, the top quintile of richest people had their net wealth increase by almost $500,000 between 2002 and 2010, while the net wealth of the second lowest quintile had barely moved.

In addition income data from the ABS supports the idea that the income of the rich has increased far more than that of the poor http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6523.0Main%20Features62011-12?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6523.0&issue=2011-12&num=&view=

If it is in fact the case that the rich are paying a higher share of total tax simply because they have got richer, then I don’t see a real problem. Your argument seems to be that they should get a break because they have got richer.

2. I agree with you that people are born unequal and have unequal access to opportunity. Where I differ from the argument you are making is that I don’t see how that then becomes an argument that greater inequality is better. Surely to be a useful functioning society we should seek to minimise inequality of opportunity where we can?

One of the issues I see with American society is that it is becoming so unequal that it has become unstable. This is when revolutions occur.

3. Lastly, I take issue with your argument about the relative fairness of the recent Australian budget. From what I have read in the papers, the problem seems to be that while the extra rich are being asked to contribute 2% more, which they will hardly notice from their large disposable incomes, the poor in contrast are asked to contribute a lot in the way of both costs and reductions in benefits, that they cannot really afford. There is your fairness problem.

Yep its a shame that the author isn't doing the job of a scholar - that is raising inconvenient questions for the government of the day.

Instead he appears to be an advertising mouth-piece for Abbott's conservative mantras.

Killarney says,

So GMH ‘fully funded' your engineering degree, huh? AND no doubt paid you a salary while you were studying.

There you have it, folks! Hasbeen got his degree for FREE! And was PAID to do it!

No Killarney, I got sick of it in less than a year. A GM role I quickly found was not for me. However I was awarded that cadetship because my results meant GM wanted to employ me. Any reasonably smart person who worked as hard as I did would have had the same opportunity.

In those days, if not wealthy, you could take a teachers scholarship, or win one from business who wanted the top graduates. Oh, & schooling was compulsory to 15, then available to all.

My mother relented & signed my navy application, & I became a navy fighter pilot, all set to defend people like you, although I'm not sure I'd do it again.

When I came out I returned to uni & paid for my tuition from my savings.

However, I am not a fool. If we are offering handouts to all, I see no reason to pay for them, & not collect them. I currently collect our quite handsome age pension, & as I was a contributor when we actually had a levy, I believe I am entitled to it.

I do get very sick of the wingers who reckon it is not enough. If one made even a mild effort towards their mature wellbeing they can live very well on our pension. Those who did not make this effort have no one but themselves to blame.

Where I live, the ones who don't work are the ones with the money & those who work are considered as the discriminated against. This is a legacy of Labor & hopefully this situation will be looked at by Premier Newman's successor.