The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Alternative Budget 2017-18 > Comments

Alternative Budget 2017-18 : Comments

By David Leyonhjelm, published 3/5/2017

Each spending cut from the last parliament should be retested in the new parliament, which has already shown greater fiscal responsibility than its predecessor.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All
Well here we go again, with welfare cuts not too cleverly camouflaged as a responsible budget. With as usual for this snout in the taxpayer trough/welfare recipient commentator? Not a even bare whisperer of negative gearing or subsidized capital gains, even as massively
non affordable house and rent prices drive ever increasing levels of Aussies on to welfare or worse.

That said not completely bereft of good ideas, like the higher tax threshold, which could be s high as $50,000 and a lower flat tax rate, which as I've said many times could be as low as 15%, as an unavoidable rate

. Which if implemented as an entirely unavoidable flat tax that everyone above the threshold paid, would eventually get rid of the deficit via snowballing economic growth.

Moreover as an unavoidable tax above the threshold without exclusion, would end bracket creep forever and the need to for tax compliance and all associated costs!

Which would allow an average 7% to be returned to the bottom line, meaning the effective rate would be just 8% adjusted. meaning greater motivation for real cashed up investment and as Australian companies headquartered here/self funded retirees, as would considerably lower energy prices, which however, like thorium power, include humongous sovereign risk for a few, (foreign debt laden speculators?) and therefore to be resisted to the very last self serving, sycophantic ultra right wing conservative, budget bothers, like David?

And to hell with the overall economy, real jobs and unfettered unprecedented growth?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 3 May 2017 12:10:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh dear alan, you just dont get it, do you!

Negative gearing allow investors to buy property that returns 2 - 5% on value and, as the value increases, through rent increases, the investment become posetively geared.

By all means scrap NG, but at your peril. Investors will fall over each other to devest in residential housing, leaving the renters to compete with fewer houses in coming years as they wont build houses if there are no buyers. Then, as population increases, (thanks to loose immigration policies) the fewer houses become more in demand, and rents will go up.

The simple fact is, if you dont get 10% on your money, why would anyone invest in mums and dad housing. The 10% is made up of income + capital growth + tax write offs. And you want to take a blow touch to two of these with the 3rd, rents, sure to surge. What a genius! Perhaps you should run for Pm instead of Bill because a trained monkey will win the next election if Mal is still there.
Posted by rehctub, Wednesday, 3 May 2017 7:52:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy