Dear Paul,

Our current treasurer is a bit of a concern.
His latest bit of advice - "get a well-paying
job," (when unemplyment is the highest its ever
been under the current government)
is about as good as his earlier comment
on poor people and cars. He is definitely out
of touch and shamefully in denial about the
housing situation especially in his home-state.

Melbourne also has a housing problem. Foreign
investment is pricing younger people out of
the housing market. It will be interesting to see
what the Foreign Investment Review Board which is
investigating nearly 200 cases of suspected unlawful
purchases of property will find. Two hundred cases
according to experts - is only the tip of the iceberg.

DavidF,

Although I think Hockey is a wealthy boofhead, insensitive to most people who do have money worries, I firmly believe in the capitalist system. It has been proven to work, just as the options have proven NOT to work.

That's historical fact, not opinion, so your comment that Hanson-Young's "wealth distribution ideas should be adopted" is astounding.

There is a concentration of wealth in relatively few hands. Your are right about that. The relatively few who are richer than the rest of us all have something that we do not have. If we, say 80% of the population had whatever it takes to get rich, we would all be rich; but we do not have what it takes, and most of us have to get used to the idea of being happy with what we have.

Short of bloody revolution, there will NEVER be a re-distribution of wealth in a democracy. If there was a revolution, it would not be long before we were all poor, including the erstwhile rich. Even the 'socialist' Labor MP's (the party is socialist, but the hierarchy is not) will never fall for re-distribution of wealth. They are in the rich group themselves, not our lot.

And, just how much of her more than adequate salary and savings (including superannuation) do you think Hanson-Young of the extreme Left would be prepared to have distributed among the rest of us?

The whole idea is stuff and nonsense, David, and you should be very pleased that it is. Without the wealth of the few, the rest of us would be much, much worse off than we are.

ttbn wrote: "Without the wealth of the few, the rest of us would be much, much worse off than we are."

That sounds crazy to me.

Why am I not surprised at your ignorance of financial matters david f.

You would of course be amazed to realise 60% of tax is paid by the top 15% of income earners. The bottom 50& effectively pay no tax, the government spends more on us than the total tax paid.

Stop bitching, or those high income earners might decide they have to keep too many, & stop working so hard/smart.

Hasbeen wrote: "Why am I not surprised at your ignorance of financial matters david f.

You would of course be amazed to realise 60% of tax is paid by the top 15% of income earners. The bottom 50& effectively pay no tax, the government spends more on us than the total tax paid.

Stop bitching, or those high income earners might decide they have to keep too many, & stop working so hard/smart."

I am not ignorant of financial matters although you sound quite ignorant. You think those who make a lot of money work hard/smart?

I probably have worked much harder in my life than James Packer with his yacht and his father's billions. He has managed to lose a couple of the billions because he isn't nearly as smart as his father. Vast sums are made by financial manipulation and a tax system which is set up to favour the rich. Some of the people who work the hardest such as hospital orderlies are the lowest paid. Earnings are not proportionate to effort.

The rich pay a large proportion of taxes. They also avoid a lot of taxes. It is nonsense to say that 50% pay no tax. With the GST everybody who buys almost anything pays taxes. The GST makes sure that the bottom 50% pay taxes.

The Catholic bishops were set to write a pastoral letter on the regressive nature of the GST. Howard announced 400 million more for Catholic schools, and the letter never went out.

Hasbeen, it is not a good way to argue to call other people ignorant because they disagree with you. The GST is a device to avoid a comprehensive income tax system which would be based on ability to pay. I'm calling it like it is. The income tax is too low, and the GST should be eliminated.

I was not commenting because I disagree with you david f, but because of the total foolishness of your previous comment.

Meanwhile it was nice of you to confirm my opinion of your understanding, of financial matters.