(Though NSW should keep its borders closed and stay in lockdown for another few weeks)
Armchair Critic,
A 5 metre high fence around Sydney & Melbourne would be an excellent project for a National Service to kick off !

As far as I'm concerned I don't think any Public Servant should be on higher salary than the PM. As simple as That !
That includes Judges,, Lawyers, ABC & SBS, & any Project manager & consultant whose salary is paid from the Public Purse !

Indy, your vindictive approach to public servants salaries could have unintended consequences, EXAMPLE;

A PS Dept head on a taxable income of $400k p.a, presently pays $153k in income tax, giving a nett income of $247k p.a. Should that same PS take a forced 25% pay reduction to $300k taxable income, apply your 15% flat tax equalling $45k, his nett income would rise to $255k. Thus the despised ones nett income would go up by $8,000 p.a.

Now, how about answering one of my questions, like the reduction in minimum wages with your 15% flat income tax, would the aged welfare benefit you receive also be cut by a mandatory 15%, seems only fair?

I KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE ANYTHING THAT WOULD EFFECT YOUR PRESENTLY, MOST GENEROUS GOVERNMENT LARGESSE, BUT YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

Paul1405,
You're right when you say presently & that's the crux of the problem ! The present system is flawed that's why I advocate "CHANGE" !
You constantly dissect my proposals with the present system as your argument. How many times do I need to tell you that it is the present system we need to get away from to make the situation better & more equal !
Also, when you pay 15% for argument's sake then in that 15% should be your Pension, Dental & other Medical as well as Ambulance. A PS Dept head should not be on $400,000 in the first place ! Bring him back to no more than $300,000 ! How can you justify 400 Grand for doing what ? Old age pensioners have earned their pension, I'm not so sure about those who always avoided work.

would the aged welfare benefit you receive also be cut by a mandatory 15%, seems only fair?
Paul1405,
Your Tory attitude towards Old Age pensioners flies in the face of your supposed Socialist leanings !
What about the Welfare component in your Superannuation ?
I maintain that Superannuation should be a voluntary contribution & the Old Age pension should be returned to what it was, a compulsory contribution throughout a wage earner's life.
We do not have wages that allow putting "something away" for later years. People need a safety net & Govt should provide that in return for not providing a level playing field & fixed goal posts !

Indy,

I always favoured a retirement scheme which tied compulsory superannuation and aged pension welfare together. A non means tested pension ('Pensoncare') component payable at the age of 65 based on years of residency in Australia as a citizen or permanent resident from the age of 20. In other words a full pension would be paid to those holding 45 units (65-20=45), a part pension to those holding less units, (migrants). If you migrate or die before the age of 65 you receive a cash payout based on years of residency less years to retirement. Based on a compulsory 7.5% contribution rate, a full pension payment to all of $300 week would not be unreasonable. Taking a holiday/working o/s does not affect the pension, providing in total time spent out of the country does not exceed 2 years

To give you an example of a payment to someone who dies or leaves the country permanently. Based on a figure of 15 times annual pension (average life expectancy of 80 years) say $15,000 x 15 = $225,000 A migrant arrived at age 30 died at age 60 and spent 8 years back in the old country. That person would hold 60-30-5-8 units = 17, their payout would be 17/45 times $225,000 = $85,000. A similar lump sum payout arrangement for those who die or migrate between the ages of 65 and 80 would apply. A full pensioner who dies at age 70 his estate would be entitled to a cash payout (80-70)/15 x $225,000 = $150,000.

A compulsory superannuation account of another 7.5% of earnings (in place of the present 9.5% compulsory contributions) would operate side by side with the compulsory 'Pensioncare' scheme. Similar to what operates now, but publicly owned and operated, and invested in nation building projects, call it 'Supacare'. Supa would be invested in public projects, with interest paid at the 10 year bond rate, with operating charges covered by the government. People could also invest privately in supa as they do now. The safety net is the pension, the bonus is the supa scheme.