|
|
| Chookie |
| 'things' seem to be getter bigger......hmmmmmm;) :haha: |
|
|
| lethal |
Hi everyone, been away for a few days and my perogative not to rejoin the debate till id read up on the budget have led me not to reply till now. But well im back and im going to put down my views and some facts. Enjoy! :)
Firstly, The increase in family benefits. This is one of the major points in the budget - it is the thing that the govt is basing its re-election on more then anything else, and as such the extra funding going into the scheme is very enticing to families in all tax brackets. The extra 40,000 child care placements in after school care and 4000 day care placements are both very welcome things but in truth dont even scratch the surface of what is needed! This will not even meet 1/3 of the currnet unmet demand nor will it affect those areas were it is most needed (ie areas that are deemed unprofitable by private institutions - private institutions are the ones recieving this funding.). The reforms to the Family Tax Benefit A and B, will go some way to repairing the debacle that those 2 schemes have become, and will address to a certain extent the current system which actively discourages mothers from returning to the work force (currently mothers returning to the workforce lose both the benefits that they would have recieved staying at home caring for the children and get taxed at a higher rate, thus being a major financial disadvantage to return to work after a child.) The increase to these schemes replace the Howard Govt's FAILED baby bonus scheme which was proven to be a complete and utter right off! :rolleyes:
This budget is aimed at encouraging people to have children which is in one sense financially responsible seeing as in 10 years time there will be a huge number of australians retired and not working, so i suppose in thinking to the future, the more children, the more future workers, better for the economy. Financially sound thinking. Socially VERY IRRESPONSIBLE! Talk to any person earning $100,000+ and ask them what they think would be the most expensive asset they could have and they will say children. People who make large amounts of money have less kids then those who have very little money. The reason kids cost a lot of money! As such most people on high incomes live by the SINK or DINK philosophies (Single Income No Kids, Dual Income No Kids) until they are well into their thirties. Encouraging children therefore wilL merely encourage those on lower incomes to have more kids (because of the small financial incentives) and thus creating an underclass of poor families with lots of kids, the social costs of that im sure you can all guess. But even assuming that this situation doesnt occur, is increasing the number of kids really that big a gain? Its a delayed resource coming through 20 years from now, a resource that will cost a lot to educate to a standard where it is earning enough to help support the rest of the nation, and then what happens in 65 years time when the next generation baby boomers hit retirement age? Its just perpetuating a problem with a 65 year cycle time!
secondly, tax cuts. This is the issue i have the most problem with. The primary reason for the movements in the tax thresholds is to counter bracket creep (according to Peter Costello anyway), but if that were truly the case then all tax brackets would have moved. The fact of the matter is that if we use purely the ABS's figures for the increase in peoples incomes over the last 10 years, the tax free threshold would have moved from its current $6000 mark up to $13500. Now ive noticed a lot of people on here saying that our tax rates are too high anyway being nearly 50% at the highest rate, and i agree its high but we have a progressive tax system which means that you dont pay 50% of ALL your income in tax...
Example 1 - lets assume you earn $100,000 and make absolutely no deductions on your taxable income (if there is a single person in Aus who does this they must have an IQ less then that of a glass of water!:rolleyes: ).
You pay no tax on the first $6000, you then pay 17% for the next $15600 ($2652), then 30% for the next $30400 ($9120), then 42% for the next $10500 ($4410), then 47% for the remaining $37500 ($17625) meaning you pay in actuality $33807 or 33.8%. Now thats not really that high is it? With the new scheme however you will save $2195.00. You now pay only $31612 or 31.6%. Wow big saving... :rolleyes:
Example 2 - a person on $40 000 currently pays $8712 tax (20.4%), with the new scheme they'll still pay $8712. Huge saving huh? :rolleyes:
Personally id like to see the $14.7 billion spent on increasing the tax free threshold for EVERYONE rather then just those on highest incomes! A simple $1000-2500 increase in the tax free threshold would benefit everybody in australia especially those on the lowest incomes and would still give a tax cut to those on the highest incomes - our $100,000 example would still recieve a tax cut of $170-425 a year, whilst our $40,000 example would save the same. Or if the government pushed back all the brackets by the $1000-2500 then a saving of $470-1175 would apply for our $100,000 example whilst a saving of $300-750 and i think everyone would agree the system would be far more equitable. I also dont believe the cost would be much greater then the current proposed changes, however i dont have access to the govts data so i cant be 100% sure of that!
Thirdly, The increase in superranuation contribution - BIG THUMBS UP!! nuff said...
fourthly, the increase in defense and intelligence spending. Im giving this a cautious thumbs up. Apart from the addition of 2 extra RAAF AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning & Control) Aircraft, there doesnt appear to be much of an increase in expenditure on actual military projects. This i think is a good thing because the defense force white paper released 2 years ago outlined all the expenditures for the future and how they were to be payed for, so im glad that there is no EXTRA money going to some of these projects because the white paper outlined quite effectively what was needed for a well balanced Aus military force, additional spending is just wastage in my opinion. Oh and just to let you know those 2 extra AEW&C's are damn good planes - when we have all 6, aus will possess probably the worlds best early warning fleet especially when combiined with the Jindabyne Over-the-horizon Radar Network (JORN) that we have across northern Aus! Also someone mentioned the collins class submarines as being an example of wasted money. I would just like to correct that person - the collins class subs are actually (now that theyve been modified, unfortunatley at great expense due to the MONUMENTAL cockup of the american electronics contractor and the up of the aus defense dept to NOT write certain clauses into the contract) a world class subamrine. :)
The rest of the budget in my opinion sounds quite reasonable and is of less importance then these key areas (my opinion once more) though there are a few issues like the funding for aboriginal communities and the environment. But the election deciders are those above.
As for education i dont have the figures on me so im not going to comment on it in depth but i think you will find that if you look at the money spent on private school students (by govts, parents and the schools own funding (from private ventures, etc.)), you will find that it is MUCH greater then that spent on public school students. The evidence of this is fairly easy to find - drive past bankstown high then drive past sydney boys high, you make the decision. Which you would send your kids to if you had the choice! Personally on this topic im very much a communist idealist - i would love to see private schools banned! That way kids from poor families would recieve the same education as those from rich families! There would of course be some discrepencies between various areas (kirribillie kids would undoubtedly recieve beter education then mount druitt) but the system would be FAR more equitable. However, thats just a pipe dream and not going to happen, so lets move right along shall we? :rolleyes:
As for the question about where is Latham going to get his funding from. Personally im GLAD that they havent said were its coming from yet. I like the idea that the Labour is thinking about the problem and coming up with the best solution. if an answer to the 5000 page budget document was released within the same week, id be INCREDIBLY SUSS about it! However, i can already see a few areas that the moeny could come from. Reworking the tax system like labour has said they would means they have $14.7 billion to play with. An extra $2.2 billion could be saved by stopping the governments proposed one-off $600 bribe to families that will be paid in july this year. It is very much a bribe and should be touted as such. This is all im going to comment on in this regard because once again i dont have the governments figures, nor am i part of the opposition. I do look forward to hearing their counter proposal though.
And Sel: That increase cant be natural, it cant!!!!! :eyes: :p :p :p
That is all..... look forward to hearing your responses! :) |
|
|
| tubby |
| quote: | Originally posted by lethal
i think you will find that if you look at the money spent on private school students (by govts, parents and the schools own funding (from private ventures, etc.)), you will find that it is MUCH greater then that spent on public school students. |
it's obvious that all up private schoole have more money per student, but they get a lot less/student than publiuc schools. a couple of years ago the government wanted to count schools own fundraising as part of their funding, so anything you raised was deducted from your government funding. Totally discourage effort from the parents and community to support your schools. Similarly, discouraging parents from paying extra for education, all that achieves is to drag everyone down to a low average, it would do nothing to improve general standards.
Anyone here tried going to a macdonalds of an evening in singapore ot hong kong? ever noticed they're full of kids studying? The only thing that will significantly improve our education system is a change of parental standards which they can pass on to the kids. Until then we can all just blame the government, a nice fat target |
|
|
| matt_a |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubby
it's obvious that all up private schoole have more money per student, but they get a lot less/student than publiuc schools. a couple of years ago the government wanted to count schools own fundraising as part of their funding, so anything you raised was deducted from your government funding. Totally discourage effort from the parents and community to support your schools. Similarly, discouraging parents from paying extra for education, all that achieves is to drag everyone down to a low average, it would do nothing to improve general standards.
Anyone here tried going to a macdonalds of an evening in singapore ot hong kong? ever noticed they're full of kids studying? The only thing that will significantly improve our education system is a change of parental standards which they can pass on to the kids. Until then we can all just blame the government, a nice fat target |
Werd! It's all in our attitudes. Even talking to some of my older friends who have finished Uni, if you tell them you are reading a book that is even partly educational, you get shot down for being a nerd and "as if you'd read books". I pity these people.
Some people want a good education and some people don't care about it. Or their parents don't care about it. There are heaps of kids in year 12 that do all work, and then blame the public education system for their poor marks. Just like our society, no body wants to take responsibility for themselves anymore. Education is there if you want it. It depends on your attitude to it whether you take it in or not.
I also cannot understand all thesr richos that dont want kids for economical reasons. I mean whats the point of their life? Live, get rich, enjoy it for a while, get old and die. Leave nothing. Seems pointless to me. What's their point in life. |
|
|
CLICK TO RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE
tranceaddict Forums Archive > Local Scene Info / Discussion > Australia
|
