Who to vote for?

boobook

Well-Known Member
Last edited:

Mick_Marsh

Active Member
If Albo wins by a landslide (highly likely), then the appeasement factor goes out the window.
Remember the last election?
The polling was predicting a Shorten landslide.

The polling today shows both the LNP and ALP in the mid 30s. Albo scraping it in with Greens preferences.
I'll wait for the end of election night.
Albo might scrape it in, not in a landslide.
Albo might form a minority government in coalition with the Greens (and we remember how well that worked last time, don't we).
 

peterfermtech

Well-Known Member
Who wrote that article? They forget that tax is paid on profit not revenue. Not saying all the companies are doing the right thing, but the whole premise of the article is completely flawed. They mix income with revenue. Der
I think it's called journalistic licence. As long as you print some facts the rest of the opinions are considered factual.
 

John U

Well-Known Member
Who wrote that article? They forget that tax is paid on profit not revenue. Not saying all the companies are doing the right thing, but the whole premise of the article is completely flawed. They mix income with revenue. Der
It’s great that these massive companies are so altruistic that they continually operate for no profit. Australia is very lucky that they decided to bless us with their presence.
 

boobook

Well-Known Member
It’s great that these massive companies are so altruistic that they continually operate for no profit. Australia is very lucky that they decided to bless us with their presence.
There is no doubt in my mind that offshore profiting should be stopped or controlled. But also as that article does not acknowledge, tax is on profit, and many businesses make a profit some years and a loss in others. Same as a small business.

This has been the same for over a hundred years, libs, labour, all governments. So I am not sure if your point that it's a liberal party problem. Infact in 2016 the libs brought in laws to reduce offshore profits, generating 25B in tax. So to your point, you should support liberal.
 

Albynsw

Well-Known Member
It’s great that these massive companies are so altruistic that they continually operate for no profit. Australia is very lucky that they decided to bless us with their presence.

You really are missing the point focussing on one aspect of the bigger picture.
Just as a side note, one of our prominent mens tennis stars has his registered address in the cayman islands so guess who is also paying no tax but he is a sportsman so we all love him of course. I don’t doubt that there are a lot more of them doing the same
 

John U

Well-Known Member
Not missing the point at all. My point is that in many circumstances, not all, the wealthier a company/individual is, the greater the ability to partake in tax minimisation. Companies and individuals making money in Australia should be prepared to contribute.
Companies/individuals that pay bugger all should be called out and shamed. Companies/individuals who pay their way should be applauded.

Didn’t the lnp pass a law allowing this stuff to be concealed (for super wealthy)?

Like I said earlier, the banks manage to pay their way. Why shouldn’t miners?

Sports stars/film stars same deal.
 

Albynsw

Well-Known Member
Not missing the point at all. My point is that in many circumstances, not all, the wealthier a company/individual is, the greater the ability to partake in tax minimisation. Companies and individuals making money in Australia should be prepared to contribute.
Companies/individuals that pay bugger all should be called out and shamed. Companies/individuals who pay their way should be applauded.

Didn’t the lnp pass a law allowing this stuff to be concealed (for super wealthy)?

Like I said earlier, the banks manage to pay their way. Why shouldn’t miners?

Sports stars/film stars same deal.

These same laws and taxation avenues apply to all Australians, mum and dad investors do exactly the same thing and can minimise or totally negate paying any tax at all. This is standard common practice as any financial advisor will tell you and I would be surprised if you don’t do the same, only a fool wouldn’t. The only difference is the scale.
Sure I agree that it would be great if everyone paid more tax in an ideal theoretical world but it doesn’t work like that.
You have to look at the spin-off of what their tax offset brings to the economy. Remember when labor tried stopping negative gearing on investment properties for example?
All the investors, many who were just mum and dad ones too started selling off their investment properties and the rental market shrunk which caused a housing crisis and spike in rentals, they soon realised the knock on effect and reversed the law.
I recall when it happened that the investors took their money out of property and were buying taxi plates instead as they could get a 9% return on their money ( back then a taxi plate cost as much as a 1 bedroom unit in Sydney)
Banks deal in hard figures so it is much harder for them to hide profits but I don’t think they would be paying tax if they could get around it, I
you can hardly call them model citizens
 

John U

Well-Known Member
I claim very little. If I’m earning I’m happy to pay tax.
You have to look at the spin-off of what their tax offset brings to the economy. Remember when labor tried stopping negative gearing on investment properties for example?
All the investors, many who were just mum and dad ones too started selling off their investment properties and the rental market shrunk which caused a housing crisis and spike in rentals, they soon realised the knock on effect and reversed the law.
Not the way it went down. Don’t know about investors selling.

Greed isn’t good. If people want to buy investment property let them go it alone, or reduce the number of properties it can be claimed on.

From Jan - The current policy settings aren't working (if you're not wealthy).

I'd be interested in the classification of these 'mums and dads' regularly referred to. I know many 'mums and dads' who aren't invested in property, and few that are. I think the ratio is something 10% who take advantage of it.
 

Albynsw

Well-Known Member
I claim very little. If I’m earning I’m happy to pay tax.

Not the way it went down. Don’t know about investors selling.

Greed isn’t good. If people want to buy investment property let them go it alone, or reduce the number of properties it can be claimed on.

From Jan - The current policy settings aren't working (if you're not wealthy).

I'd be interested in the classification of these 'mums and dads' regularly referred to. I know many 'mums and dads' who aren't invested in property, and few that are. I think the ratio is something 10% who take advantage of it.

At the time my wife worked in a property management sector of a large realestate agency in inner western Sydney, they managed over 3000 properties in a blue colour working class area.
She saw it play out first hand.
If this is not true then why did they reverse their decision?
 
Last edited:

peterfermtech

Well-Known Member
The politics of envy. Funny how mining and oil companies are greedy and evil however those that utilise the products of these "evil" companies to support wasteful consumerism such as Tesla and Apple are are almost worshipped like demigods.
 

John U

Well-Known Member
At the time my wife worked in a property management sector of a large realestate agency in inner western Sydney, they managed over 3000 properties in a blue colour working class area.
She saw it play out first hand.
If this is not true then why did they reverse their decision?
Look at the Article. Sydney and Perth went up, the rest of the country didn't.
1651140834996.png


Why did they abandon it? Not sure. Pressure from many wealthy and influential individuals with conflicts of interest in the area.
 
Top