This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Has Clive Palmer gone loco?

Jump to new
Calliope said:
Why should you assume that it is your divine right that we should pay for your children's tertiary. education?
Click to expand...
You do raise an interesting point.
Knobby, who amongst Australia's taxpayers, do you believe should be taxed sufficiently to provide the funds to pay for your children's tertiary education?

It's not a malicious question in any way, just a genuine enquiry.
 

I will ask it another way.

Why should our best and brightest be excluded from the tertiary education system when we want to be the clever country? Even in the old days there were scholarships for people without the means to go to University. If you look throughout history, the people who got these scholarships tended out to be the some of the brightest scientists , diplomats and politicians the world has seen.

Why should we destroy opportunity to give a minor tax cut to the wealthy. Why should we turn away from the Australian concept of egalitarianism? "Sorry Denise, your mother is a single Mum, despite the fact you are a mathematical genius, there is no way you can go to University, get a job at Kmart."

This is not to say the funding could not be better directed. Why are we paying for rich kids to do a surfing course at Melbourne University? It can be done another way without being socially inequitable.

Also, I believe in some redistribution of wealth by taxation. This has been un-argued for generations. The Libs have stated they plan to give tax cuts at the end of their term so they can win elections.

So I will ask it another way?
Why is it good for society that only wealthy kids can go to University when in most countries of the world University students are chosen on ability for the ongoing good of the country and society? Where would Germany be now? Why did George W Bush go to Harvard despite being a very average student?
 
drsmith said:
Niki Savva has a good point in the above but the carbon tax wasn't the one to pick for the battle with Clive. The mining tax is a better option.

TA has walked away from Clive Palmer before and will do so again when the timing is better.
Click to expand...
With the mining tax repeal, the government is going to reject senate amendments to retain associated spending measures.

THE political brawl over $40 billion in budget savings reached an impasse last night when the Abbott* government refused to accep*t changes to the repeal of the mining tax, setting up a new test of will over the contentious reform.
Click to expand...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...g-on-mining-tax/story-fn59nsif-1226992733364#
 
Knobby22 said:
.

Also, I believe in some redistribution of wealth by taxation.
Click to expand...

By the way you are continually complaining that you want more handouts, I suspect your family is among the 48% of Australian families that pay no net income tax. Your hero Clive, doesn't pay any income tax either


Welcome to the welfare nation: Half of Australia’s families pay no net tax
Click to expand...
http://www.news.com.au/national/wel...s-pay-no-net-tax/story-fncynjr2-1226911042149

ATTACH=CONFIG]58720[/ATTACH]
 

Attachments

  • Oliver-Twist-asking-for-more.jpg
    27.4 KB · Views: 150
Calliope said:
By the way you are continually complaining that you want more handouts, I suspect your family is among the 48% of Australian families that pay no net income tax. Your hero Clive, doesn't pay any income tax either
Click to expand...

I pay plenty of tax and don't negative gear to avoid it. I have a really good job and am an Associate. I was the second person in my family ever to go to University and when I went my family was in dire straits. I thank the Australian populace for letting me succeed.

Under your ideal world, where privilege is entrenched, I suppose I never would have got the chance. Oliver Twist is what the world used to be like before we acted more humanely.
I think we will just have to disagree on the direction Australia should go. I feel as a 6th generation Australian on all sides that I have the right to my view.
 
Knobby22 said:
I pay plenty of tax and don't negative gear to avoid it. I have a really good job and am an Associate.
Click to expand...
Many of the 48% play plenty tax, but their hand-outs exceed what they pay.

I may be naive, but I just can't understand how a person with a really good job, and an Associate to boot, should expect me, a self-funded retiree, to help pay for your children's tertiary education. It is all the more strange, when you consider that Palmer, the guy you reach out to as your last hope (for student handouts?) pays no taxes at all. :dunno:

It is also strange that you would make a remark like "Under your ideal world, where privilege is entrenched", when your apparently ideal world is entrenched entitlement and dependency on the nanny state.

Sorry if I appear grouchy, but I have my quarterly supplementary tax bill in front of me and the reason it is so big is because of the hefty 30% tax I pay on my term deposit interest, and I know the government will pass on a large chunk of it to persons better off than me, as you obviously are.
 
Knobby, I understand that you want your children to receive taxpayer funded tertiary education. Seems an absolutely logical desire from a parent's point of view.

I guess all I'm trying to point out is that we all want what we want for ourselves.
However, for someone to receive assistance means that some other taxpayer has to provide it.

I was just asking which of that taxpayer cohort you thought should offer their taxes to support your children's education.

Others might think more should go to eg the unemployed to help them get a job, any job. Or people struggling with mental or physical health problems who need social suppport.

Wherever we look there are gaping needs. Can't your children avail themselves of the HECS funding which doesn't have to be gradually paid back until they are earning? Am I mistaken in thinking no one has to pay for their degree up front if they are Australian citizens?
 
I guess all I'm trying to point out is that we all want what we want for ourselves.
However, for someone to receive assistance means that some other taxpayer has to provide it.
Click to expand...

The taxpayer also gets the benefit of the services that qualified people provide. Sure we pay for them in fees and charges, but they have to be available in the first place.

Think public transport (or other utilities), we pay for the running costs by fares, but we also pay for the capital cost ie availability through our general taxes. I think uni degrees are about a 50% student funded through HECS and 50% taxpayer funded. The taxpayer funding is paid off by the taxes that the students pay over their lifetime.
 
SirRumpole said:
. I think uni degrees are about a 50% student funded through HECS and 50% taxpayer funded. The taxpayer funding is paid off by the taxes that the students pay over their lifetime.
Click to expand...
Sure, if they get to actually earn enough to pay tax. There are, as Knobby points out, some pretty useless degree courses out there. I seem to recall your making this very point a while back.

It just seems to me that, given the massive amount of demand for taxpayer dollars, to be particularly generous to tertiary students who have their entire earning capacity ahead of them, rather than, say, providing assistance to people who are saving the country money by personally caring for disabled or aged family, or perhaps offering more basic mentoring and support programs for disadvantaged students in the public school system, might be more fair.

Putting all the political point scoring aside, we will all have our personal views about this, depending on what matters most to us.
 
Julia said:
Sure, if they get to actually earn enough to pay tax. There are, as Knobby points out, some pretty useless degree courses out there. I seem to recall your making this very point a while back.
Click to expand...

Yes,there is a lot of room to only publicly fund courses that are in demand by the community, the rest of the tertiary education budget could be put into areas that you mentioned. Pity that no one in politics seems to have picked up on this point.
 
After 11 years on the shelf, Jacqui Lambie's looking for a man.

Well hung and lots of money are minimum requirements.

Knowing when not to speak (which is all the time) is also up there.

Must also be a keen gardener.


http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-radio-station-heart-1073-20140722-3ccr2.html
 
She is the opposite of a standard politician, isn't she? What a handful Lambie is!

I love that she doesn't want her man to communicate verbally.
Definitely not one of the sweet type of women.
 
I don't like to use the Hate word but if I was to hate anyone it would be that Lambie woman.
I wish she would shut up and fade away. What an assault on the senses she is.
 
From the comments section of the Fairfax article above,

Please God - if I close my eyes, tap my heels together three times and pray real hard - don't let me be reincarnated in the next life as a Tasmanian whipper-snipper.....please?
Click to expand...

I don't think whipper snipper sales are about to skyrocket.

Jamie dropped off the line before radio presenters could set up a date for the pair.

“I have that effect on the men,” Senator Lambie said.
Click to expand...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...-her-mens-policy/story-fn59niix-1226997606291

Meanwhile, I suspect someone's managed to give her some advice,

"I apologise to any radio listeners who may be offended by my comments on Kim and Dave's Show," she said in an issued statement.
Click to expand...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-22/lambie-describes-her-ideal-man-as-well-hung-on-radio/5615164
 
waza1960 said:
I don't like to use the Hate word but if I was to hate anyone it would be that Lambie woman.
I wish she would shut up and fade away. What an assault on the senses she is.
Click to expand...

I used to think Paul Keating was dead right when he described the Senate as "unrepresentative swill". But Lambie has successfully rendered that colourful phrase totally inappropriate. It's much too complimentary for her. She is far, far worse than unrepresentative swill.
 
She would be a good catch .pension for life all expenses paid not to much to ask for..
reminds me of a quote for a movie star her hubby said I have spent enough on you to buy a battleship...she replied you have spent enough in me to float it,
 
If it doesn't have the man power or versatility of the Honda GX35, it just won't cut it.
 

Attachments

  • feature-image.jpg
    213.9 KB · Views: 51
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
HMY - Harmony Gold Mining Corp (NYSE)
Replies
2
Views
1K
rcw1
R
The threat of US as a Superpower
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Knobby22
Albo's Coal and Gas Price Cap and Financial Aid proposal
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
Smurf1976
J Capital Research
Replies
1
Views
2K
greggles
R
5 Years of Reflection
Replies
9
Views
7K
Dona Ferentes
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...