The Turnbull Government

[SirRumpole]

There it is again, “the LNP”.

In the past it was always “Liberal” or “the Coalition” until things started to go to crap and they came up with this “LNP” term which seems to have been widely adopted.

There is no such thing as the LNP except in Queensland, but it's just easier to write LNP than writing Liberal National parties or Coalition.

 

[moXJO]

There it is again, “the LNP”.

In the past it was always “Liberal” or “the Coalition” until things started to go to crap and they came up with this “LNP” term which seems to have been widely adopted.

I can only assume it’s done in the hope that people confuse it with another party which has long uses a 3 letter acronym, that being the ALP.

Seriously, read any news report from the past and it’s clear these guys have tried a rebranding. I guess the realised that most have worked out that the Liberals are actually conservatives and that the Coalition is rather one sided anyway so needed a new term.

I just wish they’d get on with governing the country for the benefit of the population with less attention paid to the likes of gambling monopolists and their ilk.

Hows labor looking in Tas state Smurf?
I heard they were running on a no pokie machine platform with a Jacinda cookiecutter template.
Apparently narrowed the gap?

 

[Smurf1976]

Hows labor looking in Tas state Smurf?

Putting aside my own views so trying to make a “neutral” comment, the way it seems to be going is:

*People see pokies as a definite problem and dislike the legislated monopoly given to one operator but it’s not a “top tier” issue so far as voting is concerned for most.

*The Liberal campaign has left Labor for dead. Regardless of their own preference or interest / lack of interest in politics just about everyone is talking about a certain Liberal TV advertisement. That ad would be the most common conversation topic in the state at the moment surely.

*Labor is clearly the underdog, even the party itself has said as much.

*Notable that house prices are seen as a problem. I say that noting that $400K still buys a decent house in Hobart but people are starting to see that as too high and something that needs to be addressed. If that’s happening down here then I can only wonder what’s going through the minds of people in Sydney or Melbourne where even double that price doesn’t get you anything much.

*Health is a key issue. Both parties plan to spend big - they’ve got no choice if they want any chance of being elected since it’s a very major issue.

*Traffic and transport has oddly become an issue. If the public knew the full story that would cause a lot of trouble for the Liberals but luckily for them it’s not widely known so neither party has an edge there.

*Both are largely silent on the issue of finances beyond some limited claims here and there.

My personal expectation is that the Liberals will be returned with a clear majority.

It is also my expectation that whichever party forms government after this election will not be in government after the next one in 2022. That thought applies regardless of who wins this time.

 

[Tisme]

I remember when learning economics, one of the fundamental truths about taxation, apart from being an income for public service and utility, was that the higher the taxation the less capital inflow to the middle and lower classes and more to the wealthy elite, mainly because they afford the cash flows and infrastructure and control the means of production.

With the relaxation of taxation wages are supposed to increase and drive up consumption, drive up company revenue and profit, etc. Hard to know how much life is left in consumerism, especially if China has to look inward for sales of product as the USA gears up for domestic production itself.

 

[Tisme]

Michael Rowland‏Verified account @mjrowland68
Final preparations underway for Federal Parliament’s special sitting in Altona next week. #auspol

 

[SirRumpole]

Why corporate tax cuts won't sell to the voters.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...-done-but-where-are-the-profits-going/9490032

 

[Tisme]

Oh dear. The worst part of this is she thinks its appropriate to act like a spiteful big sister:

Of course if she has been withholding information about workplace infractions she is culpable.

See her in action first video

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-28/michaelia-cash-forced-to-withdraw-threats/9492838

 

[SirRumpole]

Oh dear. The worst part of this is she thinks its appropriate to act like a spiteful big sister:

Of course if she has been withholding information about workplace infractions she is culpable.

See her in action first video

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-28/michaelia-cash-forced-to-withdraw-threats/9492838

Another resignation coming up ?

What a shrew.

 

[Tisme]

Another resignation coming up ?

What a shrew.

Nasty piece of sh1t3 in anyone's language. Does nothing to further the argument that women in equity politics brings with it a less adversarial atmosphere and better governance. Now if only Tanya and Penny would just do the right thing and join a communist party (e.g. Greens)

 

[wayneL]

Nasty piece of sh1t3 in anyone's language. Does nothing to further the argument that women in equity politics brings with it a less adversarial atmosphere and better governance. Now if only Tanya and Penny would just do the right thing and join a communist party (e.g. Greens)

Or just fade away into a well deserved obscurity...

 

[sptrawler]

Nasty piece of sh1t3 in anyone's language. Does nothing to further the argument that women in equity politics brings with it a less adversarial atmosphere and better governance. Now if only Tanya and Penny would just do the right thing and join a communist party (e.g. Greens)

Maybe they could get Julia to return, and head up a "Women First Party", heaven help anyone who said anything against them.

 

[SirRumpole]

Maybe they could get Julia to return, and head up a "Women First Party", heaven help anyone who said anything against them.

Julia was elected to the leadership mostly by men.

 

[sptrawler]

Julia was elected to the leadership mostly by men.

Yeh, she was a real gem, that's why they replaced her with come again Kev.

But I can understand why men would vote for her, they would be too $hit scared not to.

 

[SirRumpole]

The Federal government will buy Snowy Hydro from NSW and Victoria.



And then what ?



Sell it off to their mates in business to make even more profit and push our power prices up even more ?



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-02/government-buys-out-states-snowy-hydro-shares-for-$6b/9500908

 

[luutzu]

Why corporate tax cuts won't sell to the voters.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-...-done-but-where-are-the-profits-going/9490032

Heard on the radio that King Henry, or whatever his name is, Chairman of NAB?... He was quoted as saying that Australia ought to lower its corporate tax rate if it wants to remain "competitive" around the world.

Then, in the same breath... that it ought to increase its personal income tax rate because, I kid you not, you do not want Australia to be in a budget deficit.

I thought corporate tax cuts pay for themselves, and then some. But apparently it's only to make Australia competitive, whatever that means because raising workers' taxes sounds a lot like taxing the poor to give to the rich.

 

[SirRumpole]

I thought corporate tax cuts pay for themselves, and then some. But apparently it's only to make Australia competitive, whatever that means because raising workers' taxes sounds a lot like taxing the poor to give to the rich.

You could cut the headline rate if you cut back generous concessions, deductions and rebates at the same time.

Say, the diesel fuel rebate - $6 billion a year estimated

Allow companies to write down only a third of their profits each year from past losses. I don't know how much this would save but it would get some companies paying tax again.

Eliminate "instant asset write offs" and go back to depreciation.

I'm sure there is a lot of other sweeteners that could be cracked down on.

 

[luutzu]

You could cut the headline rate if you cut back generous concessions, deductions and rebates at the same time.

Say, the diesel fuel rebate - $6 billion a year estimated

Allow companies to write down only a third of their profits each year from past losses. I don't know how much this would save but it would get some companies paying tax again.

Eliminate "instant asset write offs" and go back to depreciation.

I'm sure there is a lot of other sweeteners that could be cracked down on.

Yea, that'd be sensible. But then why would mates do that kind of stuff to one another?

 

[bellenuit]

You could cut the headline rate if you cut back generous concessions, deductions and rebates at the same time.

...

Allow companies to write down only a third of their profits each year from past losses.

You still don't get it. That is not a concession, it is just being fair.

I don't know how much this would save but it would get some companies paying tax again.

And how many would it drive out of business by making them bankrupt or simply chose to not bother because the government are now taxing their efforts to create jobs and provide services rather than their profits.

How do you think those companies will compete against overseas companies that don't have this same impost? Why would they bother. Just simply buy shares in overseas companies and you will likely make a lot more money that going into business for yourself.

Eliminate "instant asset write offs" and go back to depreciation.

Instant write-offs are depreciation but all in the same tax year. It is done as an incentive for companies to invest in new plant and equipment. The tax not paid the first year because of the ability to instantly write-off the asset cost, is paid in subsequent years as they can no longer depreciate that asset. Overall there is no difference in the tax paid by the company, just the timing of the payments.

You seem to have the attitude that businesses are our enemy and we should do everything possible to discourage them operating in Australia.

 

[SirRumpole]

You seem to have the attitude that businesses are our enemy and we should do everything possible to discourage them operating in Australia.

What is the point of cutting the tax rate when the average tax actually paid is 17% ?

With the personal tax rate of up to 45% its pretty obvious that corporations simply aren't paying their share.

https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/10/turns-australias-company-tax-rate-isnt-high/

And what you don't get is that the benefit of company tax cuts will flow mainly to foreign shareholders not the average worker who haven't had pay increases for years.

 

[bellenuit]

What is the point of cutting the tax rate when the average tax actually paid is 17% ?

17% of what?

With the personal tax rate of up to 45% its pretty obvious that corporations simply aren't paying their share.

Corporation's pay the wages that allow individuals to be taxed. They also pay payroll tax and GST on the value they have added. They pay 30% on profits. They also pay super contributions for individuals.

Companies are the lifeblood of the economy and without them we would have nothing, just some government run industries like the old style soviet block. Equating companies with individuals makes no sense. The more companies (in general) the better and we want to encourage them to set up here.

You cannot equate companies with individuals and say the company tax rate is fair or unfair based on what that rate is. The personal tax rate is up to 45%, but that isn't paid by anyone as it is the top rate of a progressive scale. Many people pay no tax and most pay a lot less that 45%.

And what you don't get is that the benefit of company tax cuts will flow mainly to foreign shareholders not the average worker who haven't had pay increases for years.

For a lot of companies that are on the edge, the tax rate cut may be just what keeps them viable. If you believe that tax rate cuts will have no benefit, then you must either hold that the converse is true (increasing the company tax rate will have no adverse effect so we might as well make it 100%) or you must believe that we are currently in the sweet spot.

There will be many who benefit from the tax rate cut. That some may be foreign shareholders doesn't mean anything. Some of the extra cash will go to employees, some will go to expansion, some will go as dividends to direct shareholders and indirectly to almost all people who have super.

It will make companies a bit more competitive and that is positive for all companies.