wuddie
Black by Demand
FREEBIES!!! F*** YEA!!!
oh wait, its only tax cuts.
oh wait, its only tax cuts.
Can you not go half a post without a comment that fulfils some form of self-gratifying, masturbation?Nebuchanezzar said:Can you not go half a post without your incredibly lame, partisian, pseudo-political hack type posts?
No, what I'm saying is that the sentiment of those blogs does not represent the perceptions of the broader electorateSparcod said:So are you saying that 'swinging voters' are denying that they are lefties??
wheredanton said:.
I'd pretty much bet the house on the Liberals to win the election.
You have to be a fool for bet any money on the ALP claiming power.frog12986 said:I wouldn't go that far. Howard is clever, but so is Rudd. It could be as close as 1961..
Haha.. I suppose it's easier for me to say as I'm not a gambler..wheredanton said:You have to be a fool for bet any money on the ALP claiming power.
You can wager a bet with me if you like. I'd be happy to take your money at the end of the year.
Well I'm all for what we've just recieved but you could argue:Honestly, what could you say about the budget besides agreeing with it? It hit the mark so succinctly...
Put your money where your mouth is! I'd happily take a wager with anyone that the Liberals will win.frog12986 said:Haha.. I suppose it's easier for me to say as I'm not a gambler..
However, the betting markets, although readjusted after last night, still indicate a skew towards the ALP..
You should have earlier then because the price was pretty good.wheredanton said:Put your money where your mouth is! I'd happily take a wager with anyone that the Liberals will win.
Given that we pay more tax compared to Americans, I think we expect more from our government and our tax money.banco55 said:I do think it's kind of disturbing how apparently people's vote rests to a large extent on how big a bribe they get with taxpayers money. Say what you want about the US but they don't have the same kind of hand out mentality when it comes to government spending.
I was impressed too you know. It was certainly better than the past 2 or 3 budgets.Not-That-Bright said:Well I'm all for what we've just recieved but you could argue:
- They have had 10 years in which they could have done such measures before, this is just a desperate plea.
- A lot of the payments are one off and perhaps you could argue much of what is being given will be taken away next budget if the coalition returns.
- It is inflationary
- Not enough spent on global warming.
Meh
The reason for doing that is to provide some incentive for individuals who currently earn $25000 to embrace additional hours without being taxed more heavily for doing so. (i.e. students, mothers etc) This is aimed at increasing the productive capacity of the economy...Sparcod said:-For tax cuts, someone earning $25000 gets $2.88 whereas someone earning $30000 gets over $21.
Yeh but people who earn under $25000 are most likely part-timers/casuals. As you pointed out, Costello wants more of these people to take up more hours. I think that people like students, mothers, carers etc wouldn't want to increase their work hours because of the other commitments in life they have and they require a balance. I'm not referring to all of them but just most of them.frog12986 said:The reason for doing that is to provide some incentive for individuals who currently earn $25000 to embrace additional hours without being taxed more heavily for doing so. (i.e. students, mothers etc) This is aimed at increasing the productive capacity of the economy...
Granted, some people may not want to, however the government is at least removing the disincentive to allow the decision to rest with the individual..Sparcod said:Yeh but people who earn under $25000 are most likely part-timers/casuals. As you pointed out, Costello wants more of these people to take up more hours. I think that people like students, mothers, carers etc wouldn't want to increase their work hours because of the other commitments in life they have and they require a balance. I'm not referring to all of them but just most of them.
This is true but it's also (arguably, I'd say strongly for our economy) more important to provide greater incentive for people to work more than it is to provide direct tax cuts to people in the bottom margins, to assist then you'd really want to look at more welfare etc whereby tests can be done so that only those needy get assistance.Yeh but people who earn under $25000 are most likely part-timers/casuals. As you pointed out, Costello wants more of these people to take up more hours. I think that people like students, mothers, carers etc wouldn't want to increase their work hours because of the other commitments in life they have and they require a balance. I'm not referring to all of them but just most of them.