Labor's Policies?

[imadodgyumpire]

I didn't mind the ripping Shorten gave to Turnbull today. **** it was funny.

 

[RUNVS]

Watching the latest episode of Q&A Chris Bowen definitely gave the impression that Labor is currently creating a new tax code policy and that it will probably be released in 2015. By what he said it sounds like the GST won't be a part of it though.

 

[Qsaint]

Watching the latest episode of Q&A Chris Bowen definitely gave the impression that Labor is currently creating a new tax code policy and that it will probably be released in 2015. By what he said it sounds like the GST won't be a part of it though.

The stooped thing about that is I think most people are resigned to the fact that the GST will go up a bit or broadened. Put the income tax rates up and watch the backlash

 

[pazza]

The stooped thing about that is I think most people are resigned to the fact that the GST will go up a bit or broadened. Put the income tax rates up and watch the backlash

From where..crazy uncle Rupert?

 

[madmug]

The stooped thing about that is I think most people are resigned to the fact that the GST will go up a bit or broadened. Put the income tax rates up and watch the backlash

At this stage we dont need a tax 'increase', taxes just need to be collected by reducing middle class welfare. Its the excessive 'give aways' in Super, Trusts & Negative gearing, that need fixing.

We need a fair review of the tax system. Currently its clear that we dont have a Gument that understands 'fairness'.

 

[Maggie5]

https://newmatilda.com/2015/02/13/l...be-murky-ownership-nation’s-largest-coal-mine
"But Labor has argued that such an investigation is a matter for the Australian Securities Investment Commission and voted with the coalition against the Greens’ motion."
Good one Labor!
In 2013, after a High Court direction, the Indian Ministry of Environment and Forestry investigated a raft of environmental breaches committed by the company.
Leave it someone else to protect the environment. Are they one of your donors too?

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

The stooped thing about that is I think most people are resigned to the fact that the GST will go up a bit or broadened. Put the income tax rates up and watch the backlash

True. I think that's why it is so appealing to people, but that is also why Labor have probably decided not to do it. It impacts the poor more, and the poor really aren't doing that well with most welfare at a just-enough-to-get-by level. I think Labor would want to agree with simplifying it, but instinctively you don't want to see it on things like healthy food, so perhaps their resigned to some complexity.

 

[Lester Burnham]

Watching the latest episode of Q&A Chris Bowen definitely gave the impression that Labor is currently creating a new tax code policy and that it will probably be released in 2015. By what he said it sounds like the GST won't be a part of it though.

The would be treasurer, Clueless Chris, can't even name the tax rates and thresholds.

Under repeated questioning by talkback host Alan Jones, Mr Bowen was unable to correctly nominate the income tax-free threshold of $18,200.

Jones asked the Labor frontbencher if he could "outline to everyone out there...the various tax levels" and "at what point we pay so much in tax if you're an income earner?"

After several attempts at getting an answer, the Sydney radio personality accused Mr Bowen of not knowing his portfolio.​

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-17/chris-bowen-confident-his-credibility-remains-intact/6133774

 

[Maggie5]

The would be treasurer, Clueless Chris, can't even name the tax rates and thresholds.

Under repeated questioning by talkback host Alan Jones, Mr Bowen was unable to correctly nominate the income tax-free threshold of $18,200.

Jones asked the Labor frontbencher if he could "outline to everyone out there...the various tax levels" and "at what point we pay so much in tax if you're an income earner?"

After several attempts at getting an answer, the Sydney radio personality accused Mr Bowen of not knowing his portfolio.​

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-17/chris-bowen-confident-his-credibility-remains-intact/6133774

Was waiting to see who would bring this up first. Yeah, not a good look.

 

[Gough]

A ten year old could rote learn what the tax free threshold is, no excuse for politicians to get tripped up on stuff like this.

 

[Power Raid]

Was waiting to see who would bring this up first. Yeah, not a good look.

not a great moment but did warrant reporting as a treasurer (or opposition treasurer) doesn't need to know every threshold and tax rate for every entity including individuals of the top of his head.

but he could have handled the question better but no real damage done

 

[Maggie5]

not a great moment but did warrant reporting as a treasurer (or opposition treasurer) doesn't need to know every threshold and tax rate for every entity including individuals of the top of his head.

but he could have handled the question better but no real damage done

That is why I said not a good look but what was more disappointing were his comments the next day. Sick of politicians not able to just cop it.
This is from someone like me who thought he had potential.

 

[Mofra]

not a great moment but did warrant reporting as a treasurer (or opposition treasurer) doesn't need to know every threshold and tax rate for every entity including individuals of the top of his head.

but he could have handled the question better but no real damage done

Similar mistakes sparked the beginning of the end of Julie Bishop's tenure as Shadow Treasurer.

"Not a good look" matters quite a lot in today's image-based political game

 

[RUNVS]

Here is a very good article from Laurie Oaks

Bill Shorten’s big risk to be the man with the plan could pay off
http://www.news.com.au/national/bil...an-could-pay-off/story-e6frfkp9-1227232943583

THE Government is doing everything it can to turn up the heat on Labor over its failure — so far — to produce a plan to deal with the debt-and-deficit issue.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Treasurer Joe Hockey throw out the challenge to Bill Shorten at every opportunity.

Liberal leader-in-waiting Malcolm Turnbull repeatedly raised it in his appearance on the ABC television program Q&A on Monday. And there is a growing clamour in the media for Labor, having blocked significant Budget measures in the Senate, to propose alternative ways to deal with the growing fiscal problem.

Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen, when he is not making up implausible excuses for a memory lapse over income tax scales, promises that, well before the next election, “Australians will know exactly what Labor plans to do on revenue and expenditure”.

But the demand is for Labor to do that now, not only so Australians can debate rival economic policies in an informed way, but also in the hope that some kind of bipartisan approach might emerge in the national interest.

It is not hard to see why Shorten and Bowen are hanging tough. It benefits Labor politically to have all attention focused on the unpopular measures put forward by the Government.

Also, if Labor committed itself to alternative Budget repair measures at this stage, the Government could simply appropriate them. Understandably, the Labor leadership sees no reason to give Abbott, Hockey and co a leg up.

To justify its stand, Labor can point to the Coalition’s behaviour in opposition. In 2010, in Tony Abbott’s first term as Opposition leader, he failed to produce anything like a detailed plan to curb spending, even in his Budget reply speech attacking debt and deficit just months out from the scheduled election. Abbott told Parliament that shadow treasurer Hockey would unveil measures to reduce spending and increase productivity at the National Press Club the following week.

But Hockey failed to produce any such information, instead telling the Press Club: “Today my colleague, Andrew Robb, the shadow minister for finance, is releasing a detailed statement outlining savings measures the Coalition is taking to get the Budget back to surplus quickly.”

This pass-the-parcel farce was an early indication of the confused approach that would later become the house style of the Abbott Government. And Robb’s statement, when it emerged, was so full of holes that a claimed $46 billion in savings turned out to be worth only $6 billion.

In fact, though, if he is smart, Shorten will see that the real lesson of Abbott’s approach in opposition is the wisdom of coming clean with the public about proposed savings and revenue measures.

Abbott declined to follow the advice he is giving Labor now. He failed to produce anything like an honest fiscal repair plan before the 2013 election, even though he claimed there was a Budget emergency.

He pretended that taxes could be reduced (in some cases abolished), expensive promises (such as a gold-plated paid parental leave scheme) could be paid for and Budget surpluses restored without major spending cuts and pain for many Australians.

Inevitably, his Government’s first Budget exposed Abbott as a promise-breaker, even a liar, and shredded his credibility. Look at him now. Shorten is presumably doing just that.

If Labor has got the message, it will put together a comprehensive Budget repair plan, with no attempt to hide the painful detail, and announce it early enough to give Shorten and his colleagues time to persuade voters of its merits. Before this year is out, in other words.

Shorten has said that, while 2014 was about displaying unity and discipline, 2015 will be about ideas. Few ideas could be more important than those directed at ensuring the nation’s economic future. But Labor’s task of producing a credible plan has been made more difficult by the Government’s dumping of the paid parental leave albatross Abbott had hung around its neck.

SHORTEN no longer has the option of claiming big savings simply by promising a Labor government would abolish it.

The Prime Minister’s reputation as a slow learner got a boost from the fact that he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the decision.

Rather than killing off the scheme, despite the damage it had inflicted on the Government’s Budget strategy, Abbott wanted to simply delay it. This time, though, he was denied a captain’s call.

By accepting the challenge to become a man with a plan, Shorten will be taking a risk. Labor sources are adamant, though, that he has already decided not to follow the “small target” strategy that has become fashionable for Opposition leaders in recent years.

“We are prepared to work on the big policies that go beyond parliamentary terms,” the Labor leader told the National Press Club in November.

This is the issue on which to demonstrate it.

http://www.news.com.au/national/bil...an-could-pay-off/story-e6frfkp9-1227232943583

Completely agree with all of that.

 

[Todman]

Here is a very good article from Laurie Oaks

Bill Shorten’s big risk to be the man with the plan could pay off
http://www.news.com.au/national/bil...an-could-pay-off/story-e6frfkp9-1227232943583

Completely agree with all of that.

So will Bill rein in runaway expenditure and raise taxes?

 

[RUNVS]

So will Bill rein in runaway expenditure and raise taxes?

If he held Labor values I would guess it would be 75% raising taxes and 25% cutting spending and the 25% will be things like cutting spending to big mining companies and lowering negative gearing.

 

[Todman]

You forget, Keating took away negative gearing but was forced to re-instate it.

 

[Maggie5]

I think both major parties should look at the aged pension eligibility but judging from the back-tracking this week, won't happen.

 

[RUNVS]

You forget, Keating took away negative gearing but was forced to re-instate it.

Keating was a bit before my time. I was 8 when he was replaced as PM so I am not well versed with Keating's policies.

 

[Todman]

He who doesn't study history was be force to repeat histories mistakes.

 

[Todman]

I think both major parties should look at the aged pension eligibility but judging from the back-tracking this week, won't happen.

Do you want "Means test" it.

 

[Maggie5]

Do you want "Means test" it.

Yep, it is a matter of what the 'means' test will include.
Don't know much about what is included or excluded but I am going to read up on it a bit more.

 

[Power Raid]

I think both major parties should look at the aged pension eligibility but judging from the back-tracking this week, won't happen.

I agree they should look and agree it won't happen but having a government paid inheritance scheme as we have today is insulting.

 

[Power Raid]

Do you want "Means test" it.

I understand the pension is subject to a means test but that excludes the family home.

Example: why should someone with a $3m family home revive the pension?

Of course there are other issues we need to address at the same time like transaction taxes when pensioners downsize.

The other may include rather than stopping the pension, putting a lien on the title like strata fees effectively do or a reverse mortgage.

Reasons for doing this is to provide cash flow, allow people to stay at home but provide equity to a system that is supporting millionaires.

 

[Maggie5]

I agree they should look and agree it won't happen but having a government paid inheritance scheme as we have today is insulting.

As you near retirement age, financial planners have a prepared speech on how you should manage your assets so that you don't miss out on the aged pension.
Too easy if you are that way inclined.
Still not sure about including home though unless it is worth millions.