Society/Culture The tax system explained in beer

[sherb]

You can barely write and you're clearly a terrible human. Parking inspector would be your upper limit if you had to survive on your wits.

Three possibilities:
1. A parody account
2. Someone who is paid to post all this
3. This poster genuinely believes what he writes

If it's 3, I pity him.

 

[QuietB]

What is your question ?

A utopia does not exist and never will, nature doesn't work that way. However you just need to look at the quality of life in eastern Europe compared to western Europe or countries in Asia who adopted communism compared to those who adopted capitalism.

So a country like Norway is closest?

 

[RupieDupie]

Again, that's a very nebulous explanation and relies on vast generalisations about people.

There's plenty of people with limited money that are terrible human beings, the same as there being plenty of wealthy people who aren't. It's a very extreme, black and white perspective to take.

Is there a dollar figure one must reach in order to be "human garbage"? Is that dollar figure as compared to the majority of the world's population, in which case all Australian's are human garbage?

Surely being able to afford the computer (or fancy smart phone) and internet access means you're human garbage along with the rest of us?

Ahhh, but you’re not picking up what I’m putting down, if you put a poor person in front of me and ask me whether they are terrible, how would I know? This does not mean they can’t be terrible, but I would need further information, like is this person a bully or a thug etc...?

But if you put a person at the top in front of me and ask me if the person is a terrible person and I could give you the answer immediately, without asking for any further information, as the only way they could have got to the top is through bullying and thuggery.

Your last statement is not a good analogy as to what I’m stating as you are
1) discussing a separate society that has been fooked up by other thugs and bullies - reduce the power these thugs and bullies have and the issues go away... instantly
2) most Australians do not have more money / assets than they can utilise at the expense of other Australians, only the human waste do

 

[geelong_crazy26]

So a country like Norway is closest?

The greatest country in the world is the USA, would not use the word utopia but it is the greatest.
Norway has a few things going for it due to the fact that it is as a small homogeneous resource rich country, however it is a country that excepts mediocrity and will soon have to cut back on government expenditure.

I posted this in another thread but a person on the minimum wage in 2018 has life better than a rich person in 1918. The problem is too many working and middle class people judge how much they have by comparing themselves to others .When they compare themselves to rich people they get upset, this has nothing to do with the quality of life they live.

 

[Sinjin Smith]

The fact he can even own a Mercedes Benz signifies what's wrong with the world.

The fact that most respond to him and don't realise he's taking you for a ride is pretty stunning. Surely you know he is taking the piss and masquerading, he is as genuine as a Rolex purchased in Bali.

 

[sherb]

The fact that most respond to him and don't realise he's taking you for a ride is pretty stunning. Surely you know he is taking the piss and masquerading, he is as genuine as a Rolex purchased in Bali.

They are fake?

 

[The Passenger]

Three possibilities:
1. A parody account
2. Someone who is paid to post all this
3. This poster genuinely believes what he writes

If it's 3, I pity him.

He's been banging on about this sort of shit for a decade now. There was an infamous Bay 13 thread about him claiming to be partying at Brian Lara's house or some shit.

Pretty sure it's 3.

 

[sherb]

He's been banging on about this sort of shit for a decade now. There was an infamous Bay 13 thread about him claiming to be partying at Brian Lara's house or some shit.

Pretty sure it's 3.

I initially thought 2, but I tend to agree with you - an account that has been around so long with so many posts would likely not be that (or a troll account).

 

[faible]

If your parents don't have much money than they cant give you much money , what do you want me to say? take it up with your parents or find someone else to give you lots of money if that's what your after.

People understand there is a need to pay tax however they are not going to be motivated to work hard and take risks by paying tax. This is why socialism has always failed.

Government should spend money on welfare ,health and education but that level of spending needs to be cut.

What my parents have or have not done for me is largely irrelevant to this discussion is it not?

People work hard and take risks because even after paying tax, it puts money in their pocket.

So you believe Government should spend money on more than just law and order or national security, this is progress!

 

[faible]

Ahhh, but you’re not picking up what I’m putting down, if you put a poor person in front of me and ask me whether they are terrible, how would I know? This does not mean they can’t be terrible, but I would need further information, like is this person a bully or a thug etc...?

But if you put a person at the top in front of me and ask me if the person is a terrible person and I could give you the answer immediately, without asking for any further information, as the only way they could have got to the top is through bullying and thuggery.

Your last statement is not a good analogy as to what I’m stating as you are
1) discussing a separate society that has been fooked up by other thugs and bullies - reduce the power these thugs and bullies have and the issues go away... instantly
2) most Australians do not have more money / assets than they can utilise at the expense of other Australians, only the human waste do

Again you immediately conflate wealth with being human garbage. What an interesting perspective to hold - all people with wealth are bullies and thugs.

Is there a dollar threshold one must earn above to be a bully and thug without exception?

 

[RupieDupie]

Again you immediately conflate wealth with being human garbage. What an interesting perspective to hold - all people with wealth are bullies and thugs.

Is there a dollar threshold one must earn above to be a bully and thug without exception?

If the shoe fits? Like I stated if a person reduces the quality of life of another person who lives within the same society to get money they cannot possibly utilise, what would you call this person?

Here are some real effects of their actions;

Property investors need to have more munny than they can utilise so hard working young (and old) Australians are punished (Australians treated like garbage)
Power companies increase power costs by up to 20% for no discernible reason, other than having more munny that they can't utilise, and hard working Australians are punished (Australians treated like garbage)
For zero reason, except for some thug having more munny than they can utilise, petrol prices can be $1.50p/L, so if a hard working Australian accidentally looks at a petrol bowser they have to pay the price (Australians treated like garbage)
Big Pharma ensures that a dying person has to find tens of thousands of dollars to have access to a drug which will improve their quality of life, and pay 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 cents to make this drug (Australians treated like garbage)
Australians pay for a National Broadband Network and then have to spend more money than most other countries in the world to get internet speeds slower than those in third world countries (Australians treated like garbage)
Australian Gubmint is all about morality and does not have any money to spend on improving the quality of life of Australians but if a gay person wants to marry another person they will humiliate these people and compare their relationship to a person having sex with animals and then foot a $120M bill to see whether this is possible (Australians treated like garbage)
Some Australian religious organisations enable predatory people to molest and assault children, and a member of the Australian parliament comes out and states that he will lay the smack down on people who speak up against these organisations (Australians treated like garbage)
Some Australian charities ask people to donate to desperate people (including Australians) and then buy their CEOs and executives helicopters (Australians treated like garbage)
Some social media platforms sell the data of users so other companies and organisations can profit and/or act nefariously (Australians treated like garbage)
World leaders invade a country to protect the investment portfolios of a few people, during the war Australians directly or indirectly are killed or wounded and are made responsible for the continued fallout (Australians treated like garbage)
Banks have acted absolutely despicably to Australians, in the most obscene and degenerate manner, and will suffer no more than a slap on the wrist, and if they fook up Australians will have to bail them out (the people who lose their super etc)(Australians treated like garbage)
etc etc etc

I think it demonstrates a lot that I need to explain to a person why people on the top are degenerate thugs... why isn't it obvious?

 

[Sinjin Smith]

They are fake?

Of course not, they send the letter of authenticity after purchase, though mine spelt Molex........

 

[geelong_crazy26]

What my parents have or have not done for me is largely irrelevant to this discussion is it not?

People work hard and take risks because even after paying tax, it puts money in their pocket.

So you believe Government should spend money on more than just law and order or national security, this is progress!

I only bring up other peoples parents when they bring up my parents.

I can tell you from first hand experience and most employers with hourly employees will experience the same thing. When you ask employees to work extra hours they are not contracted to do they will often say no because once the tax is taken out it is not worth it.

People value their time so to get them to do extra work the compensation has to be worth it which is obviously subjective to the individual same thing with taking risks.

Do you honestly think that a GP co-payment of $5-$10 that does not have to be paid by children or the disabled is that bad?

 

[11sjw]

Again you immediately conflate wealth with being human garbage. What an interesting perspective to hold - all people with wealth are bullies and thugs.

Is there a dollar threshold one must earn above to be a bully and thug without exception?

It is an interesting take on life. What happens if you're just really good at something and get rich because of it?

 

[geelong_crazy26]

If the shoe fits? Like I stated if a person reduces the quality of life of another person who lives within the same society to get money they cannot possibly utilise, what would you call this person?

Here are some real effects of their actions;

Rich people have not reduced the quality of life for everyone else they have improved it.

A working or middle class person has a better quality of life in 2018 than a rich person did in 1918. The problem is too many people like yourself judge their own quality of life by comparing themselves to others. You look at a rich person and get all jealous.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

It is an interesting take on life. What happens if you're just really good at something and get rich because of it?

This is the very fundamental principal of the left. The rich get rich by exploiting everyone else and they take their unfair share of societies wealth.

 

[11sjw]

This is the very fundamental principal of the left. The rich get rich by exploiting everyone else and they take their unfair share of societies wealth.

Well we've seen where some were prepared to go post Work Choices. Whilst the vast majority of employers maintained decent pay rates for their staff, there were a few stories of entire staff lists being sacked and re-employed on substantially worse conditions.

We can throw BS Union tactics over the years against this. So someone needs to step in and ensure a balance is maintained. Hence governments need to do more than you think they need to.

 

[sherb]

This is the very fundamental principal of the left. The rich get rich by exploiting everyone else and they take their unfair share of societies wealth.

Principle.

 

[faible]

If the shoe fits? Like I stated if a person reduces the quality of life of another person who lives within the same society to get money they cannot possibly utilise, what would you call this person?

Here are some real effects of their actions;

Property investors need to have more munny than they can utilise so hard working young (and old) Australians are punished (Australians treated like garbage)
Power companies increase power costs by up to 20% for no discernible reason, other than having more munny that they can't utilise, and hard working Australians are punished (Australians treated like garbage)
For zero reason, except for some thug having more munny than they can utilise, petrol prices can be $1.50p/L, so if a hard working Australian accidentally looks at a petrol bowser they have to pay the price (Australians treated like garbage)
Big Pharma ensures that a dying person has to find tens of thousands of dollars to have access to a drug which will improve their quality of life, and pay 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 cents to make this drug (Australians treated like garbage)
Australians pay for a National Broadband Network and then have to spend more money than most other countries in the world to get internet speeds slower than those in third world countries (Australians treated like garbage)
Australian Gubmint is all about morality and does not have any money to spend on improving the quality of life of Australians but if a gay person wants to marry another person they will humiliate these people and compare their relationship to a person having sex with animals and then foot a $120M bill to see whether this is possible (Australians treated like garbage)
Some Australian religious organisations enable predatory people to molest and assault children, and a member of the Australian parliament comes out and states that he will lay the smack down on people who speak up against these organisations (Australians treated like garbage)
Some Australian charities ask people to donate to desperate people (including Australians) and then buy their CEOs and executives helicopters (Australians treated like garbage)
Some social media platforms sell the data of users so other companies and organisations can profit and/or act nefariously (Australians treated like garbage)
World leaders invade a country to protect the investment portfolios of a few people, during the war Australians directly or indirectly are killed or wounded and are made responsible for the continued fallout (Australians treated like garbage)
Banks have acted absolutely despicably to Australians, in the most obscene and degenerate manner, and will suffer no more than a slap on the wrist, and if they fook up Australians will have to bail them out (the people who lose their super etc)(Australians treated like garbage)
etc etc etc

I think it demonstrates a lot that I need to explain to a person why people on the top are degenerate thugs... why isn't it obvious?

So you've given examples of some people and some organisations. Hardly justification for your view that all people at the - as yet undefined - "top" are human garbage, degenerate thugs, or bullies.

What level of income is acceptable to you before someone defaults to being human garbage?

 

[faible]

I only bring up other peoples parents when they bring up my parents.

I can tell you from first hand experience and most employers with hourly employees will experience the same thing. When you ask employees to work extra hours they are not contracted to do they will often say no because once the tax is taken out it is not worth it.

People value their time so to get them to do extra work the compensation has to be worth it which is obviously subjective to the individual same thing with taking risks.

Do you honestly think that a GP co-payment of $5-$10 that does not have to be paid by children or the disabled is that bad?

You're actually the one that brings up your parents (specifically, daddy) all the time.

If the employee doesn't want to work that extra time it's less likely - in my opinion - because they've done a mental calculation of their real hourly rate once the tax is taken out, and more to do with a general mentality of not wanting to work more, or sacrifice their lifestyle for additional income. A point that's often missed by both sides of politics when discussing this topic.

What you value your time at, versus someone else their own time will be highly subjective, if I offered you $18.29 / hr (gross) to do a job - would you do it? Or do you value your time higher than that, and are willing to sacrifice doing that work in order to spend your time doing something else?

 

[RupieDupie]

Rich people have not reduced the quality of life for everyone else they have improved it.

A working or middle class person has a better quality of life in 2018 than a rich person did in 1918. The problem is too many people like yourself judge their own quality of life by comparing themselves to others. You look at a rich person and get all jealous.

Firstly, I'm comparing median income Australians to the median income Australians of way way way back in the pre-2000s.
Secondly, if poor people have it so good why don't the current rich people live the same?
Thirdly, I have stated this to you before, if there were 11 people at a table and 10 of them had a bowl of ice cream for dessert, the 11th could have an MCG-sized ice cream and I would not give a shite, but in reality what happens is the 11th has an MCG-sized ice cream and the expense of the other ten. It is not jealousy, it is thuggery.

 

[RupieDupie]

So you've given examples of some people and some organisations. Hardly justification for your view that all people at the - as yet undefined - "top" are human garbage, degenerate thugs, or bullies.

What level of income is acceptable to you before someone defaults to being human garbage?

Well which category of person from the top did I miss out on? How does a person who have more money than they can utilise not be considered a greedy pig? How could a person demand several times the income in comparison to other people considering they cannot even utilise it? What magical powers do they possess?

And

Why does a person have to work ~five times as much as an equivalent person in the 90s to make the same value cf. housing and on top of this be reduced to poverty by a bank for 30 years to also pay off the interest (which theoretically should be calculated based on the RBA interest rates (NAB increased their interest rates even though the RBA kept theirs the same), should be based on risk (big banks have big data and know how often a loan will default given X,Y, & Z, big banks can refuse a loan, big banks can ensure customers have mortgage insurance, and big banks should know that increasing the interest rate increases the risk of default) etc etc)

 

[spinynorman]

I can tell you from first hand experience and most employers with hourly employees will experience the same thing. When you ask employees to work extra hours they are not contracted to do they will often say no because once the tax is taken out it is not worth it.

People value their time so to get them to do extra work the compensation has to be worth it which is obviously subjective to the individual same thing with taking risks.

Having done shift work and worked alongside people who have done it, I have *never* heard someone give that as their reason to not do it.

But yes, agreed, people should be compensated for doing additional work. This is why penalty rates ought to be protected and, realistically, extended.

 

[faible]

Well which category of person from the top did I miss out on? How does a person who have more money than they can utilise not be considered a greedy pig? How could a person demand several times the income in comparison to other people considering they cannot even utilise it? What magical powers do they possess?

You've still not told me what the income requirement is to be this greedy pig, human garbage, degenerate thug, bully that you keep calling referring to?

Why does a person have to work ~five times as much as an equivalent person in the 90s to make the same value cf. housing and on top of this be reduced to poverty by a bank for 30 years to also pay off the interest (which theoretically should be calculated based on the RBA interest rates (NAB increased their interest rates even though the RBA kept theirs the same), should be based on risk (big banks have big data and know how often a loan will default given X,Y, & Z, big banks can refuse a loan, big banks can ensure customers have mortgage insurance, and big banks should know that increasing the interest rate increases the risk of default) etc etc)

Conversely; the average Australian homeowner has seen the value of their properties skyrocket. Does that also make them human garbage? Should they then sell their house significantly below the market rate in order to not be a greedy pig?

 

[RupieDupie]

You've still not told me what the income requirement is to be this greedy pig, human garbage, degenerate thug, bully that you keep calling referring to?



Conversely; the average Australian homeowner has seen the value of their properties skyrocket. Does that also make them human garbage? Should they then sell their house significantly below the market rate in order to not be a greedy pig?

The exact number would differ by person and circumstance, and the value of money increases and decreases, so why put a figure on it? It is better to have an expression such as "have more money than they can utilise at the expense of other societal members", as this can also be used to give the answer to your following question, a person who owns a house and has seen the prices soar, due to investment in property (through thugs, bullies, greedy pigs, human garbage etc), are not really at fault that their house price is rising and are only being subjected to the vicissitudes (sic) of thuggery, the people might actually want to just live in their house and utilise the property as their home - it's not their fault society is run by disgustingly foul degenerates - and therefore they do not have more asset than they can utilise.

If the person decides to sell their house to move into another they may move from a $1M to a $1M house, and once again this is not their problem that they live in a country ruled over by parasitic scumbags (and the person is still living in a house they utilise, so we are still not talking about a person wanting more than they can utilise at the expense of other people). But once the person thinks "cha-ching" and that they are going to use their first house to get equity on a second dilapidated house, have rent paid / negative gearing so they get the house for free, and then sell this years later to another person expecting that this latter person should work 10x to buy their dilapidated property, this person will "have more money than they can utilise at the expense of other societal members", then I don't have any problem calling them a greedy pig.