Why not raise taxes to slow inflation?

Remove this Banner Ad

It should be. I dont have an answer but why should only those with mortgages suffer the burden?

There has to be a better way than passing the buck onto 1/3 of people with a mortgage and the profits go into banks who dodge *loads of taxes
Especially when most discretionary spending isn't being done by younger people with larger mortgages.

Raising interest rates is a blunt instrument that won't solve the problem. Stage 3 tax cuts will just excerbate the issue. Corporate/superprofits tax is one thing that will help alleviate but you won't hear the mainstream media mentioning that, just lauding the record profits by the banks, mining corps and supermarket chains.
 
I wont support breaking of an election promise. My opinion makes sfa difference though.

Personally, I think the dumb campaigners who paid overs should wear the costs for doing so. Keep raising those rates!
Investment properties yes but people paying overs for houses don't always have a choice - everyone needs somewhere to live don't they? Ok you can say they may have bought above their means or in areas they couldn't afford but it's not like we have ghost towns in the outer metro suburbs they could relocate to instead.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

How fast are the interest rate rises working?

How much profit has the banks made?
ANZ made $7B!

Cutting jobs, record profits, shutting braches/ATM's, passing on rates ASAP to mortgages but not savings accounts. Government just sits back and lets foreign investment buy up houses.

It's a ticking time bomb before we either see mass homelessness, riots, or both.
 
40 billion in profits.
Will dividends from banks fuel inflation?

Surely tax is a safer and better option. Take money directly out of the economy and with no risk of fueling inflation more.
Extra revenue can be spent where needed.

Apparently only people with bank shares are needy.





IMG_0782.jpeg
 
People who want to be taxed more concern me. Do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you?
 
People who want to be taxed more concern me. Do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you?
People who reduce something as complex as taxation to “do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you” concern me.

Most people don’t tend to go out and donate money to the wide range of things we need governments to pay for. Hence there’s a fair argument to be made that despite their (sometimes) wastefulness, governments indeed tend to spend money better than the average Joe Citizen does.

Might explain why countries with higher tax rates tend to fare better in terms of living standards and overall happiness.
 
It isnt about us being taxed more, its about the banks and what not funding things they should.

Government ineptitude is costing us money through rate rises, tax the *ers receiving that money
Interest rates are impacted more by global pressures than anything the Australian government does. Judged against recent historical rates from this century, the current interest rate isn't particularly high.

It's crucial for all of us that our banks are financially healthy. I don't see them as a reasonable target.
 
40 billion in profits.
Will dividends from banks fuel inflation?

Surely tax is a safer and better option. Take money directly out of the economy and with no risk of fueling inflation more.
Extra revenue can be spent where needed.

Apparently only people with bank shares are needy.





View attachment 1851957
100%

I just can’t see how anyone can argue with this logic
Funnily I was just coming back to this site to reiterate the same thing

Raise taxes for the period required to slow growth but direct the revenue back into government funded social housing , cheaper land releases, more employment in the planning sector which is stifling land releases due to understaffing and offer first home buyer assistance.

Surely the outcome of this is more desirable than banks posting obscene profits and only their shareholders and executives benefiting?!
 
Interest rates are impacted more by global pressures than anything the Australian government does. Judged against recent historical rates from this century, the current interest rate isn't particularly high.

It's crucial for all of us that our banks are financially healthy. I don't see them as a reasonable target.
There's financially healthy and theres rorting people. Ridiculous attitude. They're a very reasonable target, the most reasonable
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

After trending higher thanks to the Matildas and the FIFA Women's World Cup in September, household spending dropped substantially last month, down 1%, according to the latest CommBank Household Spending Insights index.

The 1% fall was driven by fewer Australian households spending on recreation (-4.7%), hospitality (-4.5%), food and beverage (-1.3%), communication and digital (-0.7%) and household goods (-0.7%).

Despite the falls in those categories, CommBank said they were offset by higher spending in the utilities and transport categories as a result of higher energy bills and petrol prices.

“October’s CommBank HSI Index demonstrates a clear tightening in consumer spending compared to September’s result, which was buoyed by a number of one-off events like the FIFA Women's World Cup," CBA chief economist Stephen Halmarick said.

"We are clearly seeing the flow on effects of the interest rate increases from earlier in the year."

He expects the latest rate hike from the RBA last week will add "even further" downward pressure on spending in the coming months, but there could be increased spending due to the November sales season.

"Looking ahead, our base case is no further increases in the RBA cash rate, although there remains upside risk based on the inflation figures due at the end of January," he said.



So clearly interest rates are doing what they are intended to do in reducing household spending but the rates continue to rise. Why? Surely these people paid exorbitant sums to make key decisions clearly can see that inflation is driven by key indicators unrelated to interest rates.
 
After trending higher thanks to the Matildas and the FIFA Women's World Cup in September, household spending dropped substantially last month, down 1%, according to the latest CommBank Household Spending Insights index.

The 1% fall was driven by fewer Australian households spending on recreation (-4.7%), hospitality (-4.5%), food and beverage (-1.3%), communication and digital (-0.7%) and household goods (-0.7%).

Despite the falls in those categories, CommBank said they were offset by higher spending in the utilities and transport categories as a result of higher energy bills and petrol prices.

“October’s CommBank HSI Index demonstrates a clear tightening in consumer spending compared to September’s result, which was buoyed by a number of one-off events like the FIFA Women's World Cup," CBA chief economist Stephen Halmarick said.

"We are clearly seeing the flow on effects of the interest rate increases from earlier in the year."

He expects the latest rate hike from the RBA last week will add "even further" downward pressure on spending in the coming months, but there could be increased spending due to the November sales season.

"Looking ahead, our base case is no further increases in the RBA cash rate, although there remains upside risk based on the inflation figures due at the end of January," he said.



So clearly interest rates are doing what they are intended to do in reducing household spending but the rates continue to rise. Why? Surely these people paid exorbitant sums to make key decisions clearly can see that inflation is driven by key indicators unrelated to interest rates.
CommBank trying to shoehorn every last cent out of their sponsorship of the Matildas? Surely the world cup didn't have that much of a bearing on the spending habits of the entire nation?
 
Surely these people paid exorbitant sums to make key decisions clearly can see that inflation is driven by key indicators unrelated to interest rates.

Have you met people working in the finance industry? They're not anywhere near as intelligent as people think they are. Wouldn't surprise me if the same applies to key decision makers about the economy.
 
People who reduce something as complex as taxation to “do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you” concern me.

Most people don’t tend to go out and donate money to the wide range of things we need governments to pay for. Hence there’s a fair argument to be made that despite their (sometimes) wastefulness, governments indeed tend to spend money better than the average Joe Citizen does.

Might explain why countries with higher tax rates tend to fare better in terms of living standards and overall happiness.

It seems way too easy to just increase the GST rate for a specific period; hits discretionary spending mostly, doesn't impact fresh food or housing affordability, takes money out the economy and gives it to the Government instead of the banks where it might even be spent on something beneficial for society.
 
People who want to be taxed more concern me. Do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you?
Do I think the government is better at handling cash (health, education, infrastructure, defence etc) than individuals, particularly the very wealthy (holidays, expensive cars, hidden away in offshore accounts to hand over to children decades in the future)?

Probably.
 
People who want to be taxed more concern me. Do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you?
What an inane comment. Do you think the government shouldn't provide vital infrastructure and essential services to the community?
 
After trending higher thanks to the Matildas and the FIFA Women's World Cup in September, household spending dropped substantially last month, down 1%, according to the latest CommBank Household Spending Insights index.

The 1% fall was driven by fewer Australian households spending on recreation (-4.7%), hospitality (-4.5%), food and beverage (-1.3%), communication and digital (-0.7%) and household goods (-0.7%).

Despite the falls in those categories, CommBank said they were offset by higher spending in the utilities and transport categories as a result of higher energy bills and petrol prices.

“October’s CommBank HSI Index demonstrates a clear tightening in consumer spending compared to September’s result, which was buoyed by a number of one-off events like the FIFA Women's World Cup," CBA chief economist Stephen Halmarick said.

"We are clearly seeing the flow on effects of the interest rate increases from earlier in the year."

He expects the latest rate hike from the RBA last week will add "even further" downward pressure on spending in the coming months, but there could be increased spending due to the November sales season.

"Looking ahead, our base case is no further increases in the RBA cash rate, although there remains upside risk based on the inflation figures due at the end of January," he said.



So clearly interest rates are doing what they are intended to do in reducing household spending but the rates continue to rise. Why? Surely these people paid exorbitant sums to make key decisions clearly can see that inflation is driven by key indicators unrelated to interest rates.
My question is why would all the speculators and investors just stop because of interest rate rises ?
It might slow them down but if that’s their focussed wealth creation plan they are going to pursue it sooner or later

It’s called kicking the can down the road
These rate rises are doing nothing other than enriching the already rich and hurting the poor

hecken inept government doing nothing to tackle the real drivers of inflation
 
People who want to be taxed more concern me. Do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you?

Do you think banks handle your cash better?
Most of those profits get funnelled overseas …
Who really owns our banks?

So that debt needs to be paid off…how does giving Scomo’s billions he printed to the banks help our society?

You are being indirectly “taxed” by the banks…




HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited: 16.91% of Westpac; 16.83% of NAB; 18.48% of ANZ; 14.80% of CBA. JP Morgan Nominees Australia Ltd: 12.75% of Westpac; 12.03% of NAB; 14.40% of ANZ; 11.57% of CBA
 
It seems way too easy to just increase the GST rate for a specific period; hits discretionary spending mostly, doesn't impact fresh food or housing affordability, takes money out the economy and gives it to the Government instead of the banks where it might even be spent on something beneficial for society.

If you think raising the GST for a temporary period wouldn't become permanent, you've got rocks in your head.

I'm not against a raise but it would never be temporary, governments would soon waste the sugar hit and want more.
 
So you are ok with paying higher interest rates than necessary while a handful of people make a killing
When an organisation can make enough money to pay their CEO $80 million in bonuses , they are making too much money and someone is losing out unfairly
And you can spin it any way you like that it’s free market capitalism but you’ll never convince me that it’s ethical
"Capitalism" doesn't mean an unfettered free for all. That's what these neoliberal "magic of the marketplace" ideologues will never get.
 
Its not a scam. Its just a unintended feature of our institutional structure. The RBA wouldnt have to raise interest rates as high if the Labour government implemented policy to contract demand (and overseas governments as well). The labour government refuse to do this because it will be seen as political poision amongst the voters. Its not because of a scam with corporates. Thus the RBA are the only ones left to do all the demand killing through the one policy tool they have. Interest rates.

The fix for this would be an independent fiscal authority that could adjust the size of the deficit through tax rates to target inflation. Something Ive long advocated for. Along with the elimination of government debt as a thing.

ps. Young people on average (excluding recent mortgage purchasers) should be cheering for higher mortgage rates. Its needed to kill the housing market.

1/ I don't think it's unintended at all

2/ I welcome falling house prices, but so will the speculators
 
People who want to be taxed more concern me. Do you think the government is better at handling your cash than you?
At the federal level, taxes aren't necessary to pay for anything at all, because the government can instruct the RBA to create as much money as they want to finance spending. What taxes are useful for is to lower the amount of money floating around the economy to restrict inflation.

So I suppose you might firstly ask, is cutting inflation more important than me having some extra money? I would say yes, because while I personally might be able to keep up with the rising cost of living, I'd rather that the people less well off than me were able to do that too, which is more likely to happen if prices stop rising so much.

You might secondly ask, is the federal government being able to spend more without stoking inflation more important than me having some extra money? To answer that, you'd have to look at what they're planning to cut back on. Things that I think are an absurd waste of money like the AUKUS submarines are not on the chopping block. What is on the chopping block is infrastructure investment.


Given the huge ability of infrastructure spending to create jobs, make life more convenient and reduce future inflation by reducing the cost of production and transport, I would say, yes, this is more important than me having a bit more money. If the spending I think isn't important were the first to be cut, then I might change my stance, but that would require very different politicians in charge to those who run both major parties.

But as you may recall that I've said to you earlier in this thread, right now I'm only in favour of raising taxes on corporations and the very wealthy. People who earn at least three times the average income or have obscene levels of wealth. The average worker would suffer more than usual from a tax hike due to the rising cost of living.

It's crucial for all of us that our banks are financially healthy. I don't see them as a reasonable target.
Is there a point for you where our banks have moved from merely being financially healthy to making extreme profits? If so, where does that lie? If not, given that their profits mostly come from the Australian people and banking is a vital service that we can't do without, shouldn't the Australian people own the banks rather than private shareholders, many of whom are not Australian?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top