The Australian Welfare System

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by Polyal

There is a balance Revolver, I agree with most of what you say but the whole negative gearing thing needs revision...its the biggest thing tricking this country into thinking its wealthy.

You bet. Thats why there was a BIG problem when the US abolished the tax advantages of negative gearing. Got rid of it. And that cause alot of "Multi millionares" to become bankrupt over night!

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by Revolver

You bet. Thats why there was a BIG problem when the US abolished the tax advantages of negative gearing. Got rid of it. And that cause alot of "Multi millionares" to become bankrupt over night!

I can only imagine the disapproval of the elite if that were to happen here.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by blueoval

I can only imagine the disapproval of the elite if that were to happen here.

Gasp! Are you suggesting that we don't live in Australia's self proclaimed egalitarian society? Who'd a thunk that...

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Polyal

There is a balance Revolver, I agree with most of what you say but the whole negative gearing thing needs revision...its the biggest thing tricking this country into thinking its wealthy.

I agree. Trouble is, if they change it, almost certainly, it will only apply going forward disadvantaging younger buyers who didn't get in on the action. You want a price correction to benefit buyers, apply the changes to ALL current investors. Then we'll see who has invested within their means....

I never understood why neg gearing is allowed. You cant claim regular PAYE-related deductions against your capital gains, so why can you take your neg gearing losses and apply them against your PAYE income?

[jpblue1000]

Are we going to be told the answer? is it 16 dollars an hour or 160 million. C'mon cheap and while your at it tell us how we can reduce it to a level your happy with say maybe only 6 percent of GDP

JP

[cheap]

You know the answer, the real question is how the heck is that amount being funded per hour. For that matter how is the nations $100 million per day interest bill being funded?

Answer: they aren't. We're collectively beyond being in poo, we're down the S bend.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Polyal

There is a balance Revolver, I agree with most of what you say but the whole negative gearing thing needs revision...its the biggest thing tricking this country into thinking its wealthy.

The real reason no Government will get rid of it as it creates employment, builders, electricians, brickies and so on, the flow on effects are huge when building is happening, that is why Governments focus on building when stimulating the economy, 'big projects', roads, schools, hospitals etc, keep the tradies in work and the flow on's are huge

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by cheap

You know the answer, the real question is how the heck is that amount being funded per hour. For that matter how is the nations $100 million per day interest bill being funded?

Answer: they aren't. We're collectively beyond being in poo, we're down the S bend.

I might know the answer or I might be wrong...there were 5 or 6 options and so far the spread of responses is all over the place and I might have been wrong...or some of the other 'voters' might have been wrong and need informing. A decimal place miscalculation could have been made and there may be nothing to worry about or someone's in a panic because they believe the national GDP of new zealand is being spent on Pensioners in Australia per hour.

Now probably to your surprise I think the figure is too high at circa 7-8 percent of GDP spent on welfare by our government on our behalf, but I hate the waste in the system not the support it provides.
I believe half of this spending is for pensioners. These people worked their career knowing the pension was there as a safety net for them. The social contract cant be broken and the pension reduced or removed, for some its all they have, for some its what they are owed and I wouldn't dare demand you relinquish your super because you also have other wealth so why demand their promise be cut reduced or removed.
I am all for Soylent green, Baby boomers, the last pensioners suck balls, don't get me started on the other generations like x and 'I'.
So the other half of welfare spending. Disabled pensions accounts for a large sum of this and c'mon, you'd be a right dick to deny some of the most truly needy in our communities from social support. Sure some abuse it, tighten down on them, but funding for the watchdogs gets slashed and savings made in the wrong location.
Another form of welfare is the dole or social security payments for the unemployed or unemployable. I like the safety net this provides those in need. I've been lucky in that I have never needed it, never set foot in side a job placement agency or CES or whatever, but Im pretty glad if I needed it, because it all went pear shaped It would be available. Now again people abuse it and this needs to be minimised, but we cant close a useful beneficial system because a handful or two of people don't follow the letter of the law. for surely if we did then looking at the plethora of corporate welfare and tax avoidance opportunities available would also be appropriate.
Lets stop looking to harm a small minority of our community because a smaller minority abuses our collective generosity. Lets crack down fairly on them and extend that fair re-assessment of spending to all government welfare spending, private and corporate.

JP