I am not a journalist: I just write about such things as Super concessions to wealthy people
I am not a journalist. As a writer, I don’t know what label people put on me. Blogger, perhaps? Columnist? Most certainly, l don’t write like one. l just write about such things as Super concessions to wealthy people.
As I recall, it was in November 2013 that I was so disgusted with the then Opposition leader Tony Abbott that, on a wing and a prayer, I decided to convert my feelings into words. Words that might make people think about what Government was and how an unpalatable opposition fitted into it.
At the time, Tony Abbott was being called the best opposition leader Australia had ever had. I found it rather breathtaking that he could be given this title based on being a perverted liar. Well, more than breathtaking, really. All because he told falsehoods about the government of the day. I asked myself if that was the criteria for being adjudged the best opposition leader; it simply made a mockery of such a title.
The title of my first incursion into writing political stuff was titled “Tony Abbott in the Lodge: Never.” I submitted it to the editor of The AIMN, and it was accepted and posted. It is still there today in all its naked inexperienced words of deserved sarcasm.
Since that first foray into writing or opining my thoughts about politics, social justice, inequality and things second nature to those of a leftish persuasion, I have written about 800 pieces for this site. That’s a fair load over 10 years to carry for a left-wing “opinion writer” who, in the past, wrote poetry and short stories for the curious mind.
It is far better to form your own opinions relative to your life experience and reason than to allow yourself to be blindly led by others.
As the writing of public journalism advanced, so did the technological requirements of the writer and the way we express ourselves. I learned Microsoft Word, Apple Pages and later Grammarly. We became like the Greens, who far too often require perfection even if it stands in the way of progress.
Truth became paramount. One had to ensure plagiarism didn’t creep into one’s thoughts accidentally or otherwise. Expressing my views as honestly as l could with a bit of flare, a drop of humour and a touch of wisdom (if it came forth) became central in my thinking.
I interrupt writing this piece for the ABC midday news
The Government intends to increase tax on superannuation over $3 million from 15% to 30%. The newsreader said that only .05% of superannuants receive this generous tax concession. My mind goes into automatic overdrive. But why didn’t they go in harder? I’m thinking.
Given the enormous demands on the Government coffers, plus a trillion-dollar debt, this is an excellent move that should eventually lead to the same treatment of negative gearing, franking credits, and all those other tax concessions favouring the rich and privileged.
I feel people on the right of politics in Australia show an insensitivity to the common good that goes beyond any thoughtful examination. They have hate on their lips, and their hatred starts with the beginning of a smile.
For me, it’s a no brainier and has the side effect of wedging the Opposition. They claim to represent the middle class but are going into bat for the ultra-rich of society. They can’t have it both ways. Dutton is now the champion of 0.05 % of the wealthiest people in Australia.
The Government needs to put the tax concessions to the rich on hold while an intense review of taxation takes place and is published in a reasonable time before the next election. Just a thought.
Bloody hell, l thought; who in their right mind thinks anyone could possibly need $400 million to retire on, even three million? Peter Dutton apparently does. He would repeal it all. What a dropkick the man is.
The notion that a few privileged individuals can own the vast majority of a country’s wealth and the remainder own little is unsustainable, politically, economically or morally.
Back to my writing!
l prefer to look at the possibilities for fairness in government rather than the economic indecency of conservative claims like they are the best managers of our money. Fair suck of the sav, I heard someone in the background say.
I am a writer with critical opinions who wears his heart on his sleeve. Who always tries to put the case for fairness, truth, equality, progressiveness, equality of opportunity and the importance of the collective over the individual?
I am by no means the best at what I do. I just do my best. I like to expose corruption and hypocrisy; if that includes my side, so be it.
My thought for the day
Meritocracy implies that those at the top of the social scale have merit and a slur against those at the bottom.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
4,862 total views, 4 views today
10 commentsLogin here Register here
Lord, you are far too modest! Perhaps a more accurate description would be ”a beacon of hope for all those betrayed by the self-serving propaganda belching forth from the main stream media-ocrity”.
But even that is inadequate. Possibly, ”rare commonsense in a corporate world smothering Australian egalitarian values for their own benefit”.
In a world that asserts wrongly that Toxic RAbbott was fit to be Australia’s Prime Minister, that Scummo is a basically decent person and that Rupert Merdick is a great Australian, it is important for the the few little boys to call out about the King’s new clothes and expose the hard truths so that we can take action to recover our rights and fair go for everyone values.
That is, after the weekend football, the pub nights and only if the surf is down.
While ever the COALition crows about their fiscal responsibility and borne to rule ”fitness to govern” sadly we only have to look back on the last nine (9) years of fiscal waste, political corruption and vote buying to remember that media must be held to account by keeping truth paramount.
Thank you for being there, Lord.
This superannuation discussion is based on a level lf low contrived tax for the rich to shut them up, make them grateful, exploit their donations, loyalty, and distort honesty. Even now, an election must be won before the ALP in government could carry out revisions. Three millions in a super account currently, with my savings investment holder, could earn between $150,000 and $200,000 p.a, so that’s plenty of pipes, cuppas, slippers, toast and a sip. I know few who EARN that now. It’s a part of the Jack Howard mania , to be noticed, admired, followed. Jack basically hated himself as he was, so had a fuhrer conversion whereby some hidden “inner” Jack was just lovely, magnificent and object of attention, free of fault and doubt, a leader, all a ridiculous fantasy. He was a self focussed low grade incompetent, cruising on the advice and direction of others, appearing to lead but abjectly following. Super for the rich from a public school desperado wannabe…If only we could all earn, spend, pay, save, be taxed FAIRLY, as befits our efforts and skills. Meanwhile, Praise the Lord who gave us this article and lead us not to the scummy Dutton for any sense or honesty. HAH!
The Government intends to increase tax on superannuation over $3 million from 15% to 30%
I heard the ABC newsreader say that too and I thought at the time, ‘that’s not accurate’ !
What the government is planning to do in 2025 is remove the fifteen percent tax concession available on superannuation earnings on balances over $3 million – there is a difference.
In my view this is a sensible move and for those who are squealing about this impost on their superannuation accounts, just remember that you have until 2025 to shift surpluses over three million into other tax dodges.
The Shovel sums it up nicely :
“Mosman protester throws glass of ’94 Penfolds Grange on famous artwork to raise awareness about superannuation changes”
I am doubtful this government will ever move on negative gearing – there are too many of THEM who have multiple property “investments”. I like them, I don’t want to suggest they are thinking only of themselves just like the wankers on the other side, but . . . . One property is a “mum and dad” investment, more that is a property developer. That change alone would make a massive difference.
Every government talks about making taxation fair. HAH!! It’s never going to be fair while people who earn as little as $20k pay tax. The threshold MUST be raised, to $30k minimum. For those on obscene salaries over $500k there is NO threshold, they pay on ALL of it. No deductions, before tax assessment, nothing FREE.Imagine, everyone paying tax the same way. Let’s face it, if you’re earning squillions you’re not going to notice. As you say, who needs $400 mill in super? Super was never supposed to be a tax dodge, but it has become so. Bring it back to its purpose.
Thank goodness you are a writer, where would be without you JL
The coalition from Howard to Dutton maintain that negative gearing and capital gains incentives encourage investors to build and increase our stock of rental properties and without that incentive we would see a reduction in new rental accommodation : this argument is in my view superficial and largely a fallacy.
Labor on the other hand and many economists argue that these tax concessions as currently structured merely encourage speculators to gamble in the property market by acquiring and flipping existing properties and gaining negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions on the way through.
Both arguments have some merit but for these tax incentives to have any integrity they should, in my view, only apply to new dwellings thus actually providing an incentive to increase the available housing stock.
This was Labor’s policy but they have shelved it for the time being : in my view they should reintroduce it and commission reliable economic modelling to demonstrate how, by eliminating tax concessions on existing properties, which just distort the market, it would actually redirect those investment funds into new builds.
There are so many lies coming from the opposition bench it leads me to the conclusion that they are receiving blood transfusions from the Mad Monk and Saint Scotty.
IMO, negative gearing can only work if it applies to new homes which have tenants. Now applying to all plus the 50% capital gains tax allows keeping the premise vacant while still making a profit. Is it good for any nation’s economy to have so much of its economic wealth tied up in accommodation?
The only way to provide affordable housing & bring down rent is to increase the housing stockpile. All other actions, such as rental subsidies, increase the cost of renting.
Terence & Florence, good points. Investment in new versus existing buildings is about 1:8 from memory. Every time an existing dwelling gets on-sold it can again attract the possibility of the negative gearing perk, something that does nothing at all to encourage more activity in the building industry. Lib-Labs, the gold standard in protecting inter-generational advantage since ever I can remember.
Put simply…..there are too many tax bludgers about the place. The uber wealthy getting concessions is just appalling
I remember ‘your week that was’, lord, and it was not bad. Then you got hooked on the rabbott, ‘truth’ and the loonies. Meritocracy is ‘a sounds good’ concept for Australia. Sadly it cannot overcome ‘cashocracy’ and ‘the best man for the job’ where ‘mates and money’ combine with ‘religion and party’ to mitigate ‘merit’. It seems clear that if, as the clp claim, ‘it is my money’ so hands off, labor, the pricks would be paying 45% income tax????
uber is money to the septics
airbandb is money to the septics and properties out of the rent market
overseas religions is money to the septics
all should be taxed at 45%