Pension Asset Test Changes.

[Renato1 (Renato)]

Originally Posted by xelasnave

Who was it when asked how much money he wanted, as he was already very rich, he replied....Just a little bit more.

I think that goes for most people ...we all wanted just a little bit more.

It turns out that we all want a lot more from the rich.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nati...-1226841174461

Regards,
Renato

[Eratosthenes (Peter)]

Originally Posted by Renato1

We live in a much better country than the USA. Again, by the Credit Swisse Global Wealth report-
Number of Adult Australians owning US$10,000 or less = 6%
Number of Adult Americans owning US$10,000 or less = 29%

The land of the free seems to be very much into the freedom to be extremely poor.
Regards,
Renato

This Trend has been clearly evident in the USA over the past 4 decades. deregulation of financial markets and banks, shifting the US manufacturing base off shore, placing investor rights above all other ideals - including the US constitution (which is currently suspended under various Congressional and Presidential acts)

The question is, why is Australia sluggishly following the US pathway to social destruction when the US itself is looking for ways to get off the current train wreck before it hits the cliffs edge?

[Renato1 (Renato)]

Originally Posted by Eratosthenes

This Trend has been clearly evident in the USA over the past 4 decades. deregulation of financial markets and banks, shifting the US manufacturing base off shore, placing investor rights above all other ideals - including the US constitution (which is currently suspended under various Congressional and Presidential acts)

The question is, why is Australia sluggishly following the US pathway to social destruction when the US itself is looking for ways to get off the current train wreck before it hits the cliffs edge?

I don't think it really is. At the end of the day, Unions are powerful and very good at spreading the wealth. And their party, the ALP takes power every now and then and does a fair amount of redistribution (under Ms.Gillard, it was the raising of the tax-free threshold to $18,000).

And the concept of a living wage has been central to Australian thinking for over a century (that concept seems to have eluded the US) which in turn leads to a high minimum wage. End result - Australia is the richest country in the world on a median basis, because the wealth has been so well spread around.
Cheers,
Renato

[AndrewJ]

Australia is the richest country in the world on a median basis

We are also one of the most expensive to live in,
so it balances out ( a bit )
Also is that true when net "personal debt" is taken into account?
From what i have understood, the recent rise in housing prices and penchant for putting stuff on the plastic has moved a lot more debt to the private sector vs the Govt.
A lot of people may live in expensive houses, but we dont own em.

Andrew

[Renato1 (Renato)]

Originally Posted by AndrewJ

We are also one of the most expensive to live in,
so it balances out ( a bit )
Also is that true when net "personal debt" is taken into account?
From what i have understood, the recent rise in housing prices and penchant for putting stuff on the plastic has moved a lot more debt to the private sector vs the Govt.
A lot of people may live in expensive houses, but we dont own em.

Andrew

Hi Andrew,
Well, everyone keeps saying we're one of the most expensive countries to live in, but I go on vacation to Europe every two years, and I'm darned if I think that it's cheaper to live over there. Yes, it's cheaper in the old eastern bloc countries, but not in the rest of the place. Good value meals in Berlin, but in London and Madrid and Rome I felt I was burning money just to eat. Melbourne is much cheaper.
In places like Italy where they are all mad on designer stuff - there are hardly any discounts like we get over here. They think a sale is 10% off, whereas I think a sale is 60% off.

If one doesn't make the calculation about assets per adult without taking the debt into account, the figure would be meaningless, as the most indebted people would be the most wealthy, and no comparison between countries could be done validly.

The fact that we are the richest country in the world on a median basis becomes pretty self evident when one travels overseas. You run across Australians literally everywhere, far out of all proportion to other nationalities.
Regards,
Renato

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by AndrewJ

We are also one of the most expensive to live in,
so it balances out ( a bit )

Nope. I think life is pretty damn good down under and buying power second to none. C'mon now... why do you think everybody wants to come and live here?

[Eratosthenes (Peter)]

Originally Posted by Renato1

I don't think it really is. At the end of the day, Unions are powerful and very good at spreading the wealth. And their party, the ALP takes power every now and then and does a fair amount of redistribution (under Ms.Gillard, it was the raising of the tax-free threshold to $18,000).

And the concept of a living wage has been central to Australian thinking for over a century (that concept seems to have eluded the US) which in turn leads to a high minimum wage. End result - Australia is the richest country in the world on a median basis, because the wealth has been so well spread around.
Cheers,
Renato

I have to disagree on the point of unions having the ALP as a conduit in Canberra. Perhaps in the distant past pre Hawk Keating.

The ALP and the LNP are ideologically indistinguishable with only trivial differences that they parade around to the electorates via the corporate media.
They have the same masters and serve the same globalist banking agenda.

It's a bit like Chomsky said, in the USA "voters have a choice between two business parties" who don't represent their interests.

Currently the USA is trying to dump its trade agreement upon Australia and have half a dozen other nations in our region. And it's done in secret and if signed will mean that corporations, banks and foreign investors can sue for damages and losses against the Aussie tax payer if legislation is introduced which effects their profits. And they seek damages in a corporately set up tribunal which operates outside normal international legal frameworks.

Even the potential losses for making profits in Australia can be litigated in this tribunal. A corporation that merely has the rights to a particular technology or explorations license can claim for damages if laws are introduced in the Australian parliament.

Let's say that the Australian government legislates to ban fracking on the Australian mainland and there is a small foreign company that owns licenses to carry out fracking operations here but they haven't invested in any capital or drilled any bores yet. That company can sue in this biased trade tribunal which will convene in secret to deliberate. The tax pays even if no fracking took place.

Why does the USA impose trade agreements on other countries. It claims to want an open and free trading globe and yet locks in nations such as Mexico and Canada in NAFTA ? Obama is claiming this new trade agreement will involve 43% of the world's markets, involving 7 other nations including Australia. The 7 nations make up about 10% and the U.S.A makes up about 33%, so who do you think this agreement will benefit?

No wonder Buffett is currently eyeing Australia as a nice short term investor market.

If there is a dumber nation in the world today than Australia I would like to know which nation that is.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Marc

Nope. I think life is pretty damn good down under and buying power second to none. C'mon now.

I agree our lifestyle is very good, and after living in a few OS places, im glad i live here, but that costs.

Re buying power second to none, not so sure there.
ie why are there so many threads complaining about the costs of buying local, why are people using VPNs to download cheaper stuff from OS.

I never said we were the most expensive, just up there.

Andrew

[Eratosthenes (Peter)]

....In Australia there are currently over 2.5 million people living below the poverty line, which includes over 1 million children.

We are a country that has been economically and geo-politically blessed with riches - including a 3 decade long mining boom, and yet 1 million children live under the poverty line in this country and almost 40% of the people here rely on social welfare in one way or another. WE have debt on state and private/level that shouldnt be that high. About 95% of this national debt is private/corporate debt.

WE dont discuss these issues on a national level, via an honest and open media.

What we are exposed to daily is how many terrorists there are, and how many asylum seekers we can keep away from our borders - a policy which is not only immoral but violates the very international laws that we are signed up to and pretend to uphold.

As a people we need to discuss what sort of values and morals are important to us and how we go about our daily lives and what sort of communal structures are supported and nurtured. Otherwise what sort of clowns are we and what sort of circus are we setting up for our children to live in going forward?

[UniPol]

Looks like the IIS TOS 3.1 has been given the flick The Mod Squad must have gone on an extended holiday to Mars Wonder when they will be back from their sojourn

[Renato1 (Renato)]

Originally Posted by Eratosthenes

I have to disagree on the point of unions having the ALP as a conduit in Canberra. Perhaps in the distant past pre Hawk Keating.

The ALP and the LNP are ideologically indistinguishable with only trivial differences that they parade around to the electorates via the corporate media.
They have the same masters and serve the same globalist banking agenda.

It's a bit like Chomsky said, in the USA "voters have a choice between two business parties" who don't represent their interests.

Currently the USA is trying to dump its trade agreement upon Australia and have half a dozen other nations in our region. And it's done in secret and if signed will mean that corporations, banks and foreign investors can sue for damages and losses against the Aussie tax payer if legislation is introduced which effects their profits. And they seek damages in a corporately set up tribunal which operates outside normal international legal frameworks.

Even the potential losses for making profits in Australia can be litigated in this tribunal. A corporation that merely has the rights to a particular technology or explorations license can claim for damages if laws are introduced in the Australian parliament.

Let's say that the Australian government legislates to ban fracking on the Australian mainland and there is a small foreign company that owns licenses to carry out fracking operations here but they haven't invested in any capital or drilled any bores yet. That company can sue in this biased trade tribunal which will convene in secret to deliberate. The tax pays even if no fracking took place.

Why does the USA impose trade agreements on other countries. It claims to want an open and free trading globe and yet locks in nations such as Mexico and Canada in NAFTA ? Obama is claiming this new trade agreement will involve 43% of the world's markets, involving 7 other nations including Australia. The 7 nations make up about 10% and the U.S.A makes up about 33%, so who do you think this agreement will benefit?

No wonder Buffett is currently eyeing Australia as a nice short term investor market.

If there is a dumber nation in the world today than Australia I would like to know which nation that is.

There are certain odd premises in your discussion.

That the Unions don't have a conduit into the ALP? The unions created the ALP - there probably wouldn't have been a Fedeartion without the ALP - most ALP representatives in Canberra are from the Union movement or associated with it - the Union movement funds the ALP - the Union movement selects most of the ALP candidates.

And I don't think there is anything at all wrong with that - because for starters, I'm still a Unionist (I pay fees). So I don't understand how you can think the ALP is somehow beholden to Big Business as their masters.

As for the US "imposing" free trade agreements - it is more like people pleading with them to please give them those free trade agreements.

I keep being told about American Imperialism and the American Empire by various people. So, I ask them - could you please name for me the imperial possessions of the USA? And all the can come up with is Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Midway island - which just doesn't cut it as far as empires go. I think Australia with Kangaroo Island, Tasmania, Christmas island has bigger and better "imperial" credentials than the USA.
Cheers,
Renato

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by multiweb

C'mon now... why do you think everybody wants to come and live here?

It's the surf and the sun.

Well, the surf. Can't remember last time I saw the sun.

We live in a wonderful country burdened with horrendous costs, due to a multitude of factors.

[Renato1 (Renato)]

Originally Posted by Eratosthenes

....In Australia there are currently over 2.5 million people living below the poverty line, which includes over 1 million children.

If you want to quote poverty figures from the I-Want-To-Live-In-A-Socialist-Utopia Australian Council of Social Services, well, that's fine.

I note that for the last forty years ACOSS have always been calling for big taxes to fix this problem.

But I haven't heard them say anything about the issue in this thread - the so-called millionaires who aren't going to live as well as old age pensioners with out depleting their assets.
Regards,
Renato

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by LewisM

It's the surf and the sun.

Well, the surf. Can't remember last time I saw the sun.

We live in a wonderful country burdened with horrendous costs, due to a multitude of factors.

I think which ever way you look at it, our "problems" are really insignificant compared to the real issues they face in Europe, US and all over the world. We've got it bloody good here. Good climate, awesome food is plentiful and cheap, people are fat and some are cranky, but hey, they're not hungry. Nothing to complain about

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

Originally Posted by AndrewJ

Gday Marc

why are people using VPNs

Andrew

...I love my VPN

Col.....

[Eratosthenes (Peter)]

Originally Posted by Renato1

If you want to quote poverty figures from the I-Want-To-Live-In-A-Socialist-Utopia Australian Council of Social Services, well, that's fine.

I note that for the last forty years ACOSS have always been calling for big taxes to fix this problem.

But I haven't heard them say anything about the issue in this thread - the so-called millionaires who aren't going to live as well as old age pensioners with out depleting their assets.
Regards,
Renato

what is socialism Renato?

There are many who dont mind socialist welfare when it is applied to corporations and the banking cartels.

Take the fossil sectors in AUstralia for example - they receive about 12 billion dollars per year in tax payer funded rorts and subsidies. And this obscene hand out is given to a mature industry that is blessed with many economies of scale and market advantages (not to mention the fact that it is also over 80% foreign owned)

So when you say "socialism" you need to define it and also outline where it is applied in our society and who benefits from it.

The system is stacked - its rigged.

This is why we have perhaps the biggest corporation in the world EXXON-MOBIL post 73 billion dollars in PROFIT and pay 2% in tax.

You do not what to know what the tax payer in Australia pays to fund the corporate welfare system.

(Pension asset test? Perhaps what is needed is legislation that prohibits corporate welfare hand outs - if the corner family owned Bottle shop is subject to tough love and capitalist discipline, so should the Coles and Woolworths bottle shop chains)

[UniPol]

Originally Posted by Eratosthenes

what is socialism Renato?

There are many who dont mind socialist welfare when it is applied to corporations and the banking cartels.

Take the fossil sectors in AUstralia for example - they receive about 12 billion dollars per year in tax payer funded rorts and subsidies. And this obscene hand out is given to a mature industry that is blessed with many economies of scale and market advantages (not to mention the fact that it is also over 80% foreign owned)

So when you say "socialism" you need to define it and also outline where it is applied in our society and who benefits from it.

The system is stacked - its rigged.

This is why we have perhaps the biggest corporation in the world EXXON-MOBIL post 73 billion dollars in PROFIT and pay 2% in tax.

You do not what to know what the tax payer in Australia pays to fund the corporate welfare system.

Honestly, how long do we have to put up with this drivel.

[RB (Andrew)]

Originally Posted by UniPol

Looks like the IIS TOS 3.1 has been given the flick The Mod Squad must have gone on an extended holiday to Mars Wonder when they will be back from their sojourn

We're monitoring, it's civil so far so it's ok with Mike.

[UniPol]

Originally Posted by RB

We're monitoring, it's civil so far so it's ok with Mike.

Dear, dear, the old softly, softly approach is it?

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by Eratosthenes

Take the fossil sectors in Australia for example - they receive about 12 billion dollars per year in tax payer funded rorts and subsidies.

I knew I should have been a palaeontologist...