staringclown

Will a budget surplus kill the economy?

The budget surplus   9 members have voted

  1. 1. We should have a budget surplus because:

    • The economy is on the upturn
      0
    • Labors' credibility lies firmly with achieving a paper surplus
      4
    • We shouldn't have a surplus else the shock kills the economy
      3
    • Don't care either way
      1
    • Other - please explain?
      1

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

64 posts in this topic

a few more details here http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/plans-for-more-tax-on-super-cut-back-for-budget/story-fn7kjcme-1226342177242

But

The Daily Telegraph

has been told Treasurer Wayne Swan and Finance Minister Penny Wong argued the reduced tax break should instead start applying to people earning $200,000 a year - which would have netted the Government well more than the $1 billion over four years it will receive on the policy finally agreed to.

so it's around 250m in next years budget not 1b as the last article said.

The changes are a key measure in trying to return the budget to surplus next year.

250m is a 'key measure' when your trying to find 40b+?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Labor budget. A battlers budget. A smoke and mirrors budget but less than I imagined. The handouts are an electoral bribe. 17000 APS jobs gone over the next three years. I've lost my 50% savings bonus. I've lost my private health rebate. I've still got a sweet spot on super contributions. The poor old rich have lost far more. It's lucky for Labor the wealthy are as popular as public servants.

Edit: Anyone with multiple kids at school must think it's 2009 all over again. It really is time for an upgrade to LED technology from the plasma. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit: Anyone with multiple kids at school must think it's 2009 all over again. It really is time for an upgrade to LED technology from the plasma.

Not everyone with multiple kids in school. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The business changes that allow recouping of losses in a financial year on previous tax paid would seem a good idea for cushioning shocks for bidness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The business changes that allow recouping of losses in a financial year on previous tax paid would seem a good idea for cushioning shocks for bidness.

The law of unintended consequences will bite. I hope people will make full use of it to prove the stupidity of this policy. Can you imagine the tax revenue hit if every small business purposely ran a loss for the next financial year? I bet nobody at the Treasury took that tail risk into account. You can kiss the surplus good-bye because business tax take will go to zero. Is this a little gift the current government is leaving behind for the next government?

Edited by sydney3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not everyone with multiple kids in school. :angry:

You're obviously bourgeois like I am Ruff and deserving of punishment. Aspirational Australia is aiming for what you've got and you are obliging them. You should feel good about that. :shocking:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The law of unintended consequences will bite. I hope people will make full use of it to prove the stupidity of this policy. Can you imagine the tax revenue hit if every small business purposely ran a loss for the next financial year? I bet nobody at the Treasury took that tail risk into account. You can kiss the surplus good-bye because business tax take will go to zero. Is this a little gift the current government is leaving behind for the next government?

Syd. Bidness are usually striving to get ahead. How would making a fortune in one year and then putting your feet up in the next year solely to avoid tax reconcile against doing well in both years and making more if you could? Self interest drives business. These guys are go-getters as a rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Syd. Bidness are usually striving to get ahead. How would making a fortune in one year and then putting your feet up in the next year solely to avoid tax reconcile against doing well in both years and making more if you could? Self interest drives business. These guys are go-getters as a rule.

Negative gearing. Debt-funded private equity buy-outs. Managed investment schemes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Negative gearing. Debt-funded private equity buy-outs. Managed investment schemes.

hehe. All these options and you're telling me specufestors need more? I'll concede the point when I see rampant rorting by well performing businesses.

Actually now I think about it I can see two separate businesses working together like a binary system. Good year/bad year/same year/no tax paid. Surely they're on to this sort of scam. That took me 10 seconds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hehe. All these options and you're telling me specufestors need more?

I didn't say they needed more. I said it was bad policy and they should make full use of it to prove it being bad policy because the creators of the policy clearly didn't see the unintended consequences without this proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Resurrecting this thread due to Morrison's own budget blowout. It's identical to the goose's failure to achieve surplus. Scomo and eleventy joe scorned the goose for his drop in terms of trade and drop in revenue excuses. Only fair that the favour is returned. One quarter of negative growth and in their second term it's getting old that they blame the opposition for their own levels of fail. I don't object to the odd, angry welfare crackdown but NG, CGT and generous super cuts and we hit surplus and save the AAA... How hard can it be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, staringclown said:

Resurrecting this thread due to Morrison's own budget blowout. It's identical to the goose's failure to achieve surplus. Scomo and eleventy joe scorned the goose for his drop in terms of trade and drop in revenue excuses. Only fair that the favour is returned. One quarter of negative growth and in their second term it's getting old that they blame the opposition for their own levels of fail. I don't object to the odd, angry welfare crackdown but NG, CGT and generous super cuts and we hit surplus and save the AAA... How hard can it be?

+1. Don't like your chances but. The property developers control both major parties with their donations. Nothing major is likely to change until elections are publicly funded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now