zaph

Families earning $250k pa struggling

54 posts in this topic

Former chief whip Joel Fitzgibbon has joined other Labor MPs concerned about the prospect of taxing the superannuation earnings of the wealthy.

After the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, again refused to rule out such a tax, Mr Fitzgibbon feared Labor might botch the definition of what constitutes a ''wealthy Australian''.

''Coal miners in my electorate earning 100, 120, 130, 140 thousand dollars a year are not wealthy.''''In Sydney's west you can be on a quarter of a million dollars family income a year and you're still struggling,'' Mr Fitzgibbon said.

He said he would consider changes to the taxing of superannuation at the ''very, very, very high end'' but would not brook changes that affect ''ordinary people like my coal miners living in the Hunter''.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/fitzgibbon-joins-chorus-of-labor-mps-concerned-about-super-tax-20130327-2guo4.html#ixzz2OmsM2AEy

if $250k pa is struggling then what is ''very, very, very high end'' ?

Since you are supposed to struggle on the dole, perhaps it should be increased to 250kpa for a family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People no matter what income struggle because the society has been indoctrinated to spend it all and aspire for more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Families Minister, Jenny Macklin, can live on the $35-a-day Newstart allowance.

Anyone struggling on income higher than that need to take lessons from her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Former chief whip Joel Fitzgibbon has joined other Labor MPs concerned about the prospect of taxing the superannuation earnings of the wealthy.

After the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, again refused to rule out such a tax, Mr Fitzgibbon feared Labor might botch the definition of what constitutes a ''wealthy Australian''.

''Coal miners in my electorate earning 100, 120, 130, 140 thousand dollars a year are not wealthy.''''In Sydney's west you can be on a quarter of a million dollars family income a year and you're still struggling,'' Mr Fitzgibbon said.

Joel simply omitted to add, that many of them are trying to pay off multi-million dollar mansions.

What other reason would people earning over $250,000 per annum require all that money for?

Amazing what the omission, or simple distortion of the truth can suggest.

My son - a 2nd year apprentice carpenter earns approx $9.00 an hour. He does get an additional approx $60 per week travel allowance. And a $1000 per year tool allowance. A tradesman can earn $35.00 an hour. If I wasn't subsidising his rental (he shares with 4 others), he couldn't afford to pay the rent and all the other living costs. I usually fork out an extra $50 per wk so he can eat out. I also pay his comprehensive insurance on his work ute. Gross wages, I think he will earn a little over $19,000 this year. He is 22, single. I regard that as struggling! Have I lost the plot or what!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did love Hockey on ABC24 "I'm struggling, I have a mortgage" "How much do spend on your mortgage as percentage of your wage? Is it half" "ummm no, but I am really bearish"

How on earth could that end well for him? If I was the journalist I would have gone for the throat just for the lulz.

Sometimes I despair in the quality of their advisors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did love Hockey on ABC24 "I'm struggling, I have a mortgage" "How much do spend on your mortgage as percentage of your wage? Is it half" "ummm no, but I am really bearish"

How on earth could that end well for him? If I was the journalist I would have gone for the throat just for the lulz.

Sometimes I despair in the quality of their advisors.

hmm, Hockey's family runs a substantial real estate biz on the North Shore too, I believe... I'm sure he gets looked after, notwithstanding his 'bearishness'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ms clown and I are definitely struggling. The mercedes is due for a service and it looks like we'll have to fly economy to Europe in June. I don't know how we'll manage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, the joys of inflating the money supply. If you were a young couple with 3 young school kids and had recently purchased your first 4-5 bedroom house in Sydney, in an area with decent public transport (ie. trains) and < 1 hour from the CBD, you would need a very large combined income to support such 'habit'. I don't know if it would be as high as $250K, but it certainly would not be a 'measly' income of $100K to pay off all the bills. 20 years ago, you could divide those income figures by 3!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tales of woe or whatever are missing the point ($5 or $500 an hour).

The purpose of super is to fund your retirement. I hark back to to the Hawke/Keating days and I believe your super balance was allowed to be tax deductable to be a max 7x your Final Salary (lump sum) or 11x (pension).

So, bullsh*t aside, aren't doctors, vets, engineers, pilots, lawyers (yes the refugee/human/workers rights ones), dentists etc allowed to retire with benefits approaching their salaries? If not, why not?

This country has become a disgusting welfare/bribe state. In the last budget $131.6B was slated for Welfare up from $121B the year before, thats a stunning 34% of GOVT Expenditure. Consider defence is just $22B. Consider that welfare expenditure is 30% more than Health, Education and Defence COMBINED!!

Welfare should be a safety net for those unable to work for whatever reason. And, for those that can work but are out of work it should be there to assist with a return to work.

Not bribing with assistance packages etc. THIS is what keep the property bubble bubbling. The govt gives it to Baz and Betty with their $50K jobs each, wide screen TVs and compact SUV and the pass it on to the bank or landlord. F*cking rubbish. Its just propping up the real estate industry. If rents, house prices and car prices (2x fair value with easy credit) weren't so high ala the 60s, you wouldn't need the hand outs. This middle class welfare gravy train is putting fuel on the embers.

Also lets pay people to breed. A paediatric nurse friend tells a story recently of a meth head on her 6th child, all 6 with scrambled brains all 6 taken by children services. The mother admits its to get the cash and handouts.

But lets hit all the mid income professionals (yes, $150K-$200K is mid for a professional, the top end earn far more) so we can keep it going. Lets get welfare to 50% of expenditure.

Here, see how much you make in the largesse/bribe pool, add lots of kids to maximise the welfare holiday... http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/subjects/payments-for-families

My son - a 2nd year apprentice carpenter earns approx $9.00 an hour. He does get an additional approx $60 per week travel allowance. And a $1000 per year tool allowance. A tradesman can earn $35.00 an hour. If I wasn't subsidising his rental (he shares with 4 others), he couldn't afford to pay the rent and all the other living costs. I usually fork out an extra $50 per wk so he can eat out. I also pay his comprehensive insurance on his work ute. Gross wages, I think he will earn a little over $19,000 this year. He is 22, single. I regard that as struggling! Have I lost the plot or what!!!

Sol, why? Why has he got such a sh*t gig?

When I didn't have a clue what I wanted to be, I joined the services. Do you know that Army carpenters make $62K a year when they finish their training and $47K whilst training?

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/army/jobs/Carpenter/

Pay & Allowances

Other Ranks (Technical)

Salary while undertaking Military (Recruit) Training: $1,289 per fortnight ($33,619 per year).*

Salary while undertaking Employment Training commences at $1,474 per fortnight ($38,422 per year) and increases to $1,658 per fortnight ($43,224 per year) after 12 months of training.*

While under training, you will also receive $357 per fortnight ($9,319 per year pro rata) Trainee Allowance.

To assist you in maintaining your uniforms in good order and condition, you will receive a Uniform Allowance of $16 per fortnight ($419 per year).

Salary (excluding allowances) on completion of Initial Employment Training: $1,966 per fortnight ($51,260 per year).*

In addition to your salary, you will receive Service Allowance of $477 per fortnight ($12,431 per year) except while undertaking Military (Initial) or Employment training. This allowance compensates a member for the unique requirements that service life may impose on an individual and his or her family.

There are lots of trade and service jobs in the services that don't involve anything to do with clearing bunkers of Taliban or combat ops and only require year 10 education.

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/airforce/trades/

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/navy/trades/

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/army/trades/

I don't buy underpaid or unemployment sob stories about the young. Call me cold but it just doesn't wash. Join the services, even the cooks get paid in the high 50s.

If I was treasurer the middle class welfare recipients would get 6 months notice to get their affairs in order and its gone. The banks, car finance industry, landlords, real estate industry would scream murder. Too bad, the gravy train is over. The money I saved, a lot would go to massive overdue infrastructure projects and try and get our road and rail systems somewhat like the USA, Europe, Japan or China, and thats where my unemployed will be going.

The disabled and the old, you get welfare.

And the super? No tax on contributions to 11x your salary in fund value with max 25% on speculative and 75% fixed interest and govt paper.

Finally, income splitting for tax minimisation. Many partners with children would choose to stay home especially if house prices normalised.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a problem saying it but

BERNIE MADDOFF for treasurer.

the think with cutting middle class wealfare is , that it should reduce tax burdens, and their need for it would be reduced. as lower costs spread thru econ everyone wins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch your blood pressure if you wish to see the May budget. They will cut welfare because they have to. We will be okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tales of woe or whatever are missing the point ($5 or $500 an hour).

The purpose of super is to fund your retirement. I hark back to to the Hawke/Keating days and I believe your super balance was allowed to be tax deductable to be a max 7x your Final Salary (lump sum) or 11x (pension).

So, bullsh*t aside, aren't doctors, vets, engineers, pilots, lawyers (yes the refugee/human/workers rights ones), dentists etc allowed to retire with benefits approaching their salaries? If not, why not?

This country has become a disgusting welfare/bribe state. In the last budget $131.6B was slated for Welfare up from $121B the year before, thats a stunning 34% of GOVT Expenditure. Consider defence is just $22B. Consider that welfare expenditure is 30% more than Health, Education and Defence COMBINED!!

Welfare should be a safety net for those unable to work for whatever reason. And, for those that can work but are out of work it should be there to assist with a return to work.

Not bribing with assistance packages etc. THIS is what keep the property bubble bubbling. The govt gives it to Baz and Betty with their $50K jobs each, wide screen TVs and compact SUV and the pass it on to the bank or landlord. F*cking rubbish. Its just propping up the real estate industry. If rents, house prices and car prices (2x fair value with easy credit) weren't so high ala the 60s, you wouldn't need the hand outs. This middle class welfare gravy train is putting fuel on the embers.

Also lets pay people to breed. A paediatric nurse friend tells a story recently of a meth head on her 6th child, all 6 with scrambled brains all 6 taken by children services. The mother admits its to get the cash and handouts.

But lets hit all the mid income professionals (yes, $150K-$200K is mid for a professional, the top end earn far more) so we can keep it going. Lets get welfare to 50% of expenditure.

Here, see how much you make in the largesse/bribe pool, add lots of kids to maximise the welfare holiday... http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/subjects/payments-for-families

Sol, why? Why has he got such a sh*t gig?

When I didn't have a clue what I wanted to be, I joined the services. Do you know that Army carpenters make $62K a year when they finish their training and $47K whilst training?

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/army/jobs/Carpenter/

There are lots of trade and service jobs in the services that don't involve anything to do with clearing bunkers of Taliban or combat ops and only require year 10 education.

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/airforce/trades/

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/navy/trades/

http://www.defencejobs.gov.au/army/trades/

I don't buy underpaid or unemployment sob stories about the young. Call me cold but it just doesn't wash. Join the services, even the cooks get paid in the high 50s.

If I was treasurer the middle class welfare recipients would get 6 months notice to get their affairs in order and its gone. The banks, car finance industry, landlords, real estate industry would scream murder. Too bad, the gravy train is over. The money I saved, a lot would go to massive overdue infrastructure projects and try and get our road and rail systems somewhat like the USA, Europe, Japan or China, and thats where my unemployed will be going.

The disabled and the old, you get welfare.

And the super? No tax on contributions to 11x your salary in fund value with max 25% on speculative and 75% fixed interest and govt paper.

Finally, income splitting for tax minimisation. Many partners with children would choose to stay home especially if house prices normalised.

Well no one struggles on 250K TP but I take your point RE super. Saving for ones own retirement relieves the burden for the rest of the taxpayers.

However 50% of the workers pay no net income tax. What they do pay is reimbursed with family payments etc. So the simple truth is that welfare is required for service workers to afford to live in this country.

128116-130327-n-tax-churn.jpg

There's all sorts of (good) arguments against churn with regard to welfare payments and the amount of GDP skimmed by the bureaucracy to refund tax back to those on the lower end of the scale. It would be preferable that a living wage was paid in the first place and welfare wasn't necessary a la the 60's. But business would scream at wages at such levels. Witness the Sunshine Harvester judgment of the early 20th century.

We all know the reason why the welfare is necessary. The dream of home ownership has been preached far and wide by all political parties. I tend to think that the egalitarianism of the Australia of old is fading. It's every man for themselves nowadays. Which ever government we have will be faced with a stark choice. If they don't hit the middle class with super taxes they will hit the middle class with higher income taxes. Vested interests (AKA the actual wealthy) will usually prevail and lobby successfully against any increase in their own payments. The mining companies have proved this when they unseated Rudd. The middle class are fodder.

Ms clown and I earn ~230K household income. We are an easy target. The vast majority that pay no net tax think we should stump up ever more.

The point is am I happy to be subsidising others mortgage payments with welfare? No. If I were the government can I cut family benefits? No. If property prices were to drop would I be re-elected? No.

Changing any of it would require a brave government and we're fresh out of brave governments. Labor commissioned the Henry review and then ignored the majority of the recommendations. Including ending Negative gearing and getting rid of stamp duty in favour of a land tax.

The truly amazing bit is that even those paying no net income tax think they are over taxed. Given the requirement for infrastructure spending and the aversion to budget deficits either side of politics is going to have to make some unpopular decisions sooner rather than later. You'd think the Liberals might be up for it if they win in a landslide but they are promising the paid parental leave scheme so who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are a 'late starter', say you spent years at uni and then a year or two discovering the world before joining the hamster wheel (say 35 years on the wheel) you have no chance of getting more than say 4x annual income in super at 180k annual imcome.

What does this leave? Geared property and securities investment. If thats all thats left to fund my retirement thats what I will do.

Having those options left is by policy accident or purposeful?

Staringclown, if house prices were fair value, say 50% cheaper and rents 30% cheaper (7% yield on houses) there would be no need for the churn.

Mr Baker calculates that churn ties up about 70,000 federal public servants and costs about $7bn a year in administration costs — about 4 per cent of the commonwealth’s annual welfare expenditure.

‘‘The ATO spends another $3.2bn on tax collection,’’ he says, noting ‘‘these costs do not include the additional administration costs of state governments or private sector workers such as accountants and lawyers advising people on dealing with the tax and welfare system’’.

$4.5 billion Family Tax Benefit B, which is paid to single-income families where the main breadwinner earns up to $150,000 a year, and the $4.3 billion Schoolkids’ Bonus as particularly egregious examples of ‘‘middleclass welfare’’.
‘‘The Coalition’s proposed $4.3bn per year paid parental leave scheme will greatly increase middle-class welfare and taxwelfare churn,’’

The clincher

CURBING Australia’s chronic and growing welfare ‘‘churn’’ — including ditching Family Tax Benefit B and the controversial Schoolkids’ Bonus — provides the key to returning the budget to surplus and boosting economic efficiency.

A good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to get on the socialist gravy train last year (parental paid leave). We put an application in November last year and still haven't had it processed yet. I'm quite annoyed as I was considering buying a NAS. The one thing babies need is a good storage device. smile.gif

I'm over worrying about taxation, what options do you have?

1. Don't pay/report tax?

2. Work through offshore jurisdictions?

3. Leave the country?

4. ...?

The difficulty in my line of work is if I contract then companies will either require TFN/PAYG or may baulk at contracting a foreign entity for professional services. In countries I'd consider migrating to the personal tax rates vary between 10-18%. Currently I'd pay around 30%. It sucks but what to do? sadwalk.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It sucks but what to do?

You do what everybody else does. You decide that working is just too hard.

Edited by sydney3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do what everybody else does. You decide that working is just too hard.

Just find your own personal sweet spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do what everybody else does. You decide that working is just too hard.

I have a friend who does just that. Receives welfare/pension payments, lives in public housing and knows a lot of the ins and outs to milk what he needs out of the system. Spends his days fixing up cars and having fun in courts (has access to fee waivers and doesn't have to pay costs orders).

He always ask me, "Medved, why are you working?". Makes me wonder some days...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend who does just that. Receives welfare/pension payments, lives in public housing and knows a lot of the ins and outs to milk what he needs out of the system. Spends his days fixing up cars and having fun in courts (has access to fee waivers and doesn't have to pay costs orders).

He always ask me, "Medved, why are you working?". Makes me wonder some days...

So that he can live in public housing, and he can spend his days fixing up cars (and selling them to those other idiots who work and earn honest money) and generally having fun in courts....

That lifestyle is about to come to an end!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That lifestyle is about to come to an end!!!

We are only getting started. 80% of human activity is unnecessary. We need more people to do nothing or else we will never progress.

Edited by sydney3000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are only getting started. 80% of human activity is unnecessary. We need more people to do nothing or else we will never progress.

Huh!

Must be some new pop philosophy. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Work is not worth it. The facts speak for themselves.

"Maersk paid SurveySpec $400 a day for each employee. SurveySpec hired the employees from SOS for $US92 a day. And SOS hired the men from Pocomwell, which was paying them about $US30 a day. The men were paid $US900 a month for 84 hours of work a week."

"Foreigners were paid less than $3 an hour to work on oil rigs off the West Australian coast when they should have been covered by domestic employment laws."

http://www.smh.com.au/business/oil-rig-workers-paid-3-an-hour-20130401-2h2ym.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Work is not worth it. The facts speak for themselves.

Its actually a fundamental question.

Your statement only works as long as there are people willing to support a welfare lifestyle.

Because at the root of this is the enquiry

Why do we labour?

For what we get out of? (Hardly). Most work today is menial and mind-numbing.

The aristocracy have never advocated working for a living. Far better to have others do it for you.

Human beings have never liked work. Better if you can get through life doing as least of it as you can.

But it will always be at someone else's expense.

Work is fundamental to life.

If we digress back to agrarian lifestyles we realise that we have to work even harder, just to continue to exist.

To grow food, and cover yourself with shelter and clothing were essentials that ensured our survival, against the threats of starvation, attack and disease.

Life was work.

The problem we have today, is that people are so removed from the realities of life, that they have no idea what others labours are necessary just for them to have all that food in the supermarket. They just turn up for their dole cheque, and think it should always be there.

All this baloney about robot worlds only survives if you have people working to purchase what they produce.

Otherwise they don't have the means to keep operating.

We are a fragile system, and we are stretching the fabric thinner and thinner.

If the welfare pool gets too large for the productive workforce (which it is currently getting close) to support, then we revert back to 8th century BC system, where if you couldn't work, or contribute to the community, you died!!

We have to labour to live. It gets as simple and as basic as that.

We forget this at our peril.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Work is not worth it. The facts speak for themselves.

"Maersk paid SurveySpec $400 a day for each employee. SurveySpec hired the employees from SOS for $US92 a day. And SOS hired the men from Pocomwell, which was paying them about $US30 a day. The men were paid $US900 a month for 84 hours of work a week."

"Foreigners were paid less than $3 an hour to work on oil rigs off the West Australian coast when they should have been covered by domestic employment laws."

http://www.smh.com.au/business/oil-rig-workers-paid-3-an-hour-20130401-2h2ym.html

Work will set you free.

Cheap shot sorry. Truth is as someone who has spent a lot of time on welfare I can honestly say that working is preferable. The peer pressure alone makes working better. You need a cohort of friends who also don't work to make it even vaguely worth while to be on welfare. Otherwise it's just lonely and demoralising. We used to sit around telling each other we could conquer the system if we wanted to. Eventually it became empty rhetoric and we each had to prove it. We each have. Although, I did get very good at eight ball during that period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under current arrangements, all earnings on assets supporting income streams (superannuation pensions and annuities) are tax-free, in contrast to earnings in the accumulation phase of superannuation, which are taxed at 15 per cent.

However, Mr Swan announced that from July 1, 2014, future earnings (such as dividends and interest) on assets supporting income streams will be tax free only up to $100,000 a year. Earnings above $100,000 will be taxed at the same concessional rate of 15 per cent that applies to earnings in the accumulation phase.

For people aged over 60, concessional caps will be increased from $25,000 to $35,000 from July 1. That concession would be extended to those aged 50 and over from July 1, 2014.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/super-changes-to-hit-rich-retirees-20130405-2haim.html#ixzz2PXZHPD63

Sounds fair.

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