Labor politician need to set example

Discuss politics and current affairs here.

Hot topic: The scourge of negative gearing, Friends of the NBN and wrecking lives.  The economy and Poll tracking— all the polls.

Special Feature 1: Peter Costello and our current deficits.
Special Feature 2: Dr Turnbull and the wrong NBN prescription
Special Feature 3: The Denigration of science, technology and education.
.
Forum rules
The rules for this board are in the Charter of Moderation. Politics is for serious discussion of politics, economics and current affairs.

Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 14 May 2019, 16:36

If Labor politicians have any moral fibre they should set an example, by excluding themselves from being entitled to the grandfathering clauses for negative gearing on their investment property’s.

It appears that the current Labor politicians are in self preservation mode, to protect their investment interests.

There was an article where about 65 Labor politicians have investment properties!
I believe that one of Labor’s prominent female politician has 6 investment properties.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby johnsmith » 14 May 2019, 19:28

shouldn't this apply to liberal poli's too? Or are they a protected species? :giggle
FD.
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
User avatar
johnsmith
Mastodon
 
Posts: 8905
Joined: 25 Sep 2017, 21:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 14 May 2019, 19:52

johnsmith wrote:shouldn't this apply to liberal poli's too? Or are they a protected species? :giggle


Certainly!

But Labor politician's should stop crapping on, about the 'the interests of the big end of town', when they belong to that spectrum of society.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Bongalong » 14 May 2019, 20:01

I find it more than interesting that 6 investment properties is the talking point... VERY VERY INTERESTING INDEED... :roll

Goes to show how much anyone actually cares about the kids... :bike
"Oi!"
Bongalong
Warthog
 
Posts: 3082
Joined: 25 Jun 2018, 11:48
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby johnsmith » 14 May 2019, 20:05

Chuck wrote:
johnsmith wrote:shouldn't this apply to liberal poli's too? Or are they a protected species? :giggle


Certainly!

But Labor politician's should stop crapping on, about the 'the interests of the big end of town', when they belong to that spectrum of society.

Chuck


you prefer they do nothing ? I prefer they do something, even if they do exempt themselves now ... at least that way my kids might have a hope of buying a house in 20 years time. If prices keep going the way they are that will be unlikely, same goes for most of today's kids will.

Having said that, this is not my preferred solution. I would rather they allowed NG to apply to both existing and new houses, but limit it to one or two houses only per couple. After that no NG no matter what house. A much fairer system that would have less impact on renters.
FD.
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
User avatar
johnsmith
Mastodon
 
Posts: 8905
Joined: 25 Sep 2017, 21:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby HBS Guy » 14 May 2019, 20:11

That is still helping those who already have a house or two. Some NG houses are kept empty so no damage happens. Nah, no NG.
User avatar
HBS Guy
Tractors to Australia
 
Posts: 53129
Joined: 27 Oct 2009, 14:37

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby johnsmith » 14 May 2019, 20:12

HBS Guy wrote:That is still hekoing those who already have a house or two. Some NG houses are kept empty so no damage happens. Nah, no NG.


I don't agree with no NG. It's a legitimate business expense and therefore should be claimable as a tax deduction. You CANNOT claim NG on an empty house. It must be income producing.
FD.
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
User avatar
johnsmith
Mastodon
 
Posts: 8905
Joined: 25 Sep 2017, 21:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby pinkeye » 15 May 2019, 01:03

I think you'll find it only needs to be available for rent. If no suitable tenants arrive..??

No.. it is something that must be addressed, if you want any look in as a first home buyer. The competition from those cashed-up investors just makes it too hard.

The grandfathering doesn't JUST help labor pollies you know.? Don't be a fuckwit.

.
sleeping is good for you
User avatar
pinkeye
Warthog
 
Posts: 3887
Joined: 01 Oct 2017, 20:59
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Dax » 15 May 2019, 09:55

HBS Guy wrote:That is still helping those who already have a house or two. Some NG houses are kept empty so no damage happens. Nah, no NG.


You can't negative gear an empty house, but you can negative gear an empty house that is on the market for rent.

This constant bullshit clones indulge in by blaming the other side from what they support is always hilarious and just proves how simple a programmed clone they are, if everybody sat back and looked at the facts, then abided by them in voting, there would be no libs labs or other parties in power, just independent people that want to give the people what they want. But the world is inhabited by ideological clones, incapable of doing anything of use, other than destroy the planet and that's not much use to the future of life here.
User avatar
Dax
Cheetah
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: 12 Apr 2017, 11:15
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 15 May 2019, 14:46

johnsmith wrote:I would rather they allowed NG to apply to both existing and new houses, but limit it to one or two houses only per couple. After that no NG no matter what house. A much fairer system that would have less impact on renters.


I agree with ur comments about NG applying to both existing and new houses.

The only modification to ur suggestion is to set an upper limit on the amount that can be claimed for NG purposes. This nominal value should be determined by valuation of regional cities property prices.
The reason for suggesting regional cities is to encourage decentralisation.

So, if this value is determined to be $1 million, and an investor purchases an appartments valued at $3 million.

They can only claim 1/3rd of the purchasing cost for NG purpose and simply wear the rest.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Aussie » 15 May 2019, 14:54

Chuck wrote:If Labor politicians have any moral fibre they should set an example, by excluding themselves from being entitled to the grandfathering clauses for negative gearing on their investment property’s.

It appears that the current Labor politicians are in self preservation mode, to protect their investment interests.

There was an article where about 65 Labor politicians have investment properties!
I believe that one of Labor’s prominent female politician has 6 investment properties.

Chuck


Why, if the rest of Australia is grandfathered, ought Labor Politicians be excluded? Goose/gander.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8688
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 15 May 2019, 16:06

Aussie wrote:
Chuck wrote:If Labor politicians have any moral fibre they should set an example, by excluding themselves from being entitled to the grandfathering clauses for negative gearing on their investment property’s.

It appears that the current Labor politicians are in self preservation mode, to protect their investment interests.

There was an article where about 65 Labor politicians have investment properties!
I believe that one of Labor’s prominent female politician has 6 investment properties.

Chuck


Why, if the rest of Australia is grandfathered, ought Labor Politicians be excluded? Goose/gander.


If you think along these lines, shouldn’t they also have grandfathered the franking credits for all retirees?

Yes! For perpetrating deception on the voting community.

Labor politician's having been crapping on, about the 'the interests of the big end of town', when they belong to that spectrum of society.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby johnsmith » 15 May 2019, 16:51

pinkeye wrote:I think you'll find it only needs to be available for rent. If no suitable tenants arrive..??

No.. it is something that must be addressed, if you want any look in as a first home buyer. The competition from those cashed-up investors just makes it too hard.

The grandfathering doesn't JUST help labor pollies you know.? Don't be a fuckwit.

.


the tax office might buy that excuse for a short period of time, but no way will they allow you to NG a house that has been sitting empty for any extended length of time. It has to be a business expense, if it's not income producing, it's not a business.
FD.
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
User avatar
johnsmith
Mastodon
 
Posts: 8905
Joined: 25 Sep 2017, 21:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Aussie » 15 May 2019, 17:32

If you think along these lines, shouldn’t they also have grandfathered the franking credits for all retirees?


No. It was a gratuity...gone. Everyone with SMSFs, including Politicians, has had the gratuity removed.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8688
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 15 May 2019, 18:00

Aussie wrote:
If you think along these lines, shouldn’t they also have grandfathered the franking credits for all retirees?


No. It was a gratuity...gone. Everyone with SMSFs, including Politicians, has had the gratuity removed.


Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.

So BS and CB have created a division in the definition of 'WEALTH' and amongst retirees - class warfare.

Yet a great majority of Labor's politicians belong to the undisclosed big end of town.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby johnsmith » 15 May 2019, 18:45

gee, labor is trying to win an election ... who'd a thunk it? :grn
FD.
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
User avatar
johnsmith
Mastodon
 
Posts: 8905
Joined: 25 Sep 2017, 21:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Aussie » 15 May 2019, 18:49

Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8688
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 15 May 2019, 18:58

Aussie wrote:
Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.


And anyone earning less the $18,200 will miss out, unless they get a part pension or a govt allowance.

Do more research!

chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Aussie » 15 May 2019, 19:02

Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.


And anyone earning less the $18,200 will miss out, unless they get a part pension or a govt allowance.

Do more research!

chuck


Do you assert this effects anyone not having an SMSF?
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8688
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 15 May 2019, 19:22

Aussie wrote:
Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.


And anyone earning less the $18,200 will miss out, unless they get a part pension or a govt allowance.

Do more research!

chuck


Do you assert this effects anyone not having an SMSF?


Yes! Even part time workers who earn less then the tax threshold and own franking credit paying shares are deemed not to qualify for a cash refund. Yet wealthy property owner who can get at least $1 as a pension, will qualify for the cash refund.

These are the type of citizens that I'm arguing for, not for myself that some posters believe.

I qualify under Labor's current proposal because I get a measly amount in allowance that allows me to buy a carton of stubbies once a fortnight.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Aussie » 15 May 2019, 19:34

Aussie wrote:
Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.


And anyone earning less the $18,200 will miss out, unless they get a part pension or a govt allowance.

Do more research!

chuck


Do you assert this effects anyone not having an SMSF?


Chuck's answer is:

Yes!


I suggest you take your own medicine and do the research.
User avatar
Aussie
Minister for Foreign Affairs
 
Posts: 8688
Joined: 13 Mar 2010, 17:25

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby pinkeye » 16 May 2019, 02:03

Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.


And anyone earning less the $18,200 will miss out, unless they get a part pension or a govt allowance.

Do more research!

chuck


Do you assert this effects anyone not having an SMSF?


Yes! Even part time workers who earn less then the tax threshold and own franking credit paying shares are deemed not to qualify for a cash refund. Yet wealthy property owner who can get at least $1 as a pension, will qualify for the cash refund.

These are the type of citizens that I'm arguing for, not for myself that some posters believe.

I qualify under Labor's current proposal because I get a measly amount in allowance that allows me to buy a carton of stubbies once a fortnight.

Chuck



Utter rubbish. Shows just how things can get 'used' in perpetrating lies. Chuck is obviously badly informed, or not informed, or a moron, or a stirrer with vested interests.

This is simple .

But everyone is making it hard.

To get a refund of tax paid .... one must first pay tax.!!! Simple as THAT.

These people were very canny, in using Howard's scam.. they've had the benefit for what?? 10+ yrs..? They are old folk, who have no real expectation of continuing to live beyond their 100's.. :roll :roll :roll

Hey they'll die of neglect in an old -aged care home before they have used their capital. So.. what? I should contribute to their estate..? Nah.. the whole scheme stinks... it MUST be removed.

It is a question of equity. And, it is an economic black hole.. with taxpayers funding these folk, and hey? if you had the money and the smarts you took advantage.

Times up.
Sell off your cruiser... or even, your shares... :roll :tweed :tweed :tweed :tweed :tweed


It is ALL about that.
sleeping is good for you
User avatar
pinkeye
Warthog
 
Posts: 3887
Joined: 01 Oct 2017, 20:59
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 16 May 2019, 19:23

pinkeye wrote:
Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Chuck wrote:
Aussie wrote:
Read up a little bit more about Franking credit, and this gratuity will still continue for the exclusive wealthy - property wise -part govt pensioners.


Rubbish. Except what has been said over and over...only those with SMSFs get this gratuity taken away.


And anyone earning less the $18,200 will miss out, unless they get a part pension or a govt allowance.

Do more research!

chuck


Do you assert this effects anyone not having an SMSF?


Yes! Even part time workers who earn less then the tax threshold and own franking credit paying shares are deemed not to qualify for a cash refund. Yet wealthy property owner who can get at least $1 as a pension, will qualify for the cash refund.

These are the type of citizens that I'm arguing for, not for myself that some posters believe.

I qualify under Labor's current proposal because I get a measly amount in allowance that allows me to buy a carton of stubbies once a fortnight.

Chuck





Utter rubbish. Shows just how things can get 'used' in perpetrating lies. Chuck is obviously badly informed, or not informed, or a moron, or a stirrer with vested interests.

This is simple .

But everyone is making it hard.

To get a refund of tax paid .... one must first pay tax.!!! Simple as THAT.

These people were very canny, in using Howard's scam.. they've had the benefit for what?? 10+ yrs..? They are old folk, who have no real expectation of continuing to live beyond their 100's.. :roll :roll :roll

Hey they'll die of neglect in an old -aged care home before they have used their capital. So.. what? I should contribute to their estate..? Nah.. the whole scheme stinks... it MUST be removed.

It is a question of equity. And, it is an economic black hole.. with taxpayers funding these folk, and hey? if you had the money and the smarts you took advantage.

Times up.
Sell off your cruiser... or even, your shares... :roll :tweed :tweed :tweed :tweed :tweed


It is ALL about that.


U use ur ignorance and name calling, disguising it as a factual arguments.

A desperate Labor lobbyists!

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby pinkeye » 16 May 2019, 21:32

No reply of merit huh? Chuck..?
you don't understand what you are talking about, so you being the stooge you are, attempt some insults. Says it all eh.?


No-one who can't AFFORD IT, will be hurt by this.

Get real... no more BS, CHUCK.
sleeping is good for you
User avatar
pinkeye
Warthog
 
Posts: 3887
Joined: 01 Oct 2017, 20:59
spamone: Animal

Re: Labor politician need to set example

Postby Chuck » 17 May 2019, 18:20

pinkeye wrote:No reply of merit huh? Chuck..?
you don't understand what you are talking about, so you being the stooge you are, attempt some insults. Says it all eh.?


No-one who can't AFFORD IT, will be hurt by this.

Get real... no more BS, CHUCK.


Have u looked at the initial ALP and then the amendment web site, before u dribble out of the left side of ur mouth.

Chuck
Chuck
Feral cat
 
Posts: 243
Joined: 11 May 2019, 18:39
spamone: Animal

Next

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], hatty and 1 guest