When?...... at the next election

Another gem from Australian Independent Media:

The LNP believes higher wages lead to higher costs and therefore higher unemployment. That's why they oppose them at every opportunity. But wages growth as at September 2014 was just 2.6% for the year, which translates to a drop of $2.3 billion in tax revenues from the 2014-15 budget estimates. No wonder Hockey was looking so despondent when presenting the national accounts. And guess what? Unemployment is increasing.

You would think it was a no-brainer. Higher wages means higher tax revenue as well as greater demand for goods and services which then feeds into more employment opportunities. But, it seems our three amigos, Abbott, Hockey and Abetz, don't see it that way. The irony is that if they had their way, the wages growth figure would be even lower.

How absolutely true this is, and is, at least in a fairly major part, responsible for the current downturn in our economy.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/women-rate-tony-abbott-poorly-on-all-fronts-20141226-12dgit.html

source

The graphic has defence , community, population etc as well. Just use corsor to display from the page.

Abbotts approval rating and that of his government seems to just keep falling. Looks like the next election might be interesting. It seems highly damaging for the country to be tossing out the government every four years but what is our alternative? Only option for voters is to try to pick the best of a very bad bunch - politics in this country is at an all time low. Very few politicians out there with any credibility or obvious talent - maybe Nick Xenophon can get a party up and running?

We do need honest poliicians to govern, the only trouble is that whoever wants to be a politician, is a suspect.

Seth I think a lot of them start out with the right intentions but sadly they are led astray very quickly.

I also believe that every politician should vote according to their conscience, not by party lines.

I remember once having a Union Rep coming around during Union elections to every person and telling them who they had to vote for.  I wasn't backwards in how I told him off and used some very rude words in reply.

It was like waving a red rag to a bull for someone to tell me how to vote.

This is the law that the coalition stopped from coming into affect.What was that about lifters and leaners again Joe ?

What should be appreciated is that the tax was on earnings after repeat after 100,000.

How does it work?

Under the proposed changes, earnings on assets supporting pensions that exceed $100,000 per member per financial year will be taxed at 15 per cent.

Earnings below this threshold will remain tax free. This change is anticipated to have effect from 1 July 2014. Importantly, the $100,000 threshold is proposed to:

apply in respect of each member (and not the fund as a whole);
be an annual limit reflective of taxable income as determined under existing tax rules; and
be indexed to CPI in $10,000 increments.
Example A

Consider Mum and Dad, who each have $2,000,000 in their SMSF (ie, $4,000,000 in total split 50/50). Both Mum and Dad are receiving a pension and the SMSF is fully in ‘pension mode'. What are the implications if the SMSF generates a 5 per cent return and a 10 per cent return?

Tax payable if the SMSF generates a 5 per cent return
$200,000 of total pension earnings have been generated in the fund (ie, $4,000,000 x 5% = $200,000).
Remembering that the $100,000 threshold relates to each member and not the fund as a whole, the $100,000 threshold has not been exceeded by either member and therefore — under the proposed new laws — the SMSF tax liability is nil.
Tax payable if the SMSF generates a 10 per cent return
$400,000 of total pension earnings have been generated in the fund (ie, $4,000,000 x 10% = $400,000).
There is a 15 per cent tax on earnings exceeding $100,000 for each member.
Therefore — under the proposed new laws — the SMSF tax liability is $30,000 (ie, (($200,000 - $100,000) x 15%) x 2).

http://www.smsfessentials.com.au/strategies/smsfs-impact-government-s-superannuation-changes

source