+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 17 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 163
  1. #131
    Nowhere's Avatar
    Nowhere is offline Winner 2007- Most Supportive Of Feeding Other-Than-Breast Award
    Winner 2010- Most Optimistic Poster Award
    Winner 2010- The Most Supportive Member Award
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    11,112
    Thanks
    365
    Thanked
    1,623
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Lol at handbag hit squad I never heard that before. Not saying it is fair to call people that just made me giggle

  2. #132
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,848
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,895
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    Just quickly coming back in here (because it was from a previous post that the tangent of print media stemmed from.)

    People were asking why they hadn't heard too much about the tax cuts which must have benefitted the "rich" (and I put rich in inverted commas, as there are people who are asset rich, so it's more correct to say high income earners).

    The tone of the thread was that people blamed the ownership of the media.

    Actually - I believe it's because the changes did not benefit the high income earners, and only marginally helped lower income earners.

    Also keep in mind that these changes were to offset the effects of bringing in a carbon tax, the "clean energy rebates" were not the only payment changes supposed to do this.

    Here's the figures from changes to the tax brackets:
    0 - $6k - no change (still pay no tax)
    6 - $18k $1800 / year better off ($34/week)
    18k - $37k $3572/year better off ($68/week)
    37 - $50k $753/year better off ($14/week)
    50 - $80k $3/year better off (5c/week)
    80k + $3/year worse off


    So my theory as to why it wasn't lauded about in the press is because the majority of households in Australia are not, in fact, better off, as the projected rise of commodities due to the introduction of the carbon tax, means that they will not be better off.
    ok so numbers isn't my strong point, but if the threshold moved from 6-18k for everyone, how are the wealthy not getting that extra 12k room? I remember in another thread a little while ago it was said they did get a tax break from it, reducing their tax on 150k to 33%?? genuinely asking btw.
    Last edited by delirium; 26-02-2013 at 19:51.

  3. #133
    Busy-Bee's Avatar
    Busy-Bee is offline Offending people since before Del :D
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    11,183
    Thanks
    3,664
    Thanked
    4,704
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Past Moderator - Thank you
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    Because they raised the tax payable by the higher brackets so essentially the only people who benefitted were the ones earning between $6k and $18k (old and new tax free thresholds). All other tax payers are pretty much paying the same amount.

    I'd hazard a guess that there's not that many people earning below $18k


    I'd have to check the figures properly - but when it was shown to me where the tax changes were made - it pretty much looked like they'd moved the figures around, but did not end up actually with anyone (except the ones earning in the below below poverty line area (I don't just mean low income earners)), being any any better off. They're not worse off, but was smoke and mirrors.
    I've punched some numbers and this is what I've come up with using the example of a $50k annual income. (Using the ATO tax calculator.)

    FY 2011/12 - tax owed = $7850 which includes the $700 low income tax offset
    FY 2012/13 - tax owed = $7096 which includes the $700 low income tax offset

    The person is better off by $754 per year because of the increased tax free threshold.

    It was only the first tax bracket over the tax free threshold that changed from 15% to 19% but even this change still meant less tax for someone on $50k.

    As the calculator isn't up for this FY I used excel but I'm going to put my sums below for transparency

    Bracket
    % tax due
    Amount of income applicable
    Tax Due
    0-18200 0.0 $18,200 0
    18201-37000 0.19 $18,799 3571.81
    37001-80000 0.325 $12,999 4224.675
    Total
    7796.485
    - low income tax offset $700 7096.485

    Last point, I earn under $18k

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,710
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    7,295
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    90% of the population don't like the Greens!
    Maybe that is why they are selling so many newspapers. They write about things that people want to read about. I love reading stories of how incompetent the Greens are.
    I don't think 10% of people voting for greens = 90% of people not liking them!

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,710
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    7,295
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Oh, and wouldn't say that many people read The Australian. Thankfully! Shame about the herald sun and daily terrorgraph!
    Last edited by BigRedV; 26-02-2013 at 19:53.

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,848
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,895
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by ~Bec~ View Post
    I've punched some numbers and this is what I've come up with using the example of a $50k annual income. (Using the ATO tax calculator.)

    FY 2011/12 - tax owed = $7850 which includes the $700 low income tax offset
    FY 2012/13 - tax owed = $7096 which includes the $700 low income tax offset

    The person is better off by $754 per year because of the increased tax free threshold.

    It was only the first tax bracket over the tax free threshold that changed from 15% to 19% but even this change still meant less tax for someone on $50k.

    As the calculator isn't up for this FY I used excel but I'm going to put my sums below for transparency

    Bracket
    % tax due
    Amount of income applicable
    Tax Due
    0-18200 0.0 $18,200 0
    18201-37000 0.19 $18,799 3571.81
    37001-80000 0.325 $12,999 4224.675
    Total
    7796.485
    - low income tax offset $700 7096.485

    Last point, I earn under $18k
    OK so what does that mean? told you I'm useless with sums

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ~Bec~ View Post
    Australia has the highest concentration of media ownership in the world - it makes for ****e media and chronic lack of diversity of opinion.
    I agree in regard to lack of diversity. Fairfax does not have one on staff conservative columnist. The ABC does not have a conservative host on any of their political programs.
    The only diversity comes from News, which happens to hire journalists from both sides of the fence.

    With the internet, there is plenty of diversity. What do you feel that you don't have access to?

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    3,757
    Thanks
    1,205
    Thanked
    2,112
    Reviews
    15
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by VicPark View Post
    Don't worry about it Father. Some feminists on here think that unless you let women do what they want when they want, that you are a man/woman hater. And they resort to personal insults to try and score points with heir feminist friends. I've been accused of having a penis because I don't believe women should have certain rights such as the right to terminate for non medical reasons.
    Oh get off your high horse. I was referring to the fact Abbott wants to make abortion illegal, therefore, taking away a woman's right to make choices about HER body.

    So when I made the comment about father having a wife/daughter, it was more to try and figure out what man wants their loved ones rights taken away from them.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Anjalee For This Useful Post:

    Busy-Bee  (26-02-2013)

  10. #139
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRedV View Post
    I don't think 10% of people voting for greens = 90% of people not liking them!
    You are right. It was a pluck. But it seems to be one of those parties you either love or hate. I don't think it would be too far from 90% though. Will you accept 80%?

  11. #140
    Mod-pegasus's Avatar
    Mod-pegasus is offline ADMINISTRATOR
    and all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the one word...UNLESS
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,644
    Thanks
    1,733
    Thanked
    1,735
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    ok so numbers isn't my strong point, but if the threshold moved from 6-18k for everyone, how are the wealthy not getting that extra 12k room? I remember in another thread a little while ago it was linked they did get a tax break from it?? genuinely asking btw.
    Because people who earn higher incomes now pay higher rates above the $37k

    ie. 32.5c/dollar over the last bracket between earning $37k and $80k this was previously 30c/dollar



    Quote Originally Posted by ~Bec~ View Post
    I've punched some numbers and this is what I've come up with using the example of a $50k annual income. (Using the ATO tax calculator.)

    FY 2011/12 - tax owed = $7850 which includes the $700 low income tax offset
    FY 2012/13 - tax owed = $7096 which includes the $700 low income tax offset

    The person is better off by $754 per year because of the increased tax free threshold.

    It was only the first tax bracket over the tax free threshold that changed from 15% to 19% but even this change still meant less tax for someone on $50k.

    As the calculator isn't up for this FY I used excel but I'm going to put my sums below for transparency

    Bracket
    % tax due
    Amount of income applicable
    Tax Due
    0-18200 0.0 $18,200 0
    18201-37000 0.19 $18,799 3571.81
    37001-80000 0.325 $12,999 4224.675
    Total
    7796.485
    - low income tax offset $700 7096.485

    Last point, I earn under $18k
    See - my calculations in my post above. I used the two years of 2011/2012 and subtracted the tax paid from the years 2012/2013.

    The figures I have done are correct, as you do not calculate your tax in every bracket - you subtract your base rate for the last bracket, then multiply the left over dollars by the new rate.

    So a person earning $80000 in the 2011/2012 year paid:
    $4,650 plus 30c for each $1 over $37,000 = which equates to:$17550 tax /year

    The same person earning $80000 in the 2012/2013 year will pay:

    $3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000 = which equates to: $17547 tax /year

    Bec - I should have clarified, even if you earn less than $18k /year, I'm sure when you combine to create household income, you'll find the difference is lessened. (Unless your partner also earns less than $18k/year)
    Last edited by Mod-pegasus; 26-02-2013 at 20:00.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Would the economy collapse if...
    By Susan Mac in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-05-2012, 11:24
  2. Tony Ferguson
    By jazzcait in forum Weightloss & Fitness Challenges
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 21-04-2012, 11:04

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Boody Organic Bamboo Baby Wear
Softer than your bub's bum Boody Organic Bamboo Baby Wear
Australia's favourite eco brand has delivered a gorgeous baby collection. Made from organic bamboo, Boody's extraordinarily soft and stretchy, skin-friendly tops, bottoms, onesies, bibs and wraps don't 'cost the earth'. Get 20% OFF! Code BUBHUB16.
sales & new stuffsee all
Bub Hub Sales Listing
HAVING A SALE? Let parents know about it with a Bub Hub Sales listing. Listings are featured on our well trafficked Sales Page + selected randomly to appear on EVERY page
featured supporter
henry and grace
Summer Cool. We are the only brand in the world to use ultrafine Merino wool to produce the finest, softest & most luxurious garments whilst keeping mum and bub cool and dry. Wear them multiple times before machine washing-hard to believe, but true.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!