Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,747
- Location
- Southampton, UK
Exactly. Having insurance for your house is one thing, but that doesn't cover roads or other national infrastructure.
Australian Flood Tax
- Thread starter AndyT
- Start date
Exactly. Having insurance for your house is one thing, but that doesn't cover roads or other national infrastructure.
Are you really daft enough to think that I was talking about floods the exact same size as those in Oz happening here? I'm talking about relative size, i.e. in terms of percentage of population affected not square metre of water.
The problem is; where do you stop? If you think it should be the 'right' thing to do to pay up for your unfortunate co-citizens then why not do the same for all the unfortunates across the globe? Aren't they human? Aren't they unfortunate? Where do you stop paying more? Until you are in the same position as them?
That's why the government is there, to make these decisions with your taxes. It's more preferrable (to me) that the Australian government should cut the budgets of other projects that affect people and transfer that money to repair the damages rather than increase income tax. You could argue that it's the same thing but people wouldn't be annoyed as much (I'd think).
I suspect most people aren't insured for this as there's probably a clause stating "acts of god" i.e. floods, hurricanes, earthquakes etc can't be claimed for.
MW
Fair point, well made; but then again, why are we paying benefits to lazy people or paying National Insurance so fat twunts can get gastric bands?
I personally believe that victims of an "act of God" are probably more worthy of help than the fat bird down the street who instead of going for jog has another pie; or the guy who smokes 40 a day. Yet part of my salary pays for the fat bird's gastric band or the smoking guy's heart bypass when these are self inflicted.
Yes, perhaps you're right; instead of adding tax levies, maybe govt's should just redirect the cash from people who make their own problems to those who really can't help what happened.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
I was actually disappointed by this. It's further punishing the rich.
I don't disagree one bit. The issue of how the taxes are alocated is a massive can of worms, but the principle on how aid should be alocated should rely to government level.
Agreed to a certain extent, but you've selectively chosen to ignore a great deal of statistical comparison in your assertation. Tax revenue from cigarettes & tobacco raise a good £10bn a year in the UK (http://www.the-tma.org.uk/tma-publications-research/facts-figures/tax-revenue-from-tobacco/), which is a fair 10% of the entire NHS annual budget for the upcoming year (http://www.ehi.co.uk/news/ehi/3108). In comparison, smokers are estimated to cost the NHS about £1.5bn per year in smoking-related diseases (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3292979.stm). I'd never advise anybody to smoke, but until a total ban comes in to force (which it won't), you can consider us martyrs - we're paying more for your public health treatment than you'll ever pay for ours.
I'm not familiar with the figures for fat people, but it's always nice to check your facts first.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
There is nothing strict about the Australian immigration policy. Australia has all the immigration issues we have!
[TW]Fox;18327282 said:
That's news to me. I've always understood that Austrailian Immigration is very strict, both for temporary and long-term/permanent residence. Then again, I've never hadd cause to look into it. Don't they run on a comprehensive points-based system to establish your worth to their society? Bonus points for particularly reputable professions, respectable credit history, that sort of thing?
I've also heard it mentioned that Australia can be a fairly racist society in places, but again I've never had cause to look into whether this is just conjecture or if there's any truth to it. I suppose from an outside view, even from internal, objective scrutiny, England can be a pretty racist country too. It'd be foolish of anyone to project the experiences of a few onto an entire nation's assumed conduct.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Well that's odd, as I don't have enough 'points' to enter Aus, yet have more than enough to enter the UK if need be.[TW]Fox;18327282 said:
I hate these robin hood taxes - take from the rich and give to the poor. That hardly shows solidarity of the people.
A much more viable approach would be to raise sales taxes a couple of percent. The everyone pays fairly, and those with more expendable income who buy more expensive items/services pay more as they see fit.
I would also be looking to fine the companies who built houses on known flood plains.
A much more viable approach would be to raise sales taxes a couple of percent. The everyone pays fairly, and those with more expendable income who buy more expensive items/services pay more as they see fit.
I would also be looking to fine the companies who built houses on known flood plains.
You've got more chance of being served in a shop by an English person in London than you have of being served by an Australian person in Sydney. I was amazed at quite how much immigration there was - mostly Asian.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
Ah, I guess you mean unskilled immigration then.[TW]Fox;18327412 said:
Dont know about the rest of the country but a lot of people from WA are massively racist. Not just to aborigines, but to a lot of other races too, but not to the same extent as they are to aborigines. Sometimes its banter, but I also get the underlying tone of seriousness in their voice.
I havent had a chance to chat with the guys at work about the tax as we got hit with a category 3 cyclone yesterday and have been holed up since wed afternoon.
This is a one-off levy to raise essential funds for the reconstruction of essential infrastructure in Queensland. It will help the government to avoid a budget deficit, and it is being used in conjunction with a range of cost-cutting measures, including the scrapping or delaying of expensive non-essential policies.
The levy itself is hilariously low; people with an income of $50,000 will pay $1 dollar extra per week for 12 months. I defy anyone to tell me they can't afford that.
Australia's previous government (a conservative government, no less!) introduced 6 different levies during its time in office, even when the budget was in surplus. Every single one of those levies was larger than the flood levy.
This is a complete non-issue. People will rage about it because they don't like the idea of the government taking more money, but once the reality sinks in, they'll realise they were massively over-reacting. We saw exactly the same thing when John Howard introduced the GST. Huge outcry followed by a nationwide scare campaign, and then... people just got on with their lives.
More than $120 million has already been raised via charitable donations and additional funding from state and federal government. But with reconstruction due to cost ~$5 billion, that's nowhere near enough. Damage to Queensland was immense. The flooding covered an area larger than France and Germany combined. We are not talking about the little puddles you get in the UK.
The levy itself is hilariously low; people with an income of $50,000 will pay $1 dollar extra per week for 12 months. I defy anyone to tell me they can't afford that.
Australia's previous government (a conservative government, no less!) introduced 6 different levies during its time in office, even when the budget was in surplus. Every single one of those levies was larger than the flood levy.
This is a complete non-issue. People will rage about it because they don't like the idea of the government taking more money, but once the reality sinks in, they'll realise they were massively over-reacting. We saw exactly the same thing when John Howard introduced the GST. Huge outcry followed by a nationwide scare campaign, and then... people just got on with their lives.
More than $120 million has already been raised via charitable donations and additional funding from state and federal government. But with reconstruction due to cost ~$5 billion, that's nowhere near enough. Damage to Queensland was immense. The flooding covered an area larger than France and Germany combined. We are not talking about the little puddles you get in the UK.
Last edited: