Should Wealthy People Be on a Version of The "Cashless Welfare Card"

sarahlump on 18/04/2020 - 06:18

The GST is not proportional to income. Very poor people pay the same amount as very wealthy.

If multi-millionaires and even wealthier were forced to use a cashless card they could be charged a higher more proportionate amount of GST.

I also feel that many businesses would relish charging a millionaire $20 for a carton of milk.

I also feel that the super-rich would call in their corporate army to burn the place down if somebody tried to implement it(but that's just the cynic in me).

Just on the merit of whether GST should be proportionate to income, should the uber rich be on a higher rate of gst with a special shopping card?
(ps don't say this is just one of their fancy exclusive credit cards)

Poll Options

  • 4
    Proportionate GST no card
  • 19
    Proportionate GST card
  • 615
    Same GST
Financial

closed Comments

          • sakurashu on 18/04/2020 - 16:34

            @tarb: Poverty line at 50% of the median wage is 457 a week and Newstart for a single person with no children is $559.00. It obviously gets a bit more complex if it's an unemployed family but Australia is actually quite good. In Brisbane on 559 a week I could rent a place with flatmates (maybe $200), throw in a few bills and food and I would still have enough money left over for a few luxuries

            • sarahlump on 18/04/2020 - 23:23

              @sakurashu: I feel like you've never lived below the poverty line.

              • Tonyh87 on 19/04/2020 - 23:12
                +1

                @sarahlump: I feel you have never worked a full time week to receive your pay and realize that all your hard work only resulted in a tiny bit more money than a person who has not worked at all and has received 'wages' from centrelink.

              • sakurashu on 21/04/2020 - 20:49

                @sarahlump: That's just a weak comment from somebody who doesn't have an argument to stand on and won't engage in discussion

                Also fyi my dad supported our family of 7 on around 55k for a number of years after we came to Australia - $960 a week for a couple with two kids is the line, I'll let you do the maths genius

            • Laurana on 19/04/2020 - 03:13
              +6

              @sakurashu: I’m pretty sure Newstart is not $559/week normally. Though it’s probably now due to COVID-19.

              To others: The Centrelink system isn’t perfect and it would be great to be able to provide everyone with more assistance. But hating the people who are contributing more than 50% of what they earn isn’t the way to go about it.

              I was born in a place with zero government assistance, so I find it really hard to listen to people expecting the Australian government to provide a better standard of living and complaining about living below the poverty line while also affording a computer, iPhone and internet. Go live in a third world country and then come complain about the poverty line here.

              As I said previously, we should strive for the best. But let’s do so without the entitled attitude.

          • sangohan on 19/04/2020 - 23:46
            +1

            @tarb: i do believe the current welfare pays for a basic, no frills life. The major cost is rent, and it means they will need to move to a lower cost rental instead of staying where they are and suffer a high rent.

            Also, from what i hear, a lot of dole recipients cheat the system by working under the table for cash. I know it's hard to really enforce this tho.

            What seems to be the problem with high welfare is that it traps you - if you start working a low wage job, it's not going to pay much better than welfare. Thus, you'd have to find a much higher paying job for it to be worth getting off welfare. But those jobs are far fewer. I don't know how to solve this problem, cept to not decrease welfare until a certain job threshold (so if you can work, you will always get more money, rather than punished by receiving less welfare). This will incentivize people to work, or to look for work genuinely.

    • sarahlump on 18/04/2020 - 23:22
      -2

      I feel like you dont understand being poor. I feel like you don't understand employment. I feel like you've invested in the propaganda of the free market. I feel like you think poor people are lazy.

      • ajr5k on 19/04/2020 - 00:27
        +8

        I mean I hate to be blunt but poor people generally are lazy… The two sort of go hand in hand.

        Based off your post history, I get it - It sucks that other people have more money than you. But, they have earned that money through working and you too can earn more money in a capitalist system. Even in non-formal employment structures - When I was at uni, I made a surprising amount of money walking dogs. Like an actual livable wage by todays standards. And it was great exercise as well.

        Without being smart, have you considered checking out services like AirTasker?

      • OG Puppy Banana on 19/04/2020 - 13:09
        +5

        Australia has a huge amount of social safety nets to get anyone out of poverty. Frankly, no one wants poverty as it's not good for the economy. Instead, we invest in a safe, healthy and well educated population.

        Yes, one's environment can depress success, but for the most part, the system can be accessed by 99.9% of the community.

        Let's review what all Australians get that lots of other countries do not:

        1. Equitable access to free and high quality kindergarten, primary school and high school

        2. Equitable access to TAFE, trade programs and higher education

        3. Means tested access to income during times of unemployment

        4. Free in/outpatient medical care in world class hospitals and no/low cost medicine

        5. Decent minimum wage and employee work rights

        6. Subsidised housing and social care if things get really tough

        7. Guaranteed access to aged and palliative care, as well as a pension

        8. Strong border security and decent standing in international trade

        I can go on.

        The key point is that someone has to pick up the bill for about a $500k-$1m+ government investment in your safety, health, social welfare and education over the course of your life.

        Obviously, this is the taxes you pay for a crack at all Australians having social equity and a "fair go".

        If you have drawn from these benefits and expect someone else to pay, that is a HUGE sense of entitlement - especially considering you can keep redrawing from these benefits again and again at the cost of other Australian's until you can start contributing to the bill by way of your own tax, WHICH IS ALSO MEANS TESTED!

        • sakurashu on 21/04/2020 - 20:59

          We are actually now the highest minimum wage in the world - so it's a fair bit more than decent even if living costs are also quite high ;)

          I've only used a couple of these benefits so far but HECS/HELP being a huge one, I'm already grateful; my parents wouldn't have been able to support me through a crippling amount of student debt in a lot of other countries

      • Tonyh87 on 19/04/2020 - 23:13

        I feel you've invested in the propaganda of free money

  • ajr5k on 18/04/2020 - 13:39
    +7

    This post hurt my head. I want my 60 seconds back.

  • Seraphin7 on 18/04/2020 - 14:10
    +13

    Spot the foaming at the mouth commie! Fair dinkum, why not just jump straight to AK-47 enforced wealth redistribution and be done with it?

    • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 14:23
      +6

      It never starts like that. It starts like this.

      You don't come out guns blazing. You steal from the minority and give to the majority, thus strengthening your position.

      Once you've sucked dry the easy target, you will need a new cash cow. Proceed on to the next most acceptable minority.

      By now, your authority is entrenched. You need to buy loyalty from those with means to remove you, either by means of force or coup. You restructure the distribution to favour key political pieces and to the army.

      Your second cash cow is now dry. You still need to pay your pawns but now, you can be more liberal with your victims. After all, even if the majority disagrees, you have paid for your guns.

      Rinse and repeat until there is nothing left and become dissociated by socialists elsewhere. After all, that late stage socialism is just tyranny and not actual socialism… or so they keep claiming.

      Socialism works. When it grows up and becomes authoritarianism, suddenly, not so fun.

      • Seraphin7 on 18/04/2020 - 14:28
        +5

        You are, of course, 100% correct. We all know how it ends though … the elites live high on the hog, while the vast majority end up stinking of cheap soup and starving to death.

        And here's another spoiler alert … those who most loudly proclaim their desire for a move to the socialist state end up in the latter category, never the former.

        • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 14:47
          +3

          Definitely.

          The people you need to help you stage a coup are not the same people you need to maintain power.

          You cannot afford to pay everyone so you must at some point transition from distributing to those who stage the coup to those who keep you in power.

          PS. If you do stage a coup, think of me. I'm not interested in head honcho, but I am a great hand to the king.

          I can also juggle and make jokes. I am joking about the juggling.

        • brendanm on 18/04/2020 - 20:53
          +3

          All the animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 22/04/2020 - 23:01

      Spot the foaming at the mouth commie! Fair dinkum, why not just jump straight to AK-47 enforced wealth redistribution and be done with it?

      Đi đi mau!

  • MeesusEff on 18/04/2020 - 14:34
    +18

    Ahh I remember you from the Rent Moratarium thread with the epic ridiculous statement of "why don't landlords have savings or get a 2nd job" to support a non paying tenant.

    You seem to feel as if the rich (basically all middle income and above) owes the poor people favours for their situation. News flash, life is unfair. Are you the type that comments "it's disgusting for someone to win $80 Mil powerball they should split it to 80 x $1mil" when you bought a ticket yourself? Australia is already pretty lucky to have such a good welfare and health system. In other countries, you think the old or the disabled or poor get support from the govt? No, they suck it up and work through it or die.

    The way you are thinking seems as if you are gearing for a Communist society. Everyone to get the same pay, housing etc.

    • leiiv on 18/04/2020 - 14:54
      +1

      Everyone to get the same pay, housing etc.

      That is a good idea. Everyone gets the same pay from government, ie UBI. Everyone can also get a basic housing provided by government. Cannot pay your rent? Just move to the public housing.
      But there is no reason to limit the people who are smarter and work harder to not get more income and a better place to live.

      • brendanm on 18/04/2020 - 20:54

        If we had ubi I could quite work and work cash in hand a couple of days a week and be ahead, that would be fantastic, bring it on!

    • irony on 18/04/2020 - 16:50

      yep, I remember sara from that thread too…

      • emptypocket on 18/04/2020 - 21:55
        +2

        She sounds like a Karen

      • arkie0 on 18/04/2020 - 23:42
        +10

        Great, you buy keep buying those lottery tickets and I'll wait for my share.

      • darkmattersunB6c0MV on 19/04/2020 - 15:30

        Really?
        I respect your wishes, so you can do that if you win.

        But this is not logical to me.
        I rarely play lotto, but if I win, will share it with family and friends and have soon be fun, not distribute it.

      • Ughhh on 19/04/2020 - 15:33

        I'm sure there a lot of people here a lot worse than you, and since you're lucky enough to have a property to rent out, perhaps you could share your wealth and PayPal $10 to everyone here?

  • leiiv on 18/04/2020 - 14:45
    +2

    No. GST should be abolished, or the stamp duty, as promised before.
    Instead of GST, the state can do ultra progressive property and mineral and water tax. It should also include intellectual properties.

    • Vote for Pedro on 18/04/2020 - 15:36
      +4

      Mineral tax? That was tried. Remember the ads from the poor mining companies that were crying they’d go broke and aussie battlers would suffer. A bit of lobbyist pressure, some free attack dogs from news corp and boom, mining tax gone.

  • JimmyF on 18/04/2020 - 14:52
    +1

    Just on the merit of whether GST should be proportionate to income, should the uber rich be on a higher rate of gst with a special shopping card?

    hahahaha no.

    We already have taxes proportionate to income, its called income taxes.

    So lets get rid of GST :)

    • leiiv on 18/04/2020 - 14:55

      Income tax is collected by federal, the states also need something to chew on :)

      • JimmyF on 18/04/2020 - 18:43
        +1

        Get rid of GST, tweak income tax, states can have some of that.

        Honestly we have federal, state and local governments. One of them should be 'removed'.

        Speaking of which, do we need state gov anymore? Honestly Australia is small enough to piss them off and have wonderful things like the same laws australia wide. and save some money too.

        • khomeini on 21/04/2020 - 21:44

          Short answer is no. Legally the states (and therefore state governments) existed before the federal governments. So the answer is no, state govts will not be disbanded.

          • JimmyF on 21/04/2020 - 22:06

            @khomeini:

            Legally the states (and therefore state governments) existed before the federal governments
            So the answer is no, state govts will not be disbanded.

            Everything changes….. If the reason is because its always be done that 'way', then its a pretty good reason to look at if its still should be done that way!

  • The Wololo Wombat on 18/04/2020 - 14:56
    +6

    Is that you Karl? Classic 'equality' logic:

    "Let's create equality by making things unequal for the group that I envy!"

    Let's instead strive for equality of opportunity, NOT equality of outcome.

    Oh, but I only think this way because I've been manipulated by the media to serve the wishes of our corporate masters. I'm not WOKE like OP who, at only 26 years old and still in their undergrad, understands deeply the class struggle we've been in since the dawn of civilization! /s

    • sarahlump on 18/04/2020 - 23:27
      -1

      I'm not 26, stalker.

      • sakurashu on 21/04/2020 - 21:06

        I don't think that was the point of his comment

  • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 15:10

    The GST is not proportional to income. Very poor people pay the same amount as very wealthy.

    "Very poor" people have no money and either rely on donations or steal to survive. They pay no GST.

    Poor people can afford less good and services and therefore pays less GST. Wealthy people can afford more premium good and services and a lot of more it and therefore pays way more gst than any poor people ever will. How is that not fair?

  • Cluster on 18/04/2020 - 15:47
    1. You would have to eliminate all cash transactions, otherwise the wealthy person would just use that.
    2. The wealthy person could transfer money to a relative and get them to make the purchase.

    Make the relative pay a high GST value as well? That relative could be a child with no income at all. That wouldn't be fair, would it?

    There are so many ways to get around this differing GST level notion that make it not viable.

    • sarahlump on 18/04/2020 - 23:28

      so you're implying rich people are unethical immoral thieves. I like this.

      • Cluster on 19/04/2020 - 12:33
        +1

        I reread my post and I honestly can't see where I implied rich people are thieves.

      • pharm86 on 19/04/2020 - 16:42
        +2

        I think Cluster is implying your idea is stupid

      • Ughhh on 19/04/2020 - 23:52
        +1

        You sound like a professional victim.

  • YoungQuan on 18/04/2020 - 15:49
    +13

    can't believe this is even a question…f..cking stupid

    • OzCheapo on 19/04/2020 - 12:32
      +2

      This is probably a troll post so we probably shouldn't feed it.

      • dbun1 on 19/04/2020 - 13:31
        +3

        If you see the OPs posts on other threads they are either trolling everywhere or honestly believe they should be on the gravy train and have a free ride through life at other people’s expense.

        • sakurashu on 21/04/2020 - 21:09
          +1

          Sadly I think they honestly believe that - I would 100% rather my taxes to go to some true Aussie battler than this whiny person; where's the ridiculous poll for directing your tax dollars?

    • brendanm on 18/04/2020 - 20:56

      Not well by the look of it.

      • Tonyh87 on 20/04/2020 - 23:45
        +4

        According to reddit, I don't think aged care is OP's main source of income

        • brendanm on 21/04/2020 - 06:35
          +3

          Woah…

        • danishcapitalist on 21/04/2020 - 07:00
          +3

          *Incum

        • danishcapitalist on 21/04/2020 - 10:37

          That is a very tragic read and I wouldn't wish OP's life problems on anyone, but it does provide a lot more context to every post of his that I've read. I just wish that people that have 'had a hard life' would try to pull themselves up to live better instead of dragging others down to their level for equality.

  • Vert93 on 18/04/2020 - 16:20
    +3

    When did this forum turn into OzSocialism?

  • Tvsupaguru on 18/04/2020 - 16:23
    +29

    What a joke of a discussion thread.

    Because I work harder, to make a better life for my family and I the OP is suggesting I should pay more for stuff. I already do ! I am in the highest income bracket. I spend more so I pay more gst. I get no government handouts, so subsidies, no family tax benefit, I pay medicare, I also pay the higest rate for private health with no deduction.

    To the OP - You are a moron. Only someone who wants the easy road, and suck money from the rest of us who work hard would suggest such an approach because you believe you are entitled and the government, and us hard working high income earning as you call it indivuduals support you and your lazy butt.

    Heres a thing, lets tax the bludgers and low income earners more so they go out and try to work harder so they get taxed less, and have an incentive to work harders, as the less you earn and the less you wor the more you get taxed.

    Only people who expect to the country to support them cos they are "underpriviledged" ever suggest high income earners should pay more

    As far as I am concerned only the sick, elderly or disabled should get governenment support - everyone else get off your ass and go make your own life and stop putting your hand out to others.

    Everyone - Everyone regardless of income should pay EXACTLY the same amount in tax - no more or less.

      • giftcardinspector on 19/04/2020 - 08:03
        +4

        Using your logic, people who consume more resources than they produce shouldn't exist either?

        • sarahlump on 19/04/2020 - 08:16
          -3

          I would like for people to inherently have value instead of being tied like an iron ball to production.

        • Tvsupaguru on 21/04/2020 - 09:08

          People who are consuming are paying GST on that consumption, keeping the tax dollars rolling in. If they consume less, then there is less GST revenue and the downward spiral begins.

      • sangohan on 19/04/2020 - 23:53
        +3

        Just by existing in australia, you're already richer than most of the people in sub-saharan africa, with their daily starvation and poverty and diseases, not to mention the wars and genocides.

        So by your logic, you should not exist.

        • Tvsupaguru on 21/04/2020 - 09:10
          -1

          If the sub-saharan africa issues are your concern, go live there, leave australia, so that you do not contribute to the australian economy, and you can contribute to theirs. Go and help build their economy.

    • khomeini on 19/04/2020 - 13:50

      I think to put things into perspective… Tvsupaguru, how much tax do you pay (in $ values)?

      Not how much is transferred or written off into property (negatively geared) or family trusts.

      That would help explain to those of us with lesser incomes the value of your contributions.

      Ie. Person 1 on say 400k salary may have to pay $150k on taxes directly to the ATO.

      Person 2 on say 50k salary doesn't pay much to ATO or may even recieve something from them.

      So if there are incentives to cut taxes, IMO, surely the ones paying more should benefit.

      • Tvsupaguru on 21/04/2020 - 09:13

        To answer the first point - none of your business.

        To answer your second point. ZERO. I am wage earner. I have no other income, supporting a growing family, and Single income. And with a family and a single income I do not put my hand out, and I do not recieve any govenemnt support or payments.

        • khomeini on 21/04/2020 - 20:04

          Sorry, I should be clear… Between my wife and I, we generally pay more tax than the cutoff for the highest taxed bracket.

          We definitely whinge about having to pay so much tax, especially when we see others having time to do everything we want, but without working hard as we see it.

          IE. Have a few kids or be on a low income but get govt handouts (from what I'd assume is coming out of people who work hard taxes).

          HOWEVER, (and I think this is where the OP is coming from) I still hate to think that someone like a Donald Trump or similar businessman/politician gets away with paying little to no tax back to the ATO based on redistributing via family trusts or some other setup. I'm sure some of us have complex financial arrangements but this is where there are grey areas.

          If you are, as you say someone in a higher salary paying back to the ATO, then no issues. If you are however on a higher salary but with little to no pay back, then surely this isn't fair.

          Politicians do this and hence I'm forever skeptical of their motives to either cut taxes or increase their pays/allowances.

          I'm sure some accountants (based on creating smart accounting for their clients) and doctors (who've probably got family trusts) can comment.

  • abc123z on 18/04/2020 - 16:30
    +2

    This is the most ridiculous thread ever

  • newbiesh on 18/04/2020 - 16:36
    +2

    governemnt should fine people whos got more than 4K saved up.

    jkz

  • dbun1 on 18/04/2020 - 17:52
    +6

    Judging by this thread and the OPs posts in other threads, they honestly seem to believe they deserve a free ride on the gravy train.

    • Vert93 on 18/04/2020 - 18:46
      -1

      What type of train? Choo choo!

      • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 21:46

        The gravy one.

    • Tvsupaguru on 21/04/2020 - 09:14

      Too many people exploit the graxy train and expect that it is their right.

      • Laurana on 22/04/2020 - 02:02

        Can you please provide me with some actual facts to that statement?, any data or research that you have on this? because I see it used a lot and it’s never ever backed up.

  • od810 on 18/04/2020 - 18:43
    +1

    People need to understand the concept of fairness and some basic concept of finance. This kind of thread and thread suggesting on taxing corporate on revenue just make me really sad…

    • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 21:34

      People need to understand the concept of fairness and some basic concept of finance

      Agreed.

      This kind of thread and thread suggesting on taxing corporate on revenue just make me really sad…

      Why?

      • od810 on 19/04/2020 - 00:14
        +3

        Because revenue does not equal income so it is illogical thing to tax on revenue.

        • [Deactivated] on 19/04/2020 - 10:03

          So tax on corporate income then?

          • od810 on 19/04/2020 - 11:29

            @[Deactivated]: If you try to understand how complex the structure of international corporates are, you will find it is really hard to tax on income. I am not saying that let the big corps get away with tax, but it is very hard matter if the ato follow the laws. Most of the time the ATO will lose the battle because policies won't catch up as quickly as the new structure. So next time you see people say just tax the international companies, you would think we love to do that but it is not that simple

            • [Deactivated] on 19/04/2020 - 12:06

              @od810:

              just tax the international companies, you would think we love to do that but it is not that simple

              Then it means we need to keep chasing and try harder to close the loopholes.

              Where's the concept of fairness here?

              ABC - A third of companies pay no tax.
              Updated article.

              I think it should be a global effort, not just an Australian one.

              If people are worried about share prices (or some other personal interest) but not the long-term welfare of the country, it's their choice. Companies can increase their performance by actually performing… Not just by dodging taxes.

              • od810 on 19/04/2020 - 22:04
                +1

                @[Deactivated]: Exactly, it is a global effort. Technically none of these corporates did anything "wrong" by the law, they just have bunch of accountants and lawyers that are working the loopholes. But until countries agree on away to do it, i don't see how it can be fixed.

                And countries use attractive tax policies to attract tax revenue. Look at singapore, corporates chose to place their Hq there because they have more attractive tax rates. It just effectively become a race to the bottom in some part of the world

                • [Deactivated] on 20/04/2020 - 00:04

                  @od810: Very true

                • Tvsupaguru on 21/04/2020 - 09:18

                  @od810: There will never be a global effort. Every country will look after their own back yard only. That will never change.

              • Tvsupaguru on 21/04/2020 - 09:17

                @[Deactivated]: Hence the need for a certalised Australian bank controlling all payments into and out of the country. Tax the corporate consumption like a GST. you then catch all the monies flowing out of the country to overseas companies where they pay not australian tax or GST. Once you tax the corporate consumption by taking the money everyone sends out, the game is over.

          • sangohan on 19/04/2020 - 23:54

            @[Deactivated]: which already exists - corporate taxes. They are set at 30%.

            • [Deactivated] on 20/04/2020 - 00:10
              +1

              @sangohan: True, but in the articles linked above, it's basically outlining that multinational companies (with operations and bases not in Australia) can exploit loopholes and shift their profits to overseas accounts. Thus, companies escape being taxed at the 30% rate.

              Australia has decent enough hospitals which will become strained as the population ages, and our education standards have been falling. Well, we need taxes to fund healthcare and public education for all.

    • Jaystea on 19/04/2020 - 01:26

      Fairness and Justice are unfortunately incorrectly interchanged nowadays. Socialists would like to think that they are the same thing - they are not.

  • drink water on 18/04/2020 - 19:02
    +4

    Q: What is very large, makes a lot of smoke and noise, takes down 20 liters of gas per hour, and cuts an apple into three pieces?

    A: The Soviet machine built to cut apples into four pieces.

    • [Deactivated] on 19/04/2020 - 00:54

      because the so called capitalist system is much better /s

      • sakurashu on 21/04/2020 - 21:13

        Last I checked we are doing way better than all of the Soviet countries

  • burningrage on 18/04/2020 - 19:52
    +2

    OP must be jealous me thinks.

    • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 21:47

      Envious.

      burningenvy

  • Milestron on 18/04/2020 - 19:55
    +7

    How would this retarded idea be administered? You go to the checkout and if you are wearing a tophat and a monocle then the milk is $20?

    • knackers on 18/04/2020 - 20:16

      if you are wearing a tophat and a monocle you're buying the whole cow for $20…

    • [Deactivated] on 18/04/2020 - 21:47
      +9

      F off.

      I ain't paying $20 for milk.

      • funnysht on 19/04/2020 - 11:52
        +1

        lol. Just saw your profile pic.

    • abc123z on 18/04/2020 - 21:55
      +6

      But there is no GST on milk. I can't believe we are two pages into this thread and it hasn't been said several times.

      • Aneurism on 19/04/2020 - 00:07

        I've never tasted GST in any drinkable liquid..What does GST taste like anyway ?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join