I'm with DV in saying....So What! It has no context to the argument regarding super contribution taxes and each governments policies. If you are looking at superannuation investment the way I think you are, then it says it all about your take unfortunately. You've obviously got nothing.....they were the realities! I'm only going to say this one more time.........If you have children or are looking after a disabled individual or one of the partners is disabled etc you can still claim the rebate!!!.........If couples do not fit any of these requirements you cannot claim the rebate!!! What you seem to be saying (obviously you did not understand the criteria) is that it takes the wife all day and every day to look after herself and her husband......remember there are no other responsibilities such as children, disabilities etc etc. In other words, go and find some work, there is nothing stopping you!!! AM, you badgered and taunted me back into this debate for stupid responses like this! You are all over the place trying your best to pretend credibility.......go away and follow the issue rather than follow some idiotic 'News Limited" headline in favour of your political party of choice. For frigs sake, absolutely everyone acknowledges super is way too generous for the wealthy but you! Just look at the figures you have just provided. Utterly delusional my friend!!
Can't forget the fact as wolfie initially raised that Abbott would scrap the superannuation tax offset for low income earners!
Yep, some things have come down in price relative to today. But the general cost of living has gone up considerably. You wouldn't live on 15 pounds a week today. It has everything to do with TV's answer. He insinuated that I was wrong in saying that money would de-value by up to 20% over 20 years. The fool is obviously not old enough to appreciate this fact, however, you are old enough so you know that I am right, not withstanding your quib about the FJ Holden. I can remember it costing one shilling to go to the pictures and for sixpence you got an icecream almost too big for one kid to eat! But yes DV, a good example you have given us of the de-valuation of money. That is 'so what', the de-valuation of money over time and how in will impact on your super savings.
AM I used to think you were just regurgitating Liberal rubbish propaganda but now I believe you actually think this way. When I was a child I was given 20 pence to go to the pictures, yes, and I also bought a coke, then a bag of sweets with the refund on the coke bottle. Recently we (my family) were visiting my father. He gave my daughter $50 to take herself and his great grandson to the movies. We discussed the 20 pense days and he told me that it was a lot harder for him to give me that 20 pense, when at the time he owned his own farm and had reasonable income then what giving $20 today would be from his old age pension. We talked about how only the very few could even afford a radio and how all the neighbors would come to their place to listen to the wrestling on theirs. We talked about how expensive telephones were, refrigerators and that for most, a holiday was a 4 or 5 hour drive to the seaside. How most could only afford to rent a cabin or a van. Only the rich would fly, only the well to do had cars and only the lucky had a phone. It was years after refrigerators came in that the common person could afford one and that nearly everyone had a vegetable garden to help them make ends meet. My mother made my school uniforms to save money and knitted all our woolens, Christmas stockings had one or two small toys in them, some things for school and a few candies. I see in my own lifetime and just since my own family was young, that today we are a lot better off generally than we were back in the "Good old days", but yes they were the good old days, we didn't want so much to be happy, we weren't greedy. Today we are so well off yet still want so much more. No longer is a week in Budgewoi or Tea Gardens good enough, we want a resort holiday in Bali or a trip to Disneyland. No longer is a TV in the lounge room good enough, we want a widescreen TV in every bedroom as well, DVD players and cable. We don't want to share the family phone or walk to a phone booth, we each want one in our pocket. I am sitting here writing this on a laptop I purchased new for $400 which is a thousand times more powerful than the Amstrad I did my university assignments on that cost me $3000, no hard disk, double 5.25 disk drives. The problem is that we are too well off today
I am sure even someone as cognitively challenged as you can appreciate the enormous importance the de valuation of money over time has in regard to your super savings. Super is a long term investment, decades long, that is why de valuation of money must be included as a major factor in any discussion about the taxing of of super contributions and earnings. You mean the unrealities. You dont' know what you are talking about. Please explain Howards 'tax bracket' that discouraged people from putting money into super and explain how Rudd/Gillard changed the 'tax bracket' to encourage people to invest in super. Time to come up with some figures TV, give us the numbers, don't just blindly repeat what you read in the papers and what your Labor masters tell you. You're getting yourself all confused now, you cannot claim the dependent spouse rebate if you have children or look after someone who is disabled. There may be other rebates to claim but not the DSR. I never said it took all day, every day to look after a husband, but now that you have raised the issue, it IS almost a full time job to properly run a home, children or no children. But you are clearly ignorant of these things. Why should a dependent spouse go and find a job if they don't need to? Why should they go and take a job off someone who really does need it? many stay at home wives put what spare time they do have into community and charity work, particularly after the children are gone. Are you saying we should discourage this volunteer workforce and tell them all to go and get a job? No, it is only fair and sensible to 'share' some of the husbands income with his wife through a dependent spouse rebate. And there we have your problem in a nutshell. "..absolutely everyone acknowledges...." in other words you are just blindly repeating what you have read, heard and been told. You have not actually looked any deeper, never tried to find out for yourself, never THOUGHT for yourself. So once again, it's time for you to provide some numbers. I have given you the figures, a maximum of $25,000 concesional ( that is employer super and salary sacrificed contributions) which is taxed at 15% can be put into super per annum and a maximumof $150,000 AFTER TAX contributions can be contributed. It's time TV, tell us how this makes super a 'tax haven for the wealthy', how this is 'way too generous for the wealthy'. Give us the numbers. Go and check my figures for yourself on the ATO web site. I afraid you are the one who is delusional.
You're rambling DV, sounds like you had a very similar upbring to myself and my 6 brothers and sisters. Out in the country, an income just adequate and mum did everything. I didn't taste jam or a cake or a lot of other things that had been bought in a shop until I left home. But now you have got me rambling. This has nothing to do with the taxation of superannuation.
I was in Sydney last week and was speaking to a lot of economists and financiers, just chit chat over lunch. Most of them are surprised it has taken a government and in particular this one(remember they are white collars) this long to dig into super. It is and always was a sitting duck. The general consensus is that Abbott will do nothing about it, as it is easy money, and has bipartisan support. At least at a secretive thought level. The scary bit is that this is just the start. Today it is the wealthier Super funds, tomorrow the mid level and then finally it will be all encompassing. Get used to it, learn to savour the taste of sh!t, as it is just the beginning. It really does not pay to work hard, save, and educate yourself in this country. No matter how hard you strive to make sure you are not a burden on forthcoming generations, you will be an easy target. Fair ? I think not. Australian ? most definately.
