Submitted by Shatner'sBassoon on Fri, 11/06/2015 - 19:48
AN ALL-ENCOMPASSING KALEIDOSCOPIC JOIN-THE-DOTS/ADULT COLOURING BOOK EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT IN NARCISSISTIC/ONANISTIC BIG PICTURE PARASITIC FORUM BLEEDING.
LIKE POLITICAL LIFE, PARTICIPATION IS WELCOME, ENCOURAGED EVEN, BUT NOT NECESSARY.
I'll try to make this brief. No, it will be brief 'cos I've got stuff to do.
All of the above in your comment Sypkan is perception. Yours and the article in question. The article itself is based on polling. Corporate media articles feed the perceptions, do some polling, then feed the public again. As you yourself intimate it's really mis-perceptions all-round.
Shoot the messenger?
As a wiser head once said, "don't hate the media, BECOME THE MEDIA"!
Independent media, social media, these threads!
Critical reading and critical thinking can deconstruct the perceived wisdoms and truths and 'common sense' and PR bollocks.
I watch Insiders on the ABC not for the content as information per se but to see how its constructed and presented. Like that article, they really can't see that they are a big part of the problem. A big, big part.
That's why Chomsky & Herman's Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media is still relevant and important. Do yaselves a favour if you haven't.
Go to the Trump thread. Me and Andy M kinda discussed this a bit more deeply.
Then again, don't ever get too 'deep' and didactic. People turn off. I know it's hard not to but 'softly, softly, catchee something-or-other'. Google is our friend! Leave breadcrumbs. People internalise when they discover things themselves. Or think they have. Insidious media and advertising 101. BECOME THE MEDIA indeed!!!!
Indo how do you feel about the coalition scare campaign to keep their wealthfare policies of negative gearing and franking credits in place?
I don't think so Scomo has proven himself, he was the best immigration minister we have seen, somehow mopped up the mess of Kevin, so i have a lot of respect for him on that, and since being in power has kept things chugging along fine.
The thing with politics is everyone always wants to think they know best and are experts in how a country should be run, but the reality is its way to complex for us to understand and its only in hindsight that much can be understood, many things sound good in theory but in practise are not.
Im probably the only person in Australia that thinks this, but i actually think any government liberal or Labor actually do a good job, we are so much better off in so many ways than any other country especially other the last ...there is only a few other countries that do a better job and then they are generally smaller countries where things are less complex.
My only personal concern is really unsustainable population growth, but the irony is half the reason the last 20 years has been so good is probably due to our high immigration.
So if i had my way and reduced migration, id probably screw everything up.
For further reference and common sense.
General Social issues: Rita Panahi & Lauren Southern
Indigenous issues: Jacinta Price and Anthony Dillion
Gender: Debra Soh.
Islam: Armin Navabi & Brigitte Gabriel
Population: Dick Smith
@Bindboy in theory i don't like the tax benefits etc for negative gearing, but in reality like i said above, i don't think any of us understand the complexity of running a country, economy etc...
its like this huge machine with al these parts and we all have views and opinions on these little parts thinking if we change or remove the machine will keep going or even improve in performance, when in reality we don't know what this little part does, and changing or removing could make the machine run rough etc
Plus we are all full of contradictions, in theory I'm against negative gearing, but then I'm also a tradie who relies heavily on work from people who have negative geared houses or just holiday houses that are tax write offs etc
Allied to my post above, imagine a future where people get their news and information from Studio Ten, Sky News After Dark, Sunrise, Today, Murdoch (He'll still be alive! Literally. And he'll own everything in the media landscape). There'll be no papers! Well, except for Murdoch loss-making advertising vanity rags. No State media either. Sold off to Murdoch! And Google and Facebook algorithms will get us the best news money can buy too. From around the world! (More Murdoch?!)
Imagine the governments we will have then!
Hang on...are we there yet?? (US has beaten us to the bottom already?!)
Well Indo, it's complex for sure but it would seems a simple principle that you don't tax people in order to give it to those who are already better off, which is the way that coalition policy has always worked. They will campaign hard against Shorten because he is the first Labor leader in a long time to threaten their lurks. If you want to vote for them fine, but do it with your eyes open. The owners of those negatively geared properties you work on are using your taxes to do it.
"I actually think Sco mo is the best leader the liberals have seen since Howard.
Only issue i have with him is he lets his religious views get in the way of things a bit.
Labour on the other hand haven't had a leader of any substance since Julia/Kevin era and even then it was obviously a mess.
If labour wins its not through any substance or leadership, its just because nobody wants the liberals in again"
I actually agree with most of that indod, even about sco-mo being their best leader since....
Geez that bar has been set low, barely room for a contorrionist dwarf.
"They will campaign hard against Shorten because he is the first Labor leader in a long time to threaten their lurks. "
Care to elaborate?
I haven't heard of anything of substance
As I said above, negative gearing and franking credits. They have moved on from middle class welfare, which was always a strong vote getter for them, to wealthfare. Basically Robin Hood in reverse, steal from the poor and give to the rich. Gone too far this time though, which is why they are running scared.
"Kath" from the comments section of The Age today ........
"I am so sick of this. Getting cash refunds for taxes that were never paid is an obscene form of generational theft and welfare for the rich. If you are complaining that you are going to lose $30,000 a year, that means you have MILLIONS in your share portfolio. And you expect other taxpayers to give you a cash handout because you are lucky enough to have millions in shares?
This paper also needs to stop giving a platform to lobbyists and vested interests to run their scare campaigns. "Retiree tax", my backside.
I am fed up with the greed and sense of entitlement of so-called "self-funded" retirees relying on taxpayer handouts so that they never have to dip into their superannuation capital. That is NOT what superannuation was intended for. It isn't an inheritance scheme - it is supposed to support you in retirement. It is not the job of taxpayers to help you preserve a vast capital of shares so you can pass them onto your kids.
And people wonder why we have such ridiculous levels of inequality in this country...
I have older family members who see nothing wrong in amassing huge amounts of capital stashed in real estate and structuring (aka hiding) their assets so that they can squirrel away millions while claiming the full aged pension. At the same time, they rail against "dole bludgers", homeless people and single mothers and say that welfare is "unaffordable". This conveniently ignores that the vast bulk of Australia's welfare bill is the aged pension.
Many pensioners live in poverty. Someone with a multi-million share portfolio isn't one of them".
It was an ace lurk in its day, but that day is rapidly disappearing.
It works like this : Couple X have worked diligently their entire lives. They own their house with no intention of ever selling because it’s a home , not an investment.
Due to their sacrifice and hard work , they’ve also squireled away $500K during their lifetimes in lieu of Super. Now they’ve retired, their shares are returning 7 percent P/A so they’ve got $35K income between them. $350 / week each ....enough to deplete their pension eligibility substantially.
They’ve both paid taxes their whole lives into the scheme that Australia adopted whereby a portion of their working lives income went into a pot from which they’d be eligible to deduct later. This was DESIGNED to pay for a weekly stipend for Australians once they were past a designated age. Then the pot was rolled into general revenue and the government tried to keep everyone’s hands off the money they’d contributed by law to fund their old age.
So couple X paid lots of tax , worked hard , did the right thing by the nation and now they’re measly retirement income is to be also taxed .
Now their income is less than or equal to the pension which is paid to a 80year old Chinese grandmother who came to Australia 5 years earlier who is soaking up the revenue pot which couple X paid into their whole lives.
How is that fair ?
I’ve actually calculated that if I was a single bloke , unless I’m earning at least 5 percent interest on a lump sum of at least $500K , I’m no better off in retirement than the life long welfare recipient who lives next door.
And then you’ve got all the infrastructure that self funded retirees have provided with their lifetime of taxes which they are in the queue to use exactly the same as the Chinese grandmother and the serial dole bludger who have not contributed a single cent to our society.
Not to mention that many self funded retirees saved their money through the mandatorily deducted portion of their wages known as superannuation. This super is placed in funds whereby it is usually gambled on the stock market . A market which has its stability destroyed by government enabled irresponsiblity of financial institutions , mostly beyond the control or knowledge of the average worker.
So they take your money , potentially lose it in a stock market crash and if they don’t they’ll double tax you in your retirement all because you’ve striven to be an exemplary member of the society we live in.
It’s a piss take.
The financial advice offered on this forum is only of a general nature and may not apply to your individual circumstances. There is also a significant chance that it is misleading, wrong and designed to reinforce racist and other stereotypes. It is strongly recommended that you obtain independent professional financial advice.
Totally agree Blowin, classic case of the carrot and the donkey.
Except that the example given is wrong as by my calculation they would still be entitled to a pension of about $860.00 a fortnight. Add their $1380.00 from their investment to that and the fact that they are mortgage free and .......... that is a good standard of living. Plus they still have capital to draw down as they age should something unexpected happen.oo
On $350 wk each they are eligible for $215 a week of a basic pension.
This makes a total of $565 wk each .....on which they must pay $41 tax ! Leaving them with $524 each per week , whilst grandma from China gets full single pension of $345 wk .
So all that hard work to be $225 better off than someone who has never contributed a single thing to Australia. Which is fair enough , it’s good that our pensioners are looked after, but it’s the $41 per week each that couple X are paying in tax which is the entire point of this discussion.
They should not be paying this tax . The argument that its fat cats living high on the hog is utterly unjustified in most instances.
Better to take a look at why we’d possibly consider giving a life long pension to someone who’s migrated from China without them paying a dollar in tax,
PS BB , the whole racism thing ?
Wrongly attributed again , mate. Here’s a few pointers for when you’re next keen on tarring and feathering someone with your accusations :
Pointing out that someone has recently migrated from another country ie China - Not racist.
Stating that you don’t like Chinese style of government- Not racist .
Saying “ I don’t employ Chinese because they’re lazy “ - Racist.
Saying “ I don’t particularly like Chinese culture and lion dancing is repetitious “ - Not racist.
Refusing to serve someone at a place of business because they are Chinese - Racist.
Get it ? If not , keep practicing. Your finger pointing is ugly and it’s getting old .
If you did not want to dog whistle up the racists, why refer to the grandmother as Chinese? Why refer to the long term unemployed, the vast majority being blameless, as dole bludgers if not to reinforce negative stereotypes? I will look at your figures again, I may have missed the "each".
Oh, and residency rules are 10 years for the pension. An elderly person immigrating under family reunion could also be subject to other financial conditions.
Yep a 10 year Assuarance of Support guarantee for parents on family reunion visa. with a bond that is lost if they access any welfare payment. So are you withdrawing any of your offensive and misleading bullshit Blowin? No, I thought not.
Why not refer to the grandmother as Chinese ? The example was for a foreign born pensioner . Is it racist to mention that people from other countries claim a pension .....No.
Dog whistling ! What’s the term for using false accusations of racism to stifle debate ? Bitch whistling ?
A large percentage of immigrants to Australia are Chinese. I’m sure an 80 year old lady recently moved to Australia from China couldn’t and wouldn’t find a problem with being referred to as Chinese.
And even if she did , it’s completely factual . Not subjective at all.
And the fella I’m referring to is an unapologetic dole bludger. This is not a stereotype, this is a specific example.
And he’ll gladly brag about the fact. He loves to say that “ the working class can kiss my arse “
Why so specific if your purpose was innocent. Nah mate it was dog whistle and yep I will point the finger at that kind of crap everyday. And now the dole bludger was aimed at one person? Ha ha ha ha ha. Watching you try to crawl out from under your bullshit is the funniest thing I've encountered all day!
So Grandmother is 68 years old , guaranteed support for ten years = 78 .
She then lives to be 100 years old . Who do you think is paying for this person to live for 22 years ? Yes , that’s right . It’s couple X’s tax dollars paying for her pension, hospital visits , home care , subsidies, public transport etc etc .
And they’re paying for it with the tax on THEIR retirement money !
You’ll do anything to dodge reality , BB.
But.....the entire discussion isn’t about the dole bludger or Nan from China , it’s about the tax that couple X shouldn’t have to pay.....remember ?
It was about stereotyping, but it was the type of stereotyping you excuse . It was about stereotyping anyone who’s worked their guts out as a rich fat cat . Remember how this thread discussion started talking about retirees with “ multi million dollar share portfolios “ ?
That’s not the reality , that’s the stereotype. And it needs to be dismantled.
“I’ve actually calculated that if I was a single bloke , unless I’m earning at least 5 percent interest on a lump sum of at least $500K , I’m no better off in retirement than the life long welfare recipient who lives next door”
You don’t think that’s aimed at one person ? Actually, I’ve got a few more of them to use as examples if the reality makes you uncomfortable.
Fuck , BB, you really need to chill on the racist accusations, I’ve no doubt you do it everyday. Thing is , it’s still an insult and you can’t walk around slinging insults around without finding yourself facing repercussions one day. False accusations aren’t thrown around without blowback.
Franking credits? A refund on tax you never paid, used mainly by people in a much better financial situation than your example and so a gross example of wealthfare. I would be surprised if the couple in your situation would suffer any disadvantage. You would have to look at the actual legislation. Labor are unlikely to introduce a policy which hits people on lower incomes.
Used mainly by ......is stereotyping.
Chinese mainly can’t swim. See how it works ?
ooops, caught out again misrepresenting the truth.
5% of $500,000 is $25000 which gives you $960 a fortnight. The first $172 does not influence your pension so Centrelink will consider $788 a fortnight. They deduct 50c in the dollar from your pension so you will lose $394 per fortnight which gives you a pension of $440 add your $960 and you have an income of $1400.00 a fortnight. Over $560 a fortnight better off than the basic pension plus a significant amount of capital to draw down if needed. Please check my calculations. It
Real world example .
In reply to Mahn England
Thanks Mahn, you want to reduce my income to the tune of approx $3600 per annum. That’s a massive $69.23 per week from a total gov’t funded age pension of $482.93 per week for my wife and myself combined.
The dividends in our SMSF are currently averaging around 4.23% nett due to the stuffed up Australian equities market.
We are living on the wild side of life on a massive total income of $45632.36, what do you live on?
Using Chinese as an example was completely fair seeing in recent history Chinese make up the largest group of immigrants
Well actually Blowin my current income is slightly less than that. I would also think that for much of my life, after paying the mortgage, my income in real terms was similar or lower. Look mate, if you want to retire with a higher standard of living than the average worker,mood luck to you but don't expect to suck on the government tit to fund your lifestyle. Classic example. Retirees who own their own home and have enough investments to generate that kind of income want the taxpayer to foot the bill for their expectations. The word is GREED over-entitled, over-priveleged wannabe parasites.
"Chinese mainly can’t swim. See how it works ?"
Yeh I've go it, most grandmothers are Chinese! Blowin I think the logical fallacy is false equivalence but really it is a primary school level of argument and you should be seriously embarrassed.
"Using Chinese as an example was completely fair seeing in recent history Chinese make up the largest group of immigrants"
Not true. India outstrips them. More to the point the argument was not based around nationality. Idenifying a perceived problem with one group of immigrants therefore is unfair and encourages racial stereotypes.
Okay its now India, but China's not far behind.
I mean seriously it's just an example, this political correct crap is just getting crazy.
Dole bludger is also fine to use, it's part of our Australian vernacular to use the word, i myself was on the dole for ages until i got my arse into gear.
If your on the dole long term you are a dole bludger, no excuses thats just how it is, there is always work out there if you want it, problem is most people are to fussy on what jobs they will do or wont move for work etc.
That said its not always a word associated with negativity.
Chinese parents make up over 50 percent of family reunification visas , BB.
So it’s not a racist example . It’s a very meritorious example.
Does it make you uncomfortable to be confronted with the truth ? Is it offensive to you when I note there are THOUSANDS of them ?
And you can suck my dick with your constant accusations .
How’s that sound ?
"If your on the dole long term you are a dole bludger, no excuses thats just how it is, there is always work out there if you want it,"
Absolutely not true Indo. I have had family members retrenched in their fifties who could not get a job. They were seen as too old for the kind of work they had previously done and too skilled for retail or other lower paid work. There are many areas in Australia with unemployment rates over 7% so maybe you can get a job if you are young and fit or have specific skills. Bad luck if you are unskilled in your fifties. The term "dole bludger" used as anything but a light hearted reference is negative stereotyping of a group most of whom are doing it tougher than ever with current Centrelink requirements and their unfair suspensions of payments. Just hope it doesn't happen to you!
Hmm and homophobic too ..... remember that phobia is fear. What are you frightened of Blowin?
Sweet Jesus , you’re like a fucking preprogrammed robot who spits” right on “accusations at times you mistakenly think appropriate.
You think I’m homophobic because I insulted a heterosexual man by suggesting he suck my dick . Do you even understand the definitions of the insults your flinging around ?
You think I’m frightened by gay people...!
Levels of sanctimony are getting stratospheric.
I feel ill.
Scrambling, scurrying, dodging & weaving.
Serial dole bludgers & Chinese grandmothers.
Explain/excuse away, Curls. Where the bloody hell are ya? Like to see the contortions.
Jesus wept. What is this joint?
Sounds like he just needs to adjust his resume so he doesn't appear overqualified so he can get those not so good jobs.
I doubt the fruit picking industry would turn him down either.
Got any more expert tips? Y'know from one 'serial dole bludger' to another.
“The word is GREED over-entitled, over-priveleged wannabe parasites.”says BB.
Funny how you apply that to lifelong tax payers but not to someone who’s just moved to the country thinking they can just ship over their unproductive, non contributing, liability elderly parents and the Australian taxpayers are expected to look after them for the rest of their days .....free health care , subsidised living and CASH in hand each and every week.
Oh , I forgot ....it’s to prevent our ageing population, right ?
Psychological projection 101.
Fuck me you boys go at it night after night after night eh?
It's a glacially slow process.
Meanwhile in Australia...
I keep getting sucked into the vortex.
Meanwhile in Australia https://www.smh.com.au/national/western-australia/departments-failed-to-...
As Jacinta highlights quite regularly, authority's now can't be seen to intervene and protect these children because of fear of being accused of creating a second stolen generation.
Blowing next time you go see that Asian medical specialist that saves your life ask him why he bought in his 80 year old grandmother who is ripping you off :-)
Blowin, let me explain why I consider your comment to be homophobic. I assume that what you said was intended as an insult and will give you the benefit of the doubt as the other interpretation, that you were soliciting sex on the forums, would be even worse. Mutual dick sucking is normal male homosexual behaviour. So you have taken what is a normal expression of sexuality in a group and turned it into an insult. This is a put down of those identifying as part of that group. You might like to consider that members of that group have a long history of oppression and even now being homosexual is a significant risk factor for suicide amongst young men. So yep, the comment is homophobic and contributes to the negative stereotypes that drive youth suicide. So maybe cut that out of your insult library. Use some imagination. "You are nothing but the faeces splattered hoof of a bovine encephalitic cow." for example.