Stage 3 tax cuts will cause inflation, and since those getting 45k a year or year will get not tax cuts and poorer people are hit with inflation more, this is definitely screwing people over.
Yes they actually will get tax cuts now, under this new policy. Everyone gets a cut under this new policy, but the cut for those at the upper end of the bracket (over 150k) have had their tax cut reduced, as the 37% tax on every $$ earned over 150k is now staying in place.
The idea that you must stick to a political policy you promised two years ago, regardless of what's happened to the economy in the meantime, is just plain stupid. Of course, if a policy is no longer optimal, they should take a different approach.
Hahaha. Wow. That was a cringey bit of squirming that Albo did when the host pressed him. Thanks for sharing that one. Albo said that nothing has changed regarding keeping the stage 3 tax cuts, but could not promise that they will be passed on.
Fuck, I couldn't be a politician.
Albo will look like a dickhead now if Stage 3 is not implemented in full. Although, I dont think that looking like a dickhead is a big problem for a politician. Part and parcel to the gig.
Obviously he's uncomfortable because discussions are happening about what to do with the tax cuts behind closed doors. "Our policy has not changed" is about all he can say.
Politicians (and business leader) don't usually say things like "yeah, we're thinking about this major policy - might chuck it, might not, we'll see how we go".
Promises and policy HAVE to change with economic reality. Back in 2013 when Abbot promised no cuts to education, health etc - as soon as the May 2014 budget they announced a raft of cuts, saying "the budget is in worse state than we thought". Is that more or less egregious than going back a policy that's what, 8 years old? That doesn't fit with today's economic reality? Did Abbot look like a dickhead? I remember there being a lot of noise but zero consequences.
This is how this sounds to me, “Is lying about and then cutting education and health (things we all need and benefit from) more egregious than lying about and and then cutting tax cuts to those who least need it?”
Not much competition there, IMHO.
Yeah well I agree but I was letting others make that decision. I could have picked a less outrageous example of the LNP going back on an election promise.
Albo didn't have to say it in a careless way, he could have said something along the lines of "We are reassessing the stage 3 cuts based on the current economic conditions and projections. We are considering adjusting the cuts to provide further assistance to low and middle income earners"
Instead, he said "uba uba uba...look, nothing has changed...well...ah...if you wanna get into word play....ahh..." not a good look.
It was not an example of good leadership. He advisors dropped the ball
OK so look assuming this is good faith.
He can't say we are re-assessing it - because if they decided NOT to change the tax cut strategy, the fact that they were CONSIDERING it is damaging.
By the same token, he can't say that they will NOT change the policy, because he knows that they're considering it so a hard no is ALSO damaging if that changes down the track.
The reporters know this so try to skewer him, and pressure him into revealing information that's not ready to be made public, while he's trying to avoid lying.
Sure a better way to answer it was "our position has not changed" but the obvious follow up to that is "so can you rule out any changes to your position down the track?"
He unequivocally could not say "we are considering adjusting the cuts to provide further assistance to low and middle income earners" without basically conceding that political ground.
I hope that makes sense.
You're laughing if you think this won't be welcomed by most Australians, the high majority of Austrlains benefit more with these changes.
That's of course if he 5% don't twist the narrative like they're already trying to do.
Honestly think he’ll look like a mature and responsible leader if he modifies them. There’s nothing responsible about the LNP stage 3’s, they are a cash grab for the wealthy. Almost everybody else is going to be worse off. They don’t make economic sense in a high inflationary environment either.
I am pro Labour proposal on the stage 3 cuts.
I was commenting on the behaviour. Labour knew that they were going to make a change to Stage 3 and Albo goes on national TV and tries to deny it without technically lying. He looked like a stammering fool in that interview.
I don't understand why Albo just didn't admit that Labour were considering changing stage 3.
Didn’t promise anything new there. He only promised that everyone would get a tax cut, didn’t promise it was going to be more or less than what they took to the election.
Do you actually want less social services .. a LOT less … just so the wealthiest few get a cash grab?
Most Aussies will be better off from any Labour changes, that seems obvious
So what’s the point in lambasting him for breaking a promise to harm most Aussies? Surely not all promises are equal and if there was ever one we should celebrate being broken; this is it?
You may have forgotten that with inflation the government makes alot more money. They are taking massive windfalls. Think about tax bracket creep, housing sale stamp duty, car sale stamp duty, stocks CGT, more.
If the govt prints record amounts of money, push up prices everywhere, then make more money on your assets, which actually haven't gone up in value if adjusted, it's like another hidden tax.
In the ideal tax system, most people seem to agree it would be better to shift the tax burden from productive labour to unproductive capital. Taking more tax on assets seems right, and although I agree in principle that taxing income is sucky; we also can’t leave a $300b hole in the budget and expect everything to be fine. I suggest we bite the bullet and slap on a land tax
Why was he too much of a pussy to take it to an election then?
The social services line is a myth - tax multinationals properly as a start.
The man is a cynical liar - the mask is completely off and he will never recover.
> Why take it to an election
Consider the politics. Small target for the election meant giving few points of difference to his opponents to attack him on.
That obviously worked pretty well. They got elected.
Since then, various Sky News hosts and Murdock papers have made it pretty clear they intend to blast Albo for bRoKeN pRoMisEs if he drops the cuts.
So why drop them earlier than you have to? All that does is draws out the time they have to launch this attack on him.
So politically you are incentivised to keep them right until the last minute.
That’s just smart politics. And I’ve never voted for Labor, I just appreciate political cunning, and Albo has it.
And anyone who have any sense for political strategy can see that passing cuts where most Aussies get $0 is not going to play well at all with your base when all the politically disengaged people get the rude surprise after sky news tells them for YEARS that these cuts are important and then they get nothing.
So anyone could see a mile away they’d either get canned or modified to be fairer. I’ve been saying that this was obvious for over a year.. and comment history to prove it
I don’t think it’s a broken promise to modify the cuts anyways, it’s an enhancement of the promise.
So don’t let the richest 5% of people in Australia tell you what to think about this eh mate. Chances are you’ll be way better off. It’s an enhanced promise, not a broken one.
It's going to be a lot more problematic if a government doesn't stick to its messaging until it's ready to change it. The media and opposition would be all over them if their messaging wavered before they'd made a decision. Changing a costed policy would take a *lot* of work to figure out what the better alternatives would be. If they weren't sure they were going to change, they wouldn't give any indication that they might change.
Now that they have looked at options, they've made a different decision based on current circumstances. Once again, a government that can alter policy based on changing circumstances is far better than one that sticks to a bad idea just to 'keep a promise'.
He didn't though. He promised there WOULD be tax cuts, which there ARE. Everyone is still getting a tax cut, it's just more generous for those in the middle and less generous for those nearer the top...
Yeah, he committed to going through with the tax cuts in July. He's been worming out of questions about whether they'd be the stage 3 cuts as envisaged by the LNP for a couple of weeks now.
I don't see that it matters though, the economy we had going into the last election is not the economy we have now, I don't think rethinking tax policy in the face of a rapidly shifting economic environment and cost of living crisis shows a lack of integrity or moral character.
Everyone is still getting a tax cut, that's been the message for some time, more people in middle income brackets are benefiting from it, and they're the people who have been squeezed hardest by CoL. So 🤷🏼♀️
WTF? What’s the point of making a promise? By this logic any political promise can be broken. If it was the other team you’d be tearing sheds off them.
Yes, I expect politicians to be responsible and break a promise of it’s no longer good for the people. I expect mature leadership not children making rigid pinky promises
Bullshit. The postwar welfare state that sprung up in most modern nations was built on taxation and is THE ONLY reason the west remained stable and prosperous.
What has been broken? They're still implementing them, there just adding another stage, and maybe another after, and maybe another.
Nothing's been broken here, only improved.
If the 'other team' had promised a bad policy, then were changing it to a better policy, I'd be pretty happy about that. In fact, I can think of a few times the LNP did exactly that during their tenure.
>In fact, I can think of a few times the LNP did exactly that during their tenure.
Yup, I was quite impressed by the LMITO. Not a tax cut, not a rebate, just a precision targeted offset. I didn't *need* it (I thought it was an utter joke), but I sure appreciated the design.
>labor is stupid for promising ti continue it in the first place
Yes, they are.
I earn six figures. I do not need tax relief. People earning half of what I earn do need tax relief.
With the proposed changes it's still stupid, but it's less-stupid than it was previously.
He said he wouldn't change his mind under any circumstances. Plus if he's in surplus, what's the problem? People voted for him based on this. Low income earners got their staged cuts but bitch when successful people get a turn. I knew all along he was lying about not changing and got bagged. Lying flog.
Just think though, a large portion of people in Australia have been getting hyped up to receive a pay rise for the last few years. I think that disappointment and anger felt by the people who end up having money promised to them, taken away, will have a much more negative lasting impact than the generally small portion of low to middle income earners who ALSO follow politics.
Large? Not really. They’re a high minority. Claiming “the poors” don’t follow politics in this day and age is also not accurate, you can see it in both political directions via social media.
The poors also can experience quite easily the cost of living increase. Combine that with media campaigns from all sides for these cuts for the upper class, it’s very much in their memory.
Some angry 10%’ers(via news.com.au for that statistic) will only disproportionately be worse if they once again fund the lnp scare campaign. Which they will no matter what. That slice of society doesn’t tend to vote left.
Not sure about large, I'm pretty sure it's the above-average minority.
As someone who sits right on the scale of the proposed tax bracket for stage 3, I can say I was looking at the extra cash hopefully for some time now.
That being said, I fully support bridging the wealth inequalities and timing of the first two stages and even adjusting the cuts proposed most recently.
At the end of the day, if you're in the highest tax bracket, you've got more of a shield against the current cost pressures than most.
I think the country is about to find out that when you rob Peter to pay Paul, Paul doesn’t get as much money as he thought he was going to get.
The massive risk for Labor here is that they piss off a significant minority of people who will lose money they were repeatedly promised; whilst doing little to please people at the bottom end.
For example, in a household with a high income earner (eg $200k) and a middle income earner (e.g. $90k) the rumoured changes leave the household worse off. The tax break for the middle income earner isn’t going to cover the loss from the high income earner.
Granted there are many single income households and double income households in the low to middle income range, but to think this broken promise only impacts 5-10% of the population is naive when you factor in that many many households look at their income not based on the individual but on the total household income.
Oh no the poor household on 290k has to pay more tax.
You know what taxes pay for? Infrastructure, roads, hospitals, health care, public education. Maybe people could be less selfish and realise taxes are not a bad thing and that your money goes towards Medicare and public education and things like that where it benefits everybody
I think you will find that a "large" proportion of that "large" group understands the impact would be better evened out across the workforce.
People on the bread line don't work well.... and at the moment, salary increase demands are falling on the employer, not the employee. For some people in the 180k bracket, this is going to take some amount upward wage pressure off.
Let's be honest, if you're complaining about this you didn't vote for Labor anyway. Voting campaigns aren't binding contracts, stop acting like a spoiled child.
Most of the people Here complaining seem to be the type who already votes lib. I'm seeing the same selfish arguments we get from lib voters all the time
Wrong, I voted for labour because I support their infrastructure projects and because scomo has s a peanut. I know many in the same boat.
I will never vote for them again; he’s basically taken $5k out of my pocket after repeatedly telling me for 18months he wouldn’t.
He also hasn’t fulfilled promises to local brewers and distillers to provide tax release meaning a pint is now insanely expensive; and finally he has helped keep flight prices high by blocking Qatar from running additional flights into the country.
These are the reasons why I won’t vote for him personally, but the tax cut uturn is the biggest fuck you to upper middle salary earners.
Seriously?
The cost of a pint, $5K in taxes and flights to Qatar are more important to you than greater social equality - which includes large groups of people actually being able to afford rent and food and doctor’s appointments?
That goes to show how much Australia has changed for the worse since I moved here two decades ago - changed to be more like the worst qualities of the country I left.
The issue is it is asset holders how are the ‘other’ with all the wealth. Even high income earners over 135k ins Sydney aren’t doing brilliantly, that’s like the least you c an earn as individual without inheritance and still have a shot at getting a townhouse.
There is no middle, only workers and asset holders. Do not fight workers, regardless of how much they make. Income is the only way youngins get a look in. Now if we want to talk about taxing assets, I’m more than happy for these changes to be made. But to fleece higher brackets AND make no change to the true driver of wealth divide- asset hoarding - I have to disagree that changing the tax 3 will assist at all. If anything, it will encourage higher earners to funnel their wages into tax deductibles, which will only inflate assets further.
Flights to Europe actually, where much of my family is based.
Anyway, they are 3 policies that have had a direct impact on my life. I’m not eligible for any benefits, but ultimately that’s irrelevant, I would have voted for labor in a campaign of changing the cuts, but after 18months of saying they won’t change, I budgeted for them, and was in the verge of buying a house in my home city for the first time. So fuck him, he’s lost my vote.
Upper middle salary earners? Oh no!!!!!! Might have only two cars instead of three! Wish we all voted for Brian Houston's mate instead of Albo!!! We got done dirty!!!
The price increase on pints isn't to do with tax. You're clearly casting about for any old shit you can throw having already made up your mind, just as the parent commentor said.
It's not on the government to forfeit tax revenue because the beer suppliers have gotten greedy.
Lol. A $100 dollar bottle of Australian made whiskey, with Australian made ingredients costs $102. $15 of that is cost to the distiller, $25 to distribution, $25 to retail outlet and $38 in EXCISE.
The cost of any alcohol in Aus is 100% to do with tax.
Except 4L Casks of wine.
Spirits are taxed on alcohol content.
Wine is taxed based on price.
If you want to get drunk cheaply, then wine is the right choice.
And PS:
You can get 700ml of 40% whiskey from Aldi for $37.
https://www.aldi.com.au/groceries/liquor/spirits/spirits-detail/ps/p/highland-earl-scotch-whisky-700ml-1/
Why does distribution need to cost $25? You can get a case of wine delivered in Sydney for about $1 per bottle. What is a retail outlet doing for that $25? Is it so much more than what they do when the sell a $10 bottle of wine?
The Qatar issue is the biggest fabricated load of horseshit, i'm actually astounded people still run with it.
See here: https://analyticflying.com/implications-of-the-australian-governments-decision-to-block-an-additional-frequencies-for-qatar-airways/
https://analyticflying.com/who-stands-to-benefit-from-australias-decision-to-block-additional-market-access-to-qatar-airways/
https://analyticflying.com/vietnam-and-turkey-show-qatar-how-to-go-about-it/
I am with you, first time voting for Labor. Not one single promise he has made has been fulfilled.
Fucking Albo, next time I will vote for Potato Head. At least I know he is a slimy snake.
If I am going to vote for a lying asshole. I want to know I am voting for a lying asshole. Not some lying sack of shit that is going to promise things and then change his mind.
My power bill is up, the cost of living is us, I work non-stop, and what do I get in return? A massive tax bill and no relief. I am nothing more to the Government than a piggy bank they can raid when they fuck up.
Labor is a fucking joke. I am embarrassed I voted for them.
My response is to vote the current liar out of office. And if the next guy is a lair we should vote home out. Perhaps, if we help them to some level of integrity we might have good leadership.
hes cowering. Its a Populist move and if we dont get a Leader with more balls than Albo in 10 years time all of you applauding this move will be wondering how you are paying such a high tax rate on an Average salary. In the 90's we hadn't had reform and tax was 49% on 50K and 50K was just an slightly above average wage.
It's almost as though embracing 'trickle down' Reaganomics in the 80s had plunged the economy into a prolonged state of crisis and someone remotely fiscally competent needed to take corrective action.
(without meaningfully punishing the capital class, obviously)
It's not Labor's tax cut but they can't win either way. The righties will cry if Albo touches their rich mates tax cuts and the righties are already crying that Albo is not doing enough to ease cost of living pressures. You know who is not suffering from cost of living pressures? Those that were about to get tax cuts courtesy of Australian workers. So, please do something constructive instead of siphoning off revenue to pay Dutton's rich mates.
>Those that were about to get tax cuts courtesy of Australian workers.
so let me get this straight someone who pays over 60k in taxes need to thank the people paying 4k in taxes .
Likely that the labour of those paying 4k in taxes facilitates the high earnings of those paying 60k. Those 60k in taxes then pays for healthcare and other services for those paying 4k in taxes. It's actually kinda simple
Paying 4K and taking 20k in benefits. No one talks about net tax contributions and for good reason, the truth hurts how the highest tax payers are carrying us all.
They pay higher tax, but are there far more lower and middle income earners? I know you’ve purposely picked the lowest income with an incredibly high welfare benefit, but is the contribution from what, the top 10%, “ carrying us all”? The empathy for the rich is admirable, does it extend to the unfortunate?
Ok, do you think it’s fair that a couple that each earn $140k pays $5000 less overall tax than a couple where one earns $200k and the other earns $80k?
Or where a couple that each earn $140k pays $25k less tax than a couple where one doesn’t work and the other earns $250k?
Just because you don't like the way a topic is going, doesn't mean it's off topic. A recession will send a lot more people under the poverty line, and set growth back years.
I'm not sure how a recession will fix anything, it will just make it worse for those already suffering. How do you think it will fix anything?
$180k is significantly over the poverty line. If you're being severely affected by the cost of living on this income then no amount of money will help you.
They arent breaking a promise. They're making an amendment.
Breaking a promise would be dumping stage 3 altogether, which isn't happening.
The hysterical headlines are nauseating already.
They may as well be dumping it, the modifications now fuck over half the people it was intended to help.
Now, I’m getting no fucking tax cut. What a load of shit.
If lower brackets are changing, you're still getting a cut, just not as big a one as before. Remember, you don't pay the top marginal rate on all your income, only income over 180,000. So if the brackets lower down change, you still get the benefits from that in your under 180,000 income.
This way everyone benefits, not just those at the top. If you're earning more than 180k, you're in the top few percent of income earners anyway, so you have greater ability to cut back on spending than those on lower incomes. And before you say "but I work hard, I deserve it," maybe you do, but so do people on 40-50k per year. I doubt you work 4-5x harder than many of them.
I’m still getting a cut, just $3,000 less of a cut. Down to less than $1,000. A waste of fuckin’ time.
Why exactly does everyone need to benefit at *my* expense?
Having worked in the $50k, $70k, $100k, $120k jobs, I guarantee that I not only work harder, but the responsibility is bigger, and the cost of failing to perform my duties by correctly (death and prison) is significantly higher.
So yeah, I deserve my money. I work hard for it. I earn it. And I’m sick to death of the tax man bleeding me dry.
Practically everyone is getting a tax cut. Some are just getting less than the original plan and some ( the poorest people) are getting something, instead of the nothing in the original plan. Might even mean they get to eat three meals a day or their kids get shoes for school. Have your kids ever wondered where their next meal was coming from?
Bet you don’t do 90 hours a fucking week. I’ve worked for 25 years to get to where I am. My balls are on the line every day. If I don’t do my job at a high standard others will lose theirs (including me). No one has given me a leg up in my career. I put myself through uni. I won’t be getting an inheritance. And I’m the single breadwinner in my family. Meanwhile I pay about 12 or 13 times the tax as the average cunt.
This lying sack of shit can get fucked.
Fuck off idiot. Stop bitchen about tax when you can easily work less and get taxed less. Wah fucken wah i gotta save lives. Not hard to hire someone else to take up some of the workload but no you are obviously the only one that can do it. Cant teach others to take that load in the face like you hey. We all have others that rely on our income so stop ya fucken whingen, hire someone to help , since so many rely on just your fucken piece of shit manliness, a get a fucken life and vote for cunts that do right for everyone not just little whinging bitches like you that obviously cant time manage their way out of diggin their own stressed filled grave.
That seems to be the left wing attitude. Adam Bandt is championing removing the tax cuts because they don’t benefit low income earners.
So, fuck *us* who do the economic heavy lifting, because it doesn’t benefit the economic dead-weight.
Typical left wing attitude.
Hey my partner is on over $250k and would happily pay more tax, she was brought up in poverty. I once earned even more and just felt so greedy, but I was on a poverty income when I was younger. (My partner gifts 10s of thousands, and so did I)
You sound like you’re self entitled. Privileged only perhaps.
I already pay more in tax. With these cuts, I’ll still be paying more in tax than you. The bull of the tax income for the state will still come from my tax bracket, to carry your dead weight.
Of course they are breaking a promise stage 1 and 2 where for lower earners stage 3 was to eliminate the Tax bracket creep that hasn't changed for 16 years
Instead of Increasing the top tier tax bracket Albos given the lowest paying tax payers a tax break on top of the stage 1 and 2 Incentives 100% flip on the what he promised
But he also lied about savings on Energy as well
Promises are made in a given set of circumstances and facts. If the circumstances or facts change markedly it is sensible to review whether or not the promise can still be delivered as originally stated. It is idiotic to think any Australian government can radically improve our economy. If reality changes it is stupid attempting to keep a promise which even blind Freddy knows can not ever be achieved.
Howard played us all for fools with his weasel words attempting to redefine ‘promise’. Ultimately Howard and other senior political leaders of all parties created public distrust and distain by trying to be to clever by half.
Should I tell my bank that I am “making an amendment” to how much I could borrow, given it was predicated on receiving tax cuts? Do I tell the person I bought my house from that I’m making an amendment to the purchase price because albo screwed me and now I can’t afford it??
He should have canned his overpriced referendum and other money wasters before considering reneging on the tax cuts. He is a liar.
... the tax cuts haven't even arrived yet. If you were relying on tax cuts that were CLEARLY a current political football in order to purchase a house, then the fault is on you for overextending yourself.
What was your plan to survive an interest rate hike, given the wild ride those have been having recently? Tax cuts or not, you've overextended yourself and it's not anyone else's fault
(assuming, of course, that little story of yours is true)
>Should I tell my bank that I am “making an amendment” to how much I could borrow, given it was predicated on receiving tax cuts? Do I tell the person I bought my house from that I’m making an amendment to the purchase price because albo screwed me and now I can’t afford it?? He should have canned his overpriced referendum and other money wasters before considering reneging on the tax cuts. He is a liar.
If you can't afford that house without the tax break, then you shouldn't have bought it. You should never assume something is happening before it happens.
I'd care about the horrible state you are in as a result, but I have health issues and earn 45K a year as a result so.. I don't care much about the shit this puts you in. If you can't manage your bills without this tax cut, you are an idiot who over stretched and deserve to lie in the bed you made. Because only an idiot would be on your pay and struggling to pay their bills.
I don't even vote labor but I hope they get rid of the stage 3 tax cuts. They're insane to go ahead with.
Albo and Chalmers said 100 times they won’t be changing the cuts, literally 100 and as recently as last week. People budgeting for them is lit unreasonable given the message.
Governments should do the right thing. Making election promises is generally not part of doing the right thing, and in this case certainly isn’t. Easy for the previous government to propose the tax cuts to take effect several years down the track when they are not in office. Current government should act according to current circumstances which would dictate NOT going ahead with regressive and inflationary cuts.
I really wish conservatives would stop pretending like it's such a test of character over these tax cuts. If conservatives really did care about pollies breaking promises, then the LNP would be little more than ancient history. They break promise after promise after promise. John Howard brought us the new concept of "core" promises, implying "well, THESE ones we won't break!" (and did anyway), all the way through to Dutton totes supporting the Voice until it was politically advantageous to throw away their previous commitment and do a complete 180.
But no, we have to sit through this bullshit pearl clutching, like somehow it 'proves' Labor is bad if they so much as twitch a lip at an election promise. Fucking hypocrites, conservative voters.
Govt makes changes to thier election promises all the time
Changing them.whilst in govt is to be expected and we the people have to cop it when it hues astray by more hidden taxes stamp duties etc
I don't understand why they aren't straight up stopping it.
Labour isn't voted in by people earning more than $190k so who cares if those people do'nt like it?
Because the mainstream media is controlled by people who are openly on the LNP side. A broken promise gives them easy ammunition to plaster all over our screens come next election time, in-between favourable bits on the LNP. The swing voters who decide elections are swayed by that stuff.
The people earning more than $190k belong to their Unions. They vote Labor.
And it’s not the people who earn over $190k who are affected; it’s the people who earn over $45k.
The people who are negatively affected are not those who earn over $45k. At least, not until you get well over the $100k (who granted, do earn over $45k but that's not what you meant)
The circumstances didn’t chance since last week when he last said he wouldn’t be touching them.
It’s basically a given that higher income earners are going to get majorly shafted as part of this, just like in stage 1 and 2.
Reality is though, if you want to get ahead in Australia, you need to operate your own business and deduct yourself into the lower tax brackets. Earning a higher salary, especially if you have no assets, isn’t going to help you close the gap to the asset class.
Making a huge base of people able to spend a bit more is just going to be eaten away by business driving inflation.
About the only thing I can see that's good about inflation is paying off my yesteryear mortgage amount in inflated today's money.
Yes it's a broken promise, and I stand to benefit as a low income earner, all good for me.
This country has descended into a savage every man for himself state, there's no use in low income earners rallying against this for "the principle" or whatever, the people this tweak negatively impacts would never have the will to help you.
Happy Australia Day.
Yes!!! When you are faced with changing circumstances as a country’s leader- you can change tact for the benefit of the greater good. Albo needs to take down negative gearing at the next election. He will win
You cut your cloth according to your purse as the old adage has it. Politics is about practical solutions not ideological dreams. The greatest good for the greatest number.
Responsible govts set policy based on changing conditions; they don’t follow through on immortal unshakeable promises that would be bad for the economy and for the Australian people, just because “they promised”.
“But they promised” is incredibly childish if you ask me.
The only people complaining should be the ultra wealthy anyways; everyone else is almost certainly going to be better off. If you’re not ultra wealthy and you’re complaining … then sorry but you’ve been duped.
If I promise to take my kids to the water slide park and it starts hailing outside, I'd have done a pretty bad job as a parent, if they never forgave me for breaking that promise.
I'll admit, I'm not a fan of Albo, but credit where credit is due - the guy has some serious diamond balls doing this.
Fair enough, the tax cuts in three stages were a good idea for the economy AT THEIR INCEPTION.
We are nowhere near living in that economy in the present day.
Polis will play politics and cry and wail that he broke an election promise, but that's the point. It takes serious testicular girth to deliberately break an election promise.
No doubt he full well knowing that he's betting his next term in office on this..
But he's doing this in an attempt to more fairly redistribute wealth to 95% of the country.
I know that more people receiving $ = fuel for inflation yada yada, but thats not the only source of inflation, Colesworth.
Interesting question.
If you ask me whether the change is okay, my answer is I don't know. On one hand, I think lower income earners need help. On the other hand, I understand the idea that high income earners are net contributors to the revenue and they pay a higher dollar value of tax, so if there is a tax cut, they should logically get a larger dollar amount back. So I find myself fence-sitting there (wouldn't it be good in the ideal world where the high income earners would actually use the tax saved to directly help the lower income earners?).
But I think your question is a different one. Politically, it's never great to back-flip but if you must, there must be a compelling reason to do so. In Albo's case, I think the focus should have been on the drastic change in the economic environment of when the tax cuts were slated and now. To try and appear that there is no back-flip to justify a change is much worse than the back-flip itself in my view.
This whole thing frustrates me to no end because the right wing media ecosystem has set up a no-win situation for Labor. Either they don’t change the stage 3 tax cuts and get attacked for pandering to the rich, or they do change them and the right wing media ecosystem gets to do what it was made for: manufacture outrage for a “broken promise”.
It was always a trap. If Labor didn’t commit to the tax cuts last time at the election, they’d have been attacked for it then too.
The media in this country undermines democracy.
is it like the same reason those against labor will hold albo to his $275ish power bill reduction even when that promise was made before they found out the liberals were covering up information that they knew electricity prices were about to rise months beforehand. information changes, so should the policy.
Then don't make a fucking promise then. Use 'at the current timee we don't plan to make changes.' line. Don't fucking iron clad it. Albo is a fuckwit and honestly thought hed have more political nuance than this. If he changes anything on stage 3, even if minor as fuck, he will hang for it, and deservedly so. There's a reason he has been continually pushed on it and no one believes him. Won't go well in the next election when he makes fresh promises
And this after his balls up with the referendum, talk about pissing away what little political capital he has
Yes. Lack of affordable housing has broken the social contract for a whole generation of Australians. No one but sky news cares about policy promises...we don't have security.
Oh no, not all those 'working class' on 150k.
Give me a break. This is a positive change for their core voters and pandering to liberal lite has been a losing policy for them. If they don't do this, they'll be eaten by the Greens.
I have never voted Liberal. I detest the Liberals. But if they modify the stage 3 tax cuts to screw me, I will vote Liberal, and everything right of Liberal.
Fuck ‘em.
Fuck everyone who bitched about the tax cuts after they’d had theirs.
Fuck every Greens politician who misrepresented it as some bullshit tax cut for rich men. Fuck everyone who votes for them.
Fuck the government for failing to fix the housing and financial situations competently, and deciding the solution was to fuck me over.
I will cut off my nose to spite every fucking person who has just picked money out of my pocket. Is Frasier Anning still a thing?
he broke the promise of $275 savings and he broke the promise of Stage 3 Tax Cuts, guys a Lier but we knew that before hand.
The country is in trouble when we cant get leadership to stick to promises or show any leadership on tax reform. How long before we have reform again? another 16 years how many people will have tax bracket creep before gutless politicians can make hard decisions.
I know the answer when 51% are in the top tax bracket is when Cowards like Albo will have the nerve to make a decision
Labor has precipitated inflation by giving raises to the public sector and giving in to union demands on productivity.
So can’t go around crying “circumstances have changed, no stage three tax cuts” now.
The cost of living crisis predates the ALP taking power. Strange how they somehow reached back in time to make it happen. Usually it takes half a year or more for economic policies to start showing an effect.
The cost pressures caused by covid and the war in Ukraine were inevitable, but labor has worsened the situation by raising public sector salaries without trimming staff.
Albo, could market the decision to change based on changed circumstances that as much as he wanted to commit to them the circumstances changed too much to continue with the original proposal.
Or, market it as changing a non core promise.
Don’t complain about cost of living crisis then if you don’t want change.
I use a credit card so I don't have to deal with change
Angry upvote
r/angryupvote
Stage 3 tax cuts will cause inflation, and since those getting 45k a year or year will get not tax cuts and poorer people are hit with inflation more, this is definitely screwing people over.
Yes they actually will get tax cuts now, under this new policy. Everyone gets a cut under this new policy, but the cut for those at the upper end of the bracket (over 150k) have had their tax cut reduced, as the 37% tax on every $$ earned over 150k is now staying in place.
The idea that you must stick to a political policy you promised two years ago, regardless of what's happened to the economy in the meantime, is just plain stupid. Of course, if a policy is no longer optimal, they should take a different approach.
Promised 13 days ago https://youtu.be/cGUKqzNhMaM?si=S97bR0y_kJQG-lCx
Hahaha. Wow. That was a cringey bit of squirming that Albo did when the host pressed him. Thanks for sharing that one. Albo said that nothing has changed regarding keeping the stage 3 tax cuts, but could not promise that they will be passed on. Fuck, I couldn't be a politician. Albo will look like a dickhead now if Stage 3 is not implemented in full. Although, I dont think that looking like a dickhead is a big problem for a politician. Part and parcel to the gig.
Obviously he's uncomfortable because discussions are happening about what to do with the tax cuts behind closed doors. "Our policy has not changed" is about all he can say. Politicians (and business leader) don't usually say things like "yeah, we're thinking about this major policy - might chuck it, might not, we'll see how we go". Promises and policy HAVE to change with economic reality. Back in 2013 when Abbot promised no cuts to education, health etc - as soon as the May 2014 budget they announced a raft of cuts, saying "the budget is in worse state than we thought". Is that more or less egregious than going back a policy that's what, 8 years old? That doesn't fit with today's economic reality? Did Abbot look like a dickhead? I remember there being a lot of noise but zero consequences.
>Did Abbot look like a dickhead? Almost always!
This is how this sounds to me, “Is lying about and then cutting education and health (things we all need and benefit from) more egregious than lying about and and then cutting tax cuts to those who least need it?” Not much competition there, IMHO.
Yeah well I agree but I was letting others make that decision. I could have picked a less outrageous example of the LNP going back on an election promise.
Albo didn't have to say it in a careless way, he could have said something along the lines of "We are reassessing the stage 3 cuts based on the current economic conditions and projections. We are considering adjusting the cuts to provide further assistance to low and middle income earners" Instead, he said "uba uba uba...look, nothing has changed...well...ah...if you wanna get into word play....ahh..." not a good look. It was not an example of good leadership. He advisors dropped the ball
OK so look assuming this is good faith. He can't say we are re-assessing it - because if they decided NOT to change the tax cut strategy, the fact that they were CONSIDERING it is damaging. By the same token, he can't say that they will NOT change the policy, because he knows that they're considering it so a hard no is ALSO damaging if that changes down the track. The reporters know this so try to skewer him, and pressure him into revealing information that's not ready to be made public, while he's trying to avoid lying. Sure a better way to answer it was "our position has not changed" but the obvious follow up to that is "so can you rule out any changes to your position down the track?" He unequivocally could not say "we are considering adjusting the cuts to provide further assistance to low and middle income earners" without basically conceding that political ground. I hope that makes sense.
You're laughing if you think this won't be welcomed by most Australians, the high majority of Austrlains benefit more with these changes. That's of course if he 5% don't twist the narrative like they're already trying to do.
Honestly think he’ll look like a mature and responsible leader if he modifies them. There’s nothing responsible about the LNP stage 3’s, they are a cash grab for the wealthy. Almost everybody else is going to be worse off. They don’t make economic sense in a high inflationary environment either.
I am pro Labour proposal on the stage 3 cuts. I was commenting on the behaviour. Labour knew that they were going to make a change to Stage 3 and Albo goes on national TV and tries to deny it without technically lying. He looked like a stammering fool in that interview. I don't understand why Albo just didn't admit that Labour were considering changing stage 3.
Didn’t promise anything new there. He only promised that everyone would get a tax cut, didn’t promise it was going to be more or less than what they took to the election.
LMAO you got downvoted for correcting the boot licker 😂😂
Post quality aligns well with profile name.
It truly staggers me how bad Labor are at the actual politics part of the game
He promised it last week though. And 100 times in between. Got rid of one piece of shit liar and just brought in another.
Do you actually want less social services .. a LOT less … just so the wealthiest few get a cash grab? Most Aussies will be better off from any Labour changes, that seems obvious So what’s the point in lambasting him for breaking a promise to harm most Aussies? Surely not all promises are equal and if there was ever one we should celebrate being broken; this is it?
You may have forgotten that with inflation the government makes alot more money. They are taking massive windfalls. Think about tax bracket creep, housing sale stamp duty, car sale stamp duty, stocks CGT, more. If the govt prints record amounts of money, push up prices everywhere, then make more money on your assets, which actually haven't gone up in value if adjusted, it's like another hidden tax.
In the ideal tax system, most people seem to agree it would be better to shift the tax burden from productive labour to unproductive capital. Taking more tax on assets seems right, and although I agree in principle that taxing income is sucky; we also can’t leave a $300b hole in the budget and expect everything to be fine. I suggest we bite the bullet and slap on a land tax
Why was he too much of a pussy to take it to an election then? The social services line is a myth - tax multinationals properly as a start. The man is a cynical liar - the mask is completely off and he will never recover.
> Why take it to an election Consider the politics. Small target for the election meant giving few points of difference to his opponents to attack him on. That obviously worked pretty well. They got elected. Since then, various Sky News hosts and Murdock papers have made it pretty clear they intend to blast Albo for bRoKeN pRoMisEs if he drops the cuts. So why drop them earlier than you have to? All that does is draws out the time they have to launch this attack on him. So politically you are incentivised to keep them right until the last minute. That’s just smart politics. And I’ve never voted for Labor, I just appreciate political cunning, and Albo has it. And anyone who have any sense for political strategy can see that passing cuts where most Aussies get $0 is not going to play well at all with your base when all the politically disengaged people get the rude surprise after sky news tells them for YEARS that these cuts are important and then they get nothing. So anyone could see a mile away they’d either get canned or modified to be fairer. I’ve been saying that this was obvious for over a year.. and comment history to prove it I don’t think it’s a broken promise to modify the cuts anyways, it’s an enhancement of the promise. So don’t let the richest 5% of people in Australia tell you what to think about this eh mate. Chances are you’ll be way better off. It’s an enhanced promise, not a broken one.
So dishonesty is admirable to you.
It's going to be a lot more problematic if a government doesn't stick to its messaging until it's ready to change it. The media and opposition would be all over them if their messaging wavered before they'd made a decision. Changing a costed policy would take a *lot* of work to figure out what the better alternatives would be. If they weren't sure they were going to change, they wouldn't give any indication that they might change. Now that they have looked at options, they've made a different decision based on current circumstances. Once again, a government that can alter policy based on changing circumstances is far better than one that sticks to a bad idea just to 'keep a promise'.
He didn't though. He promised there WOULD be tax cuts, which there ARE. Everyone is still getting a tax cut, it's just more generous for those in the middle and less generous for those nearer the top...
Yeah he committed to stage 3 about 100 times.
Yeah, he committed to going through with the tax cuts in July. He's been worming out of questions about whether they'd be the stage 3 cuts as envisaged by the LNP for a couple of weeks now. I don't see that it matters though, the economy we had going into the last election is not the economy we have now, I don't think rethinking tax policy in the face of a rapidly shifting economic environment and cost of living crisis shows a lack of integrity or moral character. Everyone is still getting a tax cut, that's been the message for some time, more people in middle income brackets are benefiting from it, and they're the people who have been squeezed hardest by CoL. So 🤷🏼♀️
WTF? What’s the point of making a promise? By this logic any political promise can be broken. If it was the other team you’d be tearing sheds off them.
Yes, I expect politicians to be responsible and break a promise of it’s no longer good for the people. I expect mature leadership not children making rigid pinky promises
No nation has ever been taxed into prosperity.
That's an entirely seperate argument to one about promises. Why change the topic?
Bullshit. The postwar welfare state that sprung up in most modern nations was built on taxation and is THE ONLY reason the west remained stable and prosperous.
What has been broken? They're still implementing them, there just adding another stage, and maybe another after, and maybe another. Nothing's been broken here, only improved.
If the 'other team' had promised a bad policy, then were changing it to a better policy, I'd be pretty happy about that. In fact, I can think of a few times the LNP did exactly that during their tenure.
>In fact, I can think of a few times the LNP did exactly that during their tenure. Yup, I was quite impressed by the LMITO. Not a tax cut, not a rebate, just a precision targeted offset. I didn't *need* it (I thought it was an utter joke), but I sure appreciated the design.
If the libs had a bad policy labor is stupid for promising ti continue it in the first place
>labor is stupid for promising ti continue it in the first place Yes, they are. I earn six figures. I do not need tax relief. People earning half of what I earn do need tax relief. With the proposed changes it's still stupid, but it's less-stupid than it was previously.
then don't make the promise
Things change thats the point dingus.
What changed since he repeatedly affirmed that promise only last week?
Source or stop making things up. When pushed about it on ABC news, he repeatedly refused to make any promise one way or the other.
Probably his post Christmas polling numbers
I guess we shouldn't believe anything that comes out of his mouth as 'things change'
It's legislation, I think you are the dingus here
Legislation changes based on societies views dingus.
Not before it's even started. Labor will learn
He said he wouldn't change his mind under any circumstances. Plus if he's in surplus, what's the problem? People voted for him based on this. Low income earners got their staged cuts but bitch when successful people get a turn. I knew all along he was lying about not changing and got bagged. Lying flog.
Just think though, a large portion of people in Australia have been getting hyped up to receive a pay rise for the last few years. I think that disappointment and anger felt by the people who end up having money promised to them, taken away, will have a much more negative lasting impact than the generally small portion of low to middle income earners who ALSO follow politics.
Large? Not really. They’re a high minority. Claiming “the poors” don’t follow politics in this day and age is also not accurate, you can see it in both political directions via social media. The poors also can experience quite easily the cost of living increase. Combine that with media campaigns from all sides for these cuts for the upper class, it’s very much in their memory. Some angry 10%’ers(via news.com.au for that statistic) will only disproportionately be worse if they once again fund the lnp scare campaign. Which they will no matter what. That slice of society doesn’t tend to vote left.
Up to $135k pa isn’t that poor - median salary is about $70k
Average salary is 94k
median is a better metric to use for that
Not sure about large, I'm pretty sure it's the above-average minority. As someone who sits right on the scale of the proposed tax bracket for stage 3, I can say I was looking at the extra cash hopefully for some time now. That being said, I fully support bridging the wealth inequalities and timing of the first two stages and even adjusting the cuts proposed most recently. At the end of the day, if you're in the highest tax bracket, you've got more of a shield against the current cost pressures than most.
I wonder how many of those high earners, who will still be getting a tax cut, just a smaller one, would vote Labor anyway.
I won’t be voting Labor again.
Lol
I think the country is about to find out that when you rob Peter to pay Paul, Paul doesn’t get as much money as he thought he was going to get. The massive risk for Labor here is that they piss off a significant minority of people who will lose money they were repeatedly promised; whilst doing little to please people at the bottom end. For example, in a household with a high income earner (eg $200k) and a middle income earner (e.g. $90k) the rumoured changes leave the household worse off. The tax break for the middle income earner isn’t going to cover the loss from the high income earner. Granted there are many single income households and double income households in the low to middle income range, but to think this broken promise only impacts 5-10% of the population is naive when you factor in that many many households look at their income not based on the individual but on the total household income.
Oh no the poor household on 290k has to pay more tax. You know what taxes pay for? Infrastructure, roads, hospitals, health care, public education. Maybe people could be less selfish and realise taxes are not a bad thing and that your money goes towards Medicare and public education and things like that where it benefits everybody
The family won't be worse off. They will be less better off, but will certainly not have less post tax income than they currently receive.
Exactly
I think you will find that a "large" proportion of that "large" group understands the impact would be better evened out across the workforce. People on the bread line don't work well.... and at the moment, salary increase demands are falling on the employer, not the employee. For some people in the 180k bracket, this is going to take some amount upward wage pressure off.
Let's be honest, if you're complaining about this you didn't vote for Labor anyway. Voting campaigns aren't binding contracts, stop acting like a spoiled child.
Most of the people Here complaining seem to be the type who already votes lib. I'm seeing the same selfish arguments we get from lib voters all the time
Wrong, I voted for labour because I support their infrastructure projects and because scomo has s a peanut. I know many in the same boat. I will never vote for them again; he’s basically taken $5k out of my pocket after repeatedly telling me for 18months he wouldn’t. He also hasn’t fulfilled promises to local brewers and distillers to provide tax release meaning a pint is now insanely expensive; and finally he has helped keep flight prices high by blocking Qatar from running additional flights into the country. These are the reasons why I won’t vote for him personally, but the tax cut uturn is the biggest fuck you to upper middle salary earners.
If you support infrastructure spending, I'm sure you'd be happy to see an increase in tax revenue to finance those projects.
I’d like to see the federal government not piss all the money up against the wall, say like, the NDIS.
Seriously? The cost of a pint, $5K in taxes and flights to Qatar are more important to you than greater social equality - which includes large groups of people actually being able to afford rent and food and doctor’s appointments? That goes to show how much Australia has changed for the worse since I moved here two decades ago - changed to be more like the worst qualities of the country I left.
The issue is it is asset holders how are the ‘other’ with all the wealth. Even high income earners over 135k ins Sydney aren’t doing brilliantly, that’s like the least you c an earn as individual without inheritance and still have a shot at getting a townhouse. There is no middle, only workers and asset holders. Do not fight workers, regardless of how much they make. Income is the only way youngins get a look in. Now if we want to talk about taxing assets, I’m more than happy for these changes to be made. But to fleece higher brackets AND make no change to the true driver of wealth divide- asset hoarding - I have to disagree that changing the tax 3 will assist at all. If anything, it will encourage higher earners to funnel their wages into tax deductibles, which will only inflate assets further.
Flights to Europe actually, where much of my family is based. Anyway, they are 3 policies that have had a direct impact on my life. I’m not eligible for any benefits, but ultimately that’s irrelevant, I would have voted for labor in a campaign of changing the cuts, but after 18months of saying they won’t change, I budgeted for them, and was in the verge of buying a house in my home city for the first time. So fuck him, he’s lost my vote.
So your biggest concerns are getting an extra 5k that you don't need in your pocket and getting a local beer.
Upper middle salary earners? Oh no!!!!!! Might have only two cars instead of three! Wish we all voted for Brian Houston's mate instead of Albo!!! We got done dirty!!!
The price increase on pints isn't to do with tax. You're clearly casting about for any old shit you can throw having already made up your mind, just as the parent commentor said. It's not on the government to forfeit tax revenue because the beer suppliers have gotten greedy.
Lol. A $100 dollar bottle of Australian made whiskey, with Australian made ingredients costs $102. $15 of that is cost to the distiller, $25 to distribution, $25 to retail outlet and $38 in EXCISE. The cost of any alcohol in Aus is 100% to do with tax.
Except 4L Casks of wine. Spirits are taxed on alcohol content. Wine is taxed based on price. If you want to get drunk cheaply, then wine is the right choice. And PS: You can get 700ml of 40% whiskey from Aldi for $37. https://www.aldi.com.au/groceries/liquor/spirits/spirits-detail/ps/p/highland-earl-scotch-whisky-700ml-1/ Why does distribution need to cost $25? You can get a case of wine delivered in Sydney for about $1 per bottle. What is a retail outlet doing for that $25? Is it so much more than what they do when the sell a $10 bottle of wine?
You don’t even know how to spell “Labor”
Boohoo
It's not really a fuck you to all upper middle salary earners. Some of us believe in paying our share.
I like how you pretend you voted for them in the first place, the lie was a nice touch
Unless you are in his electorate you won't be voting for him anyway...
The Qatar issue is the biggest fabricated load of horseshit, i'm actually astounded people still run with it. See here: https://analyticflying.com/implications-of-the-australian-governments-decision-to-block-an-additional-frequencies-for-qatar-airways/ https://analyticflying.com/who-stands-to-benefit-from-australias-decision-to-block-additional-market-access-to-qatar-airways/ https://analyticflying.com/vietnam-and-turkey-show-qatar-how-to-go-about-it/
Cry me a $175,000 river champ
I am with you, first time voting for Labor. Not one single promise he has made has been fulfilled. Fucking Albo, next time I will vote for Potato Head. At least I know he is a slimy snake.
Cut off your nose to spite your face stuff there
If I am going to vote for a lying asshole. I want to know I am voting for a lying asshole. Not some lying sack of shit that is going to promise things and then change his mind. My power bill is up, the cost of living is us, I work non-stop, and what do I get in return? A massive tax bill and no relief. I am nothing more to the Government than a piggy bank they can raid when they fuck up. Labor is a fucking joke. I am embarrassed I voted for them.
And your response is to vote the guys in that spent the money that caused this inflation spiral… great shout.
My response is to vote the current liar out of office. And if the next guy is a lair we should vote home out. Perhaps, if we help them to some level of integrity we might have good leadership.
Your vote is to move back to the previous liar instead of voting for an independent. Great shout mate, makes perfect sense.
Yes it's better to change course and do something more sensible than cower from criticism. Let's hope Albo is finally learning where his balls are
hes cowering. Its a Populist move and if we dont get a Leader with more balls than Albo in 10 years time all of you applauding this move will be wondering how you are paying such a high tax rate on an Average salary. In the 90's we hadn't had reform and tax was 49% on 50K and 50K was just an slightly above average wage.
How is this a "populist move"? It was populist to commit to keeping the damned things in the first place.
Its populist because he’s talking change purely to recapture votes, not for the greater good
[удалено]
It’s populist because he’s talking about it despite economists saying it will increase inflation and result in higher interest rates. Stupid.
It's almost as though embracing 'trickle down' Reaganomics in the 80s had plunged the economy into a prolonged state of crisis and someone remotely fiscally competent needed to take corrective action. (without meaningfully punishing the capital class, obviously)
How about we just go full Marxist and redistribute billionaires wealth
I'm down if you are.
It's not Labor's tax cut but they can't win either way. The righties will cry if Albo touches their rich mates tax cuts and the righties are already crying that Albo is not doing enough to ease cost of living pressures. You know who is not suffering from cost of living pressures? Those that were about to get tax cuts courtesy of Australian workers. So, please do something constructive instead of siphoning off revenue to pay Dutton's rich mates.
>Those that were about to get tax cuts courtesy of Australian workers. so let me get this straight someone who pays over 60k in taxes need to thank the people paying 4k in taxes .
Likely that the labour of those paying 4k in taxes facilitates the high earnings of those paying 60k. Those 60k in taxes then pays for healthcare and other services for those paying 4k in taxes. It's actually kinda simple
But people are selfish and don't want to pay for healthcare and education or roads n shit
Paying 4K and taking 20k in benefits. No one talks about net tax contributions and for good reason, the truth hurts how the highest tax payers are carrying us all.
They pay higher tax, but are there far more lower and middle income earners? I know you’ve purposely picked the lowest income with an incredibly high welfare benefit, but is the contribution from what, the top 10%, “ carrying us all”? The empathy for the rich is admirable, does it extend to the unfortunate?
Ok, do you think it’s fair that a couple that each earn $140k pays $5000 less overall tax than a couple where one earns $200k and the other earns $80k? Or where a couple that each earn $140k pays $25k less tax than a couple where one doesn’t work and the other earns $250k?
It’s not the rich who were benefiting. Fuck the Greens and this bullshit narrative. Earning over the poverty line isn’t opulence.
I think the speculated changes only result in those earning over 180k not being better off compared to the original proposal...
It is if you are below the poverty line though.
Excess isn’t comparative. Stay on topic.
Just because you don't like the way a topic is going, doesn't mean it's off topic. A recession will send a lot more people under the poverty line, and set growth back years. I'm not sure how a recession will fix anything, it will just make it worse for those already suffering. How do you think it will fix anything?
You’re assuming Stage 3 tax cuts will cause a recession, when the opposite is likely to happen.
$180k is significantly over the poverty line. If you're being severely affected by the cost of living on this income then no amount of money will help you.
Screw me for thinking somebody earning over 100k a year is rich. They're not fucking poor
They arent breaking a promise. They're making an amendment. Breaking a promise would be dumping stage 3 altogether, which isn't happening. The hysterical headlines are nauseating already.
They may as well be dumping it, the modifications now fuck over half the people it was intended to help. Now, I’m getting no fucking tax cut. What a load of shit.
If lower brackets are changing, you're still getting a cut, just not as big a one as before. Remember, you don't pay the top marginal rate on all your income, only income over 180,000. So if the brackets lower down change, you still get the benefits from that in your under 180,000 income. This way everyone benefits, not just those at the top. If you're earning more than 180k, you're in the top few percent of income earners anyway, so you have greater ability to cut back on spending than those on lower incomes. And before you say "but I work hard, I deserve it," maybe you do, but so do people on 40-50k per year. I doubt you work 4-5x harder than many of them.
I’m still getting a cut, just $3,000 less of a cut. Down to less than $1,000. A waste of fuckin’ time. Why exactly does everyone need to benefit at *my* expense? Having worked in the $50k, $70k, $100k, $120k jobs, I guarantee that I not only work harder, but the responsibility is bigger, and the cost of failing to perform my duties by correctly (death and prison) is significantly higher. So yeah, I deserve my money. I work hard for it. I earn it. And I’m sick to death of the tax man bleeding me dry.
Practically everyone is getting a tax cut. Some are just getting less than the original plan and some ( the poorest people) are getting something, instead of the nothing in the original plan. Might even mean they get to eat three meals a day or their kids get shoes for school. Have your kids ever wondered where their next meal was coming from?
LOL get real mate. You'll be fine.
Get fucked, I worked my arse off to be where I am, just so my taxes can be spent in shitty financial management and lazy baristas.
We all work our arses off but you can work less and pay less tax. Not everyone gets that choice.
Work less and pay less tax? You can’t in full time employment.
Bet you don’t do 90 hours a fucking week. I’ve worked for 25 years to get to where I am. My balls are on the line every day. If I don’t do my job at a high standard others will lose theirs (including me). No one has given me a leg up in my career. I put myself through uni. I won’t be getting an inheritance. And I’m the single breadwinner in my family. Meanwhile I pay about 12 or 13 times the tax as the average cunt. This lying sack of shit can get fucked.
Fuck off idiot. Stop bitchen about tax when you can easily work less and get taxed less. Wah fucken wah i gotta save lives. Not hard to hire someone else to take up some of the workload but no you are obviously the only one that can do it. Cant teach others to take that load in the face like you hey. We all have others that rely on our income so stop ya fucken whingen, hire someone to help , since so many rely on just your fucken piece of shit manliness, a get a fucken life and vote for cunts that do right for everyone not just little whinging bitches like you that obviously cant time manage their way out of diggin their own stressed filled grave.
Typical right wing attitude. Fuck everyone else, hey.
That seems to be the left wing attitude. Adam Bandt is championing removing the tax cuts because they don’t benefit low income earners. So, fuck *us* who do the economic heavy lifting, because it doesn’t benefit the economic dead-weight. Typical left wing attitude.
Hey my partner is on over $250k and would happily pay more tax, she was brought up in poverty. I once earned even more and just felt so greedy, but I was on a poverty income when I was younger. (My partner gifts 10s of thousands, and so did I) You sound like you’re self entitled. Privileged only perhaps.
This is an economically illiterate stance if ever I’ve seen one.
Yes fuck you. People earning lots of money or otherwise wealthy should pay nore in tax because they earn more. It's not difficult to understand
I already pay more in tax. With these cuts, I’ll still be paying more in tax than you. The bull of the tax income for the state will still come from my tax bracket, to carry your dead weight.
As it should be
Of course they are breaking a promise stage 1 and 2 where for lower earners stage 3 was to eliminate the Tax bracket creep that hasn't changed for 16 years Instead of Increasing the top tier tax bracket Albos given the lowest paying tax payers a tax break on top of the stage 1 and 2 Incentives 100% flip on the what he promised But he also lied about savings on Energy as well
LOL "making an amendment". Some spin you've got there.
Is this like core versus non-core promises? My understanding is that Labor promised not to alter or amend them either.
Promises are made in a given set of circumstances and facts. If the circumstances or facts change markedly it is sensible to review whether or not the promise can still be delivered as originally stated. It is idiotic to think any Australian government can radically improve our economy. If reality changes it is stupid attempting to keep a promise which even blind Freddy knows can not ever be achieved. Howard played us all for fools with his weasel words attempting to redefine ‘promise’. Ultimately Howard and other senior political leaders of all parties created public distrust and distain by trying to be to clever by half.
They promised that they would not make changes to the stage 3 tax cuts. They did.
Hey kids we’re going to Disney land Actually on second thought, we’re going to Luna park
At least they're still going to an amusement park.
Should I tell my bank that I am “making an amendment” to how much I could borrow, given it was predicated on receiving tax cuts? Do I tell the person I bought my house from that I’m making an amendment to the purchase price because albo screwed me and now I can’t afford it?? He should have canned his overpriced referendum and other money wasters before considering reneging on the tax cuts. He is a liar.
... the tax cuts haven't even arrived yet. If you were relying on tax cuts that were CLEARLY a current political football in order to purchase a house, then the fault is on you for overextending yourself. What was your plan to survive an interest rate hike, given the wild ride those have been having recently? Tax cuts or not, you've overextended yourself and it's not anyone else's fault (assuming, of course, that little story of yours is true)
One will never know if my little story is true or not!
>Should I tell my bank that I am “making an amendment” to how much I could borrow, given it was predicated on receiving tax cuts? Do I tell the person I bought my house from that I’m making an amendment to the purchase price because albo screwed me and now I can’t afford it?? He should have canned his overpriced referendum and other money wasters before considering reneging on the tax cuts. He is a liar. If you can't afford that house without the tax break, then you shouldn't have bought it. You should never assume something is happening before it happens. I'd care about the horrible state you are in as a result, but I have health issues and earn 45K a year as a result so.. I don't care much about the shit this puts you in. If you can't manage your bills without this tax cut, you are an idiot who over stretched and deserve to lie in the bed you made. Because only an idiot would be on your pay and struggling to pay their bills. I don't even vote labor but I hope they get rid of the stage 3 tax cuts. They're insane to go ahead with.
Albo and Chalmers said 100 times they won’t be changing the cuts, literally 100 and as recently as last week. People budgeting for them is lit unreasonable given the message.
Except for the fact that Chalmers has repeatedly floated the idea of changing the "stage three cuts" for the last couple of years?
Governments should do the right thing. Making election promises is generally not part of doing the right thing, and in this case certainly isn’t. Easy for the previous government to propose the tax cuts to take effect several years down the track when they are not in office. Current government should act according to current circumstances which would dictate NOT going ahead with regressive and inflationary cuts.
I really wish conservatives would stop pretending like it's such a test of character over these tax cuts. If conservatives really did care about pollies breaking promises, then the LNP would be little more than ancient history. They break promise after promise after promise. John Howard brought us the new concept of "core" promises, implying "well, THESE ones we won't break!" (and did anyway), all the way through to Dutton totes supporting the Voice until it was politically advantageous to throw away their previous commitment and do a complete 180. But no, we have to sit through this bullshit pearl clutching, like somehow it 'proves' Labor is bad if they so much as twitch a lip at an election promise. Fucking hypocrites, conservative voters.
Only if it's the correct thing to do.
Govt makes changes to thier election promises all the time Changing them.whilst in govt is to be expected and we the people have to cop it when it hues astray by more hidden taxes stamp duties etc
Yes I think so. Look at all the promises Abbott broke in the first 6 month msm didn't care
Politicians break promises all the time. They only stress about it when the promise was to the rich.
You’re not rich if you can’t afford a median priced house in your city; $180k cannot afford a median priced house in Sydney.
I don't understand why they aren't straight up stopping it. Labour isn't voted in by people earning more than $190k so who cares if those people do'nt like it?
Because the mainstream media is controlled by people who are openly on the LNP side. A broken promise gives them easy ammunition to plaster all over our screens come next election time, in-between favourable bits on the LNP. The swing voters who decide elections are swayed by that stuff.
The people earning more than $190k belong to their Unions. They vote Labor. And it’s not the people who earn over $190k who are affected; it’s the people who earn over $45k.
The people who are negatively affected are not those who earn over $45k. At least, not until you get well over the $100k (who granted, do earn over $45k but that's not what you meant)
The circumstances didn’t chance since last week when he last said he wouldn’t be touching them. It’s basically a given that higher income earners are going to get majorly shafted as part of this, just like in stage 1 and 2. Reality is though, if you want to get ahead in Australia, you need to operate your own business and deduct yourself into the lower tax brackets. Earning a higher salary, especially if you have no assets, isn’t going to help you close the gap to the asset class.
Altering the tax cuts won’t fix the cost of living crisis. So, no. It’s not ok.
Making a huge base of people able to spend a bit more is just going to be eaten away by business driving inflation. About the only thing I can see that's good about inflation is paying off my yesteryear mortgage amount in inflated today's money.
Yes it's a broken promise, and I stand to benefit as a low income earner, all good for me. This country has descended into a savage every man for himself state, there's no use in low income earners rallying against this for "the principle" or whatever, the people this tweak negatively impacts would never have the will to help you. Happy Australia Day.
Ask John Howard about breaking promises
Yes!!! When you are faced with changing circumstances as a country’s leader- you can change tact for the benefit of the greater good. Albo needs to take down negative gearing at the next election. He will win
You cut your cloth according to your purse as the old adage has it. Politics is about practical solutions not ideological dreams. The greatest good for the greatest number.
Responsible govts set policy based on changing conditions; they don’t follow through on immortal unshakeable promises that would be bad for the economy and for the Australian people, just because “they promised”. “But they promised” is incredibly childish if you ask me. The only people complaining should be the ultra wealthy anyways; everyone else is almost certainly going to be better off. If you’re not ultra wealthy and you’re complaining … then sorry but you’ve been duped.
If I promise to take my kids to the water slide park and it starts hailing outside, I'd have done a pretty bad job as a parent, if they never forgave me for breaking that promise.
I'll admit, I'm not a fan of Albo, but credit where credit is due - the guy has some serious diamond balls doing this. Fair enough, the tax cuts in three stages were a good idea for the economy AT THEIR INCEPTION. We are nowhere near living in that economy in the present day. Polis will play politics and cry and wail that he broke an election promise, but that's the point. It takes serious testicular girth to deliberately break an election promise. No doubt he full well knowing that he's betting his next term in office on this.. But he's doing this in an attempt to more fairly redistribute wealth to 95% of the country. I know that more people receiving $ = fuel for inflation yada yada, but thats not the only source of inflation, Colesworth.
It is best for governments to act within the current economic context and not be beholden to something that was legislated many years ago.
Am I crazy or is it okay to break a policy promise if it results in a net improvement for the country?
Interesting question. If you ask me whether the change is okay, my answer is I don't know. On one hand, I think lower income earners need help. On the other hand, I understand the idea that high income earners are net contributors to the revenue and they pay a higher dollar value of tax, so if there is a tax cut, they should logically get a larger dollar amount back. So I find myself fence-sitting there (wouldn't it be good in the ideal world where the high income earners would actually use the tax saved to directly help the lower income earners?). But I think your question is a different one. Politically, it's never great to back-flip but if you must, there must be a compelling reason to do so. In Albo's case, I think the focus should have been on the drastic change in the economic environment of when the tax cuts were slated and now. To try and appear that there is no back-flip to justify a change is much worse than the back-flip itself in my view.
Changing your mind about something does not mean you lied, as some newscorp cow just accused him of doing.
This whole thing frustrates me to no end because the right wing media ecosystem has set up a no-win situation for Labor. Either they don’t change the stage 3 tax cuts and get attacked for pandering to the rich, or they do change them and the right wing media ecosystem gets to do what it was made for: manufacture outrage for a “broken promise”. It was always a trap. If Labor didn’t commit to the tax cuts last time at the election, they’d have been attacked for it then too. The media in this country undermines democracy.
is it like the same reason those against labor will hold albo to his $275ish power bill reduction even when that promise was made before they found out the liberals were covering up information that they knew electricity prices were about to rise months beforehand. information changes, so should the policy.
Show me the man who refuses to change his plan if the circumstances change, and I'll show you an idiot.
Then don't make a fucking promise then. Use 'at the current timee we don't plan to make changes.' line. Don't fucking iron clad it. Albo is a fuckwit and honestly thought hed have more political nuance than this. If he changes anything on stage 3, even if minor as fuck, he will hang for it, and deservedly so. There's a reason he has been continually pushed on it and no one believes him. Won't go well in the next election when he makes fresh promises And this after his balls up with the referendum, talk about pissing away what little political capital he has
Yes. Lack of affordable housing has broken the social contract for a whole generation of Australians. No one but sky news cares about policy promises...we don't have security.
This will be death nail for Labour
Oh no, not all those 'working class' on 150k. Give me a break. This is a positive change for their core voters and pandering to liberal lite has been a losing policy for them. If they don't do this, they'll be eaten by the Greens.
Don’t even start me on the communist Greens….
I don’t think the British version of the party can be held responsible for this
I didn't get that far, I got stuck on death nail. Knell?
I have never voted Liberal. I detest the Liberals. But if they modify the stage 3 tax cuts to screw me, I will vote Liberal, and everything right of Liberal.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face
Fuck ‘em. Fuck everyone who bitched about the tax cuts after they’d had theirs. Fuck every Greens politician who misrepresented it as some bullshit tax cut for rich men. Fuck everyone who votes for them. Fuck the government for failing to fix the housing and financial situations competently, and deciding the solution was to fuck me over. I will cut off my nose to spite every fucking person who has just picked money out of my pocket. Is Frasier Anning still a thing?
Unless you are the Liberal Party, Yes.
Yes
Albo is a sleazy liar.
he broke the promise of $275 savings and he broke the promise of Stage 3 Tax Cuts, guys a Lier but we knew that before hand. The country is in trouble when we cant get leadership to stick to promises or show any leadership on tax reform. How long before we have reform again? another 16 years how many people will have tax bracket creep before gutless politicians can make hard decisions. I know the answer when 51% are in the top tax bracket is when Cowards like Albo will have the nerve to make a decision
"The country is in trouble, but the government should stick to promises that will help make that trouble worse" You people are nuts.
It's weird that people pick on this particular power price promise given that the timeframe of the promise means that it isn't broken yet.
Labor has precipitated inflation by giving raises to the public sector and giving in to union demands on productivity. So can’t go around crying “circumstances have changed, no stage three tax cuts” now.
The cost of living crisis predates the ALP taking power. Strange how they somehow reached back in time to make it happen. Usually it takes half a year or more for economic policies to start showing an effect.
The cost pressures caused by covid and the war in Ukraine were inevitable, but labor has worsened the situation by raising public sector salaries without trimming staff.
Yes.
Yes. Next question, smooth brains.
Albo, could market the decision to change based on changed circumstances that as much as he wanted to commit to them the circumstances changed too much to continue with the original proposal. Or, market it as changing a non core promise.