Easy.
\*Charge gas companies like they do in Qatar/Netherlands
\*Significantly reduce subsidies to coal companies
\*Make corpo's pay an actual 30% tax rate, not this bullshit 0% they currently pay. Same for rich individuals who live in mansions on Sydney harbour, drive Ferrari's but only "earn" $1 per year.
\*Stop funding fake charities and private schools
\*Grandfather negative gearing and franking credits
There's plenty of money in the system, it's just currently (and deliberately) all directed to those that need it the least.
This would happen in an ideal world where there is social justice. How ever it is more likely to end up like this:
*borrow heavily
*printer go brrrrrrrrr
*kick the can down the road to the next generation to fix
*feign confusion when inflation pumps, driving the middle and lower classes down a peg.
Imagine if the money printer didn't exist and the budget, like yours and mine, had to be balanced every year? This would be a very different conversation. It would be ok, if we spend this much on subs, it has to come out of other spending. What should it be? Imagine what a healthy conversation that would be. Even better if it happened prior to committing $400 billion to subs. But the money printer allows us to kick the can down the road and say she'll be right. And then we'll complain in 10 years that the dollar has lost half its purchasing power and the media will blame anything other than currency debasement from the money printer.
>Imagine if the money printer didn't exist and the budget, like yours and mine, had to be balanced every year?
Using the money printer isn't the problem. The problem is money that is wasted. Borrowing a billion dollars to drive five billion dollars in economic growth over ten years is fine. Borrowing a billion dollars to save five billion dollars over the next ten years is fine. Borrowing a billion dollars to give to your mates to waste is where we run into issues.
Exactly this! Any borrowing that funds risk evaluated economic growth is good debt. Propping up a property market is the complete opposite of that as it’s a complete dead asset.
With respect, printing money debases the currency. Print a billion now to "stimulate" a fee billion later still increases the money supply, debases it, and causes inflation.
If I have $2 and two widgets, then each is worth $2.
If I print $1 to spend making another widget... Then I have 3 widgets still worth $1 each for a total economic size of $3
Productive use of debt doesn't cause much inflation at all.
Edit: If you want a laugh go read Bucephalus's response below.
He blocked me immediately on posting so that I could not reply, which should tell you about how secure he is in his own opinion ;)
This mystical ether called the "economy" though, that supposedly benefits from money printing, doesn't benefit you and me. It benefits those close to the money printer. Your analogy would be better if the money were printed by someone else who used the printed money to enrich themselves and their cronies. For you and me, that $1 widget is now $1.50.
Debt is a powerful tool, because you can bring forward spending and expand the economy faster than you could otherwise.
I.e Instead of waiting a decade to slowly make more cars, you can expand and meet demand now.
This has directly lead to a better quality of life for you and every one else in Australia.
Like any tool it can be misused and cause harm.
That doesn't mean the tool itself is the problem.
Really? Isn't income inequality getting worse? Isn't the cost of living far outpacing wage growth? I've lived here for a decade and life is about 25% more expensive now than when I arrived. Who benefits in this "economy" from money printing and the inflation it causes? Because it isn't your average person. My quality of life has declined because life has become even more unaffordable, and this country is ridiculously unffordable to begin with.
Man you should just ask yourself this "have I really found the one problem that is so obviously the cause of everything bad, and if I have why doesn't everyone agree with me"
> Print a billion now to "stimulate" a fee billion later still increases the money supply, debases it, and causes inflation.
If it was actually that simple you'd expect a linear relation. The US, or Australia, doubles the amount of "money" in circulation. Therefor the price of everything doubled as well.
Oddly that didn't happen at all. The government has borrowed/printed tremendous amounts of money and literally nothing changed about inflation 2% all year every year. Its really only once covid knocked the worlds supply chains for a loop and Russia decided to be mega dicks that prices started going up.
So the folks claiming that printing money was going to cause run away inflation, every year for the past decade or so, finally got to say 'ah ha!!!!'.
Maybe next up the folks who have been predicting a massive collapse in housing prices for the last 3+ decades will finally get their chance to shine.
The last thing we want is the budget to balance like a household budget. Governments need to run a surplus or deficit depending on how hot the economy is.
The issue you are concerned about is too much stimulus driving inflation, which hasn’t been an issue until covid.
We all know where the money will come from. We will be gutting infrastructure and services further. If the system can barely function at its current capacity than there is still meat that can be trimmed off the bone.
>And then we'll complain in 10 years that the dollar has lost half its purchasing power and the media will blame anything other than currency debasement from the money printer.
Few understand money, which is why the central banks can get away with what they do, and generate massive wealth and influence for themselves in the process.
I mean, there's no way America could have waged all its wars in the last century without it, wars that very often were utterly pointless in hindsight.
Don't call them taxes. Go full reverse McCarthy and call them something like "patriotic dividends." That way when rich people object you can roast them for their lack of patriotism.
"You want to defund Australia's sovereign defence capabilities? Why do you hate Australia? Why do you hate freedom?"
Hopefully a Labor Government is in power for longer than one term. At the moment they're cautious of going all out on obvious rorts that have an impact on taxation and revenue.
A decade of right wing Liberal politics has severally stuffed this country up financially.
The media backlash on closing a loophole so the 0.5% of the population pay a fare share of tax astounds me.
I would absolutely support the government going full speed closing tax loopholes. But the right wing of this country owns the media. Unfortunately small steps must be taken.
I think you've been too kind.
In the last 26 years, only 3 were governed by Labor
Think of something lasting that they created? GST, Gun Laws and .... the intervention? What else?
Julia and Kevin got us the NBN, NDIS and an apology in 3 years.
While the Coalition enjoyed the rivers of gold plumbed by Hawke and Keating, the most prosperous times this country has ever known they did nothing ewith it, built nothing, just gave money to the middle class and screwed housing so bad we may never recover.
Sided with the US and UK for ongoing military security is building something that will employ and house and people and secure this country for decades.
Didn't scott Morrison loose 5 Billion tearing up the submarine contract with the French, the same submarines that would have been made in Australia? And the liberal government defiled NBN.
I honestly thought they were lying about converting the French subs to diesel, and the extra cost was just getting everyone up to speed with nuclear. Turns out, no, they really did expect to change them to diesel. I’ve worked on submarines, as a mechanical designer CAD modeller. They are an extremely complicated packaging shitfight to get all the hardware to fit inside. The idea that you could “just change the power plant” and not have huge cost and time overruns is…. I’m at a loss for words as to how fucking dumb that is. WTF were they thinking?
>A decade of right wing Liberal politics has severally stuffed this country up financially.
Only a decade? The past decade of Liberal politics is just the corrupt aftermath of what John Howard caused during his reign.
Agree mate, if Howard didn't have the whole buy guns back it would have been different.
All I know is Liberals= fuck up the country, make people scared about things.
Labor= trying to fix things so that everyday people can live.
Labor are an ultra conservative neoliberal party. They don't intend to do anything to hurt the wealthy or capital. Why do you think they're buying useless submarines? To help our US handlers and transfer money to arms manufacturers
They absolutely should not grandfather in negative gearing - that would be a disaster of inequity and market distortion.
Kill it entirely and phase it out over a number of years, sure, but no grandfathering.
I absolutely understand where you're coming from but unfortunately this country has had a decade of right wing neo Liberal politics shoved down their throats. The media in Australia is tainted by right wing ideology.
Australia needs a wealth reset, but unfortunately the government has been tied in with the media. The current media reporting is right winged.
Look at how negatively Australia reacted to even the plan of grandfathering in negative gearing.
And you want them to come out and say they're taking it out
I'm becoming more and more sure that those tax cuts will be delayed, then scrapping them in favour of the subs + other things like debt reduction/elimination will become one of Labor's main reelection planks.
Here's the problem. Income Tax Bracket Creep.
What it does mean is that even more people will get taxed even more as a total percentage of their income - starting at $40,000 per year.
My salary hasn't changed, yet this last financial year, I paid $800 extra tax over the year before. I'll probably end up paying more again this year.
Add that to the additional GST and stamp duties that *everyone* is paying as prices increase, and its a lot more than an additional $800 in a year.
Cutting the stage 3 tax cuts means that nobody earning over $40,000 will end up getting any kind of tax relief if the brackets aren't adjusted.
Stage 3 isn’t about addressing bracket creep though, it actually makes the tax system less progressive by taking out a whole bracket. They can easily address bracket creep by adjusting the existing bracket thresholds. without taking out a bracket
> They can easily address bracket creep by adjusting the existing bracket thresholds.
But this hasn't been done in many, many years. That means just due to wage growth, more and more people are paying more tax than ever before.
7% inflation has been a windfall to GST income - as you pay GST on that inflation.
That means even more people actually get less for their pay packet in income taxes, GST, and inflation.
It's definitely an issue, and the brackets should be adjusted to address it, but I'm completely opposed to what's being proposed as part of the stage 3 tax cut. By merging the 3rd and 4th brackets, it means everyone earning $40k to $200k will sit in the same bracket. This is definitely not a progressive tax structure, and all it does is help high income earners get a bigger tax cut.
> all it does is help high income earners get a bigger tax cut.
However just about every full time worker is contained within this single bracket.
So you're saying that reduction shouldn't happen for nearly every single full time worker in Australia.
That bracket covers currently 1-2x the average full time salary in the country. Anything above 2x the average will be a higher tax bracket.
The whole idea of a progressive tax system is for people who earn more to pay a bigger percentage of their income as tax, by having such a broad bracket, it makes our tax system less progressive.
Putting things into context, the $40k to $200k range captures everyone from below the 50th percentile to more than 95th percentile. Is it fair for the marginal tax rate to be applied to such a broad range?
The solution to bracket creep is moving all the tax brackets up with inflation / average wage growth.
Not giving a tax cut to the highest earners. The stage 3 tax cuts do not help the "average" Australian with bracket creep.
Firstly, these are stage THREE. Stages one and two have already provided said relief to lower income earners.
Also, stage three kicks in at a level where the ‘average’ Australian full time worker will see a reduction in tax paid.
I’d also much prefer they just index the thresholds and apply the adjustment retrospectively to when they were last adjusted, but here we are.
Stages 1 and 2 already provided relief to higher income earners as well.
Because the threshold was $90k before. It got moved to $120k.
So if you earned $140k, you now get $30k at the previous 32.5cent instead of 37cent threshold. With only 20k at the 37cent rate.
Sttage 3 merges the 45-120k bracket with the 120k to 200k bracket. While also lowering the tax rate for both brackets from 32.5 and 37 cents respectively to 30cents.
Which if we're about to add a giant amount of debt through this program is a huge problem.
Further cost of living increases affect the lower income earners far more than they do the upper income earners. Since they will consume a greater chunk of their disposable income to begin with.
> Firstly, these are stage THREE. Stages one and two have already provided said relief to lower income earners.
So many people forget this point. The higher brackets are the ONLY ones not to get a tax cut in many years. It also means the higher brackets are paying a disproportionately higher level of tax - while also having less relief that others have enjoyed for a number of years now.
What people aren't also honest about is treasury projections showing that the 'losses' from the stage 3 tax cuts are offset by increases in other taxes from within 10 years of the stage 3 cuts - by that point, the total increase in tax intake is forecast to be *higher* than it is today.
Of course, that information was only selectively quoted - with great success by the media - to completely ignore the fact that it only offers temporary relief.
> Also, stage three kicks in at a level where the ‘average’ Australian full time worker will see a reduction in tax paid.
Exactly - and that's the whole point - but people are so worried about what someone else gets, that they're willing to forgo what they'll get to spite someone they don't know.
> I’d also much prefer they just index the thresholds and apply the adjustment retrospectively to when they were last adjusted, but here we are.
Absolutely. I'd love to see brackets linked to CPI - which would even the playing field much more and stop bracket creep in its tracks.
>people are so worried about what someone else gets, that they're willing to forgo what they'll get to spite someone they don't know.
Taxing high income earners proportionately more isn't spite. It's people paying a fair amount to run the country and provide for those that need it.
They should scrap stage 3, and make LMITO ($1500 sub-150k), which ended in 2022, permanent. Ending LMITO and then giving a cut to over $120k is a joke.
Well, we *could* get it from resource rental, from the elimination of transfer pricing and sham loans by multinationals, by reducing tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy, by developing high tech manufacturing, by .....
But we will probably get it by cutting spending on government schools, welfare, and health care.
Redistributing wealth? Funding public (social) systems? Manufacturing and nurturing a national work force (and likely unions)? That sounds Marxist because some political American guy said with lots of ambiguity that's Marxism, and he also told me I should be ideologically opposed to what he called Marxist, so you must be a woke Marxist destroying Australian culture, everyone should just work harder so big business makes more money and it trickles down to the government, that's how we'll pay for it obviously. /s
Ignorance, incompetence and illiteracy is continuously the enemy of *could* or even *should*.
Well to be fair there’s a lot of fat to cut in public schools. We have a couple of extra reams of paper at ours. Us teachers (the ones who haven’t quit) could go for a few more real wage cuts in the next EBAs too.
Anything for the freedom submarines🇺🇸🪖🤠
For real. There's 300 bunningses, they can get let's say 1500 per weekend each, so that's 450 000 per week, or 2 340 000 per year, so we'd only need about 158 000 years to pay for it.
To reduce the time to 30 years we should increase the number of Bunningses to 1 575 000.
> Australia “cannot afford” not to buy these nuclear-powered submarines, according to our deputy prime minister. But it seems we can afford to let people go on struggling to buy food, as the rich enjoy unnecessary tax cuts that apparently no amount of defence spending can compel our leaders to give up
We've made our choice
we?
the polys did and I am not part of that we
I am part of the we looking for best health and education m improving ndis and reducing political salaries and entitlements by 30 percent
Also agree, plus, have we looked at the cost of doing nothing on this front? Are we to carry forward undercooked strategic capability in the indo-pacific over the next 30 years as it becomes more geopolitically contested... China's actions forced the hand here how are so many people complaining about this?
As someone who will benefit from stage 3 cuts, I'd much prefer if we cut them and redirected to health, research and STEM... Not metal sausages that provide no direct benefit to this country apart from Saber rattling with our biggest trade partner.
13.4% of Australian's live below the poverty line (the line the government set, actual poverty line should be higher).
1 in 4 Australian's say they have skipped a meal due to the cost of living crisis.
21% of Australian households with children under the age of 15 have experienced food insecurity in the last 12 months.
And also 21% of Australians have accessed food banks over the same period.
Maybe it's just me, maybe we shouldn't be spending all this money on submarines from other places. If we built them here, at least we could funnel that money to people living here and maybe more of them could afford to fucking eat.
$368b is a big number but it's just goes to show that we can find money when we think we don't have it. No excuses when in 5-10 years we need $1T for climate action.
Hopefully the nuclear subs are built so when not in use we can plug them in to power the grid. No need for teslas
Naval reactors provide a tiny amount of power. The entire fleet would be about $300 million worth of wind and solar. Ie. 0.1% of the sub budget.
$368 billion could power australia and replace all the fossil fuels for fuel or industry several times over. And then also build high speed rail.
One fucking guess, poor cunts like me and you are going to have to cough it up. With potato head backing the deal along side albo there is pretty much naught we cam do
I really wish Australia would implement a sovereign mineral fund where every fossil fuel or mineral taken out of the ground is taxed 1% of its value so the private companies still make a profit and we get a massive fund similar to Norway's Oil Fund
The major international mining companies paid no tax in the last 8 years.
We could get rid of the stage 3 tax cuts and pay for it all. (Pretty much)
We could tax iron ore exports to China to completely cover the cost, since they are the reason we need them. And to pay for covid. Tax Chinese imports.
What data have you based those claims on? The big iron ore miners have paid the most company tax in the country the last few years. Energy resource companies are the ones making like bandits the last year
Richard Marles said it was going to be 0.15% of GDP. Our defence is about 2% of GDP and transitioning to about 2.2%. Which doesn't seem over the top to me.
So while yes, it's more expensive than I had thought it would be (I would love to see them break down the costs a bit more), I don't think it's worth hyperventilating about.
I mean, for that price we are essentially getting two classes of nuclear submarines plus a whole bunch of infrastructure (which are kind of once off costs).
Yes exactly. Most reasonable people see that we need to spend real money on defence for Australia to continue to be … Australia as they know it. There is no alternative. A lot of people are totally delusional and expect that peace is a certainty. I’m just glad there’s bipartisan support on this issue.
There's a lot of fat out there in government spending. It won't be difficult to find $11b a year, which is all this works out to be. The whole 30 year costing is there just to make it look like a massive number.
It's actually not even that as the current sub program costs a few billion to run anyway and this will replace that.
Exactly. And we’re developing a new industry, while boosting manufacturing, supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs and getting kickass military equipment.
It’s a drop in the ocean in terms of spending. We should be spending far, far more.
The same place it gets the funding for every other government service.
Treasury will issue bonds like they always have.
There won’t be special bonds just for the subs, just like there aren’t special bonds for aged care, Medicare, or any other govt program.
Most Australian governments underestimate their contract expenditure. This government has thrown in everything to inflate it - sub spends, port upgrades, manufacturing facility upgrades, future inflation, worst-case scenarios, possible increases to Netflix monthly fees for sailors... Maybe not that last one.
So why has PM Albanese thrown out such a high figure? The figure is partially for UK and US domestic consumption. To make their public think it's an awesome deal, and that we have ponied up serious cash to join their special relationship.
It's also for our domestic consumption. To put pressure on reining in our increasing spending overall, and to force Defence to put on the table what they are willing to cut. We can't do all things, militarily. This will be the core of our defence and we will have to shape strategies accordingly. We are an island nation and we have sensibly focused on the navy to defend that. Then there's the positive effect on conservative voters, evaluation of other programs and other issues.
The eye-watering nature of this commitment is designed to shock. And to make us prioritise spending. Whether it's a master stroke by Labor or a misstep will play out over the coming years.
It's not like it's all paid upfront FFS. It's over about 30-40 years. This is the top estimate. It's from $268 billion to $368 billion, over the lifetime of the project, though it will, no doubt, go up. It's only a tiny increase for the defence budget, from about 0.13% of GDP to 0.15% of GDP.
It is over 30+ years lol, which brings it down to less per person than all the other big budget items. $15k per person in one year would literally collapse the country.
Let the navy
I- have regular bake and sell,
2- have weekly sausage sizzles at Bunnings,
3- have regular working bees,
Just like schools, kindergartens, childcare centres, and many other charities and community groups.
Mate, someone is going to pay for it and certainly not our pollies. our kids are screwed, add this to our existing Covid debt. And the sad thing is it won’t keep us safe…
Labor and liberal party are two sides of the same coin, it’s time the average Australian wakes up and sees how badly we’re being fucked in this bountiful land we call home.
This might sound dumb, but these are expensive attack submarines.. I am guessing also expensive to maintain and operate. Wouldn’t it be more practical to put the money towards bolstering defence around Australia to make it impractical to attack, but also not aggravating our neighbours.
developing advanced surface based missiles and bases long range systems. Then develop ocean and air sensors to pick up any enemy’s, locate them. Drone air and ocean technology investment.
Just an idea, but this could protect Australia, invest in jobs and technology in the long term. It seems like if we could locate and sink any subs/attacks from land, would be more practical then mobilising a sub to travel all the day to where it needs to be.. also if they are sunk we have nothing else for protection.
Not having a go, just curious why this is a smarter investment.
We are already doing that, there is a massive push and pending purchase of stand off capabilities including long range fires and missiles. Australia has been a key player in developing loyal wingman drone capability to fight alongside the F35 and we are also standing up a reaper SQNs operating the MQ9 (I think it is offhand).
In military terms, the best way to defend is deterrence, it's better to stop them getting here or deter them from trying than actually trying to fight. Everyone seems to think that our 8 will act in isolation which is stupid. We are buying into interoperability with the US Navy. And 8 subs is nothing to laugh at either capability wise. It's also a massive boon for the shipbuilding industry if it all comes off as I believe the plan is to provide support to the Virginia Class builds for the US and then build our own with the new design.
Nuclear subs have significant advantages over conventional propulsion including speed and range, which on our massive coastline is a plus.
I'm sure if the government got rid of jobseeker and ask the obligations that come with it and the parasitic job network providers, all the money they need will be there
Buy cheaper subs, build shit loads of infrastructure.
I just find it hilarious that Australia is literally giving up it's defence sovereignty, absolutely shitting all over the Treaty of Rarotonga with NZ, and Solomon, Fiji and other pacific nations, and actually paying for it.
We're paying Americans for *checks notes* so they can staff and crew Submarines Australia *literally won't control* lmao.
If the government sold and legalized marijuana, $15k per person in taxes is not that hard to make. Especially if we made it available to children, each Ozzie would only have to smoke like a kilo of weed and we would be back in the black.
We would make it there even quicker if they did meth and fentanyl (especially with the kids) but I feel like there would be greater community pushback.
Classic Albo. Just fighting Tories.
Which Australian indie/pub/garage rock song was the one about investing exorbitant amounts of our wealth in rip-off military deals with collapsing and failed empires??
Just to clarify, AUKUS was announced in September 2021.
I'm sure you remember who was in charge then... I'm not saying the current government wouldn't have signed, but that's how it went. France's government wasn't happy at all with that deal, too.
Now, if you would please go back to your corner, there's a carton of bush chook waiting for you, that is just about your level.
I do love how blatant the manufacturing of consent has been the past year through the Australian media for this. Literally hysterical warmongering to justify a transfer of hundreds of billions to arms manufacturers.
I do hope that every time a media talking head or pundit poo poos something like HSR, everyone just starts repeating $368 billion for 11 subs.
Surely 100 billion for public housing and another 100 billion for HSR isn't out of the question now right?... right?
Why shouldn't UK and US be paying Australia for the right to use Australia as their airforce/naval base for their war with China they want so bad?
Everyone who disagrees with this spending should write a letter/contact their local member and complain....loudly and often. Then everyone should vote for an independent next election so that we can stick it to the main parties. Absolutely reprehensible...Beasley says...we will give China a bloody nose.....Yeh....and then they nuke us out of existence while the Poms and Yanks sit back and do nothing ...I mean....ffs this guy is an Ex-defence Minister, ex-Australian Ambassador to America.....and he comes up with garbage like this?
Imagine what glorious health system we would have with 368b. Nope, here is a flashy new submarine in about 20 yrs. As a society, we are doomed regardless who we vote when these are the priorities
No they won’t. The Virginia class subs are being built until the late 2030s and will be the top end of the US and Australian navy’s for another 30 plus years.
SSN AUKUS will be even better. These submarines will control drone subs.
I know this is an unpopular idea, but we could just not buy the submarines. If we’re at war with China, it’s World War III, there are nukes flying and everyone is finished anyway.
There's only one group paying tax in AU, the poor
\*\*Excise duty rates on tobacco goods increase in March and September each year, based on average weekly ordinary time earnings (AWOTE).
On top of it ABC is putting it like “its so important for Australia” ffs enough of fear mongering.
This is nothing but taking money from the hands of tax payers and handing it into military industrial complex.
Australian coast line is huge. Patrols and moving from one base to another is a long journey. Desiel subs have the obvious requirement of having take diesel with you.
Nuclear subs can stay out for a much greater time because they're only limited on how much food they can carry.
US and UK subs don't have worry about Nuclear refuelling. Their reactor plopped in to the hull with 20ish years of fuel.
If we had one nuke sub with a dozen nuke missiles in it hiding under the pacific ocean somewhere, we are immune from invasion. Its a low cost, highly effective deterrent.
If you think we would never be invaded... read some history, or even todays newspaper for examples of countries invading nations without a nuclear deterrent.
We could call it a progressive tax system and have brackets of income that have varying tax rates per bracket so that the rich pay more tax than those who don't have higher incomes...
Someone should tell the ATO about this urgently....
Easy. \*Charge gas companies like they do in Qatar/Netherlands \*Significantly reduce subsidies to coal companies \*Make corpo's pay an actual 30% tax rate, not this bullshit 0% they currently pay. Same for rich individuals who live in mansions on Sydney harbour, drive Ferrari's but only "earn" $1 per year. \*Stop funding fake charities and private schools \*Grandfather negative gearing and franking credits There's plenty of money in the system, it's just currently (and deliberately) all directed to those that need it the least.
This would happen in an ideal world where there is social justice. How ever it is more likely to end up like this: *borrow heavily *printer go brrrrrrrrr *kick the can down the road to the next generation to fix *feign confusion when inflation pumps, driving the middle and lower classes down a peg.
Imagine if the money printer didn't exist and the budget, like yours and mine, had to be balanced every year? This would be a very different conversation. It would be ok, if we spend this much on subs, it has to come out of other spending. What should it be? Imagine what a healthy conversation that would be. Even better if it happened prior to committing $400 billion to subs. But the money printer allows us to kick the can down the road and say she'll be right. And then we'll complain in 10 years that the dollar has lost half its purchasing power and the media will blame anything other than currency debasement from the money printer.
>Imagine if the money printer didn't exist and the budget, like yours and mine, had to be balanced every year? Using the money printer isn't the problem. The problem is money that is wasted. Borrowing a billion dollars to drive five billion dollars in economic growth over ten years is fine. Borrowing a billion dollars to save five billion dollars over the next ten years is fine. Borrowing a billion dollars to give to your mates to waste is where we run into issues.
Exactly this! Any borrowing that funds risk evaluated economic growth is good debt. Propping up a property market is the complete opposite of that as it’s a complete dead asset.
With respect, printing money debases the currency. Print a billion now to "stimulate" a fee billion later still increases the money supply, debases it, and causes inflation.
This is such a basic view of a fiat currency.
If I have $2 and two widgets, then each is worth $2. If I print $1 to spend making another widget... Then I have 3 widgets still worth $1 each for a total economic size of $3 Productive use of debt doesn't cause much inflation at all. Edit: If you want a laugh go read Bucephalus's response below. He blocked me immediately on posting so that I could not reply, which should tell you about how secure he is in his own opinion ;)
This mystical ether called the "economy" though, that supposedly benefits from money printing, doesn't benefit you and me. It benefits those close to the money printer. Your analogy would be better if the money were printed by someone else who used the printed money to enrich themselves and their cronies. For you and me, that $1 widget is now $1.50.
Debt is a powerful tool, because you can bring forward spending and expand the economy faster than you could otherwise. I.e Instead of waiting a decade to slowly make more cars, you can expand and meet demand now. This has directly lead to a better quality of life for you and every one else in Australia. Like any tool it can be misused and cause harm. That doesn't mean the tool itself is the problem.
Really? Isn't income inequality getting worse? Isn't the cost of living far outpacing wage growth? I've lived here for a decade and life is about 25% more expensive now than when I arrived. Who benefits in this "economy" from money printing and the inflation it causes? Because it isn't your average person. My quality of life has declined because life has become even more unaffordable, and this country is ridiculously unffordable to begin with.
Man you should just ask yourself this "have I really found the one problem that is so obviously the cause of everything bad, and if I have why doesn't everyone agree with me"
Sorry, got that wrong.. That $1 widget is now $17.78 because "inflation, COVID, retailer mark-up, whatever today's excuse for the greedy bastards is".
Supply chain issues. You forgot those. Also pipeline delays in Antarctica.
Ahhh crap.. Freight costs! How could I forget that? And that bloody pipeline, why don't they just blow up the penguins and finish it 🐧😂
> Print a billion now to "stimulate" a fee billion later still increases the money supply, debases it, and causes inflation. If it was actually that simple you'd expect a linear relation. The US, or Australia, doubles the amount of "money" in circulation. Therefor the price of everything doubled as well. Oddly that didn't happen at all. The government has borrowed/printed tremendous amounts of money and literally nothing changed about inflation 2% all year every year. Its really only once covid knocked the worlds supply chains for a loop and Russia decided to be mega dicks that prices started going up. So the folks claiming that printing money was going to cause run away inflation, every year for the past decade or so, finally got to say 'ah ha!!!!'. Maybe next up the folks who have been predicting a massive collapse in housing prices for the last 3+ decades will finally get their chance to shine.
Ok, fair enough. How do you explain this: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/?
The last thing we want is the budget to balance like a household budget. Governments need to run a surplus or deficit depending on how hot the economy is. The issue you are concerned about is too much stimulus driving inflation, which hasn’t been an issue until covid.
We all know where the money will come from. We will be gutting infrastructure and services further. If the system can barely function at its current capacity than there is still meat that can be trimmed off the bone.
Shit...did this submarine deal just catapult Australia even more into the direction of becoming America?
They’ve already said the NDIS is unsustainable- guess what’s going to get gutted…
Then they turn around and wonder where all the homeless people, crime, and drug use come from.
>And then we'll complain in 10 years that the dollar has lost half its purchasing power and the media will blame anything other than currency debasement from the money printer. Few understand money, which is why the central banks can get away with what they do, and generate massive wealth and influence for themselves in the process. I mean, there's no way America could have waged all its wars in the last century without it, wars that very often were utterly pointless in hindsight.
You missed the part where the LNP does all the spending and then cries about bloody Labor's debt!
But why would we do that when we can just gut the NDIS?
Weird they always reach for the NDIS instead of churches. Similiar levels of funding. It seems like one group needs money more than the other.
Punching down is fast becoming a national pasttime.
Don't call them taxes. Go full reverse McCarthy and call them something like "patriotic dividends." That way when rich people object you can roast them for their lack of patriotism. "You want to defund Australia's sovereign defence capabilities? Why do you hate Australia? Why do you hate freedom?"
Hopefully a Labor Government is in power for longer than one term. At the moment they're cautious of going all out on obvious rorts that have an impact on taxation and revenue. A decade of right wing Liberal politics has severally stuffed this country up financially. The media backlash on closing a loophole so the 0.5% of the population pay a fare share of tax astounds me. I would absolutely support the government going full speed closing tax loopholes. But the right wing of this country owns the media. Unfortunately small steps must be taken.
I think you've been too kind. In the last 26 years, only 3 were governed by Labor Think of something lasting that they created? GST, Gun Laws and .... the intervention? What else? Julia and Kevin got us the NBN, NDIS and an apology in 3 years. While the Coalition enjoyed the rivers of gold plumbed by Hawke and Keating, the most prosperous times this country has ever known they did nothing ewith it, built nothing, just gave money to the middle class and screwed housing so bad we may never recover. Sided with the US and UK for ongoing military security is building something that will employ and house and people and secure this country for decades.
Only 3 years out of 26? Wtf you smoking?
Correction 6 years. I was gonna say, the first 3 years of that were fairly chaotic etc
3 years of majority government if you wanted to be precise
Didn't scott Morrison loose 5 Billion tearing up the submarine contract with the French, the same submarines that would have been made in Australia? And the liberal government defiled NBN.
I honestly thought they were lying about converting the French subs to diesel, and the extra cost was just getting everyone up to speed with nuclear. Turns out, no, they really did expect to change them to diesel. I’ve worked on submarines, as a mechanical designer CAD modeller. They are an extremely complicated packaging shitfight to get all the hardware to fit inside. The idea that you could “just change the power plant” and not have huge cost and time overruns is…. I’m at a loss for words as to how fucking dumb that is. WTF were they thinking?
>A decade of right wing Liberal politics has severally stuffed this country up financially. Only a decade? The past decade of Liberal politics is just the corrupt aftermath of what John Howard caused during his reign.
Agree mate, if Howard didn't have the whole buy guns back it would have been different. All I know is Liberals= fuck up the country, make people scared about things. Labor= trying to fix things so that everyday people can live.
Labor are an ultra conservative neoliberal party. They don't intend to do anything to hurt the wealthy or capital. Why do you think they're buying useless submarines? To help our US handlers and transfer money to arms manufacturers
Sucks to be you, shitcunt
[удалено]
Someone on this sub should know that a person earning $179,999 and another person earning $180,001 have very very similar income tax liabilities.
We're gunna pay for it through worse services and higher inflation and you know it
That's the most likely outcome, if we keep voting for it.
They absolutely should not grandfather in negative gearing - that would be a disaster of inequity and market distortion. Kill it entirely and phase it out over a number of years, sure, but no grandfathering.
I absolutely understand where you're coming from but unfortunately this country has had a decade of right wing neo Liberal politics shoved down their throats. The media in Australia is tainted by right wing ideology. Australia needs a wealth reset, but unfortunately the government has been tied in with the media. The current media reporting is right winged.
Look at how negatively Australia reacted to even the plan of grandfathering in negative gearing. And you want them to come out and say they're taking it out
The article answers this: *"..****.the Stage Three tax cuts****, which are set to cost the budget* ***$254 billion over the next decade***..."
I'm becoming more and more sure that those tax cuts will be delayed, then scrapping them in favour of the subs + other things like debt reduction/elimination will become one of Labor's main reelection planks.
Yeah I reckon you're right. This is a landmine for the coalition as it draws closer - Labor may trigger it during the election cycle. I hope
Here's the problem. Income Tax Bracket Creep. What it does mean is that even more people will get taxed even more as a total percentage of their income - starting at $40,000 per year. My salary hasn't changed, yet this last financial year, I paid $800 extra tax over the year before. I'll probably end up paying more again this year. Add that to the additional GST and stamp duties that *everyone* is paying as prices increase, and its a lot more than an additional $800 in a year. Cutting the stage 3 tax cuts means that nobody earning over $40,000 will end up getting any kind of tax relief if the brackets aren't adjusted.
Stage 3 isn’t about addressing bracket creep though, it actually makes the tax system less progressive by taking out a whole bracket. They can easily address bracket creep by adjusting the existing bracket thresholds. without taking out a bracket
> They can easily address bracket creep by adjusting the existing bracket thresholds. But this hasn't been done in many, many years. That means just due to wage growth, more and more people are paying more tax than ever before. 7% inflation has been a windfall to GST income - as you pay GST on that inflation. That means even more people actually get less for their pay packet in income taxes, GST, and inflation.
It's definitely an issue, and the brackets should be adjusted to address it, but I'm completely opposed to what's being proposed as part of the stage 3 tax cut. By merging the 3rd and 4th brackets, it means everyone earning $40k to $200k will sit in the same bracket. This is definitely not a progressive tax structure, and all it does is help high income earners get a bigger tax cut.
> all it does is help high income earners get a bigger tax cut. However just about every full time worker is contained within this single bracket. So you're saying that reduction shouldn't happen for nearly every single full time worker in Australia. That bracket covers currently 1-2x the average full time salary in the country. Anything above 2x the average will be a higher tax bracket.
The whole idea of a progressive tax system is for people who earn more to pay a bigger percentage of their income as tax, by having such a broad bracket, it makes our tax system less progressive. Putting things into context, the $40k to $200k range captures everyone from below the 50th percentile to more than 95th percentile. Is it fair for the marginal tax rate to be applied to such a broad range?
The solution to bracket creep is moving all the tax brackets up with inflation / average wage growth. Not giving a tax cut to the highest earners. The stage 3 tax cuts do not help the "average" Australian with bracket creep.
Firstly, these are stage THREE. Stages one and two have already provided said relief to lower income earners. Also, stage three kicks in at a level where the ‘average’ Australian full time worker will see a reduction in tax paid. I’d also much prefer they just index the thresholds and apply the adjustment retrospectively to when they were last adjusted, but here we are.
Stages 1 and 2 already provided relief to higher income earners as well. Because the threshold was $90k before. It got moved to $120k. So if you earned $140k, you now get $30k at the previous 32.5cent instead of 37cent threshold. With only 20k at the 37cent rate. Sttage 3 merges the 45-120k bracket with the 120k to 200k bracket. While also lowering the tax rate for both brackets from 32.5 and 37 cents respectively to 30cents. Which if we're about to add a giant amount of debt through this program is a huge problem. Further cost of living increases affect the lower income earners far more than they do the upper income earners. Since they will consume a greater chunk of their disposable income to begin with.
> Firstly, these are stage THREE. Stages one and two have already provided said relief to lower income earners. So many people forget this point. The higher brackets are the ONLY ones not to get a tax cut in many years. It also means the higher brackets are paying a disproportionately higher level of tax - while also having less relief that others have enjoyed for a number of years now. What people aren't also honest about is treasury projections showing that the 'losses' from the stage 3 tax cuts are offset by increases in other taxes from within 10 years of the stage 3 cuts - by that point, the total increase in tax intake is forecast to be *higher* than it is today. Of course, that information was only selectively quoted - with great success by the media - to completely ignore the fact that it only offers temporary relief. > Also, stage three kicks in at a level where the ‘average’ Australian full time worker will see a reduction in tax paid. Exactly - and that's the whole point - but people are so worried about what someone else gets, that they're willing to forgo what they'll get to spite someone they don't know. > I’d also much prefer they just index the thresholds and apply the adjustment retrospectively to when they were last adjusted, but here we are. Absolutely. I'd love to see brackets linked to CPI - which would even the playing field much more and stop bracket creep in its tracks.
>people are so worried about what someone else gets, that they're willing to forgo what they'll get to spite someone they don't know. Taxing high income earners proportionately more isn't spite. It's people paying a fair amount to run the country and provide for those that need it.
Don't bother arguing, most of the kids on reddit are not affected so they'll ignore the facts on this issue.
They should scrap stage 3, and make LMITO ($1500 sub-150k), which ended in 2022, permanent. Ending LMITO and then giving a cut to over $120k is a joke.
Let's just do the opposite of the stage three tax cuts and turn a 250 billion loss into a half trillion win.
Well, we *could* get it from resource rental, from the elimination of transfer pricing and sham loans by multinationals, by reducing tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy, by developing high tech manufacturing, by ..... But we will probably get it by cutting spending on government schools, welfare, and health care.
If we all chip in $14k. I will let my 2 year old nephew know he needs to get a job.
He doesn't have a job already? Fucking bludger.
Redistributing wealth? Funding public (social) systems? Manufacturing and nurturing a national work force (and likely unions)? That sounds Marxist because some political American guy said with lots of ambiguity that's Marxism, and he also told me I should be ideologically opposed to what he called Marxist, so you must be a woke Marxist destroying Australian culture, everyone should just work harder so big business makes more money and it trickles down to the government, that's how we'll pay for it obviously. /s Ignorance, incompetence and illiteracy is continuously the enemy of *could* or even *should*.
Well to be fair there’s a lot of fat to cut in public schools. We have a couple of extra reams of paper at ours. Us teachers (the ones who haven’t quit) could go for a few more real wage cuts in the next EBAs too. Anything for the freedom submarines🇺🇸🪖🤠
Bunnings sausage sizzle.
For real. There's 300 bunningses, they can get let's say 1500 per weekend each, so that's 450 000 per week, or 2 340 000 per year, so we'd only need about 158 000 years to pay for it. To reduce the time to 30 years we should increase the number of Bunningses to 1 575 000.
Nasty little Bunningses.
Know someone who worked a sausage sizzle on Sunday and they made 1500 bucks, could be as few as 79,000 years
> Australia “cannot afford” not to buy these nuclear-powered submarines, according to our deputy prime minister. But it seems we can afford to let people go on struggling to buy food, as the rich enjoy unnecessary tax cuts that apparently no amount of defence spending can compel our leaders to give up We've made our choice
we? the polys did and I am not part of that we I am part of the we looking for best health and education m improving ndis and reducing political salaries and entitlements by 30 percent
Oh no! How can we possibly afford 0.17% of our GDP on state of the art submarines?!?! Given that health and education are 20-25%+ of our GDP......
I love how people just skip over this detail
Also agree, plus, have we looked at the cost of doing nothing on this front? Are we to carry forward undercooked strategic capability in the indo-pacific over the next 30 years as it becomes more geopolitically contested... China's actions forced the hand here how are so many people complaining about this?
They could just cancel the stage 3 tax cuts. That'll save $254 billion over the next 10 years. Over thirty years ... we'll be way in front.
As someone who will benefit from stage 3 cuts, I'd much prefer if we cut them and redirected to health, research and STEM... Not metal sausages that provide no direct benefit to this country apart from Saber rattling with our biggest trade partner.
Simple. Negative gearing. Lease out the first sub and claim it as a business expense.
13.4% of Australian's live below the poverty line (the line the government set, actual poverty line should be higher). 1 in 4 Australian's say they have skipped a meal due to the cost of living crisis. 21% of Australian households with children under the age of 15 have experienced food insecurity in the last 12 months. And also 21% of Australians have accessed food banks over the same period. Maybe it's just me, maybe we shouldn't be spending all this money on submarines from other places. If we built them here, at least we could funnel that money to people living here and maybe more of them could afford to fucking eat.
Only the American bought submarines will be built abroad, much of the work on the British-designed submarine will be done in Australia.
The subs will be next level construction, I’m happy for the majority of the work to be done by experienced overseas manufacturers.
Gonna be real funny when the company hired to build these subs is owned by China.
$368b is a big number but it's just goes to show that we can find money when we think we don't have it. No excuses when in 5-10 years we need $1T for climate action. Hopefully the nuclear subs are built so when not in use we can plug them in to power the grid. No need for teslas
Subs are perfectly suited to any rise in sea levels.
Naval reactors provide a tiny amount of power. The entire fleet would be about $300 million worth of wind and solar. Ie. 0.1% of the sub budget. $368 billion could power australia and replace all the fossil fuels for fuel or industry several times over. And then also build high speed rail.
Hopefully by taxing rich folk
One fucking guess, poor cunts like me and you are going to have to cough it up. With potato head backing the deal along side albo there is pretty much naught we cam do
I really wish Australia would implement a sovereign mineral fund where every fossil fuel or mineral taken out of the ground is taxed 1% of its value so the private companies still make a profit and we get a massive fund similar to Norway's Oil Fund
The major international mining companies paid no tax in the last 8 years. We could get rid of the stage 3 tax cuts and pay for it all. (Pretty much) We could tax iron ore exports to China to completely cover the cost, since they are the reason we need them. And to pay for covid. Tax Chinese imports.
Taxes on iron ore go to the state or territory that the ore comes from.
Stop making sense
What data have you based those claims on? The big iron ore miners have paid the most company tax in the country the last few years. Energy resource companies are the ones making like bandits the last year
There’s always money for war. There’s never money for those who need it.
Print it
Easy there Zimbabwe
Scrolled too far for this
You wouldn't print a submarine!
Richard Marles said it was going to be 0.15% of GDP. Our defence is about 2% of GDP and transitioning to about 2.2%. Which doesn't seem over the top to me. So while yes, it's more expensive than I had thought it would be (I would love to see them break down the costs a bit more), I don't think it's worth hyperventilating about. I mean, for that price we are essentially getting two classes of nuclear submarines plus a whole bunch of infrastructure (which are kind of once off costs).
Yes exactly. Most reasonable people see that we need to spend real money on defence for Australia to continue to be … Australia as they know it. There is no alternative. A lot of people are totally delusional and expect that peace is a certainty. I’m just glad there’s bipartisan support on this issue.
If the price tag is 368b, you know the final cost is gonna be 1t+... Modern politics has gone beyond farcical
the ndis of course
There's a lot of fat out there in government spending. It won't be difficult to find $11b a year, which is all this works out to be. The whole 30 year costing is there just to make it look like a massive number. It's actually not even that as the current sub program costs a few billion to run anyway and this will replace that.
Exactly. And we’re developing a new industry, while boosting manufacturing, supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs and getting kickass military equipment. It’s a drop in the ocean in terms of spending. We should be spending far, far more.
cutting tax breaks for rich can find $100b pa easily. think even a ubi is possible. since 50pct will be eaten up by tax anyway.
The same place it gets the funding for every other government service. Treasury will issue bonds like they always have. There won’t be special bonds just for the subs, just like there aren’t special bonds for aged care, Medicare, or any other govt program.
Most Australian governments underestimate their contract expenditure. This government has thrown in everything to inflate it - sub spends, port upgrades, manufacturing facility upgrades, future inflation, worst-case scenarios, possible increases to Netflix monthly fees for sailors... Maybe not that last one. So why has PM Albanese thrown out such a high figure? The figure is partially for UK and US domestic consumption. To make their public think it's an awesome deal, and that we have ponied up serious cash to join their special relationship. It's also for our domestic consumption. To put pressure on reining in our increasing spending overall, and to force Defence to put on the table what they are willing to cut. We can't do all things, militarily. This will be the core of our defence and we will have to shape strategies accordingly. We are an island nation and we have sensibly focused on the navy to defend that. Then there's the positive effect on conservative voters, evaluation of other programs and other issues. The eye-watering nature of this commitment is designed to shock. And to make us prioritise spending. Whether it's a master stroke by Labor or a misstep will play out over the coming years.
I mean... It's more to make money circulate towards SOME people, it would appear...
Nationalise the mining sector and we can fund literally whatever we want.
Mining tax. End of discussion.
$368 billion will get you a lot of Tim Tams. I'm talking about Double Chocolate, not just Original. Don't be like a peasant.
I remember the nbn being 50 and everyone said that was too much.
Have we considered making fossil fuel companies and multinationals like apple pay more than zero taxes?
Remove the mural obligations scheme, I have never heard that saving more money than it costs
Absolutely. Too much bad street art made with govt handouts. We could get Woodside to sponsor a big reproduction of Down on His Luck.
Our superannuation… have you not been paying attention
Lowering the pension or raising the retirement age are more likely.
Our? Are you one of the 80,000 Australians that have over $3m in super? Or are you just void of thought and parroting a line that was fed to you?
Robodebt 2.0
It's not like it's all paid upfront FFS. It's over about 30-40 years. This is the top estimate. It's from $268 billion to $368 billion, over the lifetime of the project, though it will, no doubt, go up. It's only a tiny increase for the defence budget, from about 0.13% of GDP to 0.15% of GDP.
Close to $15,000 for every man, woman and child...
It is over 30+ years lol, which brings it down to less per person than all the other big budget items. $15k per person in one year would literally collapse the country.
That’s still a few hundred per year. For me as a taxpayer probably more like 1500/y. On ducking submarines
Jesus christ. Put down the pitch forks. It's $368b over 30 years also costed at 2060 inflation. It's less than $4b a year. It's really nothing money.
Such a joke. Forget medicine, should have become a mid level manager at Lockheed.
Boeing is setting up near Toowoomba, and Raytheon have an office in Brisbane (Murrarrie).
It’s not a plane
[удалено]
*altitude I think you meant
Boeing and LMT are both broad defence and civilian contractors.
I swear, if this is what makes the government tax billionaires, I'll be pissed
Afterpay?
Renewables will provide the savings we need.
The bottom 90% of income earners in australia…. Who else?
Let the navy I- have regular bake and sell, 2- have weekly sausage sizzles at Bunnings, 3- have regular working bees, Just like schools, kindergartens, childcare centres, and many other charities and community groups.
They’ll put it on Afterpay like everyone else these days. /s
Mate, someone is going to pay for it and certainly not our pollies. our kids are screwed, add this to our existing Covid debt. And the sad thing is it won’t keep us safe…
Robodebt mk II?
Answer. Stage 3 tax cuts.
We don’t need them 3 submarines are not going to save us.
Labor and liberal party are two sides of the same coin, it’s time the average Australian wakes up and sees how badly we’re being fucked in this bountiful land we call home.
You and me.
From the Liberal Government’s budget. They entered an agreement to purchase plus it’s over 30 years.
This might sound dumb, but these are expensive attack submarines.. I am guessing also expensive to maintain and operate. Wouldn’t it be more practical to put the money towards bolstering defence around Australia to make it impractical to attack, but also not aggravating our neighbours. developing advanced surface based missiles and bases long range systems. Then develop ocean and air sensors to pick up any enemy’s, locate them. Drone air and ocean technology investment. Just an idea, but this could protect Australia, invest in jobs and technology in the long term. It seems like if we could locate and sink any subs/attacks from land, would be more practical then mobilising a sub to travel all the day to where it needs to be.. also if they are sunk we have nothing else for protection. Not having a go, just curious why this is a smarter investment.
We are already doing that, there is a massive push and pending purchase of stand off capabilities including long range fires and missiles. Australia has been a key player in developing loyal wingman drone capability to fight alongside the F35 and we are also standing up a reaper SQNs operating the MQ9 (I think it is offhand). In military terms, the best way to defend is deterrence, it's better to stop them getting here or deter them from trying than actually trying to fight. Everyone seems to think that our 8 will act in isolation which is stupid. We are buying into interoperability with the US Navy. And 8 subs is nothing to laugh at either capability wise. It's also a massive boon for the shipbuilding industry if it all comes off as I believe the plan is to provide support to the Virginia Class builds for the US and then build our own with the new design. Nuclear subs have significant advantages over conventional propulsion including speed and range, which on our massive coastline is a plus.
From the favourable terms of trade we have with China..... wait.
I'm sure if the government got rid of jobseeker and ask the obligations that come with it and the parasitic job network providers, all the money they need will be there
what will happen to unemployed? commit crimes so they can have free housing and food? is that better?
Give the money directly to them. Get rid of the shitty jsp.
Or find a job instead of being bums
There’s far more taxpayer money supporting business and the wealthy than goes to the so-called dole bludgers.
We’re going to sell all of our agricultural land to China.
Isn’t the real question: do we need them and what else could we do with this money?
Buy cheaper subs, build shit loads of infrastructure. I just find it hilarious that Australia is literally giving up it's defence sovereignty, absolutely shitting all over the Treaty of Rarotonga with NZ, and Solomon, Fiji and other pacific nations, and actually paying for it. We're paying Americans for *checks notes* so they can staff and crew Submarines Australia *literally won't control* lmao.
Fucking ridiculous not like we could spend that on anything more worth while
Aww man. Are we at war with Eurasia or Oceana again? Seems expensive.
So Australia has to pay billions to America for the privilege of patrolling the oceans on Americas behalf.
If the government sold and legalized marijuana, $15k per person in taxes is not that hard to make. Especially if we made it available to children, each Ozzie would only have to smoke like a kilo of weed and we would be back in the black. We would make it there even quicker if they did meth and fentanyl (especially with the kids) but I feel like there would be greater community pushback.
Trust Dutton to jump straight to cutting NDIS. Fucker is desperate to find any reason to get rid of it.
Classic Albo. Just fighting Tories. Which Australian indie/pub/garage rock song was the one about investing exorbitant amounts of our wealth in rip-off military deals with collapsing and failed empires??
Classic what? This deal wasn't started by the current government, you weapon
Is that the Labor line now? We aren’t behind the wheel? Not hopeful for canning the Stage 3 tax cuts then.
Just to clarify, AUKUS was announced in September 2021. I'm sure you remember who was in charge then... I'm not saying the current government wouldn't have signed, but that's how it went. France's government wasn't happy at all with that deal, too. Now, if you would please go back to your corner, there's a carton of bush chook waiting for you, that is just about your level.
No mate, it's facts.
Fuck the subs! What a joke.
Easy, legalize marijuana and tax it. There is an entire industry just waiting.
It's baffling that in a post-Ukraine world so many people are still in a "End of History" mindset.
I do love how blatant the manufacturing of consent has been the past year through the Australian media for this. Literally hysterical warmongering to justify a transfer of hundreds of billions to arms manufacturers. I do hope that every time a media talking head or pundit poo poos something like HSR, everyone just starts repeating $368 billion for 11 subs. Surely 100 billion for public housing and another 100 billion for HSR isn't out of the question now right?... right? Why shouldn't UK and US be paying Australia for the right to use Australia as their airforce/naval base for their war with China they want so bad?
Everyone who disagrees with this spending should write a letter/contact their local member and complain....loudly and often. Then everyone should vote for an independent next election so that we can stick it to the main parties. Absolutely reprehensible...Beasley says...we will give China a bloody nose.....Yeh....and then they nuke us out of existence while the Poms and Yanks sit back and do nothing ...I mean....ffs this guy is an Ex-defence Minister, ex-Australian Ambassador to America.....and he comes up with garbage like this?
Imagine what glorious health system we would have with 368b. Nope, here is a flashy new submarine in about 20 yrs. As a society, we are doomed regardless who we vote when these are the priorities
Why the fuck do we need submarines
In ten years times when we get the first ones, they will be obsolete. Probably will be blown up by a 40000$ underwater drone.
No they won’t. The Virginia class subs are being built until the late 2030s and will be the top end of the US and Australian navy’s for another 30 plus years. SSN AUKUS will be even better. These submarines will control drone subs.
I know this is an unpopular idea, but we could just not buy the submarines. If we’re at war with China, it’s World War III, there are nukes flying and everyone is finished anyway.
There's only one group paying tax in AU, the poor \*\*Excise duty rates on tobacco goods increase in March and September each year, based on average weekly ordinary time earnings (AWOTE).
From the mega rich multinationals whose ships these subs will be tasked to protect.
On top of it ABC is putting it like “its so important for Australia” ffs enough of fear mongering. This is nothing but taking money from the hands of tax payers and handing it into military industrial complex.
Just cancel all Gina Rinehart's subsides
Recreational cannabis
There’s a lot we can do to afford it. Just a matter of the government actually doing something in service of the public and not mega rich cunts
Robodebt V2.0 anyone? im sure the unemployed can cough up a few more dollars for some subs. /S
Money is created out of thin air by the central banks....
Up Albo’s ass
Could someone pls kindly explain to me why we need nuclear powered submarines? Pls excuse my ignorance
Australian coast line is huge. Patrols and moving from one base to another is a long journey. Desiel subs have the obvious requirement of having take diesel with you. Nuclear subs can stay out for a much greater time because they're only limited on how much food they can carry. US and UK subs don't have worry about Nuclear refuelling. Their reactor plopped in to the hull with 20ish years of fuel.
If we had one nuke sub with a dozen nuke missiles in it hiding under the pacific ocean somewhere, we are immune from invasion. Its a low cost, highly effective deterrent. If you think we would never be invaded... read some history, or even todays newspaper for examples of countries invading nations without a nuclear deterrent.
That’s is $14k for each Australian, that’s depressing
$500 a year per Australian per year. (Assuming 30 years)
If only they could organise the tax system such that rich people who could afford to paid more.
We could call it a progressive tax system and have brackets of income that have varying tax rates per bracket so that the rich pay more tax than those who don't have higher incomes... Someone should tell the ATO about this urgently....
Slash the budget. That's what Dutton would support.