Search results

That's true. And I think the consequences of this driver's mistakes were fairly substantial punishment. Fear of imprisonment that no doubt caused months of anguish. The knowledge of having caused a death, which will no doubt haunt that driver for the rest of their life. The nightmares that...

They should be upfront - advising patrons on entry and not expecting them even to note warnings on a website (even if they are there). But some restauranteurs have no idea how to treat customers. I went to one that offered a free 'standard' meal if it was your birthday and you were dining with...

Yes. The future is worrying with these Communists at the helm, following the global elite's edict that they must ensure we own nothing. But I don't think Keating did such a great thing, because it was really all about a tax dodge for the rich, and he sure gave them a beauty, while in fact he...

Meanwhile, young folk can't afford a home, which is of far more value in retirement than a few hundred thousand extra in super. Take the example of a couple both earning $80K a year. Between them, they lose a whopping $19200 to super annually. Now, that's great from the perspective of how the...

So right MistyB1. Our kids sold their investment properties too. Less properties means higher rents. I don't get how tenants or government think making life harder for landlords is a win for tenants. If I don't want a pet in my house, why should I be forced to allow a tenant to have one? It's MY...

It would help if governments correctly calculated the impact of inflation on the aged. Claiming it is in the 2-3% range shows complete disregard for reality. My rates went up 17%. Insurances on cars 7%. Insurance on the family home up 28%. Food costs up at least 40%. Water rates up 40%. These...

It's not just the risk of the level reducing, or inflation pushing everyone above $3 mil. It's the economic harm that is inevitable from taxing unrealised gains, which is unbelievably stupid and has been proven to wipe out innovation and new enterprise and actually REDUCE the total tax take...

I think part of the problem young folk face (those on lower incomes) is that 12% of their income is taken for super, leaving a lot less to save for a home. It makes no sense. It's well recognised that a home of one's own is the best security one can have in retirement. Let them draw from their...

I agree the 5% deposit policy is dumb, but this claim that any reasonable house costs $1m is just nonsense. There are estates popping up all around my in Nth Brisbane with homes being bought by young ordinary working couples for prices from $515,000. That's for 3 bed, 2 bath, single garage -...

It's nice to hear that retiree super is safe - for now - but reform to tax on super in accumulation mode is long overdue. Not that this govt is likely to care about the huge inequity it creates. The high income earners are winning, so they are not likely to fix the problem. But the cost of...

The tax on $3 mil plus super is NOT a good idea, because the proposal is to impose it on unrealised gains, and that is patently stupid and will do massive harm to the overall economy. It was tried in 3 other countries and slashed the total tax take and GDP, because investors took their money...

Compare the income limits for the OAP. They are really outrageously generous when compared with the income asset-tested retirees can achieve from assets not much over the limits. A single person can earn $2500 per fortnight or a couple $3800 per fortnight and still enjoy a part pension and...

My hubby wanted all our savings in gold. Sure, it would have been safe and there would have been good growth, but I couldn't figure out how we were supposed to draw 5% of our super every month to live on. Cashing a little bit of bullion every few months to get cash to pay our superannuation...

I can't say I have much sympathy for most jobseekers, given how easy it is to find a job these days. But I do see the pension income upper limit as patently unfair and really quit absurd. A couple can be earning nearly $150K a year and still drawing a part pension, yet an asset-tested couple...

On KPIs, their pay packets would be negative. They would be paying big dollars for their titles.

Pretty sure the inflation figures are fiddled, or the criteria they use has no relevance to the reality of life on a low income. The things pensioners have to pay for - rent, council rates, water, electricity, insurance, food - have increased in price way above the stated inflation rate. Like...

No back lash from me. I agree with every word. Sad, isn't it?

Sad that the government doesn't consider that pensions are nowhere near keeping up with inflation. Interest rates are falling. The rate banks pay comes nowhere even remotely close to compensating for both inflation and pension loss. The whole system is patently unfair. It's way past time to drop...

Any couple with a little above $1 mil and nobody with $1 mil for a single is impacted by deeming rates, as they don't qualify for a pension anyway, so your scaling idea is really irrelevant. Furthermore, many with much less are not impacted because they are asset-tested, so their income is...

Those are asset limits. Centrelink examines both your income and your assets to determine whether or not you should be asset-tested or income-tested for the pension. If you are asset tested, deeming rates are irrelevant. It's all about your total financial assets. If you are income-tested...