How do we approach the future so our kids etc have a decent chance at life

[Yenn]

The protectionism may have helped us and dropping it was probably the right thing to do. now we have a policy of doing as little as possible and getting others to manufacture what we need.

Great government policy, they get the royalties from the iron ore and coal that is sold overseas without having to do anything. If we re started making things here the government would lose out on the royalties so they couldn't show largesse by wasting vast amounts of money on Sports Rorts and similar schemes.

[Old Koreelah]

13 minutes ago, Dax said:

Yet Aus until the 1970s ran on protectionism and had an excellent economy, massive industrial and small business base, great home affordability, excellent quality goods and services, housing affordability, plus very low unemployment and prices.

Yes it was a worker’s paradise. I remember the locally-made and British cars and bikes I owned: full of rust, unstable and unreliable. If Keating hadn’t opened up our economy we’d have become like Franko’s Spain or Argentina, with ossified, protected industries building outdated products.

13 minutes ago, Dax said:

Now it's the opposite and they call that progress. Haven't our standards gone down dramatically this century, along with our governments, and services being extremely inefficient. We used to get building permits within 7 days and inspections on the day, now it takes months to get a building or renovation permit. Now they use private building inspectors and look at the results of that, many new homes and buildings have shoddy work, inferior materials and bad workmanship.

I can’t see how that can be blamed on the removal of tariffs.

[Dax]

1 hour ago, Yenn said:

If we re started making things here the government would lose out on the royalties so they couldn't show largesse by wasting vast amounts of money on Sports Rorts and similar schemes.

There's a lot of of tax in manufacturing and we still get the royalties from digging it up. They've been reducing royalties for decades and are about to do it again in a couple of years, we only get between 3.5 and 5% royalties now and that would still continue if we value added them here. Royalties come from the mining of ores, not from export, it's the mining companies that pay royalties. All you have to do is follow the donation trail to see why things happen that are detrimental to our future.

[octave]

2 hours ago, Dax said:

We used to get building permits within 7 days

 

I have built 2 house, the first one in 1984 and the second one in 1990 (owner built)  Both of these building applications took more than a month.  At that time building applications had to go before the monthly council meeting.  One of the building applications was left off the meeting agenda and it is only that we kicked up a fuss that some brave secretary pushed it forward otherwise it would have been 8 weeks.   

 

In terms of efficiency so many things are cheaper and easier now.      I can remember in around 1972 my parents  getting the phone on.  The wait time was 13 weeks.    When we got the phone it was something we could not afford to use too much.   We had the money box next to the phone to save for the bill.    On Christmas day my father would book an overseas call to talk to is parents. Those worrying beeps every 3 minutes telling you that you would be charged for the next 3 minutes.  

 

Now my 88 year old mother has a zoom call with her childhood friend every week, cost? virtually nothing.    I very much look forward to every Sunday, we  started a tradition called covid coffee.  We have coffee on zoom with my brother in law and his wife interstate and my son who lives in NZ but has spent the last 3 months in the US and my sons long distance girlfriend in the US (hence his recent visit).      We chat, laugh and joke, it is great.     

 

My fathers only regular contact with his parents in England (besides a Christmas phone call)  was the old blue aerogram letter that arrived every couple of weeks.    My father did fly to England but this was extremely expensive and required him to get a night job as a waiter to save for the fare.   Next month we are flying to Adelaide from Avalon (covid permitting) one of the fares is $48 one way, who would bother to drive like in the past?

 

in the late 70s on pay day you would have to rush to the bank to deposit your wage, the bank hours then were 10AM until 3PM.   I also remember my father taking a day off to register the car which at that time in Adelaide required  a trip the the one and only office in the city.  The process was a many step process, fill in the paper work, wait, pay the money (in cash which probably required a trip to the bank) and then that curious practice where someone type your rego details onto the label followed by the tortuous process of putting the label in a bowl of water, not to mention having to scrape the old label off with a razor blade.   Now my rego process requires nothing more than a few key strokes.

 

During my life as a musician and private music teacher I pretty much neglected putting money into super but a few years ago we decided to get serious and though salary sacrifice and other means we have now retired at 59.  My father did not have the advantage of organized super and at many points in his life felt financially insecure.    I am well fed (some would say too well fed) I have reasonable shelter and health care.   In short I have very little to whine and moan about, my life is pretty good.    

 

Certainly there are things to worry about such as the environment etc.   This was also true back in the 70s just not as mainstream I guess.  We did have the burden of worrying that we may be incinerated in a nuclear war.     

 

I think that the way to be happy (everybody wants to be happy don't they?) is to recognized your privilege and realize that you will probably not be dragged off by the police in the middle of the night and that you most likely wont go hungry.      Of course we should identify things we see as problems.    Simply restating a problem over and over again is pointless and just leads to depression and does not help to rectify it.      I am terribly concerned about climate change, simply whining about it is not productive so I take actions which by themselves don't mean much but collectively along with other like minded positive folks do actually make some difference.   

 

I am not suggesting ignoring problems but I find a little absurd to portray our modern lives as some kind of hellish drudgery whilst portraying the past as some kind of paradise. 

 

  

 

  

[pmccarthy]

One of the most obvious changes has been the clearing up of skies over cities such as Melbourne and Sydney. There used to be many chimneys, including coal power stations, feeding the atmosphere. In the 1970s the inversion layer was a very obvious dark brown smog and it made you want to avoid flying into it. It is still there, but a pale shadow of its former self.

[Dax]

1 hour ago, octave said:

Both of these building applications took more than a month.  At that time building applications had to go before the monthly council meeting.

I'm a builder by trade and built many homes and commercial premises in Melbourne before music saved my sanity. We worked mainly in estates, which my company developed for some investors who bought the land, lodged the development applications and we offered buyers 6-10 different house plans and designs. Built the entire estate, including roads, services and homes. It took between 3 to 7 days to get a building permit and 8-10 weeks to handling the keys over.  Even when we did private homes, still get the permit within a month, depending on when the council meet. If you're in the business an constantly working with council and government officials, things go much smoother.

 

[facthunter]

The BIG loss is we make very little here and import others educated, rather than doing the right thing and educating our own. A Bot said 457 Visa's are the basis of MY immigration policy..The effect of this is to lower wages and conditions and exploit workers. Underpayment thrives. Nev

[Old Koreelah]

[Old Koreelah]

Why Is Australia a stable society when so many countries are not?

 

Because those who own something have a vested interest in stability.

 

Like Australia, the Americas started with massive amounts of cheap land, expropriated from the original custodians.

 

Why did North America progress much more than Latin America?

Mainly because immigrants could get to own their own home, even a farm or business. This motivated millions to relocate, work hard and innovate.

 

Meanwhile, much of the Spanish-run New World clung to the feudal approach: large landowning instead of small farms. Poor people could only hope to get low-paid work on a large estancia. 
Upward mobility for the downtrodden was almost impossible. Pressure built up and rebellions and revolutions tended to happen quite a bit.

 

Australia might have gone down the same path as Latin America.

John McArthur and his mates -the ones who arrested Governor Blight (who stuffed up another assignment, as Captain of the Bounty)- tried to set themselves up as the aristocracy of NSW. 

 

Our ex-convict and free settler ancestors had other ideas and political forces led to the Robertson Land Act, which helped my grandfather to select a small farm.

 

Aspirations translate into social stability. Anyone who has a stake in their community, like a home or business, is not likely to  become a criminal, much less join a rebellion or insurrection. This is the great secret of western democracies.

 

Do today’s young people have a decent chance to own their own bit of paradise?

 

Some disturbing recent commentary has a growing number of young people losing hope of ever owning their own home. They are spending their money of the good life, including better quality food and wine, rather than saving up for a home deposit.

 

Australia’s future stability and our kids’ future depends on us protecting what made our country a good place to live- The hope of owning something.

[onetrack]

The simple problem is the housing market is nurtured and protected by our tax system, and wealthy property owners are encouraged to buy more and more properties, enjoying fat profits whilst doing so, and thus denying the youngsters the chance to own their own home.

 

Our property ownership system is warped towards the benefit of the wealthy, and those who bought homes many decades ago. If you managed to buy a home and then lose your home through some financial disaster or other problems, you have no hope of ever getting back onto the "property wagon" again.

I have a number of friends in this position - poor investments that cost them, divorces where they failed to claim what was rightfully theirs, unwarranted bank foreclosures, financial fraud victims, or injuries that stopped them from earning a decent living.

 

Sooner or later, the property market will end up in tears. It may take another 2 or 3 decades, but it is bound to crash, just like the tulip bubble and the South Seas bubble. Too much loose money is currently chasing too little property and housing. 

A mate reckons the Govt will eventually be forced to tax the family home. It can't come fast enough, I see people people pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into their homes, buying 3 bedroom homes and turning them into 8 bedroom homes with two stories - all for one small family to live in. Then they sell it for $1.5-$2M, and it's all tax free. It's not a fair system.

[Marty_d]

Well Labor did try to do something about that in the last election - removing the capital gains tax discount - but the Australian people in their wisdom voted against it.

 

Seems to me that short-term thinking and greed will continue to drive our voting patterns.  If you can flip a house and make a few hundred thousand, who cares about the kids.

[Old Koreelah]

12 hours ago, onetrack said:

…A mate reckons the Govt will eventually be forced to tax the family home.

I’ve read some sensible proposals for a fair land tax system, which would be more equitable than current arrangements and provide great incentive for all land to be used productively.

 

Blockies like me would be affected by a tax on land area, but it depends on how land productivity is measured. Although conventional accounting would say my couple of hectares have never yielded a cent, I can justify the place in other ways: we’ve repaired generations of damage done by overgrazing, erosion and introduced species. We grow all our own firewood, much of our fruit and nuts and provide habitat for dozens of native species. Best of all, this place has kept me fit, helped maintain my mental health and saved our government the cost of keeping me in an expensive institution!

[Yenn]

OK I fully agree with you, a few acres keeps you fit, due to the need for you to be actively working there and also keeps you fit by providing good food.

I see town blocks getting smaller and smaller plus they are being set up in flood prone areas and the houses nowadays seem to be poorly designed for the climate. Most new houses in Qld look as if they have been transported from Melbourne, design wise.

We don't have any trade training in the building industry, so chippies and bricklayers are getting scarce. Even if you could afford to build a house there is a long wait for a tradesman to appear.

Government policy seems to be to tempt everyone into buying more house than they can afford with the outcome being that when interest rates rise there will be foreclosures galore. In Gladstone there were many foreclosures when the work at the gas plant construction ended. The banks foreclosed and there were hundreds of empty houses. Government moved in people from southern cities and also the banks sat on the houses for a couple of years, then trickled them back on the market. Now the banks are getting more back than their original apparent losses.

[Jerry_Atrick]

I think to improve the chances of our kids, we have to remember that democracy doesn't start and end at the ballot box and think "she'll be right, mate" in between.. My fear is that during our most active adult life, we are busting a gut to make a living, that we lose sight of other things around us. I have a conspiracy theory that is shared by many that governments want us in the debt and spend cycle, so we spend so much time servicing it, we don't have time to take stock, and importantly, bring pressure to those who govern.

 

This video is just over an hour long, and if even 1/2 true, is just plain shocking... How much else of this sort of thing goes on? I guess the answer is if we want a better life for our kids, we can't just ignore the behaviour and leave it to someone else to sort out - it won't get sorted. Whether that is joining local action/pressure groups, making voices heard through letters to the press/MPs, etc., or other action, I am not sure.. Maybe it is time to find an independent on the ticket you align with and vote for them.. Although the NP cops it in this, this appears to transcend party politics.

Although from Melbourne, I have an affinity with the NSW Riverina region as I used to spend a lot of spare time there.. What is allowed to happen is both ecologically and economically shocking. Take note of the Aussie flag depiction when the MP for the Murray electorate (can't remember the name) is being interviewed.

 

 

[willedoo]

On 11/07/2021 at 9:57 AM, Marty_d said:

Well Labor did try to do something about that in the last election - removing the capital gains tax discount - but the Australian people in their wisdom voted against it.

Labor weren't scrapping the 50% discount, they were halving it to 25% as far as I remember. I remember when Costello brought in the discount of 50% if you owned the property more than 12 months. He was crowing about how generous the government were at the time, but was keeping very quiet about the trade off - the 15% CGT rate was scrapped and instead capital gains were added to your income and taxed at normal income tax rates. For some people that meant a capital gains tax rate of 48% if the capital gain pushed them into that income tax bracket. Basically giving you $5 while reaching into your back pocket and taking $10.

 

Let's not forget that those impacted by capital gains are not all greedy speculators. Take my situation. I'm just a battler and have lived on my place for 33 years, but have to pay capital gains when I sell. My crime is owning more than two hectares. If your property is less than two hectares and you have not used it as a business, you are exempt from the tax. So I pay the tax whereas someone in town can sell their house for millions and pocket the lot. A fairer system would be to levy CGT on every house owner in the country. That would stop a lot of city people farting in church.

Edited July 13, 2021 by willedoo

[Marty_d]

You're right about halving the discount, I knew it was a reduction but couldn't remember the percentage.  And yes the law is indiscriminate and there should be extra triggers (ie the amount of the increase, the overall value of the property, whether the owner has other properties) etc.

[Jerry_Atrick]

They are thieves.. I seem to recall there was a rural tax break of some sort that working properties would qualify for. A mate of mine (well, back then) had 25 acres (about 10 hectares?) and the ATO deemed it was a hobby farm/residential property and therefore couldn't claim it. Now they are saying anything over 2 hectares (5 acres, I guess) is not residential - talk about wanting it both ways... Maybe that other tax concession hgas been scrapped since?

 

[pmccarthy]

The test for rural income now is $20,000 gross. If you don't have that, you can't claim a deduction for costs, it is deemed a hobby. So many small sheep, olive and other projects are not viable. 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Thanks @pmccarthy..

 

It does raise the question.. shouldn't the threshold for CGT exemption be the same? If it is being used as a residential property, with a small income from a hobby, then there is no way it is a commercial enterprise or property from a tax relief perspective - nor should there be from a tax application perspective.. ATO (or the guvmint) are still thieves... (in the sense of the allowable avoidance to their corporation mates).

Edited July 13, 2021 by Jerry_Atrick

[willedoo]

19 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

They are thieves.. I seem to recall there was a rural tax break of some sort that working properties would qualify for. A mate of mine (well, back then) had 25 acres (about 10 hectares?) and the ATO deemed it was a hobby farm/residential property and therefore couldn't claim it. Now they are saying anything over 2 hectares (5 acres, I guess) is not residential - talk about wanting it both ways... Maybe that other tax concession hgas been scrapped since?

 

The CGT is not quite as bad as it sounds. If you have a residential property more than 2 hectares (5 acres approx.), for CGT purposes you are exempt on your house plus 5 acres. The remainder of the land is deemed an asset and liable for tax. In my case I have 20 acres so 15 acres of the land is deemed an asset for tax purposes.. They take the value it sold for minus costs over the period of ownership. This includes rates, interest on the loan, improvements to the taxable portion property, indexation for inflation etc..

 

Then they estimate what the value of the house and 5 acres would be worth and subtract it. The figure left over is your capital gain. That is halved if you have owned the property more than 12 months and the resulting figure is added to your taxable income for the year. The hard part is getting a realistic estimate of the deductible house and 5 acres. In the real world a house + 5 acres in a high value growth area can be worth the same as if it was on 20 acres. And because of the 5 acre rule for CGT and pensions, a 5 acre block + house can be worth more than a house on 20 acres because they are in higher demand. But with tax bureaucrats, the real world has little bearing. The system can be unfair on occasion as there are a lot of grey areas in the legislation and CGT decisions by the tax department can often be ad hoc. Two people can have exactly the same tax situation, but they can hit one with the tax and let the other one off.

 

A fairer system for long time residential owners regarding the CGT would be to have a 20 year residency exemption same as they do with the pension. The same 5 acre rule applies to being eligible for the pension. But if you have more than 5 acres, they will exempt the excess acreage as an asset if you have lived there continuously for 20 years, can't subdivide, and if the land is not suitable for making a living.

 

The catch is that Centrelink are a bit tough. When I applied for the pension I thought I had all three criteria for the 20 year asset exemption as I had lived there more than 30 years and the other two conditions applied. The problem was that I looked after my dad as full time carer for three and a half years until he passed away. During that time I received a carer's payment from Centrelink and as I was staying with my dad in his house, Centrelink had that as the address on their books. During that period, I still considered my place as my primary residence. I still had the power on, mail delivered there, food in the fridge etc., and went back home whenever I got a rare break from caring. But because I spent most of that three year period staying with my dad, Centrelink deemed that I had not lived on my property for a continuous 20 years. So I don't qualify for the asset exemption even though I've been there since the late 80's.

[spacesailor]

Thats typically Beaurocasy gone mad, they make their own rules too suit themselves. 

spacesailor

[Jerry_Atrick]

Too right, Spacey.. how else do you keep lawyers and accountants employed? And aren't most MPs of that ilk? Well, not sure anymore, but in the old days, they seemed to be.

 

Willie.. I don't know anything about the 20 year rule, but it sounds a croc.. Does the rule mean, if you live in the same house for 19 years and move, the timer starts again? Surely, it should be based on your primary residence, even if you lived there for 2 days?

 

To me, if your primary residence is 100 acres and is not used for income (primary or supplementary), whether or not it could be is a moot point Of course, the government needs money and we should all pay our fair share.. but that is the problem - not everyone does.. If they did, contorted rules such as this wouldn't be needed.

 

I think its called stealth taxes here.

[nomadpete]

The rule, I believe, is 'twenty continuous years up to date of sale'.

 

But, then again, that's what I believe.

 

And it's well known that when a bloke says 'I believe...'. 

 

He really means 'I don't really know'.

[Jerry_Atrick]

7 hours ago, nomadpete said:

And it's well known that when a bloke says 'I believe...'. 

 

He really means 'I don't really know'.

🤣

[Dax]

Here's an interesting article. which tells it better than I could and it's extremely logical and pretty accurate.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9788957/MITs-1972-prediction-collapse-society-track-happen-2040-study-reveals.html

 

"In 1972, a team at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) predicted that humanity's pursuit of economic growth without regard for environmental and society costs would lead to society collapsing by the mid 21st century – a new study finds this may become a reality."