quote:Originally posted by nascar12
I'm no fan of any politician, but the $900.00 from KRudd is a big help and will be spent at a small business. That will help the manufacturer of the goods I purchase too, are you starting to get it? So that will help me, businesses, manufacturers, and their employees.
I like the idea to get back a one off bonus after paying tax every week since January 1980.
If people don't like the $900.00 concept, give it all to charity or a small business, no one has to keep it.
KRudd did get it wrong when the $900.00 was also given to prisioners and people the lived in Australia for a few years and have settled else where in the world. That is plain wrong.
Residents of Aust for tax purposes qualify for the payment... so if someone moved overseas since completing their 2008 tax, then yes they still qualify and I don't entirely agree with it either
As a low income tax payer myself ($24K pa), the $900 will help me aswell, however the majority of taxpayers I have spoken to (I work as a tax agent) I ask them, 'Congratulations you qualify for the hand out, what are you going to do with your $900?? they reply 'Great, its going straight onto the credit card/loan or purchasing a TV.' that would be approx 80% of callers. Its about spending money to create jobs... not paying off debt or buying items made overseas... this is the part that I don't agree with and I believe that if small business were to receive something they could employ more people hopefully generate more income, more growth and more jobs which means more taxes collected = more income for gov. I think its just reckless spending by the gov... look at our failing hospitals .. (I could go on all day about it... but I wont [rt]rant over) I do hope you enjoy your $900... I know I will.
[Sorry for the highjacking of thread]
I do agree with you on the social issue and families need to set responsible attitudes towards alcohol and alcoholism. But I do think it goes further than just families, it needs to penetrate social networks, social clubs and through school education.
Myself (24 yrs old now) have seen a social change when it comes to drinking.
Year 10 (2000) you went to a party to have fun. No one cared because everyone was having fun; you were there for the pizza and fizzy drink. Alcohol? what?s that? Oh beer, wine and spirits? I once tried dad?s beer and it was yuck? I am never drinking that?
Year 12 (2002) You went to a party to get drunk?It seemed that the more you were wasted on the weekend, the more friends you had on Monday at school, by Friday only half of the people remember who you were, so you drink to get popular again... [drunk] [iddi] towards the end of the year even towards the end of the school term there were plenty of [bx] and till school ended they were [rt] because it was a competition of popularity by return of school and time apart they would be [ak] then the cycle would return.
Although those years and most of those people are behind me?
Now (2009) you go to a party to have drunken fun? It seems to be game, you drink to have fun... with drinking games and your mates laughing [crackup] at you because you think that the fan motor from the roof is actually spinning the room around and the fan is still... or because of your clumsiness or because you do a nudie run down the street because you have loss all concept of class and your mates think 'your mad' because you can [sc] in 2 seconds flat. You have [pk] and your mates send it in to a men?s mag because they will get a laugh out of it and it has got more extreme, set challenges before you get to drunk, like whilst intoxicated get your ear pierced before the end of the night or you'll have to drink out of the toilet bowl... It?s not till you see someone who is at a sporting event making a complete arse of themselves do you realise how stupid they do look when they are drunk. It is a big deterrent.
In other words advertising of alcohol products does nothing except bringing out awareness of a product, which is the whole point of advertising.
Are we now going to stop advertising of 'oil and mining companies' because of 'global warming'???