Jump to content

Fat is a type of crazy

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,790
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Fat is a type of crazy

  1. Headline in todays Age ' Jobseekers in limbo as pensioners get a boost within weeks' They say a one off or ongoing increase to the pension is coming shortly. Maybe for expats an ongoing increase might be better than a one off. More chance of being eligible.  At least my mum will get it. 

  2. 19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

    So not all scientists then? If it's not unanimous then it's not settled.

     

    If worried why not wear goggles?

     

    That's the beauty of science. Scientists get the opportunity to question the current beliefs and if they are smart enough and do the hard research they'll convince others. 

    You and I aren't scientists so I think you'll agree there is a point where you have to draw a conclusion based on statistics logic and common sense. 

    If 97 per cent of scientists believe in something I'll tend to go with that. You can always look  at the arguments of the 3 per cent, and maybe 3 out of a 100 times they'll be right, but living day to day I'll go with the consensus. 

    Similar with the goggles. If new research says my chances of catching it would be reduced by 97 per cent ..I'll wear goggles. At this point it appears to be a theory with some possible merit. Or I'll believe the scientists but just decide I don't want to wear goggles and I'll keep my distance.

    You can take the word of  scientists and not be a sheep at the same time.

    • Like 2
  3. 'You haf taken away my childhood' I like Greta. Gutsy and a straight talker. Not sure she deserves it but we all know who she is and what she's after and I can't think of others of a similar ilk. Sometimes the most intense people get the message through. Nice to see a scientist get it who works out smart ways to actually achieve climate outcomes and at the same time  can help the poorer and richer economies to cope and grow and lead to a stronger peace.  

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  4. Many thai young ladies have jobs that involve waiting around for customers so they just sit there playing on the phone. And all those sweet drinks and western fast food still has some allure as something special and some thing there parents and grand parents never had. It's a concern as their DNA might find it hard to cope with such a big change to diet towards dairy sugar and fried meats - just see the ballooning rate of diabetes in India.

    Vanity and youthful vigour may win the day though - they need to look good for their tiktok videos and facebook posts so many will probably limit the fat.

    • Like 1
  5. 23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

    A mask without eye protection INCREASES the risk to yourself. See how many people are adjusting the mask with fingers that could be infected, which means they could introduce the virus into their eye. Not many in public wear eye protection.

    I'm far more likely to pick up the virus on my fingers than through the air.

    I am not sure if you are saying this, but nearly all scientists say that a mask is better than no mask including those at the CDC.

    But Donald says that a mask may be worse than no mask, and he says he knows people who agree, so he's probably right. 

    As you say it sounds  like eye protection may be even better though. Not sure about wearing safety goggles to the supermarket.

  6. 6 hours ago, oznomad said:

    They dont even have to be sneaky about it.

    Simply ceasing pension increases, whilst not actually 'taking away' anything will reduce the debt burden on the national purse, as inflation eats away at the relative amount of the payments.

    Don't forget where you saw this theory first.

    It's a logical step.

     

    For what its worth I really doubt this. Being outside Australia you might not see it but I think pensioners have more political clout than you give them credit for. A decision not to increase and A Current Affair and all the radio stations would be on the warpath. If liberals said no increase, and labour said keep the increase for example, I think it would be enough for labour would win.

    If they were to limit increases they might use a  method similar to that they used ín 2015 where they changed the index to increase the pension from the higher of the CPI and Pensioner and Beneficiary Living Cost Index, and then benchmarked to average weekly earnings, to just the increase in CPI. That was aimed to save $450 million over 5 years.   As it happens wages haven't increased much so CPI increase has probably been pretty much as good. Haven't  got the figures though.

    I think they might be more likely to change the age of eligibility which would affect future generations but not those currently getting it or those currently over 55. They might also tinker with the assets and income tests.  

  7. 11 minutes ago, oznomad said:

    Permission granted.

    However, who will be providing the money for the pensions?

     

    Did you miss the issue of changing the pension age? That went through without blood in the streets.

     

    No reason why they cant keep upping the age, or decrease the amount, or reduce the assets level for cutoff, or include the primary home in the assets, or a bazillion other things.

     

    A wise person would make other arrangements, with any future (reduced) pension simply considered a bonus - and much more than most of the world gets.

     

    They can find sneaky ways to cut things. The rebate for private health insurance was set at 30 per cent but subsequently  they, I think it was Tony Abbott,  introduced new rules so each year that 30 per cent goes down bit by bit. Each year it's only a small amount and you don't notice it but now its about 25 per for some and a lot less for others.   They might do the same with the pension. It's likely those in the system will be OK. The next generation will cop it.

    • Like 1
  8. 6 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

    Not sure I follow the above as you need to be deemed a resident to qualify for the pension, where the ATO comes into this I have no idea, as far as I know there is no tax payable on the pension.

     

    The above said, assets are deemed and tax is paid accordingly, but if I keep it under the threshold, should be all and good until I decide to exit and come back to Thailand, that said, I do also know that there is a new ruling that I have heard on the grapevine, i.e. that you have to be in Australia 2 years prior to you being able to qualify if you are a non resident, then once approved, you can have it paid while you are overseas, but you have to let them know you are going abroad for an extended holiday so to speak.

     

    No, that's not the new ruling, the new ruling is if you return after qualifying age, wait the two years and then go, and then return, and then go again, they cut you off, suffice to say, once I exit after receiving the OAP, that's it, no ins and outs for me, i.e. unless I return to stay and that won't make a difference because I will receive it. 

    I just thought you meant that you have investments now that are only tax free because you are a non-resident but that you would incur tax if you are a resident. The income for those investments may be taxable if you go back to being a resident of Australia to meet Centrelink rules. If you are 60 now I don't think you become eligible for the pension until you are 66 or 67 and  so if you have substantial investment income and go back as a resident now it could mean some tax.

    As an aside the Age Pension is taxable and forms part of your taxable income. However there is the Seniors and Pensioners Tax Offset and if the pension will be your main source of income you pay no tax. 

    • Thanks 1
  9. 13 hours ago, Nout said:

    A speculative asserstion

    It was just an observation that the biggest tax revenue in the states comes from democrat leaning places like California, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Washington etc. Bigger productive cities in other states such as Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania tend to be democrat.    Big cities in even red states like Texas are more democrat than you think. So it may be an assertion that the people who already tend to be working and have health insurance and benefit from lower taxes might overall lean democrat. There may be exceptions in pockets like Wall street but even there in 2020 they may be leaning democrat.

    The strong republican and Trump supporters in states like Kentucky,  Alabama,  the Dakotas etc are a range of people but many are lower income, lesser educated whites on lower income and often do not hail from the big cities. They bring in less tax revenue and might benefit most from Democrat policies.

    So it can seem a bit ironic that in practical terms these Trump supporters that you see at rallies,  who probably most need health care and could benefit from higher minimum wages and some income redistribution, vote republican. Seeing Trump argue and win over his supporters at a rally that the estate tax should be reduced or abolished, when few if any of them would benefit, except for large scale farmers, makes the point.

    His supporters would argue that a freer, more capitalist low tax economy, gives them better chances of a job, and that issues like gun control, tough immigration etc are of most importance. 

    You just get a sense though at a republican rally that the supporters could really benefit in practical terms from the Democrat policies they hate. 

     

     

    • Like 2
  10. 1 hour ago, scorecard said:

    So back to the beginning, where did the $25- extra per fortnight originate from?

     Thanks for the reply. I am the humourless one who didn't get the joke. Never mind. Always read twice before posting. The really funny ones you only need to read once. 

    I don't even get the pension.

    I used to work in the area. There is no $25 bonus. Just the two $750 ones. 

    • Like 1
  11. 19 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

    Goats Head Soup ? Really ? Ok. "Angie"  was a winner.

    But "Sticky  Fingers" album is  a forever in  my head .'

    I found it surprising.  I can't imagine young people saying 'Hmm Goats Head Soup from the early seventies with a few added tracks. This is a must buy.' Maybe it got heaps of the older fans excited. Maybe it resonates in a way I don't get. I still listen to 1973 music but it's more likely to be Trex or the Sweet.  

  12. 25 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

    Been living here for 5 years and finally not paying taxes for anyone, albeit it I am all for paying pensioners of they have worked and paid their taxes over the years, however the rules are you only have to have lived in Australia to receive the pension, i.e. you never had to work a day in your life and if you lived in Australia for 35 years, you will receive the full pension.

     

    As for me, well at 60 now, I will be going back if still alive to collect the pension if it's still available, by then I should be in a position to have shifted enough funds to be elable, you see the way I see it, if they are going to throw money at everyone who hasn't paid a dime in taxes, then I might as well put my hand up because I paid a lot of taxes in my 40 years of working, so I think I am entitled to it over the others. 

     

    In the meantime I will sit it out here and collect the tax free dollars on my investments legally as a non resident ????

     

    Don't try and fight the system, play it.

     

    This has probably been said a thousand times on this site but you need to be careful that in taking steps to be eligible for the pension  you are not then  deemed to be a resident for the ATO. You've probably looked into that already.

  13. 28 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

    If you have never been there what taxes are you paying there ?

    I had thought he meant he had never gone to Centrelink. I worked there for 4 years so am a bit envious of someone who has never had to go there. But he does appear to be saying Australia. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...