bpople

@bpople123

South Australia

Joined June 2016

1.4K Following

82 Followers

10 Posts

bpople123 retweeted

Robin Dods

@toy59496

18 days ago

The current CGT debate isn't really about Tax. It's about a question that societies have wrestled with since the dawn of time: how do you balance fairness with opportunity? If everyone gets the same outcome regardless of effort, risk or innovation, eventually fewer people bother taking risks. But if rewards become too concentrated, society becomes divided and unstable. The answer has never been complete socialism or complete laissez-faire capitalism. The real challenge is finding the balance. What concerns me about the current debate is that the Government seems to see only one side of the equation. The focus is on redistribution, but there is very little discussion about wealth creation. Given our declining wealth and productivity relative to our OECD peers this should be at the forefront of our conversations. The objectives of the policy may be worthy. Young Australians are struggling to buy homes. But one of the weaknesses in this debate is that we increasingly treat all capital gains as though they are economically identical. They are not. There is a fundamental difference between capital directed into existing residential property and capital directed into productive enterprise. A share purchased in a small exploration company, technology start-up or growing business helps fund innovation, jobs, exports and future tax revenue. It expands the productive capacity of the nation. A bid on an existing house largely transfers ownership of an asset that already exists, that is a zero sum game of passive capital gain and socially divisive tax shelters. But if housing affordability is the problem, then housing policy should be the solution. We should be cautious about discouraging the productive investment upon which future prosperity depends. And there is a deeper issue. Governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed. Before the election we were told there would be no changes to capital gains tax arrangements. Now there are. Trust matters. There is also a political reality that is rarely discussed. When governments continuously expand benefits without asking who will ultimately pay for them, more people naturally organise their lives around receiving those benefits. Over time, what begins as assistance can evolve into expectation, and what begins as expectation can evolve into political entitlement. Even responsible citizens eventually adapt, because failing to do so leaves them at a disadvantage. We have increasingly become "Gen E" , the "Entitlement Generation". Australia is also making a long-term bet that worries me. We are funding an ever-growing consumption state by selling finite natural resources. The iron ore, gas and coal sold today will not be available to our grandchildren. We are converting non-renewable wealth into current expenditure while underinvesting in productivity, sovereign capability and the productive assets that future generations will need. We will have nothing to bequeath our grandchildren when our sovereign defence is so inadequate that our politicians sanction live firing by Chinese warships 150km off the coast of Sydney; which they must do because otherwise we need to accept the uncomfortable truth that we have no other choice. Ultimately, no nation can redistribute wealth indefinitely unless someone is first creating it. As Churchill observed, "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries." The debate is not whether we should care for others. Of course we should. The debate is whether we can preserve the incentives that create prosperity while still maintaining a decent society. Because if opportunity disappears, capital, talent and ambition do not vanish. They simply move elsewhere. And nations that stop creating wealth eventually find themselves living under the economic hegemony of those that still do. The obligation of our generation is not merely to consume what we have inherited, but to create more wealth for future generations instead of leaving them empty holes in the ground in a desert of despair. The government's policy seems to increasingly destroy the economic tools to channel aspiration. The invisible hand of Adam Smith has turned into a very visible hand that slaps our face...

toy59496's tweet photo. The current CGT debate isn't really about Tax.

It's about a question that societies have wrestled with since the dawn of time: how do you balance fairness with opportunity?

If everyone gets the same outcome regardless of effort, risk or innovation, eventually fewer people bother taking risks. But if rewards become too concentrated, society becomes divided and unstable.

The answer has never been complete socialism or complete laissez-faire capitalism. The real challenge is finding the balance.

What concerns me about the current debate is that the Government seems to see only one side of the equation. The focus is on redistribution, but there is very little discussion about wealth creation. Given our declining wealth and productivity relative to our OECD peers this should be at the forefront of our conversations.

The objectives of the policy may be worthy. Young Australians are struggling to buy homes. But one of the weaknesses in this debate is that we increasingly treat all capital gains as though they are economically identical.

They are not.

There is a fundamental difference between capital directed into existing residential property and capital directed into productive enterprise. A share purchased in a small exploration company, technology start-up or growing business helps fund innovation, jobs, exports and future tax revenue. It expands the productive capacity of the nation. A bid on an existing house largely transfers ownership of an asset that already exists, that is a zero sum game of passive capital gain and socially divisive tax shelters.

But if housing affordability is the problem, then housing policy should be the solution. We should be cautious about discouraging the productive investment upon which future prosperity depends.

And there is a deeper issue.

Governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed. Before the election we were told there would be no changes to capital gains tax arrangements. Now there are.

Trust matters.

There is also a political reality that is rarely discussed. When governments continuously expand benefits without asking who will ultimately pay for them, more people naturally organise their lives around receiving those benefits. Over time, what begins as assistance can evolve into expectation, and what begins as expectation can evolve into political entitlement. Even responsible citizens eventually adapt, because failing to do so leaves them at a disadvantage. We have increasingly become "Gen E" , the "Entitlement Generation".

Australia is also making a long-term bet that worries me. We are funding an ever-growing consumption state by selling finite natural resources. The iron ore, gas and coal sold today will not be available to our grandchildren. We are converting non-renewable wealth into current expenditure while underinvesting in productivity, sovereign capability and the productive assets that future generations will need.

We will have nothing to bequeath our grandchildren when our sovereign defence is so inadequate that our politicians sanction live firing by Chinese warships 150km off the coast of Sydney; which they must do because otherwise we need to accept the uncomfortable truth that we have no other choice.

Ultimately, no nation can redistribute wealth indefinitely unless someone is first creating it.

As Churchill observed, "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

The debate is not whether we should care for others. Of course we should.

The debate is whether we can preserve the incentives that create prosperity while still maintaining a decent society.

Because if opportunity disappears, capital, talent and ambition do not vanish. They simply move elsewhere. And nations that stop creating wealth eventually find themselves living under the economic hegemony of those that still do.

The obligation of our generation is not merely to consume what we have inherited, but to create more wealth for future generations instead of leaving them empty holes in the ground in a desert of despair.

The government's policy seems to increasingly destroy the economic tools to channel aspiration. The invisible hand of Adam Smith has turned into a very visible hand that slaps our face...

bpople123 retweeted

Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼

@DrewPavlou

28 days ago

NEW AUSTRALIAN NDIS DISABILITY FRAUD INVESTIGATION with @PeteZogoulas. This is Minnesota-style fraud on a national scale. We found a voodoo style witch doctor who continues to operate Australian taxpayer funded disability services despite the fact that she remains under investigation for the death of a participant in suspicious circumstances. We also discovered a massive PRISONER HARVESTING SCHEME where a West Sydney businessman named Jamal Sabsabi charged the Australian taxpayer $340,000 for PHANTOM DISABILITY SERVICES to PRISONERS sitting in JAIL CELLS. Shockingly, we found Jamal Sabsabi simply started a new company right after being exposed for this prisoner scam. When we barged into his new business to confront him, we found a new West Sydney businessman sitting in his place with a gigantic golden leopard statue on his desk worth thousands of dollars. Josef Yousif at first denied that Jamal worked at the new office, before admitting he had “hired” him for his great “experience.” Upon investigating Josef, we discovered he operated under at least six different legal names with a combined criminal rap sheet that features over 50 court appearances. This is seriously one of the worst run government programs anywhere in the world. We are talking about tens of billions of dollars in fraud and absolutely vile organised crime abuse of extremely disabled Australians.

345

920

951K

bpople @bpople123

28 days ago

@TMFScottP @sqeinvest Scott, could you please elaborate on your views on government spending? Do you believe there is scope to achieve better outcomes by reducing waste and improving how public funds are allocated? Do you have any concerns over the current state of NDIS? Is more tax the answer?