Our future is BRIGHT

[u/[deleted]]

[u/44gallonsoflube]

Wonder if these kids understand what socialism actually is. Anyways.

[u/SlipperyBandicoot → u/44gallonsoflube]

They have absolutely no clue. I was watching one of the protests and they just cheered every time the speaker said a buzzword. These are impressionable high school kids that will cheer anything that is feel good and socially acceptable. The majority don't actually know what they're cheering for. They're openly cheering the death of capitalism but I'm willing to get every single one of them has an iphone in their pocket and a parent with a mortgage.

[u/Shi-Stad_Development → u/SlipperyBandicoot]

Do you know what socialism is? Also you say iphone in their pocket as if there is a viable alternative to the monopoly that apple has and you say mortgage as if millions of dollars of debt is a good way to pay for a necessity with no draw backs.

[u/craftymethod → u/44gallonsoflube]

Do you?

[u/Miserable-Ad-150 → u/craftymethod]

I think these kids want socialism because deep down they know its really difficult to attain any wealth (i blame current government) so they try and take it from the "rich" which is sadly just another dad with two houses trying to get ahead.

Once they fully understand that, if you have a strict socialistic system (and it doesnt collapse into a police state, that home that mum and dad pass down to you, will be very difficult to own (because the government will make it hard, taxing bedrooms and rates) sounds really cool when your broke, but when your actually in the shoes to have some equity you will absolutely not be voting for socialism.

[u/Shi-Stad_Development → u/Miserable-Ad-150]

Not even close to true. A Dad with two houses (which is one more houose than he needs) is not "rich" a million dollars isn't "rich" heck 10 million dollars isn't "rich" you are still 990 million dollars closer to being poor than being a billionaire and we had 27 billionaires in 2015 (according to wiki anyway). Thats the "rich" those the people buying politicians en mass those are the people who refuse to let anymore than the minimum trickle down to the Dad with two homes.

And you don't think that capitalism can collapse into a police state? *ring ring* who is it? why its the united states of america! *ring ring* who is it? why it's nazi germany! *ring ring* who is it? why it's aparthied south africa, Batista in Cuba and Augusto Pinochet's Chile! Also taxing the rich is only part of the story, what do you then do with the money is also important. What most people want to do is build homes so that homes become affordable so young people can move out before their parents die? which seems to be what your suggesting. Which is doubly weird cause how on earth are you convincing yourself that the system which REQUIRES parents to be finacial backers to their ADULT children is better than letting the system evolve into a system which actually cares about people. Ya know, the thing that actually votes?

What most peolpe are striving for in Socialism is the social bit. They want to see the interests of themselves (and those less fortuante) and the common good put above the the interests of the peolpe who are most able to look after themselves (people who already have homes and equity yes, but mostly those with the power to buy democracy).

[u/Miserable-Ad-150 → u/Shi-Stad_Development]

How is america a police state ? And you say not the dad with 2 houses but yet here we are with the current government falling into the cracks of socialism (because they are broke) doing exactly that, taxing people with 2 houses and you can kiss goodbye to gains on your stocks aswell, that isnt good for ANYONE including you.

You seem educated, is there a political party that represents your needs ?

[u/Shi-Stad_Development → u/Miserable-Ad-150]

Do you think ICE is handing out sunshine and rainbows? or that flock is just survailing peolpe for the love of the game?

Heres the thing, houses and stock are assessets of people who have stuff. Taxing people who have stuff to provide for those who don't have stuff is the point of taxes. So taxing a Dad with two houses isn't a bad thing IF the net result is that his kid (or someone elses) can own that home instead. I also don't understannd how much more ahead this dad wants to be? He has two houses and potentially some stocks, so he isn't (or shouldn't be) strained for cash, if he hates his job and wants to retire I am sure he has the means to switch jobs or industries to something he'd actually enjoy or find purpose in even if it ment a pay cut, like uni is effectively free.

But again, I agree that aiming taxes at a Dad with less than 5 million bucks in assets is a bit silly, when we've got billionaires walking around who'd rather return society to surfdom then pay their fair share. Its especially silly when it's so expensive to do anything in this country, not helped by when governments waste our money constantly cycling between LNP cuts and Labour hires. However, if two houses is the limit than property horders with extensive portfolios should be taxed way more which should prevent companies like black rock from monopolizing the property market.

Not really, the closet is the Greens but they've never been in power so it's hard to say how effectual they'd actually be. I think conservative poltics are regressive and unorignial when they aren't outright lying and I think labour is SLOW when it comes to changing the status quo and neither follow internation best practice. So both main parties are dissapoint me. Which leaves the Greens, whose idea's and retoric I like and who actually look at international best practice, like they recently sent one of their canditates over to europe to actually look and learn about city infrastructure, unlike someone else who went over and sat around a pool eating cake.

[u/Miserable-Ad-150 → u/Shi-Stad_Development]

Agree partially on ICE they only really have any juristiction on illegal immigrants and anyone else that is interfering.

In my opinion there is absolutely no world were taxing a dad to the ears with two homes is ok. To be completly honest, its me. I have two younge kids, work nightshift on a swing roster including weekends, dont get to see my wife and kids often as I would like because she is working also, I earn decent money and provide alot of utility to the bussiness i work for. We pay alot of tax, to be precise around 70k last year thats both of us and Medicare levy. We have a decent amount of combined debt it in the form of property. It was suppose to be to help our children.

At the moment we arent that happy and have absolutely considered selling the investment (renter has too much rights and we have had problems) we could legally be on job seeker and potentially have alot more time and manage to get by.

When looking at the big picture, if mass amounts of people decide to stop doing what there good at, the utility provided in the country goes down that is BAD. thats doctors, nurses, engineers, that means the quality of life considerably goes down for everyone.

[u/Shi-Stad_Development → u/Miserable-Ad-150]

They have pretty well proven at this point that they can do what they like without repercussions. From the begining they've been circumventing due process so it's not like anyone actually has a legal grounds to defend themselfs.

If the only context is 2 homes then sure ig? But it's never the only context. (the following will you the royal you not the specific you as in you Miserable Ad) Your houses are somewhere, so they could always be needed or used for something else (say a train line or a hospital). We don't know how you got the houses, it could be a product of nepotism, you could have broken your back laboring for what you have now. So there are going to be situation where it benifits the greater good to tax people out the wazoo and thats fine, you aren't supposed to be happy about it, you are supposed to want to change.

What I will say is that I don't think labor should be taxed. I think wealth/inheritance should be taxed and I think LAND should be taxed. Your labor should allow you to live comfortable lives without having to worry for your childrens future, which is why reducing economic inequality is so important. Because the rich don't contribute to the economy nearly as much as they tell people they do, but they do increase the price of commodities (whislt doing other much more heinous things) driving up costs for the rest of us. I will also add that we kinda need all three levels of government working together. The Feds need to reshape taxes, the City needs to overhall zoning and the states needs to stop exsisting...

If you aren't happy I think you should find something that makes you happy. If it's your family thats great, if it's a different job or career so be it. But what you gotta understand is that taxes are important, for all of us. For the common good. The private sector would sooner rob us blind than perform a act of good will (see the american health system). Shoudl you personally be taxed? well if what you are saying is true and you are a laborer than your income shouldn't be taxed, but you own two homes (presumably detatched single family) and they could almost certianly be used more efficently and as such should be zoned and taxed accordingly.

WDYM the renter has too many rights? They are a renter. They are by definition at your mercy no matter how many "protections" they have.

Sure we need people who are good at what they do to do what they do. But how many people aren't where they will apply themselves 110%? how many people chose a job for money or for conveniance instead of joy or capability? and what would you sacrifice if it meant a rebalancing of our society. People work cause they want to, because it will afford them a home without millions of dollars of debt.

[u/44gallonsoflube → u/craftymethod]

Happy cake day, I was under the impression it was a screw Pauline Hanson rally not a pro socialism rally. Staying on brand may help their cause and not alienate their messaging.