Will Rates Triple?

HenryBG said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

MissChief said :

I for one can’t afford to pay triple the rates just to subsidise the abolition of stamp duty. And it doesn’t seem fair in any case.

The argument here that no one will notice a tripling in rates because wages will be kicking along with inflation is also flawed. A tripling of something is a 300% increase while inflation is running at a little over 3%. At that rate, it will take your wages 100 years to catch up. People are going to notice.

Maths fail.

If the ALP just released the maths, people wouldn’t be having to use whatever limited skills and knowledge were available to them to guess.

MissChief’s maths fail is the ALP’s fault. They are banking on ignorance and confusion getting them over the line.

No,the maths fail is merely a reflection of Miss Chief’s failure to comprehend algebra .One can’t blame Labor for everything as much as one would like to!

colourful sydney racing identity said :

MissChief said :

I for one can’t afford to pay triple the rates just to subsidise the abolition of stamp duty. And it doesn’t seem fair in any case.

The argument here that no one will notice a tripling in rates because wages will be kicking along with inflation is also flawed. A tripling of something is a 300% increase while inflation is running at a little over 3%. At that rate, it will take your wages 100 years to catch up. People are going to notice.

Maths fail.

If the ALP just released the maths, people wouldn’t be having to use whatever limited skills and knowledge were available to them to guess.

MissChief’s maths fail is the ALP’s fault. They are banking on ignorance and confusion getting them over the line.

MissChief said :

I for one can’t afford to pay triple the rates just to subsidise the abolition of stamp duty. And it doesn’t seem fair in any case.

The argument here that no one will notice a tripling in rates because wages will be kicking along with inflation is also flawed. A tripling of something is a 300% increase while inflation is running at a little over 3%. At that rate, it will take your wages 100 years to catch up. People are going to notice.

Maths fail.

I for one can’t afford to pay triple the rates just to subsidise the abolition of stamp duty. And it doesn’t seem fair in any case.

The argument here that no one will notice a tripling in rates because wages will be kicking along with inflation is also flawed. A tripling of something is a 300% increase while inflation is running at a little over 3%. At that rate, it will take your wages 100 years to catch up. People are going to notice.

Matt_Watts said :

NoImRight said :

Matt_Watts said :

housebound said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it.

What, this John Howard? Your claim to integrity is that you’re like this guy? You’re referring to this guy, and then asking others to be honest? Seriously?

“Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.”

Later that day:

“Have you left the door open for a GST?”
“No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.”
“Never ever?”
“Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.”

But then there was a new election and he got in – doing the very thing that killed off Hewson’s campaign less than a decade earlier.

The more dishonest thing would be to say, just before or during a campaign that something would or wouldn’t happen, and then do the opposite.

There are a lot of them from both sides of politics (e.g. Keating’s LAW tax cuts and Howard’s core and non-core promises). GST isn’t one of those examples because it was part of an election campaign.

From an election promise point of view, if anything failed there it was the Democrats in letting the GST through when they had the power to block it.

We shouldn’t forget the fact the then Labor govt was informing the public that the budget was in surplus. Tough decisions will need to be made from time to time… Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud, along with the need for a fresh mandate for a broad-based tax (ie GST).

I can only hope this current ALP government has been truthful, although the lack of a substantive response to the significant rates increase doesn’t fill me with optimism.

“Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud,”

You say what now?

The wole 1996 election campaign, Labor was claiming the budget was in surplus. We now know it was really in deficit.

If we knew the true state of the budget beforehand, theLibs wouldn’t have had to make tough decisions about which promises to break. It would have been irresponsible to keep every promise in the face of such a huge deficit.

Precisely the same thing that happenned when Labor was elected in 1983 – the Fraser government, featuring Treasurer John Howard had been less than honest about the amount of money in the cookie jar.

History is written by the victors I guess. Quite the tradition by both sides to blame the previous Government for the first few years.

NoImRight said :

Matt_Watts said :

housebound said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it.

What, this John Howard? Your claim to integrity is that you’re like this guy? You’re referring to this guy, and then asking others to be honest? Seriously?

“Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.”

Later that day:

“Have you left the door open for a GST?”
“No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.”
“Never ever?”
“Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.”

But then there was a new election and he got in – doing the very thing that killed off Hewson’s campaign less than a decade earlier.

The more dishonest thing would be to say, just before or during a campaign that something would or wouldn’t happen, and then do the opposite.

There are a lot of them from both sides of politics (e.g. Keating’s LAW tax cuts and Howard’s core and non-core promises). GST isn’t one of those examples because it was part of an election campaign.

From an election promise point of view, if anything failed there it was the Democrats in letting the GST through when they had the power to block it.

We shouldn’t forget the fact the then Labor govt was informing the public that the budget was in surplus. Tough decisions will need to be made from time to time… Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud, along with the need for a fresh mandate for a broad-based tax (ie GST).

I can only hope this current ALP government has been truthful, although the lack of a substantive response to the significant rates increase doesn’t fill me with optimism.

“Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud,”

You say what now?

The wole 1996 election campaign, Labor was claiming the budget was in surplus. We now know it was really in deficit. If we knew the true state of the budget beforehand, theLibs wouldn’t have had to make tough decisions about which promises to break. It would have been irresponsible to keep every promise in the face of such a huge deficit.

Matt_Watts said :

housebound said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it.

What, this John Howard? Your claim to integrity is that you’re like this guy? You’re referring to this guy, and then asking others to be honest? Seriously?

“Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.”

Later that day:

“Have you left the door open for a GST?”
“No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.”
“Never ever?”
“Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.”

But then there was a new election and he got in – doing the very thing that killed off Hewson’s campaign less than a decade earlier.

The more dishonest thing would be to say, just before or during a campaign that something would or wouldn’t happen, and then do the opposite.

There are a lot of them from both sides of politics (e.g. Keating’s LAW tax cuts and Howard’s core and non-core promises). GST isn’t one of those examples because it was part of an election campaign.

From an election promise point of view, if anything failed there it was the Democrats in letting the GST through when they had the power to block it.

We shouldn’t forget the fact the then Labor govt was informing the public that the budget was in surplus. Tough decisions will need to be made from time to time… Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud, along with the need for a fresh mandate for a broad-based tax (ie GST).

I can only hope this current ALP government has been truthful, although the lack of a substantive response to the significant rates increase doesn’t fill me with optimism.

“Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud,”

You say what now?

Masquara said :

Following Zed’s measured response to this non-issue, Katie has pulled her head in. Perhaps she had the opportunity to listen to her first, histrionic interview. Perhaps she realised that the cloying “Tim & Katie, a Romance That Never Was” feature on ABC TV had made her identify with Nicole Kidman and she put three LIberal supporters following her through Greenway in a Corona, in her celeb delusion, on the same plane as those paparazzi chasing Nicole at high speed through the winding streets of Chatswood.

*yawn* Wouldn’t your time be better spent door knocking?

Following Zed’s measured response to this non-issue, Katie has pulled her head in. Perhaps she had the opportunity to listen to her first, histrionic interview. Perhaps she realised that the cloying “Tim & Katie, a Romance That Never Was” feature on ABC TV had made her identify with Nicole Kidman and she put three LIberal supporters following her through Greenway in a Corona, in her celeb delusion, on the same plane as those paparazzi chasing Nicole at high speed through the winding streets of Chatswood.

housebound said :

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it.

What, this John Howard? Your claim to integrity is that you’re like this guy? You’re referring to this guy, and then asking others to be honest? Seriously?

“Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.”

Later that day:

“Have you left the door open for a GST?”
“No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.”
“Never ever?”
“Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.”

But then there was a new election and he got in – doing the very thing that killed off Hewson’s campaign less than a decade earlier.

The more dishonest thing would be to say, just before or during a campaign that something would or wouldn’t happen, and then do the opposite.

There are a lot of them from both sides of politics (e.g. Keating’s LAW tax cuts and Howard’s core and non-core promises). GST isn’t one of those examples because it was part of an election campaign.

From an election promise point of view, if anything failed there it was the Democrats in letting the GST through when they had the power to block it.

We shouldn’t forget the fact the then Labor govt was informing the public that the budget was in surplus. Tough decisions will need to be made from time to time… Core and non-core promises were the result of Labor fraud, along with the need for a fresh mandate for a broad-based tax (ie GST).

I can only hope this current ALP government has been truthful, although the lack of a substantive response to the significant rates increase doesn’t fill me with optimism.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it.

What, this John Howard? Your claim to integrity is that you’re like this guy? You’re referring to this guy, and then asking others to be honest? Seriously?

“Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.”

Later that day:

“Have you left the door open for a GST?”
“No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.”
“Never ever?”
“Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.”

But then there was a new election and he got in – doing the very thing that killed off Hewson’s campaign less than a decade earlier.

The more dishonest thing would be to say, just before or during a campaign that something would or wouldn’t happen, and then do the opposite.

There are a lot of them from both sides of politics (e.g. Keating’s LAW tax cuts and Howard’s core and non-core promises). GST isn’t one of those examples because it was part of an election campaign.

From an election promise point of view, if anything failed there it was the Democrats in letting the GST through when they had the power to block it.

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it.

What, this John Howard? Your claim to integrity is that you’re like this guy? You’re referring to this guy, and then asking others to be honest? Seriously?

“Suggestions I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong. A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy. Nor will it be policy at any time in the future. It is completely off the political agenda in Australia.”

Later that day:

“Have you left the door open for a GST?”
“No. There’s no way a GST will ever be part of our policy.”
“Never ever?”
“Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by voters at the last election.”

“That would be alarmist”. LOL

Matt_Watts said :

When the Libs claim rates will triple, we’re talking in today’s dollar terms.

Obviously, inflation and the housing market impacts rates and the value of stamp duty etc, and everything will one day triple.

For all I know, under Labor’s plan, over twenty years rates might in (unadjusted) dollar terms rates increase by 800%. But that would be alarmist. When we talk of the average rate notice tripling, we’re really just pointing to the current value of the tax base and Labor’s expressed desire to replace certain taxes with increased rates (and Ben Phillips and Alan Duncan, people who helped craft the Quinlan Tax Review, wrote this morning in the Crimes that rates would have to “increase heavily”).

To replace almost $350 million from the tax base will need to be replaced somehow. And, when we’re talking in today’s dollar terms, it shouldn’t be too hard to explain.

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it. In this rates situation, the ALP and Greens are giving us next to no detail. I don’t think it is unreasonable for the Canberra community to be informed of the government’s plans.

The Canberra Libs have a well-thought out plan for Canberra, but an opposition’s job is to also hold the government to account. We also disagree with the unfairness the govt’s policy will bring to households who have only just paid stamp duty and who will end up having to pay it in equivalent real terms every four years or so. I’m no fan of forcing pensioners out of their homes, either.

But if the govt is so certain this is the right thing to do, they should be honest and let us know their plans. The Libs aren’t the bad guys here.

Yeah, nah.

Should have left this one for Zed to defend. Along with his questionable choices in wedding songs.

Matt_Watts said :

The Canberra Libs have a well-thought out plan for Canberra, but an opposition’s job is to also hold the government to account.

A fair point, but you should be aware that the Liberal focus on a scare campaign about rates does very little to articulate your “well-thought out plan”.

When the Libs claim rates will triple, we’re talking in today’s dollar terms.

Obviously, inflation and the housing market impacts rates and the value of stamp duty etc, and everything will one day triple.

For all I know, under Labor’s plan, over twenty years rates might in (unadjusted) dollar terms rates increase by 800%. But that would be alarmist. When we talk of the average rate notice tripling, we’re really just pointing to the current value of the tax base and Labor’s expressed desire to replace certain taxes with increased rates (and Ben Phillips and Alan Duncan, people who helped craft the Quinlan Tax Review, wrote this morning in the Crimes that rates would have to “increase heavily”).

To replace almost $350 million from the tax base will need to be replaced somehow. And, when we’re talking in today’s dollar terms, it shouldn’t be too hard to explain.

Can you imagine John Howard trying to bring in the GST without explaining it during the 1998 election? He fought for it and explained it. In this rates situation, the ALP and Greens are giving us next to no detail. I don’t think it is unreasonable for the Canberra community to be informed of the government’s plans.

The Canberra Libs have a well-thought out plan for Canberra, but an opposition’s job is to also hold the government to account. We also disagree with the unfairness the govt’s policy will bring to households who have only just paid stamp duty and who will end up having to pay it in equivalent real terms every four years or so. I’m no fan of forcing pensioners out of their homes, either.

But if the govt is so certain this is the right thing to do, they should be honest and let us know their plans. The Libs aren’t the bad guys here.

Bosworth said :

Mr Evil said :

If elected, Philip Pocock will triple the number of times he chokes the chicken per day whilst quoting from the bible.

I think we have a winner!

+1

Mr Evil said :

If elected, Philip Pocock will triple the number of times he chokes the chicken per day whilst quoting from the bible.

I think we have a winner!

HenryBG said :

poetix said :

I just checked our rates, and for a sub-700 metre block in O’Connor we are being assessed at the highest percentage, as it is valued at over $450,000.

Over the next twenty years or so, we will see the demise of the tiny home on a reasonably sized block, I think. Our house, for example, has only two bedrooms. It may be a good policy to encourage mult-unit development, but I can’t help but think that the modest house on a largish block is also something worth preserving into the middle of the century.

They did away with that about 20 years ago when they started work on Gungahlin.

Self-sufficiency? Who in Gungahlin has space to grow a decent veggie garden? nd meanwhile the blocks such as yours are being gobbled up by unit developers (I’m not saying that’s a bad thing). So we become less and less sustainable as a direct result of government planning and their ever-growing greed for $$$$ to feed their idiotic ideologies.

I have a balcony garden that produces enough vegies for a family of five with excess to be distributed to colleagues. We have seven people living on less than 300m2, all leading happy and fulfilling lives.

You shouldn’t make the mistake of assuming that your way of life is the only one worth living.

pepmeup said :

poetix said :

I just checked our rates, and for a sub-700 metre block in O’Connor we are being assessed at the highest percentage, as it is valued at over $450,000.

Over the next twenty years or so, we will see the demise of the tiny home on a reasonably sized block, I think. Our house, for example, has only two bedrooms. It may be a good policy to encourage mult-unit development, but I can’t help but think that the modest house on a largish block is also something worth preserving into the middle of the century.

What as your rate increase this year?

Sorry, I don’t know. I don’t keep the notices from year to year. But it went up, definitely.

poetix said :

I just checked our rates, and for a sub-700 metre block in O’Connor we are being assessed at the highest percentage, as it is valued at over $450,000.

Over the next twenty years or so, we will see the demise of the tiny home on a reasonably sized block, I think. Our house, for example, has only two bedrooms. It may be a good policy to encourage mult-unit development, but I can’t help but think that the modest house on a largish block is also something worth preserving into the middle of the century.

They did away with that about 20 years ago when they started work on Gungahlin.

Self-sufficiency? Who in Gungahlin has space to grow a decent veggie garden? nd meanwhile the blocks such as yours are being gobbled up by unit developers (I’m not saying that’s a bad thing). So we become less and less sustainable as a direct result of government planning and their ever-growing greed for $$$$ to feed their idiotic ideologies.

Mr Evil said :

If elected, Philip Pocock will triple the number of times he chokes the chicken per day whilst quoting from the bible.

Mr Evil, I just snorted red wine through my nose. My hat is all the way off to you for that truly magnificent effort. 🙂

One more point,

Currently the act gov makes about $170 million a year from rates,

The act gov wants to do away with stamp duty and has payroll tax concessions ect this taxes currently net the gov about $350 million a year. In the notes explaining the new tax system, the gov says that the extra cash will be made by increasing general rates, so the gov income from rates has to jump from $170 mil to $520 mil.

Mr Barr says that in 10 years we will have more rate payers to pay the extra money. But unfortunately those same rate payers will want roads to their houses, schools for their kids, will probably want their rubbish collected and maybe they will also want water plumbed in. So yes we will get more funds from new rate payers in the future but I guess the gov expenditure might also go up.

$170mil to $520 mil, that’s what the lib ads should say

poetix said :

I just checked our rates, and for a sub-700 metre block in O’Connor we are being assessed at the highest percentage, as it is valued at over $450,000.

Over the next twenty years or so, we will see the demise of the tiny home on a reasonably sized block, I think. Our house, for example, has only two bedrooms. It may be a good policy to encourage mult-unit development, but I can’t help but think that the modest house on a largish block is also something worth preserving into the middle of the century.

What as your rate increase this year?

I just checked our rates, and for a sub-700 metre block in O’Connor we are being assessed at the highest percentage, as it is valued at over $450,000.

Over the next twenty years or so, we will see the demise of the tiny home on a reasonably sized block, I think. Our house, for example, has only two bedrooms. It may be a good policy to encourage mult-unit development, but I can’t help but think that the modest house on a largish block is also something worth preserving into the middle of the century.

Duffbowl said :

Flyinghurts said :

Mr Pocock will triple the number of residents leaving the ACT to live and work elsewhere

How could I have forgotten that numpty in the list? Much shame and dishonour…

Indeed but only gay and lesbians who will be damned to hell 🙂

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Jivrashia said :

arescarti42 said :

Is getting rid of stamp duty and replacing it with land tax a really good idea? I think so.

As long as I get my $17,500 in stamp duty back they are more than welcome to introduce the new rates.

So, where do I apply for the refund?

Good point. People who already paid stamp duty should be exempt from a new land tax or be refunded their stamp duty including inflation price.

This is why it is being phased in over a number of years. I paid stamp duty less than 3 years ago and don\’t have a problem with this. Stamp duty is a rotten tax and needs to be gotten rid of. A gradual phase out is the most equitable way to do so. There is much I dislike about this government, but its bold decision to do away with stamp duty is one area where they have my respect.

There are calculators on the act revenue office website where you can check what’s happening with rates this year. The graph in the explanation notes to Barrs budget show that now will will have brackets for rates. Like income tax brackets, previously all rates were calculated at the same rate, so a house with auv of $250k would pay half the rates of a house with a $500k auv, there are set frees and charges as part of rates payment as well. Now the higher your auv the higher the percentage rate you are charged. In the notes it shows anyone with an auv of 150k will pay more the next bracket starts at 300k then 450k. If your auv is above $450k you would have noticed the 20% plus jump this year alone. With bracket creep soon everyone other than those living in apartments will have auvs of above 300k then we all start to see what it’s all about.

Hope that makes some sense,

Also I think getting rid of stamp duty is a great idea, but I think they could use a smaller hammer

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Jivrashia said :

arescarti42 said :

Is getting rid of stamp duty and replacing it with land tax a really good idea? I think so.

As long as I get my $17,500 in stamp duty back they are more than welcome to introduce the new rates.

So, where do I apply for the refund?

Good point. People who already paid stamp duty should be exempt from a new land tax or be refunded their stamp duty including inflation price.

I agree.

Here is a list of annual percentage increases in rates that I have suffered:
2007: 3%
2008: 4.7%
2009: 5.9%
2010: 6.7%
2011: 4.7%

Obviously, the ACT Government is bloating at a far faster rate then CPI, and we are paying for it.

The supposed “elimination of Stamp Duty” (which should have happened when GST was introduced, but didn’t, due to corrupt politicians) is nothing more than a cash grab.

If they need more money, the answer is to reduce expenditure. Get rid of all the rubbish like political staffers, Human Rights Commissioners, and luxury “prison” catering for criminals.

We need water, sewerage, roads, tips, policing, schools and hospitals. That’s about it.
The Schools and hospitals are currently in a chronic state of dysfunction and the ACT Government should give up all the poncing about on irrelevant ideological issues and attend to what needs to be done.

If they need information and advice on how to run schools and hospitals cost-effectively, might I suggest they request assistance from the CEO and the Little Company of Mary, respectively, whose records in these areas put the public government-run systems to shame.

If elected, ACT Labor will triple the number of people it has fudging figures to make Labor look three times as good.

If elected, the Liberals will triple the number of incorrectly completed time sheets lodged in Zed’s office.

If elected, Labor will triple the number of poker machines available in the Canberra Labor Clubs. (This probably will come true!).

If elected, Philip Pocock will triple the number of times he chokes the chicken per day whilst quoting from the bible.

If elected, The ACT Greens will triple the number of times they simply rubber-stamped ACT Labor decisions without asking any questions that might make Labor look bad.

Jivrashia said :

arescarti42 said :

Is getting rid of stamp duty and replacing it with land tax a really good idea? I think so.

As long as I get my $17,500 in stamp duty back they are more than welcome to introduce the new rates.

So, where do I apply for the refund?

Good point. People who already paid stamp duty should be exempt from a new land tax or be refunded their stamp duty including inflation price.

Flyinghurts said :

Mr Pocock will triple the number of residents leaving the ACT to live and work elsewhere

How could I have forgotten that numpty in the list? Much shame and dishonour…

Duffbowl said :

The Canberra Liberals will triple voter apathy.

The ACT Greens will triple first world guilt in Canberra.

ACT Labor will triple Australia’s mocking of Canberra.

Bullet Train for Canberra will triple the cost of rail travel while still not competing effectively against the airlines.

The Australian Motorist Party will triple the number of “Tits or GTFO” signs seen at Summernats.

Marion Lê Social Justice Party will triple circumflexion.

The Pirate Party will triple the yarrrrs.

The Liberal Democratic Party will triple the amount of confusion surrounding the use of the word “Liberal” in a political party name.

Mr Pocock will triple the number of residents leaving the ACT to live and work elsewhere

Will rates triple? Unquestionably, regardless of which party wins.

Idiotic scare campaigns like this reflect all that’s wrong with politics; three-word slogans (big new tax, rates will triple) and 10 second sound bites are used as a substitute for information, policies and, the gods help us, actual thought. All parties do it at every level of politics.

Anyone who votes on the basis of those deserves all they get. The rest of us, however, don’t.

The Canberra Liberals will triple voter apathy.

The ACT Greens will triple first world guilt in Canberra.

ACT Labor will triple Australia’s mocking of Canberra.

Bullet Train for Canberra will triple the cost of rail travel while still not competing effectively against the airlines.

The Australian Motorist Party will triple the number of “Tits or GTFO” signs seen at Summernats.

Marion Lê Social Justice Party will triple circumflexion.

The Pirate Party will triple the yarrrrs.

The Liberal Democratic Party will triple the amount of confusion surrounding the use of the word “Liberal” in a political party name.

arescarti42 said :

Is getting rid of stamp duty and replacing it with land tax a really good idea? I think so.

As long as I get my $17,500 in stamp duty back they are more than welcome to introduce the new rates.

So, where do I apply for the refund?

Last I heard under a Labor Government the Earth will eventually crash into the sun.Dont say you werent warned.

Vote Liberal and you and everyone you care about will die*

*eventually

Didn’t we have this discussion a few weeks back? http://the-riotact.com/whats-with-the-scare-story-about-rates-tripling/83057

Will rates triple under a labor government? Probably.

Will it be over some relatively long period of time such that most people don’t notice it because their real incomes have been increasing and inflation has been kicking along? Probably.

Is getting rid of stamp duty and replacing it with land tax a really good idea? I think so.

Stamp duty was awesome for state governments when property was booming and sales transactions were very high. Since the market has cooled down, transactions have crashed and much of that revenue has dried up. Whichever government we get is either going to have to seriously cut spending, continue racking up debt, or find a new tax base if we want to maintain current services.

As I’ve said before, stamp duty is an inefficient, unfair and generally horrible tax that wastes resources and creates all sorts of distortions in the economy. Land taxes are a much better way to go.

Baseless scare campaign from the Libs. Always resorting to scare campaigns with no actual facts.

The Liberal Party will triple housing prices.

The Greens will triple the number of public servants.

The Labor party will triple the audience of the RiotACT.

Those friggin trailers (and the rest of the illegally parked Liberals utes) really piss me off. “Let’s get people to vote for us by flaunting the law! It’s just cheap advertising!” Jerks.

The name of the game is: “The X Party will Triple Y”.

all answers must technically true. Funniest answer wins.