Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Send Topic Print
Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future (Read 20497 times)
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #45 - Jul 24th, 2010 at 11:45pm
 
Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 24th, 2010 at 11:28pm:


I'm all ears .. and eyes lmao Smiley

I do have a few comments to offer afterwards.


C'mon Lisa, show us your stats - you know you want to...

Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #46 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:13am
 

Hey Longy, this isn't looking like much of a bell curve: -

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6523.0
Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #47 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:32am
 
but still no justification for the 60% rate!!!

so i presume you ahve no answer at all?
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #48 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:36am
 

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:32am:
but still no justification for the 60% rate!!!

so i presume you ahve no answer at all?


On the contrary, my dear Master Bates...as usual, you weren't paying attention to my answers because you were too preoccupied with putting words in my mouth...amongst other things...
Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #49 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:58am
 

Here's a table from the same source (http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6523.0)

Note that the income share  of the 'high income' (top 2 deciles) and 'low income' (2nd and 3rd decile) households changed significantly from FY95 to FY08 - and that all other independent sources point to a far more dramatic increase in wealth distribution inequality!

Note also that the 'low income' figures do not include the poorest decile...
Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 50498
At my desk.
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #50 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 10:15am
 
Equitist wrote on Jul 24th, 2010 at 11:38pm:
Hmmnnn....you right whingers and/or good Xtians will love this one then...


http://www.catholicweekly.com.au/article.php?classID=1&subclassID=2&articleID=96...

Quote:
Report backs claims on wealth inequality
     
By MARILYN RODRIGUES

26 June, 2005

Research showing that the top 10 per cent of Australians hold half of the nation’s wealth has bolstered controversial claims by the St Vincent de Paul Society that inequality is growing at a rapid rate.

The society’s claim, based on latest figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and its call for a national strategy to address structural causes of poverty were rejected by Senator Kay Patterson, the Minister for Family and Community Services, and by Prof Peter Saunders, from the Centre for Independent Studies.

But a report by the Melbourne Institute into how wealth is distributed across the country has found that 45 per cent of the wealth is held by the richest 10 per cent of the population, who have a net worth of almost $2 million each.

Five per cent of Australians hold 31 per cent of the country’s wealth.

The findings are based on property and business ownership, bank accounts, superannuation and equity investments and vehicle ownership.


Gary Marks, research associate with the institute, says he is surprised at the level of inequality in wealth.

But Dr John Falzon, national research and advocacy officer for Vinnies, is not.

“That report uses a different measure from our paper (The Reality of Income Inequality in Australia) but it does indicate the fact that income and education are the real determinants of wealth inequality, and that wealth inequality is skyrocketing,” he said. “It’s no surprise unfortunately.”

Vinnies has been involved in a public debate since its paper was published in May challenging Federal Government claims that people on low incomes are better off than they were several years ago.

The paper says that although lower incomes have risen slightly, almost a quarter of Australian households have an income of less than $400 a week while those on the highest incomes have enjoyed a disproportionately higher income rise.

“I think we disturb the comfort zones of some who would like to perpetuate a number of myths around the significant number of Australians being left out in all this prosperity that has been generated over the last 10-15 years,” said Dr Falzon.

If you continue to perpetuate the myths that people only miss out through their own fault or bad luck, you are then able to justify a withdrawal of government from its responsibility to provide essential services such as affordable transport, health and housing, education and childcare, by saying the market does a good job of providing them anyway.

“You also open the door to undermining the income of people in the lowest income groups, such as the elderly and people with disabilities.



With 37% of all Superannuation subsidies going to the top 5% earners (i.e. massive pre-paid pensions for those who would never have been entitled to the Age Pension in any event), there can be no doubt that inequality got much worse since...



This is a measure of accumulated wealth, not actual wealth. If someone earns $100k pa and spends 90% of it that year, they are pretty well off in my book, but that analysis would make them a pauper.

...

That seems remarkably stable to me.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Sappho
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1406
Gender: female
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #51 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:07am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 25th, 2010 at 10:15am:
This is a measure of accumulated wealth, not actual wealth. If someone earns $100k pa and spends 90% of it that year, they are pretty well off in my book, but that analysis would make them a pauper.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/Attachments/ABS_Household_Disposable_Income_D...

That seems remarkably stable to me.


Where you see stability in that table I see marked changes which trend towards benefiting the rich thus supporting the claims made by The Equitist.

Between 94/95 and 07/08 disposable income for the lowest and middle  income percentile has reduced by 0.7% whilst those in the highest income percentile over that same period have seen a growth in their disposable income of 2.7%.

I also notice that the relationship; that is the ratio of difference, between low and middle income earners has remained remarkably stable.

Where it is that the wealthiest percentile have an increase in disposable income whilst all others suffer a decrease in same, therein you will find the divide between rich and poor growing.





Back to top
 

"Love is a cunning weaver of fantasies and fables."
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 50498
At my desk.
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #52 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:10am
 
Quote:
Between 94/95 and 07/08 disposable income


07/08 used different measures so the comparison is not entirely valid. See the a)

It is not a measure of disposable income. I think you would find the opposite trend if you focussed on disposable income.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Sappho
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1406
Gender: female
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #53 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:24am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:10am:
Quote:
Between 94/95 and 07/08 disposable income


07/08 used different measures so the comparison is not entirely valid. See the a)

It is not a measure of disposable income. I think you would find the opposite trend if you focussed on disposable income.


Whilst I agree that it is not a measure, I would also claim that my intend in my post was not to measure, but to identify trends... which is the intent of the ABS table. You are therefore adopting a straw-man approach by identifying that which was not intended in my post.

You speak of an opposite trend to that which the ABS table identifies as 'Equivalised Disposable Household Income'. You need to clarify that and provide evidence to support that clarification.
Back to top
 

"Love is a cunning weaver of fantasies and fables."
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #54 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:38am
 

Unfortunately, it would seem that most of the available stats are substantially pre-tweaked and pre-digested, according to the assumptions and agendas of the different authors/publishers...

These and many other ABS stats contain so many statistical smoothers and methodological changes that they are starting to look meaningless - especially since there seems to be a positive socio-economic spin put on almost everything that they have published over the past few years...

There has also been the intermittent injection, in some of their publications of negative hints about statistical unrealiability due to bureaucratic funding cuts...

Perhaps the ABS is no longer as independent of political influence as it once was!?

Whaddya reckon, Longy et al!?

Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Sappho
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1406
Gender: female
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #55 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:41am
 
Equitist wrote on Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:38am:
Unfortunately, it would seem that most of the available stats are substantially pre-tweaked and pre-digested, according to the assumptions and agendas of the author/publisher...

These and many other ABS stats contain so many statistical smoothers and methodological changes that they are starting to look meaningless - especially since there seems to be a positive socio-economic spin put on almost everything that they have published over the past few years...

There has also been the intermittent injection, in some of their publications of negative hints about statistical unrealiability due to bureaucratic funding cuts...

Perhaps the ABS is no longer as independent of political influence as it once was!?

Whaddya reckon, Longy et al!?



None the less, whilst it is that Freediver persistently demands that all which is said is to be said with data evidencing the claims, the ABS are one of the better sources to quote. Even when tweaking the stats, they do so according to statistical conventions commonly accepted.
Back to top
 

"Love is a cunning weaver of fantasies and fables."
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #56 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:03pm
 

Notwithstanding my earlier comments, the latest (2009-10) ABS Year Book has recently been released - its link is: -

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4EABC33B47FEE100CA25773700169C75?...

Yesterday, I chose the other link because it contained more graphical and tabulated data for the past quarter century - but the above link contains some interesting data.

Notably, it includes data on all 5 quintiles - whereas some of the stuff I posted last night ignores the bottom 10% of households (who, for what seems to me to be inexplicable reasons, are not classifed as 'Low Income')...
Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Sappho
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1406
Gender: female
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #57 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 12:17pm
 
Using the link supplied above this post....

Quote:
Over the period from 1994-95 to 2007--08 there was a 48% increase in the average real incomes of low income people compared with 52% for middle income people and 70% for high income people.


So, whether we are looking at the ABS 'Equivalised Disposable Household Income' or 'Average Real Incomes'... it is clear that the trend in incomes is towards an increasing divide between the rich and the others.

I wonder at what the average real inflation rate was during the same period. I'm curious to know whether real low incomes kept pace with real inflation.

Back to top
 

"Love is a cunning weaver of fantasies and fables."
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #58 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 5:03pm
 

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/boom-time--especially-if-youre-a-ceo/2006/08...

...

Quote:
Boom time - especially if you're a CEO

John Garnaut Economics Correspondent

August 21, 2006

AUSTRALIA'S super rich are earning a larger share of national income than at any time since 1950 - and the huge salaries paid to chief executives may be to blame, latest statistics show.

In 1992 the salaries of chief executives were 25 times the average worker's salary - but by 2002 they were 100 times the average.

In the 2003-04 tax year, the richest 1 per cent of individuals earned 9.2 per cent of individual income - up from 8.8 per cent in the previous year and double their share of 25 years ago.

To enter the 1 per cent club, individuals had to earn more than $148,366 - a rise of more than $12,000 on the previous year. This group had not enjoyed such a large slice of income since a huge rise in wool prices in 1950.

In their study, The Distribution of Top Incomes in Australia, the economists Andrew Leigh, of the Australian National University, and Anthony Atkinson, of Oxford University, said the trend was evident in the salaries of judges, top public servants and chief executives.

They believe chief executives have received pay rises so large as to skew the country's income distribution.

"The rapid rise in Australian CEO salaries during the 1990s suggests that much of this recent increase may have been caused by higher executive pay," they said.

The chief executive of Louis Vuitton Australia, Philip Corne, said the luxury goods market had grown rapidly in Sydney despite the city's comparatively lethargic economy.

In 2003-04, an individual had to earn $59,832 to step into the richest 10 per cent and $78,260 for the top 5 per cent.

While the rich are getting richer, inequality is not rising as fast in Australia as in other English-speaking countries because the poor have not been getting poorer. The incomes of Australia's low earners have been bolstered by a strong labour market, generous family welfare and minimum wage standards.

The status of the merely rich, rather than super rich, has remained stable. The income share of the top 10 per cent declined from 34.6 per cent in 1941 to 25 per cent in 1979, before rising again to 32 per cent in 2003-04.

In 1921, when the federal Tax Office first separated tax data for individuals and companies, the top 0.05 per cent of earners received 2.8 per cent of all income. Over the next 60 years their share fell to 0.61 per cent. It has since risen to 2.1 per cent in 2003-04.



Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 25th, 2010 at 5:20pm by Equitist »  

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Progressive Taxation: Back to the Future
Reply #59 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 5:06pm
 

Clearly, private sector employers don't pay as well as some might believe...

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/6302.0Main+Features1Feb%202010?Op...

...

As a matter of interest, what are the respective proportions of minimum wage employees in the public v's private sectors!?
Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Send Topic Print