Anyone who is not as rich as her is in her view lazy poor who needs to work harder. Libertarians like her tell us everyone can be as rich and as well off as them. Her comments are an insult tp 99.9999% of the population who are not billionaires.

The problem isn't the finiteness of wealth. The question is if they are going to let us put our hands on some.

30 years ago one member of a family with an average job (the father), was able to earn enough money for a house, a car, 2-3 kids. Now both parents have a job. With 2x income we should be living like kings, with two houses and driving BMW's, right?..... but it didn't happen. In fact, it's the opposite.

Possible answers:

a) This happened for no reason at all.

b) Some people did it on purpose to get even richer.

We pay bank interest taxes in Australia, it's still classed as income. However, it's not exactly the best investment. A lot of people invest in property, rent the place out for lower than the interest repayments and claim the losses on negative gearing (tax breaks on your main income). Easiest way to accumulate property in a short time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_gearing_(Australia)

- Oh, you're talking about the extra for higher income earners? I guess it's looked at the same way as a pogressive taxation system. It would go something like 1.5% for low and middle incomes and 2.5% for high incomes, or a flat rate of something like 2.2% fr everybody. Similar with thedifferent levels of income (does the extra 1% only apply for all income above $70k?) 

- The worse part about the QLD floods, is that despite the government's attempts to cushion the blow, premiums on house insurance went up to an obscene amount, something like $600 to $900 per annum in our area (I live in southern NSW), and many refused to cover flood damage (luckily we live in an area that has never had flooding on record). Yes, there should be smarter ways to rebuild things that have been damaged in the flood (Melbourne had a "once in a lifetime" flood when I lived there in 2003, and then again a few years later. To rebuild the same thing on the notion of "it will never happen again in our lifetime" is very negative viewing). It's a shame too, because we cannot have a serious discussion here about infastructure without it turning into an argument about gold-plating or pork barreling (NBN, Very fast rail, National energy grid). In fact, Victoria tried to cut costs in converting rail sleepers on the Albury to Melbourne line from wood to concrete. The end result is that the rail line between our two largest cities cannot be traversed over 80km/h in some places, for danger of derailment. I'd rather the government spend a little more to have it last longer in such cases.

- I'm not sure about bank interest taxes. They are in a completely different section, but if it's being taxed at a higher rate than regular income, that really should be changed (all income earned should be subject to the same taxation). I ended up paying qite a bit of tax on my bank interest, and ended up giving up and putting it into property. 

What annoys me moreso are the taxes that were implemented for a reason, and never used for that reason. For instance, the Fuel levy introduced my Malcolm Fraser was to fund road projects, yet only 14% or so of all fuel levy accumulated goes to such road projects. Had they used this money for it;s primary purpose, maybe we would have a decent Hume/Pacific/Newell/Goulburn/Princes etc. Highway system decades ago.

I'd say the problem is more C

C)  Your perception is off.   Both parents having jobs isn't the norm... and usually when both parents do work, the second parent doesn't have a full time job.  Additionally most people actually do own their

Furthermore, your discounting the MANY number of advancements in stuff and increased wealth that didn't exist 30 years ago that people have now... and only comparing things that existed then.

30 years ago you had one TV.    Now a days most people have muliple TVs,  Cellphones, Computers, videogames...  people just own WAY more stuff now a days then they did back then.   People now a days do live like kings compaired to 30 years ago. 

The problem is... a lot of stuff that 30 years ago would be seen as amazing luxuaries, people take for granted.  Heck, 30 years ago most people didn't have air conditioning.  Heck I remember when I was young having central air was a status symbol... and I'm 30.

It's all in the little stuff people buy a LOT more little stuff now a days... and for a lot of people, the little stuff is seen as essential.

Of course then again that is America.  You live in Spain, so your mileage may very. 

Spain being a much more mismanaged country then the USA.

Though if your not like 40 or older, i'd consider asking your parents... "How much more stuff do people own now compaired to back then."

- Not sure what the level for private health is now as the brackets for tax have somewhat changed, so that low income earners beenfit. First 18K is not taxible now. however othe brackets have been increased (mainly middle class), so middle class are the worst of fin this deal.  I honestly don't see why a progressive health thing shoudl apply as chances are someone who earns good money better looks after themself so they do nto go to hospital and doctors as much.

- Rail in this country has always had no good funding (except when we are shipping coal or timber offshore). I knwo in Tassie they wanted to save costs so they replaced the timber sleepers with some metal ones. They warped in the sublight (we all know how hot Tassie gets haha). They then replaced them with concrete ones.

- Eventually I will be puttin git into property (well at least my own house lol) once I got enough saved up for a 20% deposit. It is hard to do whilst paying rent where I am.

Finally totally agree about our tax funds being missused. They should go to what the taxes were originally assigned for. LIke the carbon tax. This should be used to research renewable energy solutions that do not rely on weather conditions. But most of this will get redistributed back to the low income earners. Why tax them in the first place then if all you are goign to do is redistribute the wealth.

It will be interestinng times ahead for Australia once the mining boom is over. Australia should be investing into infastructure, like dubai does from its oil money. Australia needs better roads, public transport and cheaper cost of living. Throw ontop of that better hospitality and services in tourism and people will flock here to visit the unique natural places this place has to offer.

- So it must follow the same brackets as income tax, since the tax bracket was changed this financial year. The reason why the levies are also progressive is for the same reason: it has nothing to do with rate of use, it's more related to the fact that a flat rate will push low income earners further into poverty. People have related the legal system in a similar way (though they usually forget that big business relies on legalities as much as the lower class, for things such as enforcing contracts, etc.) 

I don't want to sound pushy, but if you want my advice, buy when the market is good, deposit or not. Having under 20% means you will need to pay mortgage lender's insurance, but that's generally another $7k - 10k on top of your loan. Right now with renting, you're paying for someone else's dream instead of paying towards your own. Even if the repayments are $100 per week more than your rent, that's still putting you closer towards owning something with that money.

The carbon tax is a lot like the health setup, in that the people who would be put in the most danger of poverty are compensated. However, I think they went a little too far to soften the blow, maybe because of the massive backlash led by the opposition. Now we see the steel industry etc getting handouts to help them through it (this is on top of some other exemption they're already receiving. I can't remember which, right now). I'm hoping by the time it becomes an ETS, it will be a bit more organised.

Fully agree with the investing in infastructure with the mining boom. In fact, that's the basis of the mining tax that was imposed (whether it will be used for it or not is another matter. I'm hoping the NBN and Very fast rail could both come to fruition because of it). However, a lot of people are being convinced by the News Corp media that this mining tax is nothing but a very bad thing. In the meantime, we suddenly have some of the world's richest here now, a sudden spike in disparity from the rest of the country. Now that there's talk about taxing mining, are we suprised that Gina is loooking to dip her fingers into Channel Ten and Fairfax for media influence?

Yeah, the poor should take their money from smoking and drinking and buy into hot IPO releases like Facebook, that everyone knows would be big.  Or, was that Groupons.  Err, nevermind.

Actually, they should become like a guy I know of who sells alcohol for less, smokes for less, and also does check cashing with the lower class in a city near where I am.  He also bought a golf course.  Yeah, that's the ticket.

Or they could hire an investment guy. 

That's what I do.  Though instead of using that extra money from not drinking and smoking to invest, i mostly use it to work less hours.

You just get some investment or index funds, there is a bit of a rush to high yield invetment funds lately granted.  There is plenty of oppurtunity to make some good money though and get yourself to a good middleground/ get some assets.

Of course the issue with that is, it really wouldn't work for someone like you right now, since people on government assitance would end up shooting over top their "wealth limits" pretty quickly to get goverment assistance.

I don't qualify for a lot of stuff I might otherwise due to having investments.

Then you can worry about getting rich from there if your worried about such a thing.  It's not like anyone thinks people go from poor to bill gates within a month.

I will be buying soon. I just moved to Melbourne so I wanted to ensure job stability for my partner and I before committing. We looked at the mortgage insurance option and was told we would need $30,000 extra ontop of the loan. This was a while ago now.  Also ATM, I got spinal injury, so don't want to commit to a big loan if I cannot go back to full time work.

Sadly I work in melbourne CBD, so  It will be tough finding something in a decent suburb with good internet, transport and within say 45mins of the city below $500,000. Further out is cheaper, but people tell me bad stories about neighbours and over crowded housing with congested roads which are used daily to get to a train station. HENCE WHY YOU AND I BOTH AGREE OUR ROADS AND PUBLIC SUCK IN THIS COUNTRY. I would happily live in Geelong or Sheparton if I could get a bullet train into work that takes an hour each way.

The minning boom (or rather resource boom) is an interesting one. Our governemnt only looks at short term gains so  over the years they allowed more and more forein investors to run majorty shares of the mines. North Qld is a good example. They found some pocket of GAS (OIL) and they are going to use a british company to build and operate the place. Why not invest the majority share in this venture locally? That way more money stays in the country and gets paid directly to governemnt as profi.

Another good example is most our electricity networks have been privitised and are now owned by Asian countries and our generation by America and China. Because they are private, they are run to fail to maximise profits meaning our reliaiblty over the years has actually gotten worst in some areas.