Can you define wealth?
Jan 27th 2011, 1:52 pm
#46
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4,404
Re: Can you define wealth?
I'm confused. Are you saying you dont respect people getting away with not paying tax via loopholes or want to take advantage of these loopholes so you can go without paying tax?
Jan 27th 2011, 2:07 pm
#51
Proudly Deplorable
Joined: May 2003
Location: Alloha snack bar
Posts: 24,246
Re: Can you define wealth?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rat...the_world#List
Hong Kong 0-15%
Switzerland 0-13.2%
Both wealthy countries. I'm sure they generate a lot of income due to increased economic activity that is a result of low taxation.
Personally, I would like to have no income tax but a much higher GST.
Jan 27th 2011, 2:13 pm
#52
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,442
Re: Can you define wealth?
Did you know that income tax didn't exist in the US until 1913. Did you also know that income tax in the UK didn't exist until 1799 and was originally brought in as a levy to pay for the war? (And they kept it)
How did they fund their infrastructure and services before that time? They must have had no roads or anything... How did they survive?
Income tax to fund things like infrastructure is populist propaganda as we already pay many indirect taxes including GST to fund such things.
Jan 27th 2011, 2:14 pm
#53
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,442
Re: Can you define wealth?
He's got (a bit) of a point. Look at this list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rat...the_world#List
Hong Kong 0-15%
Switzerland 0-13.2%
Both wealthy countries. I'm sure they generate a lot of income due to increased economic activity that is a result of low taxation.
Personally, I would like to have no income tax but a much higher GST.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rat...the_world#List
Hong Kong 0-15%
Switzerland 0-13.2%
Both wealthy countries. I'm sure they generate a lot of income due to increased economic activity that is a result of low taxation.
Personally, I would like to have no income tax but a much higher GST.
Jan 27th 2011, 2:15 pm
#54
High in the Dandenongs
Joined: Apr 2003
Location: Listening to Puffing Billy
Posts: 9,183
Re: Can you define wealth?
For Perth:
4x2 with a mortgage
2 newish cars
maybe a boat
private school fees
2 holidays a year - 1 longhaul
nice stuff in your house
not worrying about paying bills
not living month to month
modest debts
That's about it. May be different on the less affluent east coast.
4x2 with a mortgage
2 newish cars
maybe a boat
private school fees
2 holidays a year - 1 longhaul
nice stuff in your house
not worrying about paying bills
not living month to month
modest debts
That's about it. May be different on the less affluent east coast.
@ that! As for Mrs affluent Eastern state herself......
Please say that you are taking the piss? That to me, that is a wealthy lifestyle, not loaded Oprah lifestyle, but way more that comfortable! Take off the last 3...and first 4...and maybe we're talking 
Jan 27th 2011, 2:20 pm
#55
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,230
Re: Can you define wealth?
More like blackmail, extortion, prostitution or slavery.
Did you know that income tax didn't exist in the US until 1913. Did you also know that income tax in the UK didn't exist until 1799 and was originally brought in as a levy to pay for the war? (And they kept it)
How did they fund their infrastructure and services before that time? They must have had no roads or anything... How did they survive?
Income tax to fund things like infrastructure is populist propaganda as we already pay many indirect taxes including GST to fund such things.
Did you know that income tax didn't exist in the US until 1913. Did you also know that income tax in the UK didn't exist until 1799 and was originally brought in as a levy to pay for the war? (And they kept it)
How did they fund their infrastructure and services before that time? They must have had no roads or anything... How did they survive?
Income tax to fund things like infrastructure is populist propaganda as we already pay many indirect taxes including GST to fund such things.
Jan 27th 2011, 2:25 pm
#57
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jul 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,442
Re: Can you define wealth?
Did people need to work then as they do now?
Did people need to keep a home then as they do now?
Did people need freedom of movement then as they do now?
The only thing that's changed is technology. Our needs as a species hasn't.
Jan 27th 2011, 2:26 pm
#58
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4,404
Re: Can you define wealth?
Did people need to eat then as they do now?
Did people need to work then as they do now?
Did people need to keep a home then as they do now?
Did people need freedom of movement then as they do now?
The only thing that's changed is technology. Our needs as a species hasn't.
Did people need to work then as they do now?
Did people need to keep a home then as they do now?
Did people need freedom of movement then as they do now?
The only thing that's changed is technology. Our needs as a species hasn't.
Jan 27th 2011, 2:27 pm
#59
Mostly Harmless
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Semi-rural wonderworld, Brisbane
Posts: 15,109
Jan 27th 2011, 2:28 pm
#60
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15,526
Re: Can you define wealth?
Good question Elice... I would have said until you stated you wanted to keep it materialistic, something about "Not wanting or needing anything" Talking from a purely financial perspective, I definitely wouldn't call 200K PA wealthy. I would struggle in my current family situation to do exactly what I wanted on that money. It probably is enough for a single person.
So for me being wealthy, would equate to working when you wanted, being able to go where you wanted... mostly overseas. Plus having enough for all ones material needs. Not even sure I would move from where I live now if I had all of that. I'd have a much better fitted out house though. I think 400K and my own business where I delegated via phone should be enough.
It's where greed comes in where the problem lies. IE: would you always travel 1st class on Long Haul or would business class be enough. Would you always want to eat 5 star or could a good meal in a decent restaurant be enough etc etc. Knowing when to stop, or your limits would be crucial in the wealth stakes I would think. Probably the difference between Wealthy and Rich that point.
Back to your original point, I certainly dont think 200k for a family is Wealthy... it's ok... We are certainly well short of that figure.
Re this levy... If my Accountant cant tweak that extra 1pct out of our tax deduction... I'll go hee in a game of tiggy.
So for me being wealthy, would equate to working when you wanted, being able to go where you wanted... mostly overseas. Plus having enough for all ones material needs. Not even sure I would move from where I live now if I had all of that. I'd have a much better fitted out house though. I think 400K and my own business where I delegated via phone should be enough.
It's where greed comes in where the problem lies. IE: would you always travel 1st class on Long Haul or would business class be enough. Would you always want to eat 5 star or could a good meal in a decent restaurant be enough etc etc. Knowing when to stop, or your limits would be crucial in the wealth stakes I would think. Probably the difference between Wealthy and Rich that point.
Back to your original point, I certainly dont think 200k for a family is Wealthy... it's ok... We are certainly well short of that figure.
Re this levy... If my Accountant cant tweak that extra 1pct out of our tax deduction... I'll go hee in a game of tiggy.
