Thursday, August 12, 2010

Notes: Thursday, August 12, 2010

"Tony Abbott backs Henry tax reform - but that could mean income tax slug"

From the expanded on-line version of a short article which appeared on p. 5 of yesterday's Sydney Daily Telegraph:

MORE than five million taxpayers who earn between $36,000 and $94,000 would be slugged with a higher tax bill under the tax plan endorsed by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott at his campaign launch.

An analysis of the shows middle income earners would pay up to $500 a year more in tax while millionaires would get a $15,300 a year tax cut.

Mr Abbott said the Henry plan for a simpler income tax system "should be the foundation of Australia's next round of tax reform".

[...] Mr Abbott told The Australian on Monday that he would to cut Australia's overall tax burden when the budget returned to surplus adding that his "instinctive priority" had always been for more personal income tax cuts.

But ACTU analysis shows that under the Henry plan, workers would pay no tax on their first $25,000 and 35c in the dollar until they earned $180,000.

A worker earning $40,000 a year would pay $200 a year more while someone earning $60,000 would face a tax rise of $100.

A worker earning $80,000 would pay $500 a year more.

Low income earners would receive substantial tax cuts under the reforms.

Those on $20,000 a year would pay $751 a year less in tax.

The biggest tax cuts, however, would go to the wealthy.

Those earning $200,000 a year would make a tax saving of $3300 while those on $300,000 would save $4800.

On the other hand, though:

Economist Posted at 9:23 AM August 11, 2010
OH please - ACTU analysis? What government is going to put up taxes on the levels you describe? Answer - none. A story where the author is not even proud enough to put his/her name to....

Comment 6 of 9

Robert of Pennant Hills Posted at 9:48 AM August 11, 2010
Rather than trust the ACTU calculation people might like to go the the Australian Taxation site and check the above figures. Income $40000 -Abbott tax- $5250. ATO calculation for present tax on $40000-$5668. Saving $418. Looks like a typical Labor con to fool the public.

Comment 7 of 9

On the inadequacies of modern men

NEARLY every man on the planet is an inferior version of men that have come before, a visiting author says.

Peter McAllister believes modern man fails to live up to his legacy because his predecessors had to be faster, stronger, smarter and fitter to survive.

[...] McAllister argues that most men fall short of their genetic potential.

Others are pre-destined to have poor eyesight, simple minds, and weak muscles and bones.

He is in town for science week, promoting his book Manthropology, the Science of the Inadequate Modern Male. Tonight's free public event at the RiAus Science Exchange is fully booked.

"Men in the past were challenged very much more than men are today and they developed to a much higher level in all sorts of ways," he said.

"Even though we have a view of ourselves as being very highly developed, we're not anywhere near as developed as what we think. We don't challenge ourselves as much as men throughout even our recent history did."

Our male ancestors were bigger and stronger. Their lives depended on their ability to hunt and defend their territory. Modern males drive to the local shop, eat more than they need and avoid hard labour.

But as palaeo-anthropologist McAllister knows, the human body is designed to respond to stress. "That happens with your bones. The more mechanical load is placed on them, the more robust they become," he said.

The fossil record is filled with bigger bones, which suggest bigger muscles. Few people alive today have the strength of people from ancient times.

"If you look at the arm bones of elite tennis players, they have bone shafts nearly as thick as (the human ancestor) Homo erectus," he said.

"They have placed a lot of stress on their bones and they have developed quite strongly. That goes to show you that in ancient times everybody was equivalent to elite athletes."

Roman soldiers were fitter than elite solders of today and aboriginal people have better eyesight, four times better than those with a farming culture.


"Non-Catholics influenced Vatican II liberalization of Catholic church, new Penn study says"

I found the following paragraphs particularly interesting:

The researchers found that the relationship between the church and state as well as changes in the institution's situation in relation to other institutions, particularly a loss of dominance and the presence of and relationship with other religious institutions, were crucial factors in predicting whether religious leaders would be open to change and also what kinds of change they would prioritize.

They concluded that in places where the Roman Catholic Church enjoyed a stable monopoly as the state church, religious leaders were almost impervious to outside influence and opposed to most kinds of change. In areas in which Catholicism was not the established faith but where the religious field was stable, however, leaders of other religious institutions were a crucial source of influence on Catholic bishops who attended and voted at Vatican II.

Here we see some benefits of Catholicism being a country's State religion and the Catholic Church its established Church, which (benefits) vindicate the perennial Magisterium's teachings on the social rights of Christ the King.

On political developments in The Kingdom of Tonga

In today's Herald:


Tonga is nothing if not counter-cyclical. Its prime minister, Feleti Sevele, was in Sydney yesterday and looking forward to stepping down at the country's elections on November 25, which will also mark the surrender of a large portion of royal power by King George Tupou V. Into the bargain, Tonga is preparing to send 55 marines from its small armed forces to Afghanistan, at a time when many nations are looking to pull out. ''It's quite something after 175 years,'' Dr Sevele said, referring to Tonga's stretch of unbroken absolute monarchy. ''But His Majesty has been the driving force.'' The 50,000 voters among Tonga's 104,000 residents, augmented by the 160,000-strong diaspora who return to vote, will elect 17 of the 26 members of the new parliament, leaving only nine representatives who are elected by Tonga's 33 hereditary nobles. The next PM will also be appointed by the parliament, not the king. Meanwhile there's an election issue to be mined among the 30,000 ethnic Tongans here. An import limit imposed by Tony Abbott when he was health minister on kava - the mildly euphoric root product - remains in force. ''It's still there,'' Dr Sevele said of the import limit. ''The reply has always been that medical issues have yet to be cleared up.''

[Bold type in the original,]

Yesterday in history: The colony of New South Wales upgraded

From the "on this day" section of yesterday's Sydney Daily Telegraph's history page (p. 69):

London upgrades NSW from penal colony to crown colony-a milestone on the road to democracy and nationhood.

It's interesting to learn about the different classes of colonies in the British Empire.

Reginaldvs Cantvar
Feast of St. Clare, Virgin, A.D. 2010

No comments: