More GST revenue can pay for cuts to income and company tax rates, for example. This shift provides a structurally more stable tax revenue base, and sharpens incentives to work and invest.

Go to fluffing hell.

[–] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Exactly; increasing the GST would be downright regressive, harming the most vulnerable and will fail to stimulate the economy in any way, shape or form.

Doing so just to pass a tax cut for high-income earners will just further exacerbate the wealth divide we are currently experiencing; wealthy people need to be taxed more, not less - to cover our budgetary deficits, broaden our safety nets and invest in public infrastructure like housing, renewable energy, and faster public transport.

Giving those that have enough even more, is just going to have them park those funds in property, rent-seeking and extracting more wealth from the under-class.

It is so counter-intuitive, I can only think that this was proposed by someone with a fetish for public self-destruction.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 2 points 2 days ago

I could maybe accept increasing the GST if it came with a significant narrowing. Any talk of broadening the GST is a complete non-starter for me. But if you changed it such that like 90% of people's necessary daily/weekly/monthly expenses were exempt, including Internet & electricity bills, most clothing, all necessary (including socially necessary) health and sanitation products (soap, shampoo, household cleaning products, toilet paper, etc.), and low-emission transportation. Then maybe I'd be ok with an increase to 15% on the products that are left.

But for some reason every time they talk about GST, it's always about broadening it. Ridiculous.

load more comments (1 replies)