Skip to content

Wayne’s World: A Special Farnham Report Budget Special

May 9, 2012

Last night the world’s Greatest Treasurer Wayne Swan announced projections that the Federal Budget will be effectively a ‘balanced budget’ in 2012-13 with a nominal surplus of $1.5 billion. 

The surplus is forecast to rise to $2 billion in 2013-14 and to $5.3 billion the following year.

As is often the case, many of the measures in the Budget had been released, leaked or alluded to in the days leading up to the Budget itself, so there weren’t a lot of surprises in the announcement itself. 

Despite predictions of a “horror budget,” the Budget isn’t overly dramatic, although, depending on your own circumstances there are some significant changes. 

Wayne Swan, described as ”a Labor budget to its bootstraps”, forecasts a $1.5 billion surplus in 2012-13 – from a $44 billion deficit this financial year – and provides funding to kickstart aged-care reforms and a national disability insurance scheme.
 
One key initiative will see a $30,000 investment in a statue of Slim Dusty.

Despite a gloomy global outlook due to the dire situation in Europe, the Government forecasts the economy to grow at a healthy 3.25 per cent next year and stay at trend or above afterwards.

For most other people the budget isn’t bad.

Breeders will be blessed with a taxpayer funded cash handout of $820 or $410 a schoolchild to parents eligible for the family tax benefit.

People earning more than $300,000 a year will have the tax on their superannuation contributions doubled to 30 per cent.

Executives face a crackdown on the taxing of their golden handshakes and living away from home allowances. And the new financial year will see the means-testing of the private health insurance rebate for singles on more than $83,000 a year and families on more that $166,000.

Anyway, it was all a bit of a non-event really…
 
 
Advertisements
140 Comments leave one →
  1. el gordo permalink
    May 9, 2012 7:45 am

    Mark my words, this is a huge financial blunder.

    ‘TREASURY has taken a $3.2 billion revenue punt that carbon prices will recover in the four years to 2015-16 by sticking to the predictions it made last year that the price will be $29 a tonne despite a collapse in international carbon markets in recent months and gloomy forecasts from analysts.

    ‘European carbon prices have been trading near record lows below $10 and some leading analysts, including Bloomberg New Energy Finance, predict that the carbon price will stay low and remain close to the $4 mark by 2020.’

    From Sid Maher in the Oz.

  2. Splatterbottom permalink
    May 9, 2012 8:41 am

    Boring budget. Can we please get back to kicking Thommo now?

  3. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 8:47 am

    If this is all that was required to get to surplus, why were we $44bn in deficit?

  4. May 9, 2012 8:51 am

    Well at least is dampened all the media blah blah about Thomson and Slipper for a bit. So we have something to be thankful for.

  5. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 8:52 am

    Pffffft!

  6. Neil of Sydney permalink
    May 9, 2012 8:56 am

    Surely there must be some investigation into Treasury. Only 12 months ago the deficit for this year was forecast to be $23B. It is now forecast to be $44B. Apparently we find out in September the actual result.

    Why should anyone trust these highly paid, highly educated people.???

  7. May 9, 2012 9:06 am

    Because we hope that they are cleverer than lowly paid, uneducated people?
    If I ran my own little economy like our governments and Treasury ran theirs, I’d have been a declared bankrupt years ago.
    Is there a pension for that?

  8. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 9:55 am

    I see the Class Warfare continues. People in their 50s who have raised a family (usually without the current level of assistance) who have paid off their house finally and have probably paid for the kid’s wedding reception have beeeen hit for 6.

    Despite promising to allow those over 50 with a super balance of less than $500,000 to be able to contribute upto $50,000 into super per annum in 2012/2013 they are back to the same level as everyonre else.

    The attack on those trying to be self funded in retirement continues.

    This continuance of Class Warfare be it the people I’ve just mentioned or the billionaire miners just proves that the overall philosophy of this government is to sew conflict and negativism.

    So another broken promise on Super.

    Further proof that the modern ALP are just a party full of cnuts.

  9. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 9:56 am

    Hello “deknarf”

    or do you prefer “franked” ?

  10. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 9:58 am

    LOL

    This budget is built upon so many ridiculous assumptions its the first time the Institute of Chartered Accountants blog has advised members not to bother with the economic details as they are ridiculously unachievable.

  11. Tony permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:05 am

    “Despite promising to allow those over 50 with a super balance of less than $500,000 to be able to contribute upto $50,000 into super per annum in 2012/2013 they are back to the same level as everyonre else.”

    Is this what you’re talking about, Jaws? Do you have a link to where are the new rules outlined?

    ‘The government has announced changes that, if passed by parliament, will permanently increase the concessional contributions cap to $50,000 for individuals who have total super balances below $500,000 and are 50 years old or over. We will publish updated guidance if these announced changes become law.’

    http://www.ato.gov.au/superfunds/content.aspx?menuid=0&doc=/content/60489.htm&page=3&H3

  12. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:13 am

    Here ya go ToSY

    About half way thru this Link

    Its also behind a Paywall at the ICAA website

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/swan-shows-astaires-flair-20120508-1ybk0.html

  13. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:17 am

    Or you could go to the budget documents rather than rely on some hack’s opinion…

    http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/bp2/html/bp2_revenue-09.htm

    The Government will defer the start date of the 2010‑11 Budget measure Stronger, fairer, simpler tax reform — increasing concessional contribution caps for individuals over 50 with low superannuation balances by two years, from 1 July 2012 to 1 July 2014. Under the higher concessional contributions cap measure, individuals aged 50 and over with superannuation balances below $500,000 will be able to make up to $25,000 more in concessional contributions than allowed under the general concessional contributions cap.

    The two‑year deferral means that for 2012‑13 and 2013‑14, all individuals will be able to make concessional contributions of up to $25,000 per year as permitted under the general concessional contributions cap. In 2014‑15, the general cap is likely to increase to $30,000 through indexation, and the higher cap would then commence at $55,000.

    In consultations on the implementation of the higher cap, the superannuation industry raised concerns in relation to the cost and complexity involved in administering the balance limit. Deferring the start date of the higher cap to 1 July 2014 will bring significant synergies and efficiencies, as it will allow implementation to occur in conjunction with changes to superannuation fund reporting and systems that will be occurring under the SuperStream reforms.

    Deferring the start date of the higher concessional contributions cap will provide savings to the Budget of $1,459.5 million over the forward estimates period.

  14. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:18 am

    The worst decision I’ve seen is the termination of $63 million for the Indigenous Literacy and Numeracy Initiative … the phrase “going forward” annoys the s#!t out of me but this is going backwards …

  15. May 9, 2012 10:31 am

    Hi Jaws,
    Franking (or “franks”) are any and all devices or markings, printed or stamped impressions, codings, labels, manuscript writings, and/or any other authorised form of markings affixed or applied to mails (males) to qualify them to be ‘postally’ serviced.
    In the journey through life I feel qualified to say that I have been suitably ‘franked’ (sometimes warranted, sometimes not).
    Pleased to see that you got the reversed wordplay — not many people do!
    Deknarfed is the preferred, hence the moniker on my blog.

  16. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:31 am

    So how does that fit into the overall strategy TB?

    http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/ministerial_statements/indigenous/html/indigenous-03.htm

  17. Splatterbottom permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:37 am

    “‘postally’ serviced”

    What a lovely expression. It really sets the imagination running free.

  18. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:39 am

    Another uninformed hack I suppose……………

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/breaking-promises-proves-a-money-saving-exercise-20120508-1yba1.html

    So what are you on about Bacchus.

    The promise was that $50K would be the cap for 2012/13 just as it is for 2011/12. Which is what many hopeful SFRs were planning on

    Its a broken promise and your Link proves it if your comprehension skills are working this morning.

    Otherwise how is this part of your link supposed to happen…………….?

    “Deferring the start date of the higher concessional contributions cap will provide savings to the Budget of $1,459.5 million over the forward estimates period.”

  19. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:59 am

    From behind the Institute of Chartered Accountants paywall

    “The deferral of the start date for this measure will have significant implications for salary sacrificing arrangements, deductions for personal contributions and transition to retirement (TTR) pension strategies. Taxpayers will need to review their strategies before 1 July 2012 when the concessional contributions cap for those aged 50 and over will drop from $50,000 to $25,000 for 2012-13 and 2013-14.

    A taxpayer aged 50 or over on the top marginal tax rate who is currently making full use of the $50,000 concessional contributions cap will effectively pay an extra $7,875 in tax if she or he has to restrict concessional contributions to $25,000 from 1 July 2012, and take the remaining $25,000 in cash salary.”

  20. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:02 am

    What is it about this place and verballing? 🙄

    I was merely pointing out the full picture as written in the budget, rather than just blindly accepting what you or the MSM has to say. The inference in what you said and the outright statement in what Ms Irvine says is that the $50,000 concessional cap is “scrapped” rather than deferred…

  21. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:04 am

    If a taxpayer over 50 on the top marginal tax rate has a super balance of < $500K, they deserve to miss out!

  22. May 9, 2012 11:08 am

    “From behind the Institute of Chartered Accountants paywall”

    *eyes glazing over*

  23. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:15 am

    “If a taxpayer over 50 on the top marginal tax rate has a super balance of < $500K, they deserve to miss out!"

    Seriously Bacchus go and look at the Current Tax Scales

    You seem very ill/poorly informed

    And here we go again with "Carbon Tax" v "Carbon Price"

    "……….“scrapped” rather than deferred…"

  24. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:16 am

    So how does that fit into the overall strategy TB?

    Not quite sure, egg, maybe just moving the deck chairs around as the band plays and ship continues to sink …

    (I think I saw it on the ticker tape scroll on ABC 24 News last night)

  25. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:16 am

    From behind the Institute of Chartered Accountants paywall

    Paywall! A fkn paywall? Who would pay? 🙄

  26. May 9, 2012 11:19 am

    “Paywall! A fkn paywall? Who would pay?”

    That’s what I was thinking…

    I can only presume that the paywall is to protect innocent people who have a personality from inadvertently wandering in there…..

  27. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:20 am

    And here we go again with “Carbon Tax” v “Carbon Price”

    “……….“scrapped” rather than deferred…”

    Shame! Shame! Wally, as an esteemed Bean Counter even you should know the difference between “scrapped” – ie gone forever – and “deferred” ie delayed implementation …

    No wordplaying by, Baccy, simply the wrong (misinformed) word used by Ms Irvine (whomever she is …)

  28. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:22 am

    If a taxpayer over 50 on the top marginal tax rate has a super balance of < $500K, they deserve to miss out!

    Because obviously they’ve been in that top tax bracket their entire working life.

  29. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:23 am

    I can only presume that the paywall is to protect innocent people who have a personality from inadvertently wandering in there…..

    LOL! Where’s me star stamp five for that! …

  30. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:25 am

    TB

    Its a scrapped promise.

    Its a deferred promise when they implement it.

    It affects everyone over the 30% bracket not just those in the top bracket.

    And what is it with ALP supporters and the way they bandy about with “they deserve to miss out”.

    Talk about envy

  31. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:36 am

    Because obviously they’ve been in that top tax bracket their entire working life.

    yeah I was thinking along those lines, James … I think I was 40+ before I could start “accumulating” with any real headway … and how many 15% would the government actually gain … (ie from 15% to 30%) … and the BB’s NEED a super boost after the GFC …

    … from what I read most BB’s retire @ 65 with about $200,000 AND a mortgage … or worse …

    Speaking at the Conference of Major Superannuation Funds in Brisbane, she said the average super balance for men aged 65 was still about $198,000 and for women $112,000 but these numbers were distorted by a small proportion of people with more super and most retirees had only $70,000 to $80,000.

    Not quite sure where this comes from though??? in the same article …

    Towers Watson head of post retirement solutions Nick Callil said baby boomers had about $800,000 in super funds, and while there was no magic bullet for a fail-proof retirement product, there were features that could be incorporated to insulate older people against risks such as a market fall near retirement, living longer than expected and inflation.

    Won’t be too many with $800,000, methinks …

    http://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-funds/for-many-boomers-super-lift-to-be-too-late-20120320-1vhvd.html

  32. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:38 am

    Its a scrapped promise.

    Its a deferred promise when they implement it.

    Now whose playing with words … 😆

    And what is it with ALP supporters and the way they bandy about with “they deserve to miss out”.

    I think my post above negates that statement …

  33. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:44 am

    People like Bacchus and his ALP henchmen and women seem to associate anyone on the top bracket with “undeserving” bankers, lawyers and my god perhaps even accountants.

    One of my clients is a surgeon. He is on around $350K p.a.

    Does he deserve it ?

    Well let’s see……………..he is on call basically 24/7…………….on his third marriage due he says to his work…………………works approximately 80 hours per week………………..and saves someone’s life basically every day.

    Not knowing his entire life story it probably means he has spent 5-6 years at med school, and 10 years to become a surgeon in orfer to get $84 per hour.

    Tradespeople get more than that doing 50 hours

    But Bacchus reckons he should contribute more because Bacchus suffers from the Class War Syndrome

  34. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:46 am

    “……..I think my post above negates that statement …”

    I dont regard you as a “Rusted On”

  35. Neil of Sydney permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:51 am

    “One of my clients is a surgeon. He is on around $350K p.a.”

    He is in the wrong profession. The head of HSU gets that plus “extras”

  36. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:54 am

    We’re not talking average workers here TB. The top tax rate cuts in at $180K. People who’ve been on <$60K all their working lives and have only benefitted from super since 1992 will probably have <$200K in super, but they most likely also can't afford to be putting $50K into super every year either!

    Come on James – anyone earning over $180K now would have worked their way up to that point over their working life. Very few would go from $40-$60K to over $180K in just a few years. They should have had plenty of time to accumulate $500K in super since 1992…

  37. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:55 am

    FFS more fckn verballing. Where TF did I say a doctor doesn’t “deserve” his income. Stuff me pickled grandmother’s mushrooms!

  38. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:56 am

    But your doctor should have had decent financial advice that would see him accumulate >$500K by the time he’s 50!

  39. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:56 am

    Another Pro Business initiative from these Insane Economic Criminals

    “The Government will increase the Road User Charge, collected by the Commonwealth from fuel which is used by registered vehicles with a gross mass of greater than 4.5 tonnes operating on a public road for business purposes.

    From 1 July 2012, the Road User Charge will increase from 23.1 to 25.5 cents per litre. This will reduce the fuel tax credit paid by the Commonwealth to eligible heavy vehicle operators.”

    4.5T GVM is NOT a very large vehicle

  40. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 11:57 am

    Good point Neil

  41. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:00 pm

    “………But your doctor should have had decent financial advice that would see him accumulate >$500K by the time he’s 50!…………..”

    You just fell into a “Rat Trap” Bacchus

    He’s only been a client for 6 months and thanks to your bunch’s new legislation I’m not allowed to provide Superannuation advice anymore.

  42. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:01 pm

    We’re not talking average workers here TB. The top tax rate cuts in at $180K. People who’ve been on <$60K all their working lives and have only benefitted from super since 1992 will probably have <$200K in super, but they most likely also can't afford to be putting $50K into super every year either!

    Come on James – anyone earning over $180K now would have worked their way up to that point over their working life. Very few would go from $40-$60K to over $180K in just a few years. They should have had plenty of time to accumulate $500K in super since 1992…

    In short, Bacchus, you couldn’t be further off the mark.

  43. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:02 pm

    “………but they most likely also can’t afford to be putting $50K into super every year either!”

    There are plenty who have just paid off their house and the kids have left home. So now is the time to start saving.

    But not under these cnuts

  44. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:03 pm

    Envy pffft! The measure probably potentially affects people like me much more than your doctors & lawyers. I’m over 50, NOT in the top tax bracket, could be looking at a transition to retirement plan after next birthday…

  45. armchair opinionator permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:05 pm

    TB did you see the interview with the ‘older’ couple on ABC24 this am, the self funded retirees living on Sydney’s north shore?

    9:30am: ABC News 24’s Nick Dole speaks with self-funded retirees Frank and Marion Russell, from Sydney’s Northern Beaches, to find out their thoughts on the budget.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-09/budget-blog-wednesday-morning/3999714

    Damned ABC journo, he started off asking them what they thought of the budget and the talking points kicked in straight away “not impressed at all, not helping us” “it’s smoke & mirrors” and “the carbon dioxide tax” was the immediate reply.

    Then one by one he took them through the individual aspects of the budget, things presumably that would affect older people (eg the NDS, stay in homes instead of going to old age homes, older workers in workforce, cancer screening etc) and one by one, they responded that each was a good thing! There wasn’t anything they didn’t like about it.

    At the end, when asked about interest deferred, Frank says “we don’t pay any tax so I won’t comment on that”!

    I just had to shake my head at the disconnect, what is wrong with these people?

    Marion is a Hazel Hawke look alike isn’t she?

  46. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:06 pm

    Not much of a “rat trap” Jaws. I never said he should be getting his financial advice from you 🙄

  47. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:07 pm

    Tradespeople get more than that doing 50 hours

    And that killed your lovely story about the surgeon … don’t know any tradies who who earn $350K for 50 hours … nor $150,000 for 50 …

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Very few would go from $40-$60K to over $180K in just a few years. They should have had plenty of time to accumulate $500K in super since 1992…

    At the risk of argueing a point … I know at least two people whose income did that … and I’m one of ’em … I would concede that it doesn’t happen too often … (the other is my son-in-law currently in the Saudi desert, ten weeks on, two weeks off, project managing the construction of a gold mine … and earning about the same as, Wally’s, surgeon – for now) …

  48. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:10 pm

    “I never said he should be getting his financial advice from you”

    You were implying it pretty clearly

  49. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:12 pm

    “And that killed your lovely story about the surgeon ”

    I’m talking about the hourly rate.

    There are plenty of plumbers and electricians in Sydney over $150K

    Just because you dont know any does not mean they dont exist

  50. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:13 pm

    Fair enough James – you’re in the business & would know. It just seems to me that the $50K concessional cap was always designed to benefit the high income earners over the battlers who really need help to save for a livable retirement.

    I still say someone on the average wage ($69165 per annum in 2011) at 50 isn’t going to be able to put $50K into super each year anyway. (My understanding is that it wouldn’t be a good idea because of the tax rates.)

  51. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:16 pm

    4.5T GVM is NOT a very large vehicle

    They are if you get stuck behind one on the highway or they are coming at you on the wrong side of the road — don’t get me started on the need to get rid of BB on the road and build more railways!

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    KL, nah, missed the ABC24 thing (I really don’t like the channel much – to repetitiveand and journos interviewing journos about other journos opinions … nobody gets out much …

    … BTW why would you interview atypical SFRs from Sydney’s Northern Beaches? 🙄

    We are comfortable but still have to watch the pennies …

    (That reminds me, the trip to Taswegia is on, first three weeks in September! Just had to wait for sreb, to emigrate to the Mainland … heheh 😉 )

  52. el gordo permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:16 pm

    Nice to see the Coalition back down on the mining tax…good stuff.

  53. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:22 pm

    Late in their careers TB? I imagine your son is a long way off 50, so has plenty of years to accumulate into super. You’re a different kettle of fish, because super wasn’t available to you for as long as it has been to today’s 50 yr olds…

  54. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:22 pm

    There are plenty of plumbers and electricians in Sydney over $150K

    LOL! Reminds me of a clients' managers who argued (in my presence) at an boardroom exec meeting on a minesite that a rival consultant from Sydney could command twice my daily rate … "because of his (my rival's) higher cost of living in Sydney" … after the deafening silence from everyone round the table… the State Manager turned to me and said … "when can you start, TB?" … my contract lasted over five years …

    Everything has relevance … but is not necessarily in context …

  55. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 12:27 pm

    Late in their careers TB? I imagine your son is a long way off 50, so has plenty of years to accumulate into super. You’re a different kettle of fish, because super wasn’t available to you for as long as it has been to today’s 50 yr olds…

    I consider 40 late … its usually half way … takes a lot to live and accumulate $500K … and yes, my s-i-l is early 30’s …

    … I prefer to be a different “kettle of fish” 🙂 … and probably true – in context … most people are “plodders” … the texts will tell you only 30% of the working population is considered “upwardly’ mobile … (that’s those that do not talk) …

    … I went into business in 1992 (when compulsory super started) … but I had started my own super in my mid/late twenties …

    I’m 65 this year …

  56. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 1:47 pm

    There is no doubt a class of high flier that does very well from an early age. That class is very small. And many burn out too but that’s another issue.

    Typically, and especially amongst the cliched doctors and lawyers, the big dollars aren’t earned until well into their 40s. Surgeons especially are at Uni until at least 30 after which they have do start their apprenticeship.

    Lawyers, whilst well paid, typically don’t really start earning the big bucks until their mid 40s by which point they’ve often racked up big debts in anticipation of the big bucks.

    Small business owners are another class where it oftens takes some years to begin to reap the benefits of hard work put in over many years.

  57. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 1:56 pm

    “That class is very small. And many burn out too but that’s another issue.”

    Agreed

    But they’ll bash anyone who dares to earn over $80K. Because that’s they do.

    After all

    “We Are Us”

  58. Splatterbottom permalink
    May 9, 2012 2:13 pm

    This isn’t a terrible budget. Basically it is what Labor does – soak the wealthy (and the not quite so wealthy) and give more to the poorer end. There is even some prospect of a surplus.

    The real problems with Labor lie in other policies – most importantly the IR reforms which have greatly empowered unions. It is no good complaining about declining tax revenues if your policies reduce profitability.

  59. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 2:22 pm

    WTF are you babbling about now Jaws? 🙄

  60. May 9, 2012 3:16 pm

    I agree with what James said at 1.47pm…

    I have quite a few lawyer friends. Those that have their own practice work very long hours. One particular close friend who also happens to be my personal lawyer often works until 10.00pm at night with little time for holidays.

    She recently turned 50, and has now (last week) just been diagnosed with two types of cancer.

    The prognosis is not good.

    I really don’t begrudge anyone how much they earn – except when their remuneration is paid for out of the income of others and squandered on brothels and the like without any sense of accountability or responsibility. Such people are just scum.

  61. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 3:55 pm

    Further proof of what a total friggin’ idiot we have as a PM. Gillard claiming Abbott is out of touch because he lives on Sydney’s North Shore and telling him to get into the real world away from the North Shore.

    Hang on……………………does this friggin’ moron realize that when she’s in Sydney she lives at Kirribilli House possibly the wealthiest suburb in the NORTH SHORE and in the shadows of the Harbour Fuckin’ Bridge.

    And where does she live in Canberra ?

    The friggin Lodge ………………!

    Fuck me

    Now she’s picked another fight with an entire District.

    This one will bite her. I predict she’ll try and use her stupid girly giggle to wiggle out of this latest gaffe.

    http://media.theage.com.au/news/national-news/abbott-is-out-of-touch-3281929.html

  62. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 3:58 pm

    I agree with what James said at 1.47pm…

    Yeah, me too … I have never worried about paying taxes either (you may have noticed that I do whinge about the way some of it is spent 😉 ) … always believed that if I earned more than the “average” then I could afford to support those who were in need at the bottom of the ladder … (wonder if its because I was born just after WWII and the adults then had all become “the common denominator” … ie money didn’t save you from being bombed – it may get you out of the call up but you were noticed pretty quickly – but in general everyone helped each other … blurred the “class” a bit … unfortunately not permanently)

    Small business owners are another class where it oftens takes some years to begin to reap the benefits of hard work put in over many years.

    True dat … on average seven years before you can say you’ve “made it” … start-up failures are horrendous – over 50% in the first years and still high in the years that follow …

    … in our case we did really well for five years (six figure net income every year) … then work just dried up $20K in year six and, The Minister, got part-time work gave us $40K … then we both worked for a colleague for ten months (disaster) … resigned and re-ignited our business with new name and focus and flew over the next nine years! Retired at 59.

  63. May 9, 2012 4:09 pm

    ” Gillard claiming Abbott is out of touch because he lives on Sydney’s North Shore and telling him to get into the real world away from the North Shore.”

    Actually, it’s already biting her on the arse Jaws…

    Latika Bourke has just confirmed that Tony actually lives in the Northern Beaches, which is what – a good 45 mins to an hour’s drive of North Sydney?

    And quite a different area to the affluent North Shore that Julia was alluding to…

  64. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:25 pm

    That’s right reb,

    Once you get past Manly you hit pockets of wealth but overwhelmingly you could be in the Western Suburbs as there are plenty of red brick 1950s decor around.

    I predict the stupid giggle will be deployed shortly

  65. Splatterbottom permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:42 pm

    “And where does she live in Canberra ?”

    According to Krudd the Lodge has been renamed Boganville.

  66. el gordo permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:45 pm

    The Northern Beaches aren’t all that swish, don’t appear to rate a mention in Sydney’s most expensive suburbs.

    http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/residential/top-10-most-expensive-sydney-suburbs-for-houses-rp-data/2012022153193

  67. Tony permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:45 pm

    🙂

  68. May 9, 2012 4:51 pm

    That list of the top ten suburbs is interesting.. I though Mosman would have rated higher.

    I imagine that those suburbs would also feature highly in the list of “the top ten suburbs for cocaine usage”

  69. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:53 pm

    Yeah right Julia, places like Narrabeen are so posh.

  70. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:56 pm

    Well fark me.

    Where’s Palm Beach ?

  71. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 4:57 pm

    “Henley”

    Where the fark is that ?

  72. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:00 pm

    I though Mosman would have rated higher.

    LOL!

    Clontarf is just North of Brisbane (suburb of Redcliffe) and strangely enough bound for the high prices of the Sydney version I suspect … as a peninsula the Redcliffe CC always had problems finding money … answer … allow high rise units with great views to Moreton Island … spend a fortune on the seafront and upgrade the whole place …

    All they need now is a railway connection to fast trains … been promised for over five decades to my knowledge … oh and a few decent restaurants …

  73. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:01 pm

    Fark me

    Henley is next to friggin’ Gladesville

  74. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:02 pm

    TB

    The road to fortune requires a marina as well

  75. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:04 pm

    Obviously my local member Bronwyn does not realise she is representing the residents of little more than a slum

  76. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:09 pm

    El Gordo

    That list of suburbs reminds me of a few nicknames that a Jewish friend gives them
    Vaucluse= Snaucluse, Bellevue Hill = Belljew Hill, Dover Heights= Jehovah Heights, Double Bay = Double Pay, Rose Bay = Nose Bay

  77. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:09 pm

    The road to fortune requires a marina as well

    Yep, got one … and canal estates and and access to Moreton Bay’s, islands, whales etc …

  78. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:16 pm

    You sound quite envious, Wally … odd considering your earlier post re incomes … 😯

  79. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:19 pm

    I’m just horrified that Palm Beach has been relegated to the Second Division.

    LOL

    I must complain to Bronwyn.

  80. el gordo permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:40 pm

    The story goes that the Jewish community escaping from Europe, bought up heavily around Sydney harbour after the Japanese midget submarine invasion.

    They didn’t see any real threat in this puny display…

  81. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:52 pm

    One of them rests just south of me

  82. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 5:53 pm

    … the Jewish community escaping from Europe, bought up heavily …

    I bet if you check, that most of the high land with views will be owned by the Micks and CofE!

    Richest real estate owners in the world … obviously didn’t understand the story about JC and the moneylenders at the synagogue …

    One of the reasons I reckon organised religion is no better than organised crime … and then they employ Fuckwits™ like Pell …

  83. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 6:13 pm

    “………..most of the high land with views will be owned by the Micks and CofE! ”

    So you reckon the last 2000 years has all been about getting a scenic view ?

  84. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 7:07 pm

    So you reckon the last 2000 years has all been about getting a scenic view ?</i.

    Nah … just playing Robber Barons and conning the simple folk out of their hard earned …

    … bit like CPA's … y'know my missus kept very accurate books (according to our accountant – and the RTO- she's one mean book-keeper) so when the accountant got our tax info on disk … he/she got one of the lackeys to check 'em and didn't change a thing … charged a few grand (or more) to "do our tax" … more like "do us" !

    Daylight fkn robbery … I wouldn't dream of thinking you might do anything like that of course …

    I don't mind paying folk for doing something I can't do … but using me or mine to simply "charge" because they can (like churches and the grab bag) … s#!ts me no end … the difference between people who make money legitimately (because of actually applying knowledge and skill) and Robber Barons (or wannabes) who do sweet FA and charge the earth … arrrrrrrrgh …

    In my defence I actually do come from a working class background – the dark satanic hills of Yorkshire … if tha' wants owt fer nowt tha' mu do it fer thesel' …

  85. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 7:08 pm

    That fkn dot is really is really s#!tting me too!

  86. May 9, 2012 7:35 pm

    ***BREAKING NEWS!!!!***

    Julia is live on the 7.30 report and her hair is now a definitive shade of BROWN!!!

    Her advisers must have decided that the red hair was not resonating well with the focus groups..

  87. May 9, 2012 7:37 pm

    Wow, she’s clearly got the shits. Not a good look at all…

  88. TB Queensland permalink
    May 9, 2012 7:51 pm

    Julia is live on the 7.30 report and her hair is now a definitive shade of BROWN!!!

    WOW! LOL!

    That has had me so concerned! Heheheh …. ToMMy will be excited … and splatterbum … just what they have been waiting for! I think they’ve finally got her!

    What a fkn cheat!

  89. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 8:34 pm

    I saw a little of Julia on 7.30. Nice hair! Tony Abbott would look better with that colour, rather than the shade of Grecian 2000 that he is currently using.

    She was rather feisty with Chris Ulhmann, anyone would think an interviewer wasn’t entitled to remind a politician of the commitments they’d previously made.

  90. May 9, 2012 8:39 pm

    “anyone would think an interviewer wasn’t entitled to remind a politician of the commitments they’d previously made.”

    Precisely!

    She wasn’t very happy about that….

  91. el gordo permalink
    May 9, 2012 8:41 pm

    The barrackers have been telling her to get a backbone and this is the best she can manage.

  92. May 9, 2012 8:54 pm

    GO TEAM!!!

    Mine?

  93. May 9, 2012 9:05 pm

    or mine…?

  94. Bacchus permalink
    May 9, 2012 9:11 pm

    Ok then – I though Ms Gillard did an excellent job representing her point of view to Mr Uhlman’s viewers without going over the top. There were no “nodding head” or “walking away” moments. Well done Julia 🙂

  95. May 9, 2012 9:20 pm

    “Mine?”

    I can’t kick ’em while they’re down, miglo.

    It seems a bit misplaced that they’re calling for Primus’ head already.

    It must be very disconcerting for supporters.

  96. May 9, 2012 9:22 pm

    Politics, on the other hand, is too full of disingenuous characters to cheer from the sidelines. Invest yourself in ‘their’ ideals too readily & you’re destined for jaded disappointment.

  97. Tom of Melbourne permalink
    May 9, 2012 9:42 pm

    Ulhmann did well. Gillard seemed testy. she simply doesn’t like being reminded of broken commitments. That’s understandable I suppose, but it goes with the job.
    ————————–
    I think it is fine to kick a footy club when they’re down. I found it entirely satisfying to hammer Carlton while they were hanging around the foot of the ladder.

  98. JAWS permalink
    May 9, 2012 10:28 pm

    Having been forced to work last night to ensure recently widowed former (20 + years ago) Miss California does not run out of caviar or have to resort to shoppers dockets to afford petrol I decided to open a gift she gave me which I had already posted about.

    I recommend the 2001 Hill of Grace next time you wander thru Dan Murphy’s

    Don’t tell your bank manager though

  99. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 9:48 am

    Fair enough James – you’re in the business & would know. It just seems to me that the $50K concessional cap was always designed to benefit the high income earners over the battlers who really need help to save for a livable retirement.

    Peter Costello’s greatest failure, and I said it at the time, was in some of the amendments to Super especially removing the tax on withdrawn lump sums. It was exacerbated by Swan’s cap on concessional contributions. Sure, have a cap, but $50k is too low and there should still be the capacity for CGT relief on lump sums rolled into super.

    Governments simply have to live in the real world. Those who CAN support themselves in retirement should be encouraged in every way to do so. Those who can’t should be properly supported. There really is very little point in talking about “battlers” and saving for retirement. “Battlers” (and I’m talking about the real battlers not the so-called Howard Battlers) barely have enough to fund rent, food, clothing and utilities (oh, and exhorbitant union dues paid for the benefit of faceless men enjoying services of a “social” nature). Having any real expectation that they will be able to fund any more than a “rainy day” super account is unrealistic. The Age Pension is for them and should be more generous.

  100. May 10, 2012 9:58 am

    Someone’s kidnapped Snacty and replaced him with a left-wing humanitarian…

    Call the police…!!!

  101. Bacchus permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:02 am

    Can’t really argue with anything you’ve said there at all James. About the only thing I’d add is there should be a realistic cap on concessional contributions once the balance of super held reaches a reasonable level – perhaps $1mill – to close a loophole for the very well off avoiding paying tax…

  102. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:04 am

    Reb, I said it the day after the particular budget (I think 2007) on the Blogocracy blog. I roundly criticised the bloke who remains to this day my favourite politician on policy grounds. No one wanted to discuss it.

    But for the sake of “balance”, I keep hearing from The PM and Treasurer that these 4 YEARS OF SURPLUS BUDGETS ($1-2 billion) will help take pressure off interest rates. Does that or does that not mean that the last 5 years of DEFICIT budgets ($40-$50 billion) put pressure on interest rates? Pardon me for my confusion.

  103. May 10, 2012 10:09 am

    anyone got any suggestions for Budget Reply Bingo….?

  104. The BarStud permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:16 am

    “Big New Tax”……………………”Stop the Boats”………………………..”Cut the Debt”……………………….”Cut Spending”……………………………….”Craig Thompson”……………………………………”Escort Services”……………………………….Blah blah blah………….!

  105. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:25 am

    Yep, Bacchus, fair enough. I always worked on the 5% rule. That is, if you draw 5% from your super in income every year then it is pretty well guaranteed to last your lifetime. I thin $50k retirement income is a fair thing (remembering that it comes tax free) so $1 million is a reasonable figure. Now we can argue till the cows come home whether that figure should be $40k or $60k, and we could also argue about “tax paid” contributions (obviously whilst there is no tax deduction on the contributions there remains an advantage in investing in super rather than outside it) but really that’s trimming the edges stuff.

    But really, having done a bunch of stuff to fix super, Costello went and fcked it, and the Swan went and fcked it some more.

  106. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:25 am

    Smoke and Mirrors.

  107. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:32 am

    “I always worked on the 5% rule. That is, if you draw 5% from your super in income every year then it is pretty well guaranteed to last your lifetime.”

    Us CA’s use the rule of multiplying what you need by 12 = Required Sum $

  108. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:45 am

    I don’t know what’s happening in other parts but Sydney Radio is full up with people just totally fed up with subsidizing families all the time.

    The callers themselves are not asking for subsidies they just want politicians to stop the cash handouts and fix up highways, hospitals and schools.

    Sounds reasonable

  109. Bacchus permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:46 am

    So in your case Jaws, you’d say the person wanting $50K pa would need $600K in super when they retire. I’d imagine that would also depend on the age of retirement?

  110. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:50 am

    Just heard……….

    “Families stare at our Hospitals and Schools everyday and night because on the collective walls of Australia’s typical family homes are mounted our future hospitals and schools”

  111. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:50 am

    And there you have the duty of an accountant versus the duty of a financial adviser. Not critising you at all, Jaws, but if I were to rely on x12, a 20% market crash becomes my fault. Relying on 5% shields the investor from that eventuality.

    And remember, of course, we are talking about government caps as opposed to market speculation, so a more conservative approach is appropriate.

  112. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:52 am

    Thats a basic retirement Mr B.

    They must make sure they take no debt into retirement.

    Jame’s goes for 20 times which if invested well will provide a very nice income. Just dont throw it in the Bank

  113. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:53 am

    That’s right, Bacchus, but in Jaws case, there is a reliance on either a certain market return over the period or death by 85yo. He is in fact closer to the reality than I, especially if the investor is prepared to actually invest.

  114. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:58 am

    “…….so a more conservative approach is appropriate.”

    Granted

    I and a few colleagues are a tad more aggressive. I prefer to buy the Bank rather than put money in it.

    Even now you can get post franking 10 to 11% on a government guaranteed investment

    As far as Costello’s reforms he should never have allowed full lump sum withdrawal. There need to be caps on that.

  115. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:01 am

    And the reality is the older you get the less travel you undertake (holidays) and the less you eat and drink.

    Look at TB

    He’s about to confront the need to start putting some money aside for nappies.

  116. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:07 am

    And I’m going on a likely retirement at 65

    If it was a 60 yo then Jame’s is closer to the mark

  117. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:11 am

    And the reality is the older you get the less travel you undertake (holidays) and the less you eat and drink.

    Look at TB

    He’s about to confront the need to start putting some money aside for nappies.

    That’s certainly true, but cold comfort for a retiree (or one approaching retirement) whose super fund has just dropped from $600k to $450k and very little sign of the kind of market or interest rate stability that gives the confidence of reasonable growth over the ensuing decades.

  118. May 10, 2012 11:12 am

    “And the reality is the older you get the less travel you undertake (holidays) and the less you eat and drink.

    Look at TB”

    LOL!

    And the less you care about your dress sense too…

    Look at TB.

  119. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:16 am

    Surprised Reb hasn’t fallen asleep yet, it’s about now in these conversations his eyes start glazing over.

    Wayne Swan’s latest quote…..

    “I won’t go on a spending spree like Mr Costello”.

    Get out, Swan, get the fuck out, and take that Gillard with you.

  120. Tony permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:31 am

    ‘Do you believe Mr Swan when he says the over-50s concessional cap has been deferred, rather than removed? I don’t think I do based on Mr Swan’s track record of promising policy changes and then breaking his promises, or minimising the policy change, or deferring the policy, or freezing indexation for years on end.

    Here’s why I don’t believe that the over-50s cap will return while Mr Swan is Treasurer . . .’

    http://www.superguide.com.au/boost-your-superannuation/another-super-con-over-50s-contributions-cap-removed

  121. Bacchus permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:31 am

    Thanks for that James & Jaws – I’m going to have to consider this stuff a lot more seriously next year (55). This is good general knowledge stuff to have though 🙂

  122. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:32 am

    “I won’t go on a spending spree like Mr Costello”.

    LOL

    Can someone explain how the f**k they are going to grow tax revenue by 10.8% (their claim) on top of the CO2 tax.

    The Budget is a joke

  123. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:40 am

    Mr B

    If you are about to hit 55 you should be considering a transition to retirement pension (TRP) right now. It could save you alot of tax

    You better get some advice

  124. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:42 am

    Don’t worry ToSY.

    Swan wont even be an MP come the next election. I’m sure a future LNP Government will lift the limits once again.

  125. Tony permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:53 am

    It’s almost as if this government doesn’t really want people to be self-funded in retirement, but wants them to be reliant on an all-powerful state.

    Oh . . . 😦

  126. armchair opinionator permalink
    May 10, 2012 11:59 am

    I don’t know what’s happening in other parts but Sydney Radio is full up with people just totally fed up with subsidizing families all the time.

    That is true jaws. I’m sick of hearing about families too, whether it be labor’s working families or liberals families. It’s like there are whole groups of our society who are ignored by the politicians. Who is providing the tax base for these ‘aspirational’ families who want the taxpayer to fund their lifestyle choices eg private health, education and investment?

    Do the rest of us exist purely to fund families? How about a simple acknowledgement of the tax contributions made by people who don’t ask for and don’t receive any benefits. It is this continual mantra of families, families, families that is annoying. Should the rest of us (no kids, adult kids, singles) just drop out of society and form our own little communes, leave the ‘families’ to support themselves (I know who would be happiest and looked after the best).

    It is especially noticeable since families are not supported as the kids get older [18-25 years], which seems to me to be a time when they are very expensive and supported a lot by parents. People can’t fund a looming retirement when they are supporting adult children who are studying and working shit retail/hospitality jobs [exploited] or perhaps still bludging off them by living at home rather than paying rent.

    The politicians are going the right way to divide us and turn us off supporting families especially as these greedy, grasping families are so vocal with the entitlement mentality.

    Now they think it a good idea to fund nannies and the FIFO mine workers have a big whinge about being away from home and ‘family’ but that is said as they are run off to invest their big bucks in yet another negatively geared investment house!

  127. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 12:16 pm

    A lot of that is true Kitty

    We flick pass huge handouts and still people die on the Pacific Highway 20 years after 2 horrendous bus crashes where the coroner of the time basically demanded a dual carriageway between Sydney and Brisbane.

    And that’s just one example.

    I’m sure other states have unfinished stuff

    Dont forget that Joe Hockey got pilloried for daring to suggest that the “Age of Entitlement” was over

  128. James of North Melbourne permalink
    May 10, 2012 12:22 pm

    It’s almost as if this government doesn’t really want people to be self-funded in retirement, but wants them to be reliant on an all-powerful state.

    Oh really???? (Apologies to a certain 300 game Geelong ruckman).

  129. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 12:36 pm

    “……….but wants them to be reliant on an all-powerful state.”

    Yep…..and beholden………….!

  130. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 4:47 pm

    Of course the broken promise in relation to the Superannuation Caps will simply drive more people into negative gearing (whether you are for or against NG is another topic) where at least they’d get to offset the loss against their taxable income plus they’d get a 50% discount on any capital gains tax (provided its owned > 12 months)

    I have 3 clients who I advised around 6 years ago to go and find apartments they would be happy to retire to (all 3 purchased sub penthouses) near transport, medical facilities,shops ,restaurants, and clubs which they have had rented out ever since and which provided losses to carry into their tax returns. If they did not move into them they’d still have to pay capital gains on sale. They also made contributions to the repayments of the principal (not deductible of course).

    None of them have much super but they do have substantial family homes of great value which they continue to enhance/renovate and which on retirement they plan to sell in around 4 years (tax free capital gains) and move into their sub penthouses which by then would have been well subsidized by the taxpayer.

    Then they will live off the remains of their family home proceeds.

    Anyone could do it but its crucial that you don’t make a mistake in where to live in retirement

    PS I thought good red wine was not supposed to give one a headache

  131. TB Queensland permalink
    May 10, 2012 5:24 pm

    Wally, I suspect you and I agree on the pig snuffling for rich folks when it comes to NG … I feel the same about “family trusts” BTW … these are simply tax havens for the rich and unwashed …

    NG not only plays with tax reduction ie government supporting landlords … while the lower paid community has to pay rent rather than buy … it also increases the value of homes disproportionately while forcing up rents … a vicious circle to keep the poor, poorer and the rich, richer …

  132. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 5:37 pm

    Let me start……………….Family Trusts ARE a rort.

    But NG is a very complex beast which I’m in 2 minds about.

    However I fervently believe that people should be able top contribute more than a paltry $25K to Super when they are in their 50s.

    That’s when they are likely to have the best chance to accumulate before they really start to feel the wear and tear of a working life.

    Hell a lot of people start to suffer failing eyesight in their 50s

  133. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 5:40 pm

    Mrs JAWS had a novel idea the other day. Why does’nt the government go to private developers and lease the air above government schools.i.e. allow high rise apartments above schools with school kids entering from one side and residents from the other.

    It would’nt work in every instance but might be worth a try somewhere

  134. TB Queensland permalink
    May 10, 2012 5:49 pm

    Agree with all that, Wally (eyesight fails around 40 BTW) … Swan seems to think that raising the compulsory super to 12% is the answer … not everyone is a “worker” as defined by the Super Act … many are contractors as companies abrogate their duty of care responsibilities … and shift it to individuals (ie workers comp) …

  135. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 6:01 pm

    And if you want any further evidence as to the quagmire of Family Trusts and Tax Law look no further than Gina changing the vesting date of one of the Rinehart Trusts.

    It used to be the case that if you formed a Trust you had to lodge its trust deed with the ATO when it was formed. If you amended the Trust then ditto.

    Now that’s no longer a requirement. Its been gone for at least 15 years plus if not more.

    So if you want to change a Trust Deed these days all you need is a cigarette lighter and an ashtray and perhaps if its a very old Trust document an old typewriter (yep we keep them and we manually lube the ribbon with ink) then photocopy it and destroy the newly typed version as the ATO will accept the copy anyway.

    The ATO just accepts everything these days.

  136. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 6:11 pm

    PS “we kep them” as a profession.I dont have a typewriter but I know a few that do

  137. May 10, 2012 6:46 pm

    ” we manually lube the ribbon with ink”

    The mind boggles.

  138. TB Queensland permalink
    May 10, 2012 7:03 pm

    The mind boggles.

    Wonder what else they manually lube!

    The ATO just accepts everything these days.

    But its still fkn dishonest! Jesus wept … no wonder the profession gets bagged as … shall we say … unprofessional for a price …

    BTW what does a “lube” cost? 🙂

  139. JAWS permalink
    May 10, 2012 10:07 pm

    LOL @ lubes

    It’s not just accountants. There are a lot of typewriters in lawyers offices
    where the deeds to a trust are written

    Just home. House next door burgled !

    Despite video and alarm system

    Another day in Sydney i suppose

Go on say something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: