35
A $1.4 billion question: The case for a new tax on Australians
(www.sbs.com.au)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2026
35 points (94.9% liked)
Australia
5133 readers
86 users here now
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's not proposed as a revenue raiser, it's intended as a public health measure.
The idea is that people buy less sugary drinks and have better dental health.
Your concerns raise a valid point, though, that revenue raised (and $1.4B isn't nothing) should be directly funneled into new programmes that benefit the working class. The study suggests that the money go into dental and other health services, but I've also seen proposals for using the revenue to cross-subsidise fresh food.
Either way, the working class could see a net benefit to their bottom line from government subsidies (which benefit from efficiencies of scale) and because they'll have less need of dental and other health services if they reduce their sugar intake.
Look man, they can use all the fancy words they want to try to convince me it's for the greater good or whatever. It really doesn't matter to me, all I hear is 'another thing you enjoy is going to rise in price' and these days that's all I fucking hear. Sick of it mate.
What if this meant something you like gets cheaper as a result? Say the extra revenue went to subsidising something else, fresh food maybe?
It still won't be equal. No more tax that targets working folk, tax wealth!! There's so much of it that Australia could very easily create the richest citizenry in the entire world just by nationalising the rocks we mine. Imagine if Gina and Clive and all those fat fucking rapists actually had to pay their fair share? Imagine the utopia that could fund! But no, instead let's make yet another working class luxury become more expensive. Fuck this place.
Would you support removing the tax on tobacco and alcohol? Why/why not?
I think a reduction is sensible yeah, any tax that targets working class consumers during a cost of living crisis is immoral IMO. The government has access to so many levers to generate wealth that doesn't involve fucking us battlers in the ass, they can pull from one of those if they need the dosh.