By: galloping.gerty
4/07/2009
10:16 pm Yahoo! Profile:
galloping.gerty Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Coz yeah, we know what studs you guys are. You're sure to go through a pack a day. *grimace* |
|
By: deemondo
4/07/2009
10:18 pm Yahoo! Profile:
deemondo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| rudd will have blood on his hands. |
|
By: galloping.gerty
4/07/2009
10:19 pm Yahoo! Profile:
galloping.gerty Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| eeww?? |
|
By: pathogan70
4/07/2009
10:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pathogan70 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Of course its difficult to resist, but could we move a few degrees away from schoolboy menstruation jokes. |
|
By: deemondo
4/07/2009
10:28 pm Yahoo! Profile:
deemondo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| ok .it was a commitment from labor in 2000.whats changed ?? |
|
By: buzzanddidj
4/07/2009
10:32 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'sorry i meant grocery watch'
GroceryChoice WAS delivered
It was dropped when it became evident.....
A. It did not have the expected uptake and useage by the consumer
B. It became evident it could never reach it's full potential without the full co-operation of 'the big 2'
Who jointly refused
. |
|
By: deemondo
4/07/2009
10:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
deemondo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| anyone who thought they could control the price of groceries . must be quite mad. |
|
By: buzzanddidj
4/07/2009
10:46 pm Yahoo! Profile:
buzzanddidj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
'anyone who thought they could control the price of groceries . must be quite mad'
So why complain on it being axed ? |
|
By: blossylyn
4/07/2009
10:49 pm Yahoo! Profile:
blossylyn Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| how much would be saved.. would depend.. if you have teenage daughters.. you may have 2 or 3 ppl to buy product for in one month.. |
|
By: deemondo
4/07/2009
10:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
deemondo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
it was a fools folly waste of mine and other tax payers monies.
thats one reason. |
|
By: aussiearisen
4/07/2009
10:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
aussiearisen Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
GG : "It's not the amount. It's the bloody principle! (no pun intended)"
Gerty, it`s not much of a principle, but gets all blown out of proportion because you are so cranky at the time. |
|
By: galloping.gerty
4/07/2009
10:52 pm Yahoo! Profile:
galloping.gerty Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"how much would be saved.. would depend.. if you have teenage daughters.. you may have 2 or 3 ppl to buy product for in one month.."
yessum. And quite often, more than one packet per person is required. It all adds up. |
|
By: pathogan70
4/07/2009
10:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
pathogan70 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Unfortunately, at this stage, everybody has put forward an opinion, and now its up to corecting spelling mistakes and insults.
To surmise- there is an inconsistency in the taxation system, which at face value, appears to discriminate against women. Its not a huge sum of money, but there's a principle. Most of us cynics can see that the beancounters would love to make a big hoo haa about cancelling this tax aND immediately implementing a more lucrative tax on something else to make up the shortfall. |
|
By: deemondo
4/07/2009
10:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
deemondo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| i have 3 daughters.it was also emotional. |
|
By: galloping.gerty
4/07/2009
10:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
galloping.gerty Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"it`s not much of a principle, but gets all blown out of proportion because you are so cranky at the time."
Think how much less cranky we'd be if the savings in GST on the product off-set the luxury tax on chocolate!
That time of the month would pass so much more smoothly for everyone involved! |
|
By: galloping.gerty
4/07/2009
10:55 pm Yahoo! Profile:
galloping.gerty Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"To surmise- there is an inconsistency in the taxation system, which at face value, appears to discriminate against women. Its not a huge sum of money, but there's a principle. Most of us cynics can see that the beancounters would love to make a big hoo haa about cancelling this tax aND immediately implementing a more lucrative tax on something else to make up the shortfall."
I think I love you. Will you marry me? |
|
By: thy.nemesis
4/07/2009
11:00 pm Yahoo! Profile:
thy.nemesis Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Who has received this week's Coles junk mail?
I hadn't heard about this until I saw their 'full-page' splash in my letterbox...
My first response was: cunning stunt! |
|
By: deemondo
4/07/2009
11:03 pm Yahoo! Profile:
deemondo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
My first response was: cunning stunt!
mine was stunning cont |
|
By: thy.nemesis
4/07/2009
11:05 pm Yahoo! Profile:
thy.nemesis Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Of course, the plural better describes the cynical games of the big 2... |
|
By: vegitamite97
5/07/2009
1:44 pm Yahoo! Profile:
vegitamite97 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
dont know very much about female products, but I think the GST couldnt be more than about 50 cents per pack
-------------------
yes seems like a cheap way of advertising for Coles.
whilst I also notice they have smallened their brand line on womens products. Alot is also Coles own brand. |
|
By: delboyroddersbro
5/07/2009
2:23 pm Yahoo! Profile:
delboyroddersbro Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
By: galloping.gerty
Yesterday (9:41 pm)
But I wouldn't exactly put sanitary items in the same class as deoderant.
------------------------- ------------------------- ---------
Maybe buzzzzzz rubs his underarms with them, hence his comparison....... |
|
By: qikvtec
5/07/2009
2:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
qikvtec Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
wheres gillard stand on this ?
***********************
Why is his opinion relevant? |
|
By: dnarever2
5/07/2009
2:27 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dnarever2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The people who use these products voted in favor of the tax in 2 seperate elections, they are only getting what they asked for.
. |
|
By: qikvtec
5/07/2009
2:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
qikvtec Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
So why complain on it being axed ?
************************* ********************
How many millions were wasted on it Buzz?
How many who opposed it spoke up and were derided for doing so?
I objected becuase it was a complete farking waste of time and money like most if not all of the ALP's policies. |
|
By: dnarever2
5/07/2009
2:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dnarever2 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<<<ok .it was a commitment from labor in 2000.whats changed ??>>>
************************* **************
Labor opposed the GST and were pushing for this exemption in the 1998 and 2002 elections.
Following the 2002 election Labor took the view that the people had been given the opportunity to vote against a GST on 2 occasions and had supported the tax.
In 2003 Labor officially dropped any plans to change the GST from their policy position.
Labor went into both the 2004 and 2007 elections with a policy of no changes to the GST.
. |
|
