| | |
28-02-2008, 09:08 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Fo Tan
Posts: 1,600
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat  To be honest they could have done something else with the money....
People who buy wine are usually people who can afford it... | You sound like the middle-class guy in the SCMP. The one who is unhappy with his HK$25,000 refund because he'd rather the government give him an education subsidy. Evidentially the government put some sort of restriction on the $25,000 otherwise he could use it as an education subsidy. He says it might afford a nice trip for his family.
And you forget---it is not the government's money. They take it from the citizens. | |
29-02-2008, 09:44 AM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: HK Age: 30
Posts: 919
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleuth You sound like the middle-class guy in the SCMP. The one who is unhappy with his HK$25,000 refund because he'd rather the government give him an education subsidy. Evidentially the government put some sort of restriction on the $25,000 otherwise he could use it as an education subsidy. He says it might afford a nice trip for his family.
And you forget---it is not the government's money. They take it from the citizens. | Wow ...major insult...."middle class"...
Anyway, couldn't be futher away from the truth...I am personally living a very decent lifestyle and do enjoy my bottle of wine...
And believe it or not since I have a very decent lifestyle a good job in an IBank, I do not see lowering the tax on wine as a priority for this city...
Was just saying that instead of scrapping tax on Wine, the gvt had the opportunity with such a surplus to do something historical (totally abolish the income tax, increase signifcantly the allowance for the elderly...).....  | |
29-02-2008, 10:14 AM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 84
| | | Mat, the good thing about the $25,000 rebate is that you can choose to do with it what you want. So put it to good use, I'm sure there are many worthy causes that would appreciate it. Spread the cheer... | |
29-02-2008, 10:32 AM
|  | Resident Peacekeeper | | Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Pokfulam Age: 40
Posts: 10,598
| | | Mat - I am 100% behind you on this. The money would have been better spent on education, medical system and the elderly / poor. | |
29-02-2008, 10:36 AM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6,308
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by emmie Hope these eye-catching 'discounts' last & keep going... | Interestingly, now that we can bring wine in without restriction I looked for the first time this morning at the prices at Singapore Airport "duty free". Conveniently they had the Oyster Bay Sauvignon which I buy from Wellcome. The price at Changi was S$28 which is 10% more than even the pre-budget price in Wellcome (HK$138). So don't go thinking that Singapore duty free is a good place to buy wine! | |
29-02-2008, 10:39 AM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: HK Age: 30
Posts: 919
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by AJZ Mat, the good thing about the $25,000 rebate is that you can choose to do with it what you want. So put it to good use, I'm sure there are many worthy causes that would appreciate it. Spread the cheer... | I am not complaining about the 25K, I was just raising the point that scrapping tax on the wine was probably not the best way to use part of this surplus...that's it. | |
29-02-2008, 10:43 AM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 64
| | | Hm. So they drop prices by 28% after tax has just dropped 40%, leading to a boost in profits of 12%. Interesting...
I realise that this is old stock they're selling, and that tax is charged on imports, not sales (I think).
I think PnS is just staying competitive. Will their prices drop another 12% after a few months? We'll see.
And they dropped the duty on beer, too. Hopefully we will get some draft real ales around town! (nice ones) | |
29-02-2008, 11:01 AM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 64
| | | And the elephant in the room is infrastructure spending, which doesn't really get talked about.
Plus they're going to spend between 15 and $20 billion on this new bridge, which seems like just an excuse to make some rich people richer, and shore up political support. | |
29-02-2008, 02:31 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Fo Tan
Posts: 1,600
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by KnowItAll Mat - I am 100% behind you on this. The money would have been better spent on education, medical system and the elderly / poor. | Perhaps. Depends on how well the government chooses what to spend on.
I might totally agree with you if the mechanism was to take less from the education/medical/elderly sectors rather than to give them more.
And better a wine tax reduction than a bridge or other give-aways to developers. | |
29-02-2008, 04:20 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 6,308
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigga Hm. So they drop prices by 28% after tax has just dropped 40%, leading to a boost in profits of 12%. Interesting... | Only because you obviously flunked maths at school.
If the price withouty duty is $1, then the price with 40% duty is $1.40. If you reduce the $1.40 bottle by 28% then you get to a price of $1.008.
If you're in a job that requires you to be numerate then I hope your boss doesn't see your post! | | Tools | Search | | | | | Rate This Thread | | | All times are GMT +8. The time now is 05:27 AM. | Partners |
