At what point should you not expect Government welfare?

[sydboy007]

Around a year ago I was reading an article about a couple who had recently bought a place at Bondi beach for something like $850K.

They were moaning about what a struggle it was to pay the mortgage, look after the kids etc etc. They were blaming the Govt / RBA for why their mortgage was costing them so much. I had visions of a gun against their head as they were forced to sign the mortgage documents.

Now the real kicker was they were earning 250K between them. Average full time earnings are around $73600 / year, so the family was over 100K a year above the average. My understanding is earning the average puts you in the top 30% of Australia.

I've seen the same attitude from people I work with. We are all highly paid, yet so many of them feel life's a struggle. I'd say it is for them, but mainly through their own fault. If you can "afford" foxtel then please don't tell me how difficult it is to pay the car rego or insurance.

What happened to buying the house you can afford as a first home buyer, not the one you really want? Build up equity and trade up in 10 years time.

What happened to budgeting and spending less than we earn?

I'm hoping that with the tax base decimated by the tax cuts of the last 10 years, without corresponding spending cuts, that who ever wins the next election is going to have little choice but to start hacking into this waste.

I'd much rather more money available to those who truly need the help, and leaving the rest of us to stand on our own 2 feet.

Spending more at primary school - articles I've read show a $3 benefit for every $ spend in a childs early years, and a far bigger focus on TAFE since all the Government companies were privatised and no longer churning out the apprentices.

I am glad that people have been willing to acknowledge this is an issue brought about by the ALP & LNP. I suppose the only thing to be happy about is at least we do have means testing (though too easy for my liking) for a lot of benefits. We could be like the Europeans and giving them to all.

 

[sails]

Excellent post, Sydboy!

And yet I scratch my head as to why you seem to support the Gillard government where it seems that nothing is Gillard's fault - she appears to blame everything on Abbott despite the fact the libs don't have the numbers to oppose her legislation. She screeches at him for misogyny while defending Slipper. She spends more of taxpayers funds than she gets in revenue leaving us with a massive debt and apparently $12 billion per year in interest alone.

The Gillard government has surprising similarities to your wealthy friends who cry poor!

 

[sydboy007]

Excellent post, Sydboy!

And yet I scratch my head as to why you seem to support the Gillard government where it seems that nothing is Gillard's fault - she appears to blame everything on Abbott despite the fact the libs don't have the numbers to oppose her legislation. She screeches at him for misogyny while defending Slipper. She spends more of taxpayers funds than she gets in revenue leaving us with a massive debt and apparently $12 billion per year in interest alone.

The Gillard government has surprising similarities to your wealthy friends who cry poor!

I'm not defending Gillard, just highlighting the rank hypocrisy of Abbott. Also this is the Abbot for PM thread

If you are going to hound the PM over an issue, and demand her to resign, then you should hold yourself to the same standards. Can you honestly say Abbotts defense of Mal Borough is anything but politics? He even admits to not reading the Judges statement on why he threw out the sexual harassment case. For a putative PM to not even bother to understand the topic he's discussing, well seriously do you really want him leading us?

Also remember, the LNP knew of slipper long before the ALP took political expediency in appointing him speaker. Why didn't they do something about him years ago?

As far as I can see, Abbott is a rank hypocrite in this.

A pox on both the ALP and LNP till they get their houses in order and decide to enact policy to better Australia, not keep their fat asses on the leather parliament chairs!

I'm a centrist - prob 60% center left and 40% center right, so I try to bring a bit of balance when I see too many lopsided arguments.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Around a year ago I was reading an article about a couple who had recently bought a place at Bondi beach for something like $850K.

They were moaning about what a struggle it was to pay the mortgage, look after the kids etc etc. They were blaming the Govt / RBA for why their mortgage was costing them so much. I had visions of a gun against their head as they were forced to sign the mortgage documents.

Now the real kicker was they were earning 250K between them. Average full time earnings are around $73600 / year, so the family was over 100K a year above the average. My understanding is earning the average puts you in the top 30% of Australia.

I've seen the same attitude from people I work with. We are all highly paid, yet so many of them feel life's a struggle. I'd say it is for them, but mainly through their own fault. If you can "afford" foxtel then please don't tell me how difficult it is to pay the car rego or insurance.

What happened to buying the house you can afford as a first home buyer, not the one you really want? Build up equity and trade up in 10 years time.

What happened to budgeting and spending less than we earn?

I'm hoping that with the tax base decimated by the tax cuts of the last 10 years, without corresponding spending cuts, that who ever wins the next election is going to have little choice but to start hacking into this waste.

I'd much rather more money available to those who truly need the help, and leaving the rest of us to stand on our own 2 feet.

Spending more at primary school - articles I've read show a $3 benefit for every $ spend in a childs early years, and a far bigger focus on TAFE since all the Government companies were privatised and no longer churning out the apprentices.

I am glad that people have been willing to acknowledge this is an issue brought about by the ALP & LNP. I suppose the only thing to be happy about is at least we do have means testing (though too easy for my liking) for a lot of benefits. We could be like the Europeans and giving them to all.

As a boomer I will maximise my entitlement.

I should qualify that, as a boomer who has hard worked, all my life.

I am buggered if the fatarses of my generation sitting at bus stops get more than I in my 70's and 80's

gg

 

[sydboy007]

As a boomer I will maximise my entitlement.

I should qualify that, as a boomer who has hard worked, all my life.

I am buggered if the fatarses of my generation sitting at bus stops get more than I in my 70's and 80's

gg

enjoy it while it lasts. When the pension class has doubled I shudder to think how we will balance the books

 

[Bill M]

A pox on both the ALP and LNP till they get their houses in order and decide to enact policy to better Australia, not keep their fat asses on the leather parliament chairs!

You said that so well and it's my sentiments exactly.

I am pinching one of Callipoe's cartoons he posted a while back which kind of describes your comment well.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23886&page=2&p=673856&viewfull=1#post673856

 

[McLovin]

enjoy it while it lasts. When the pension class has doubled I shudder to think how we will balance the books

I'll tell you one thing, I won't be hanging around to pay for it.

ALP/Lib they'll both tax anyone not on the pension to high heaven. Social security payments already eat up almost all individual income tax revenue.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

I see no reason why some slob who has never worked a day in his or her life, should have better care in old age than I.

A question for the English professor. Shouldn't that be "than me"?

Posted at 2:19.... you're not still Googling are you?!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

As a boomer I will maximise my entitlement.

I should qualify that, as a boomer who has hard worked, all my life.

I am buggered if the fatarses of my generation sitting at bus stops get more than I in my 70's and 80's

gg

A question for the English professor. Shouldn't that be "than me"?

Posted at 2:19.... you're not still Googling are you?!

Thanks GB for your display of a complete lack of understanding of English grammar.

The word "than" is not used as a preposition in my post.

English is such a delightful language for those who understand and write it.

One uses "than I" in that situation to save using another verb, so for you sitting at your bus stop of 21st century English I probably should have said

I am buggered if the fatarses of my generation sitting at bus stops get more than I get in my 70's and 80's

It does lack elegance though.

gg

 

[Julia]

A question for the English professor. Shouldn't that be "than me"?

I see no reason why some slob who has never worked a day in his or her life, should have better care in old age than I.

I'm not an English professor, GB, but gg's grammar is correct.

Consider the sentence if the meaning were spelled out in full: then it would be "I see no reason why some slob who has never worked a day in his or her life, should have better care in old age than I should."

You wouldn't say at the end "than me should", would you?

Sadly, the kind of correct grammar just demonstrated by gg is becoming less and less heard, due largely to the incompetence of the teaching profession.

 

[prawn_86]

What happened to buying the house you can afford as a first home buyer, not the one you really want? Build up equity and trade up in 10 years time.

This line is trotted out a lot and is based on previous credit growth imo. The only reason house prices are so high is due to availability of easy credit throughout the past 20 years. This has now dried up.

If the average person bought the average house 2 - 3 years ago, they would now have less equity due to house price decreases, so for them to have enough to 'trade up' in 7 - 8 years time is unlikely.

Without knowing their savings/deposit, but the example of the couple in your story they would be geared to the max, as on 250k genrally the most a bank would lend to a new home buyer is around that 850k mark from what i have seen.

 

[sydboy007]

This line is trotted out a lot and is based on previous credit growth imo. The only reason house prices are so high is due to availability of easy credit throughout the past 20 years. This has now dried up.

If the average person bought the average house 2 - 3 years ago, they would now have less equity due to house price decreases, so for them to have enough to 'trade up' in 7 - 8 years time is unlikely.

Without knowing their savings/deposit, but the example of the couple in your story they would be geared to the max, as on 250k genrally the most a bank would lend to a new home buyer is around that 850k mark from what i have seen.

Prawn

my point is rather than gearing to the max, you gear to the point where you can still have a life. This will probably mean you don't get ya dream house, but given time and a good savings habit you have a good chance of getting there.

if you choose to go above this, then don't whine about hard life is.

Personally, I think anyone buying a house in Sydney is crazy. Why pay 5.X% or more in interest when someone is stoopid enough to lend it to you for < 4% of its value, and you don't have to pay all the holding costs which saves you at least another 3-4K a year.

 

[sptrawler]

As a boomer I will maximise my entitlement.

I should qualify that, as a boomer who has hard worked, all my life.

I am buggered if the fatarses of my generation sitting at bus stops get more than I in my 70's and 80's

gg

GG, there won't be any room on the bus stop, with the number of illegal refugees sitting there.
I am sure you will give up your seat and your pension to assist more of them assimilate and transition to our welfare system.
It must be horrendous for them to navigate through the paperwork at centrelink, poor devils.

 

[Gringotts Bank]

I'm not an English professor, GB, but gg's grammar is correct.

Consider the sentence if the meaning were spelled out in full: then it would be "I see no reason why some slob who has never worked a day in his or her life, should have better care in old age than I should."

You wouldn't say at the end "than me should", would you?

Sadly, the kind of correct grammar just demonstrated by gg is becoming less and less heard, due largely to the incompetence of the teaching profession.

Looks like the correct form is either 'me' or 'I'. Just did my own Googling. I was taught 'me' at school, so I'll stick with that. Sounds less pompous also!

 

[pixel]

Looks like the correct form is either 'me' or 'I'. Just did my own Googling. I was taught 'me' at school, so I'll stick with that. Sounds less pompous also!

Starting a sentence without subject.
Relying on a very dubious self-help (Google can give wrong results and often does!)
Misplacing "also": it's either "It also sounds less pompous." or "It sounds less pompous, too."

... all of which merely confirms the truth of Julia's lament

Sadly, the kind of correct grammar just demonstrated by gg is becoming less and less heard, due largely to the incompetence of the teaching profession.

 

[So_Cynical]

Prawn

my point is rather than gearing to the max, you gear to the point where you can still have a life.

I'm thinking that no life in Bondi is better than half a life in St Marys. :dunno:

 

[medicowallet]

Very Very good original post Syd

What gets me going is that fact that you can have

$5million house and $200000 cash and get a pension

$200000 house and $5million shares and get nothing.

I just don't get it.

MW

 

[Julia]

Looks like the correct form is either 'me' or 'I'. Just did my own Googling. I was taught 'me' at school, so I'll stick with that. Sounds less pompous also!

Perhaps you could provide the example which demonstrates "me" as being appropriate in the context discussed.

 

[medicowallet]

Perhaps you could provide the example which demonstrates "me" as being appropriate in the context discussed.

I think Gringot might be a pirate.

 

[Bill M]

Very Very good original post Syd

What gets me going is that fact that you can have

$5million house and $200000 cash and get a pension

$200000 house and $5million shares and get nothing.

I just don't get it.

MW

Neither do I. Why is this rort allowed to go on? It has to change.