- Joined
- 7 October 2011
- Posts
- 471
- Reactions
- 80
That's right - you got paid a higher wage, therefore you don't NEED the welfare anymore.Well from personal experience a few years ago but still the same principle. After job promotion more resposibility, more accountability, more hassle.
The end result was after loosing child support the take home wage was the same as i was on before the promotion.
I thought you were talking about welfare paid every fortnight as a reward while you were working, now this? If I lost my job I'd hardly be a middle class income earner, would I?I'll put it in terms that you may understand.
Eager, is a young bloke who is on top of the game and getting good money, putting in lots of hours saving tons.
Well unfortunately there is a huge downturn by China and Eager is laid off.
He isn't too worried he has saved $50k during the good time, toward the deposit for a house in the future.
Well after applying unsucessfully for several jobs, Eager is getting nervous as he has spent $10k of his $50k.
So he decides to see what C.E.S has to offer if the problem persists, they tell him when you have spent the rest of the $50k come back and see us.
Eager say's, rightfully, I have paid my taxes why do I have to spend the money I have saved and done without, to put together. When I could have taken o/s holidays and pi$$ed it up to the wall.
Well why should the government support you when you have money?
Untill you experience it you don't understand it.IMO and I'm not 80 I'm 56 cheeky $hit
I thought you were talking about welfare paid every fortnight as a reward while you were working, now this? If I lost my job I'd hardly be a middle class income earner, would I?
I'm confused!
Is the dole asset tested?
Not so much asset tested in that you can own a house you're living in but savings are considered an income generating asset.Is the dole asset tested?
The welfare system is imo very uneven. You have the dole as above as a very unfair contrast to some of the family benefits to the reasonably well off, and worst of all, Tony Abbott's proposed maternity leave scheme.
No it's just easier to take cheap shots at the ones who pay most of the tax.
As I said in an earlier post I don't agree with middle class welfare. I've never had welfare, allways worked and payed taxes since 15years old.
Just get fed up with the blind attacking of the real "working family"
I totally agree about politicians, as will 99% of the population.Welfare is welfare,it's all funded through taxes.
I just get fed up of people blindly following attacks on the so called "middle class" just because politicians want to use them as a football. When politicians have the best welfare sytem in the country, tax payer funded.
I totally agree about politicians, as will 99% of the population.
Cannot agree, though, that because it's all funded through taxes, "welfare is welfare".
Imo we have an absolute obligation to care for people who cannot care for themselves, e.g. the severely disabled.
But I don't understand why we have any such similar obligation to pay people earning $150K pro rata that salary for six months if they choose to have a baby instead of continue to work. (If that figure is not correct, my apologies, but Mr Abbott's scheme from memory is somewhere around that.)
Yes, I have been very irritated over many years at paying taxes that support lazy, layabouts who just don't want to work, and young women who choose to have kid after kid rather than acquire decent education and a job. But the other side of that coin is the person I referred to earlier who has worked hard, saved, then lost a job through redundancy or illness. Imo such people should receive taxpayer support that is actually enough to live on.
But I don't understand why we have any such similar obligation to pay people earning $150K pro rata that salary for six months if they choose to have a baby instead of continue to work.
Abbott will put that one on hold after he is safely elected and gets Costello to audit the books, as the Qld LNP government has done. Pie in the sky.:shake:
His first priority should be to weed the deadwood out of the bloated public service as Newman has done.
Yes I agree. I believe there are over 1000 PS on the Climate Change committee or what ever they call it.
'CANDO' in Queensland threw it and Greg Withers out the window in the first month
The observation was made by noco that Cando Newman slashed public service numbers when taking office. Amongst this, was the closing down of the office of climate change, headed by Greg Withers, husband of Anna Bligh, late Premier.I dont get it, how did climate change enter the debate?
I dont get it, how did climate change enter the debate?
Oops sorry! Australia is not a republic!
Just watching Q & A on ABC, it is all a bit like a Julia advert, nobody is questioning her answers. It appears very staged and a bit of a saturday night live show.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dying to see the face of remorse on Gillard on election night 2013. It would be mind-boggling to hear her if she displays stubborn pride by saying "I knew it would come to this, but I did it because it was good for you"
I hope you're not holding your breath for this, Stumpy. I don't anticipate ever seeing the slightest shred of remorse from Ms Gillard. She has a self belief greater than any politician I've ever seen.I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dying to see the face of remorse on Gillard on election night 2013. It would be mind-boggling to hear her if she displays stubborn pride by saying "I knew it would come to this, but I did it because it was good for you"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?