+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 22 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 217
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,848
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,895
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    If a family earns over 166k a year surely 1k isn't going to make much difference? geez try living off a tenth of that.

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    Annabella  (10-02-2012),Deserama  (12-02-2012),MilkingMaid  (16-02-2012),MissMuppet  (10-02-2012),MyBabyBells  (17-02-2012),naebie  (10-02-2012)

  3. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    823
    Thanks
    154
    Thanked
    226
    Reviews
    9
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FearlessLeader View Post
    There's a difference between struggling because you've chosen a certain lifestyle and actually struggling. It's possible for people on 166K to be in the former category, we are just under that amount and while we don't struggle, we do have to be very careful with our money. We chose to take on a relatively high mortgage in an area we wanted to live in. I don't expect anyone to give me a handout because of that, that's our choice. It makes me feel quite ill to hear people complain that they don't get handouts from the government when they have more than enough already. Take some personal responsibility.
    Same.
    We earn a bit under the threshhold too, but we chose to take on a big mortgage in the area we want to live, and I chose to be a SAHM. Even though it means budgeting, and no nice holidays, no nice car etc I see that as our choice. We have missed out on a lot of government handouts but I am not resentful of that. I know a lot of families that work just as hard and as many hours as my DH does, but don't earn the income he does.

    *shrug* as long as we are comfortable, I don't mind not getting government handouts. They are "hand outs", after all. Meant to give people an extra hand when they need it. If I don't like it, I can move to a small town, pay off the mortgage and have a really nice lifestyle. Someone on half my family's income doesn't have that option.

    I'm sorry that you feel ganged up on. I don't think that is deliberate on other people's part. It probably is just hard for some to hear your vent if they are struggling just to pay rent or feed their kids, or if they feel PHI is already out of their reach (and we all know if any of our kids got really sick, we'd ALL rather be booking in for surgery through our PHI than on a public waiting list, so we can't pretend that current medicare system creates equality in health care).
    Last edited by Lucy in the Sky; 10-02-2012 at 13:58.

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    10,611
    Thanks
    404
    Thanked
    1,918
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    I don't have an issue with the removal of the 30% rebate for the middle class and above, as it won't decrease private health subscriptions, and it doesn't really serve any public purpose other than middle class welfare. The CCR (non means tested) is arguably middle class welfare, but I think it serves the purpose of encouraging women to participate in the workforce, which is beneficial to the country and to women.

    High income earners won't abandon their private health cover, or at least their hospital cover, which is what the government wants people to retain.

    If a family earning $200,000 per annum ceased hospital cover, then they would have to an additional $2,000 in the medicare levy surcharge (ie. extra tax) per year. They will just retain hospital cover instead, and pay the bit extra or get a slightly less comprehensive cover.

    The other reality is that the middle class are probably not inclined to slum it with the plebs at the public hospital, and there is value for them there.

    I have a good level of hospital and extras cover (about $260 per month after the 30% rebate) despite not really being able to afford it, because I don't think the public hospital system is adequate. for emergencies and childbirth, yes, but not for necessary but not urgent. I just wish the whole private system would be scrapped, and we all pay more tax and have a better hospital system.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MsMummy For This Useful Post:

    Izy  (10-02-2012),Lucy in the Sky  (10-02-2012)

  6. #34
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,786
    Thanks
    1,021
    Thanked
    2,246
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bumMum View Post
    Should they be given random money they don't need? No.. But why shouldn't they benefit from childcare and health care at a reasonable price? Because they have chosen to work and earn money.. Such an odd attitude.. This attitude is the reason why many people in this country give up striving to earn more, because the hidden costs of earning more are truly there, so its easier just not to.. You would be surprised how many families and singles try to manage their finances so they can not earn too much but earn "just enough". I remember doing the maths on returning to work and using childcare for two kids and its just too much. Of course I earn nowhere near 166 k a year or even 66k a year, but I don't begrudge anyone more affordable services that help their family

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9100 using Tapatalk
    Firstly Im not begrudging anyone it's a debate.

    Secondly 2 ppl working for 45k each are still making the effort to work.

    If a couple on say 180k pay 300 a week for one child in care then a couple on 90k pay 150 a week. It is relevant to your income. Would you not say they pay the same taking income into account...
    Yet the person on 180k is still far better of financially since the money they have left over is greater. Now there is nothing wrong with earning more all the power to you I have nothing but respect but saying you are hard done by is a little rich. In this country the ones who earn more pay more tax etc but they are still better off.

    Im not having a go Im just trying to explain my POV.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Janesmum123 For This Useful Post:

    MissMuppet  (10-02-2012),naebie  (10-02-2012)

  8. #35
    Guest Guest
    Why do we consider every single rebate 'welfare'? I'm not a high income earner, but I at least understand that some things like healthcare should be equal no matter your level of income.
    It's just a money grab, and the government is smart about it when they get it from 'high income' earners because most of us who aren't have the exact same attitude as everyone here, 'you can afford, it don't complain'
    So it's easier to accept when in reality it's not going to benefit anyone, not me, you or our kids. They have no plans for the savings, why doesn't that outrage anyone?

  9. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Guest For This Useful Post:

    kw123  (10-02-2012),LoveyDovey  (18-02-2012),Mod-pegasus  (16-02-2012),MrJones&Me  (17-02-2012),MsTruth  (10-02-2012),mummaof4  (16-02-2012),TheMadHatter  (10-02-2012)

  10. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    6,372
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked
    1,168
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    No its okay I'm not a high income earner I just felt like looking at things from a different point of view I don't like the attitude that there is something wrong with middle class welfare or that the rich deserve to be taxed at every opportunity.. I myself though am quite poor. I earn 18 bucks an hour, my partner (if I could even call him that) is a delivery driver.. I don't even know what its like to be wealthy!! I wish.. However I find the hub confusing because one minute people are proclaiming they want equality for all, that they want a society which is more like Sweden or Denmark.. Then in the next thread they don't want that at all.. They want exactly what we have which is safety net welfare and loathe spreading around the benefits. Just my point of view on this kind of issue. I'm also not having a go. I agree 166 k is a lot of money!

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9100 using Tapatalk

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to bumMum For This Useful Post:

    kw123  (10-02-2012),TheMadHatter  (10-02-2012)

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,872
    Thanks
    5,195
    Thanked
    3,896
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    I think it's a great idea means testing the health insurance rebate. It's ridiculous how a low or middle class income family struggles but yet pays for HI if they want it but a high income earner can pay for it easily but gets upset cos the rebate is not there.

    If you are earning over 280k a year and need the health insurance rebate money then pls redo your finances and budget properly.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bumMum View Post
    No its okay I'm not a high income earner I just felt like looking at things from a different point of view I don't like the attitude that there is something wrong with middle class welfare or that the rich deserve to be taxed at every opportunity.. I myself though am quite poor. I earn 18 bucks an hour, my partner (if I could even call him that) is a delivery driver.. I don't even know what its like to be wealthy!! I wish.. However I find the hub confusing because one minute people are proclaiming they want equality for all, that they want a society which is more like Sweden or Denmark.. Then in the next thread they don't want that at all.. They want exactly what we have which is safety net welfare and loathe spreading around the benefits. Just my point of view on this kind of issue. I'm also not having a go. I agree 166 k is a lot of money!

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9100 using Tapatalk
    I have a different view of equality to you in that case. I DO want equality for all Australians, but that does not mean that I want rich people to receive welfare. That's just absurd.

    If things were truly equal we'd all have access to the same healthcare, education, housing etc but that doesn't happen so we need thresholds, govt assistance etc to attempt to *balance* some of these problems.

    Do I want equality? Yes. Do I want to see people on very high incomes receiving the same family tax benefits and child care benefits as someone earning $40k to feed and house an entire family? NO!

  14. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    Izy  (10-02-2012),MilkingMaid  (16-02-2012),smallpotatoes  (10-02-2012),wrena  (16-02-2012)

  15. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    823
    Thanks
    154
    Thanked
    226
    Reviews
    9
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bumMum View Post
    No its okay I'm not a high income earner I just felt like looking at things from a different point of view I don't like the attitude that there is something wrong with middle class welfare or that the rich deserve to be taxed at every opportunity.. I myself though am quite poor. I earn 18 bucks an hour, my partner (if I could even call him that) is a delivery driver.. I don't even know what its like to be wealthy!! I wish.. However I find the hub confusing because one minute people are proclaiming they want equality for all, that they want a society which is more like Sweden or Denmark.. Then in the next thread they don't want that at all.. They want exactly what we have which is safety net welfare and loathe spreading around the benefits. Just my point of view on this kind of issue. I'm also not having a go. I agree 166 k is a lot of money!

    Sent from my BlackBerry 9100 using Tapatalk
    Sweden or Denmark don't give wealthy people 'rebates' on their PHI, they have very high taxes (up to 57% for hightest tier earrners) and they have an excellent public health system, so no need for everyone to get PHI rebates! I would 100% support that system here. I would then also drop my PHI and have an extra $250 pm in my pocket! win-win

  16. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    6,372
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked
    1,168
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Benji View Post
    I have a different view of equality to you in that case. I DO want equality for all Australians, but that does not mean that I want rich people to receive welfare. That's just absurd.

    If things were truly equal we'd all have access to the same healthcare, education, housing etc but that doesn't happen so we need thresholds, govt assistance etc to attempt to *balance* some of these problems.

    Do I want equality? Yes. Do I want to see people on very high incomes receiving the same family tax benefits and child care benefits as someone earning $40k to feed and house an entire family? NO!
    I thought we were talking about health insurance. And everyone was saying "oh well their rich they can afford it". I wasn't aware we were talking about family tax benefit. I actually said I am not in favour of giving the same amount of money to everyone regardless of income. Confused


    Sent from my BlackBerry 9100 using Tapatalk


 

Similar Threads

  1. Health Insurance
    By lilrussell in forum General Child Health Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 17-09-2012, 11:45
  2. IVF with no health insurance
    By NAT256 in forum IVF
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27-08-2012, 15:42
  3. HIF Health Insurance Fund or PEOPLECARE Health Insurance Fund?? Advice??
    By BlueButton in forum Private Health Insurance Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-04-2012, 11:39

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Babybee Prams
Save $50 in our pre-Christmas sale! All Comet's now only $500. Our bassinet & stroller set includes free shipping AUS wide, $75 free accessories, 18-months warranty & a 9 month free return policy. Check out our new designer range today!
sales & new stuffsee all
CarmelsBeautySecrets
Growing your own natural nails is easy. Years ago, I devised a simple and very effective technique which really helps boosts the nails' growth in as little as three days! And most importantly keeps them that way.
featured supporter
ProSwim
ProSwim Rostrevor runs learn to swim classes for children and adults. Lessons are run during the Summer months (Oct-Mar). Our indoor centre at Plympton Park has lessons all year round, including school holidays.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!