Closed Thread
Page 22 of 29 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 288
  1. #211
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    5,946
    Thanks
    1,973
    Thanked
    2,080
    Reviews
    16
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    At this moment, I'm just going to address one thing. Super.

    As a stay home parent, I obviously made the choice to stay at home, it's what I felt was in the best interests of my children. Because of that, I am not entitled to any super, I'm not in paid employment. I however, am entitled to my Husband's super. While I am raising our children, he is working to support us, as a family, and as a result of that, he is earning super to support us, as a couple, when we retire.

    Once I return to paid employment, my plan is to make voluntary super contributions on top of my employer contributions, in an effort to boost up the super that I missed out on whilst staying at home with my children. For low to middle income earners, there is also the Government super co-contribution, where the Government will match up to $1,000 of your personal contributions, this is something to definitely to keep in mind. It would be worth making extra payments into your super to take advantage of this (I wouldn't be entitled to it, but I still wish to bump up my own super by voluntary payments).

    In the case of single parents, I'm not sure how it works, but if you separated from a long term partner, I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are entitled to up to half of your ex-partners super, so when dividing up property etc this should be included.

    As for the Government paying stay at home parents superannuation in some form, I do not agree with it.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Lillynix For This Useful Post:

    VicPark  (21-03-2013)

  3. #212
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    996
    Thanks
    471
    Thanked
    191
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I think anyone who has jumped into this thread at the last minute instead of reading all the posts throughout are missing the point where all the sahm's haven't disagreed at all with his comment, being a SAHM is our choice so we can deal with that, the main issue that has been brought up through discussion is the lack of super for women who leave the workforce to care for their children and I agree with Lambjam about this topic.
    I had DS young (during the first year of both my uni degree and my DP) we lived within our means on the paid parenting scheme and austudy, DP has since finished uni and is now working full time while I continue to study - our earning capacity isn't fantastic but we're not relying on centrelink, yes we get FTB to help us get by, but I don't expect anything more than that.
    I think however, if I were in the position like some of the SAHMs on here where I had worked and chose to stay home but was losing all my super due to fees I would be so angry, maybe there could be some sort of system in place where fees weren't taken if you chose to leave the workforce?
    But of course nothing about finding a solution for this is easy.

    As for the working mums who have come in here and come across as saying SAHM shouldn't complain about their choice they've made etc etc, I don't see the point of your post, different things work for different people, I would go into a "support for loss thread" and go on and on about how good I have it with my pregnancy (yes an extreme example but keep your unhelpful posts to yourself)

  4. #213
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,838
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    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
    I've said numerous times I am not only in favour of the current PPL scheme, but in an increase, which would take it to at least double what the BB is. But it's been insinuated the BB should be taken away as it's a mothers choice to stay home. That's my issue.

  5. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    mama and her little bearxxx  (21-03-2013),RobinSparkles  (21-03-2013),sjay  (21-03-2013)

  6. #214
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    At this moment, I'm just going to address one thing. Super.

    As a stay home parent, I obviously made the choice to stay at home, it's what I felt was in the best interests of my children. Because of that, I am not entitled to any super, I'm not in paid employment. I however, am entitled to my Husband's super. While I am raising our children, he is working to support us, as a family, and as a result of that, he is earning super to support us, as a couple, when we retire.

    Once I return to paid employment, my plan is to make voluntary super contributions on top of my employer contributions, in an effort to boost up the super that I missed out on whilst staying at home with my children. For low to middle income earners, there is also the Government super co-contribution, where the Government will match up to $1,000 of your personal contributions, this is something to definitely to keep in mind. It would be worth making extra payments into your super to take advantage of this (I wouldn't be entitled to it, but I still wish to bump up my own super by voluntary payments).

    In the case of single parents, I'm not sure how it works, but if you separated from a long term partner, I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are entitled to up to half of your ex-partners super, so when dividing up property etc this should be included.

    As for the Government paying stay at home parents superannuation in some form, I do not agree with it.
    I was going to mention the $1000 co-contribution from the govt for low/middle income earners that contribute to their own super, wondering if a SAHM contributed $1000 to her own super if the govt would match that?

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kirst33 For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (21-03-2013),lambjam  (21-03-2013)

  8. #215
    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 Lillynix View Post
    In the case of single parents, I'm not sure how it works, but if you separated from a long term partner, I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are entitled to up to half of your ex-partners super, so when dividing up property etc this should be included.
    I feel people have taken my post wrongly, single parents are entitled to a portion of their spouse's super when there is a divorce. This still does not entile them to a portion of his future superannuation. So while single parents who have taken years off to raise children will get a percentage of the exe's super, they are still not getting any in future because of their unpaid contributions to the family. The finances are still massively unequal.

  9. #216
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ballarat
    Posts
    996
    Thanks
    471
    Thanked
    191
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    .

    In the case of single parents, I'm not sure how it works, but if you separated from a long term partner, I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong) that you are entitled to up to half of your ex-partners super, so when dividing up property etc this should be included.

    As for the Government paying stay at home parents superannuation in some form, I do not agree with it.
    What about women who were just wanting to get out of a toxic relationship, domestic violent relationships? When the general advice is get out with what you can while you can?
    For some the amount they would gain after going through court to get it wouldn't be worth it after lawyers and court fees

    While I'm not disagreeing with you at all, yes the government shouldn't have to pay us super, I definitely think it is an area that needs to come into more light as its a difficult situation

  10. #217
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    For low to middle income earners, there is also the Government super co-contribution, where the Government will match up to $1,000 of your personal contributions, this is something to definitely to keep in mind.
    This is what I'm hoping to clarify. You say "low to middle income earners"... What about those who don't earn an income at all? Does the government match their contributions? Because that's all I'm suggesting; that if SAHP see fit to prepare for old age by contributing to super, surely the government would benefit from encouraging this in the same way they do working parents?

    I agree that to expect any further assistance (eg the government providing in place of employer contributions) would be unreasonable. Bear in mind that super contributions form part of the contract between an employee and an employer. It is part of the package that they earn, not some magical extra. Some people get a car as part of their package, yet to suggest the government provide a car to a SAHP would be equally unreasonable.

  11. #218
    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 delirium View Post
    insinuated the BB should be taken away as it's a mothers choice to stay home. That's my issue.
    I'd take issue with this, too. The BB is still needed. We are still an ageing population and it was introduced to encourage people to have children because the government recognises that for most families finances are very tight, and that a payment would encourage many to have children as it would give them the funds to afford the bare essentials.

  12. #219
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    But it's been insinuated the BB should be taken away as it's a mothers choice to stay home. That's my issue.
    The baby bonus was brought in to increase birth rates. That's not necessary anymore. It sounds harsh, but it's true.

  13. #220
    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 lambjam View Post
    The baby bonus was brought in to increase birth rates. That's not necessary anymore. It sounds harsh, but it's true.
    Oh really? Did we increase the population?

    It does sound harsh, but I understand where you're coming from.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Tony abbott - rebates for nannies... Any stay at home mums feel left out??
    By Freyamum in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 31-03-2012, 01:33

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
Shapland Swim Schools
Shapland's at participating schools offer free baby orientation classes once a month - no cost no catches. Your baby will be introduced to our "natural effects" orientation program develop by Shapland's over 3 generations, its gentle and enjoyable.
sales & new stuffsee all
Pea Pods
Buy 2 Award Winning Pea Pods Reusable One Size Nappies for only $38 (in your choice of colours) and receive a FREE roll of Bamboo Liners. Don't miss out, we don't usually have discounts on the nappies, so grab this special offer!
Special Offer! Save $12
featured supporter
Baby Car Seats and Infant Car Restraints
Buying a baby car seat? Check out our 'go-to' links here!
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!