+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 238
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,850
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,897
    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 don't think anyone says high income earners don't deserve their high salaries? Just that a family income at 160/170k a year (which is the cut off I think) shouldn't need rebates when the poor are told to stand on their own feet.

    I for one say good on the high income earners. My issue is that many of these households simply don't need these tax funded perks. If we are going to be about economic rationalism, lets fund what is needed. Education, roads, health. Not giving high income families money for PHI.

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

    beebs  (13-05-2013),SpecialPatrolGroup  (13-05-2013),Tainted  (14-05-2013)

  3. #32
    SpecialPatrolGroup's Avatar
    SpecialPatrolGroup is offline T-rex is cranky until she gets her coffee.
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In the messy house, Brisbane
    Posts
    9,481
    Thanks
    2,180
    Thanked
    5,405
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    I get that - SD channels still include 2, 7, 9, 10 and SBS.

    So you get news, current affairs, movies, sport etc.

    I can't see how the fact that you don't get Go, 72, 73, 94 (shopping channels) etc makes you any more marginalised, than the fact that some people don't get foxtel.

    Your statement was that disadvantaged people could be more marginalised by not getting as many channels. I said I don't believe that is true. It is not the number of tv channels which defines whether you'll be marginalised.
    Fine then, you just don't get it.

    Let's move on to other things...

  4. #33
    Mod-pegasus's Avatar
    Mod-pegasus is offline ADMINISTRATOR
    and all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the one word...UNLESS
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,644
    Thanks
    1,733
    Thanked
    1,735
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    I work in both the private and public health sectors. It's certainly not easy for anyone to pay for their own health, and the more people that access public health - the harder it gets for everyone.

    I believe that decreasing the rebate has stopped some people having PHI, which is bad for the public health system, which is bad for the people who couldn't afford PHI in the first place.

    It's a two edged sword.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Mod-pegasus For This Useful Post:

    F&A  (13-05-2013)

  6. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,850
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,897
    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
    Yep, I totally get the need to divert from public to private health. And I do support some help. But honestly, and I know this isn't going to be popular, if you are needing assistance to pay PHI on 150+k there is something going on.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (13-05-2013)

  8. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,005
    Thanks
    1,052
    Thanked
    3,524
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Giving absolutely nothing to high income earners wouldn't work though as there would come a point when it would make more financial sense to get paid less (so pay less tax) or not work at all in some cases. Which doesn't benefit anyone, the economy or society in general.

    It's the people just on the cusp of "high income" that this affects of course. If I didn't work we would get FTB, CCB and who knows what else. Yes it would still be less than I get now but honestly, not THAT much. If I didn't have a career I love instead of just a job to pay the bills I am certain I wouldn't work.

    So then not only am I not contributing to the economy with my tax dollars, I am also taking much more in the way of benefits. And then there is societal cost of course to educated women opting out of the workforce and leaving the corporate world to the men folk. Awesome.

  9. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,005
    Thanks
    1,052
    Thanked
    3,524
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    Yep, I totally get the need to divert from public to private health. And I do support some help. But honestly, and I know this isn't going to be popular, if you are needing assistance to pay PHI on 150+k there is something going on.
    It's a popular view on BubHub.

    What isn't popular is saying.. I don't need it. I want it. And I think I deserve it.

    But nobody would have the balls to say that on here would they

  10. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,710
    Thanks
    1,392
    Thanked
    7,295
    Reviews
    0
    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 pegasus View Post
    The link that BRV posted showed that the libs had greater private debt - not government debt. It led to greater influx of taxes etc. The income that the Gillard government has now is greater than the Howard government had at the time.

    Yet their spending is greater. The link does not show holes in the argument that the libs spend less, the link does show that the libs spend in different areas.

    It does not dispute that advertising a carbon tax we had no choice in was a big waste of money, or that set top boxes could have been done for cheaper. (There was no necessity for HD) Or that the NBN could have been done for cheaper.
    Well since this thread is about waste, I thought the link was quite appropriate! IMF are a pretty reliable source.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to BigRedV For This Useful Post:

    SpecialPatrolGroup  (13-05-2013)

  12. #38
    Mod-pegasus's Avatar
    Mod-pegasus is offline ADMINISTRATOR
    and all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the one word...UNLESS
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,644
    Thanks
    1,733
    Thanked
    1,735
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    Yep, I totally get the need to divert from public to private health. And I do support some help. But honestly, and I know this isn't going to be popular, if you are needing assistance to pay PHI on 150+k there is something going on.
    I think the vast majority of people getting the rebate are nowhere near 150k - I'm certainly nowhere near that.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigRedV View Post
    Well since this thread is about waste, I thought the link was quite appropriate! IMF are a pretty reliable source.
    I didn't say the link was a problem, just that it wasn't actually saying the government spending was wasteful

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,850
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,897
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by kw123 View Post
    Giving absolutely nothing to high income earners wouldn't work though as there would come a point when it would make more financial sense to get paid less (so pay less tax) or not work at all in some cases. Which doesn't benefit anyone, the economy or society in general.
    I'm not saying give absolutely nothing to high income earners. But I don't support high income kick backs while basic support to low income families are cut.

    It's frustrating to see people here in the welfare threads say cut the BB! pay for your own kids and don't have more if you need the BB. Yet then say on triple the income that they 'need' the PHI rebate, or that the tax payer should give them 100k a year PPL to equal their wages to afford to stay at home. There's a lot of irony there.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (13-05-2013)

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,850
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,897
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    I think the vast majority of people getting the rebate are nowhere near 150k - I'm certainly nowhere near that.
    Agreed some aren't. But I know in a thread a while ago when the changes to PHI came into effect several who were in the 170+ range who lost the rebate argued they could now no longer afford it.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Am i in labor?
    By jessTJ in forum Birth & Labour Questions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17-02-2013, 06:50
  2. Nappy bins, essential item or waste of money?
    By Leahmaree in forum Pregnancy & Birth General Chat
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 09-11-2012, 19:23

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
Riverton Leisureplex
An Extreme Family Pass at Riverton Leisureplex is the ultimate way to cool off during the summer school holidays. The $30 Pass allows pool and waterslide access for 2 adults and 2 children, as well as a drink, popcorn and an icy pole for each person.
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
LCF Fun Languages Australia
We offer foreign language lessons for children 2-12 yrs in French, Spanish, Mandarin, Italian or German as after-school and preschool clubs or private language tuition. This is play-based, full immersion language learning with proven results!
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!