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.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 40 of 238
13-05-2013 19:16 #31
13-05-2013 19:18 #32
13-05-2013 19:19 #33
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.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mod-pegasus For This Useful Post:
13-05-2013 19:23 #34
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.
13-05-2013 19:26 #35
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.
13-05-2013 19:29 #36
13-05-2013 19:29 #37
The Following User Says Thank You to BigRedV For This Useful Post:
13-05-2013 19:32 #38
13-05-2013 19:33 #39
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.
13-05-2013 19:35 #40
SoftmatsSoftmats specialises in safe, non-toxic, and durable play mats. The international Premium Dwinguler™ Play Mats and ...
LATESTToilet training: when is the best time to start?Why it is OK for your child to be differentWhat is a blessing way? How is it different to a baby shower?
POPULARWhen can I start giving chores to my children?New baby nursery checklist – a guide to newborn essentialsWhat to pack for labour and hospital – a checklist
FORUMS - chatting now ...
Early waking/routine help 17 month oldToddlers (1 year olds)
WOW what a shockWorking Hubbers - Employed
IVF babies due Sep/Oct/Nov 2017pregnancy and babies through IVF
IUI QueryNon-IVF fertility assistance
Growth Of Intellection. Discussion?General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
Feature film callout to expecting mothers - melbourneMedia Requests
Really fast letdown causing vomiting?Breastfeeding Support
DS development concernsGeneral Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat