cash bonus...who cares

[timetochange08]

All I hear about is the goverments cash bonus to people with children and pensioners.Fair enough the pensioners should get it but what about single people on low income as well.Whats the goverment doing to help them.Instead he gives it to people who have children.They always get the bonus.They get everything!!!!!!

If I was given the 1000 I would of gone and spent to help the economy within reason.But I can't I don't feel like spending, my hours have been cut at work I can't find full time employment elsewhere because theres too much competition.My job is very iffy so I won't spend and I bet I'm not the only person out there in that position.What about all those people who can't spend that feel there jobs aren't safe.What about giving the money to those people!!!!!Thats where you'll find the greatest need!!!!!

I'm over hearing about people with families getting everything.I'm doing it tough and I need the bonus too!!!!!!

 

[hoianbulldog]

Firstly let me say as a childless couple we get diddly squat from the Gov't this week. Also I am certainly not an economist.

In a perfect world the allocation of the bonus would have been distributed on a needs basis however this would probably have been an administrative nightmare delaying the bonus payments for years.

Simply the Gov't felt it needed to get the money out asap and this was the easiest way.

Again, in a perfect world I would have liked to have seen measures in place to make sure that the money wasn't been spent on booze and pokies, but again this just isn't practical.

Don't forget, someone has to pay for "Working Families" and "Non Working Families".

 

[bubblegoose]

According to you all you have to do is get a couple of kids & all of a sudden you're living on easy street!

Lemme tell you bub, that ain't the case! It's the freakin opposite.

 

[Fender]

Well I know my family dont's get it because we earn to much. My uncle is a pension bludger, haven't seen him in 10 years. Will get 4k, while my folks who work hard (dad basically works 6 or 7 days a week, not only get taxed the shit out of, the don't get any bonus from the goverment. In conclusion, the goverment will keep giving out to bludgers.

 

[Daytripper]

According to you all you have to do is get a couple of kids & all of a sudden you're living on easy street!

Lemme tell you bub, that ain't the case! It's the freakin opposite.

Hear, hear.

Always makes me laugh when I hear someone whinging about how 'easy' families get it....

 

[Frodo]

Robin Hood mentality

Let it be spent on booze, ****, imported TV's and holidays.

A real boost to the economy

 

[Archie87]

I reckon some pensioners need help, but I'd like to know why aren't university and tafe students given more assistance? Especially those living away from home. A recent report from research organisation NATSEM suggests that their average income is $240 per week, but their average expenses amounts to $540 a week. Many of us students are struggling but we once again get ignored.

 

[fairdinkum]

According to you all you have to do is get a couple of kids & all of a sudden you're living on easy street!

Lemme tell you bub, that ain't the case! It's the freakin opposite.

No, I don't recall him saying anything about 'easy street'.

All he said was that many bonuses, benefits etc seem to go to 'families' and 'parents' -- and he is right. They do.

Meanwhile, those people who rightly put off having children until they are financially secure, and/or decide against children altogether (the most genuine thing a 'green' person could do IMO) get bugger all.

Should the latter people be getting benefits, bonuses from the gov? No. But neither should middle-class parents who just happen to have three kids get three grand for nothing. It is ridiculous.

 

[fairdinkum]

I reckon some pensioners need help, but I'd like to know why aren't university and tafe students given more assistance? Especially those living away from home. A recent report from research organisation NATSEM suggests that their average income is $240 per week, but their average expenses amounts to $540 a week. Many of us students are struggling but we once again get ignored.

Ross Gittins from SMH took this to mean that students are in less need of government assistance.

Go figure.

 

[chaddles]

Simply - this current government has no f'in idea on economics and it has shown from day one, and this handout is going to do nothing for to stimulate the economy. It will be simply spent on debt and/or saved away, therefore not achieving the desired result, as what happened with the government deposit guarantee... just turned into yet another problem. This is what happens when you have idiots in control of the country ie Rudd and the Duck.. At least Costello and mob had some brains on these issues.

 

[Daytripper]

I reckon some pensioners need help, but I'd like to know why aren't university and tafe students given more assistance? Especially those living away from home. A recent report from research organisation NATSEM suggests that their average income is $240 per week, but their average expenses amounts to $540 a week. Many of us students are struggling but we once again get ignored.

If a student is spending $540 a week on 'expenses' then he/she needs to go back to school and learn how to do a budget.

 

[Daytripper]

Should the latter people be getting benefits, bonuses from the gov? No. But neither should middle-class parents who just happen to have three kids get three grand for nothing. It is ridiculous.

I have been single and now I am married with kids.

Let me tell you that even though I was earning far, far less as a singleton my disposable income was far, far more than it is now.

It would be ridiculous to start handing out monies to students because :
a) It would be an administrative nightmare.
b) Most of it would just be spent on pot, disco biscuits and booze.

 

[nicolbolas]

No, I don't recall him saying anything about 'easy street'.

All he said was that many bonuses, benefits etc seem to go to 'families' and 'parents' -- and he is right. They do.

Meanwhile, those people who rightly put off having children until they are financially secure, and/or decide against children altogether (the most genuine thing a 'green' person could do IMO) get bugger all.

Should the latter people be getting benefits, bonuses from the gov? No. But neither should middle-class parents who just happen to have three kids get three grand for nothing. It is ridiculous.

not all families get the bonus, have a two year old and another on the way. We don't qualify for the child hare rebate, so receive nothing, people shouldn't just lump everyone into the same basket, although might be nice to get something, i/we don't expect it.

If help keeps economy running, then it will have done part of what the intention here is

Cheers

 

[Pornstar]

It is easy for single people to change their employment/financial situation, they just have to get off their arse and improve their skills/knowledge base to make themselves more valuable in the workplace. But it is much harder for parents to do the same because children take up so much time and money that they don't have the same resources a single person does to improve their situation.

But pensioners can just **** right off, in my opinion. They have had 60-70+ years to get their shit together and they are still peasants? Stop whinging!

 

[fairdinkum]

I have been single and now I am married with kids.

Let me tell you that even though I was earning far, far less as a singleton my disposable income was far, far more than it is now.

What is your point?

It would be ridiculous to start handing out monies to students because :
a) It would be an administrative nightmare.
b) Most of it would just be spent on pot, disco biscuits and booze.

Firstly, where did I say we should give more money to students?

Anyway,

a) How would it be an 'administrative nightmare'?
b) Any evidence to back these sorts of claims up? Even a single study which suggests students spend more on these items than society in general?

 

[1jasonoz]

Well I know my family dont's get it because we earn to much. My uncle is a pension bludger, haven't seen him in 10 years. Will get 4k, while my folks who work hard (dad basically works 6 or 7 days a week, not only get taxed the shit out of, the don't get any bonus from the goverment. In conclusion, the goverment will keep giving out to bludgers.

Unfortunatley we over tax our taxpayers by about $85 billion per year, and then have the government hand it back to certain sections of the community in the form of welfare payments.

We could easily slice of say a 1/4 of that bill and use that to provide real taxation reform.

 

[fairdinkum]

It is easy for single people to change their employment/financial situation, they just have to get off their arse and improve their skills/knowledge base to make themselves more valuable in the workplace. But it is much harder for parents to do the same because children take up so much time and money that they don't have the same resources a single person does to improve their situation.

So because single people have not bogged themselves down with impediments to professional development (ie a family), they should be at a disadvantage re: government handouts?

What absurd logic.

 

[fairdinkum]

If a student is spending $540 a week on 'expenses' then he/she needs to go back to school and learn how to do a budget.

I agree that $540/week seems excessive, but the report he is referring to suggests that students living away from home spend more than their working counterparts because, whilst students pay as much (or more) for accommodation, food, basic clothing etc, they also spend more on items necessary for their education.

 

[Daytripper]

?

Anyway,

a) How would it be an 'administrative nightmare'?

Easy - Define a student.

Couple of examples.
I'm a stay at home mum doing an online course on paper meshe. The course is 10 hours long and can be taken over any length of time. Am I a student ?

I am the son of a millionaire in his first year of university. After one term I quit, to take off overseas with the intention of resuming studies next year. Am I a student ?

 

[1jasonoz]

Easy - Define a student.

Couple of examples.
I'm a stay at home mum doing an online course on paper meshe. The course is 10 hours long and can be taken over any length of time. Am I a student ?

I am the son of a millionaire in his first year of university. After one term I quit, to take off overseas with the intention of resuming studies next year. Am I a student ?

1. no

2. Yes whilst studying, no if they take the time off from uni.

 

[Daytripper]

1. no

2. Yes whilst studying, no if they take the time off from uni.

My point is that monies would have to be spent answering questions such as the ones above and then more would be spent on disputes etc etc.

With children its easy.
Govt already has the details from Medicare. They also have your annual income via your tax return. No need for any interpretation (except for extreme cases) as its all fairly simple.

 

[fairdinkum]

Easy - Define a student.

You takin the piss?

If we are talking about uni students, it is quite simple. ATM to be eligible for youth allowance one must be studying at least three units per semester (or a minimum of x contact hours per week, x being 15 or 20 IIRC).

Couple of examples.
I'm a stay at home mum doing an online course on paper meshe. The course is 10 hours long and can be taken over any length of time. Am I a student ?

Find me a uni that offers a degree in paper mache.

I am the son of a millionaire in his first year of university. After one term I quit, to take off overseas with the intention of resuming studies next year. Am I a student ?

Not while you are not studying. Hence the term 'student'.

 

[jimmyn13]

So because single people have not bogged themselves down with impediments to professional development (ie a family), they should be at a disadvantage re: government handouts?

What absurd logic.

Perhaps in some weird way people having children may be of benefit to our society. No i must be being silly it can't be, i'm sure we'd be fine if no-one was having kids- we could all focus on professional development then and we'd all be great at our professions

 

[1jasonoz]

My point is that monies would have to be spent answering questions such as the ones above and then more would be spent on disputes etc etc.

With children its easy. Govt already has the details from Medicare. They also have your annual income via your tax return. No need for any interpretation (except for extreme cases) as its all fairly simple.

Easier than increasing the tax free threshold for all taxpayers?

Why do we over tax taxpayers by $85 billion to simply then hand this back to certain sections of the community by way of welfare-thats madness!! We should pair back the taxation welfare churn to a safety net, i.e. remove family tax benefit A&B, baby bonus etc and use that money to lower across the board taxtion levels.

Children, the government defines someone 24 years of age as being a child for family tax benefit calculations!!

 

[Daytripper]

Easier than increasing the tax free threshold for all taxpayers?

Why do we over tax taxpayers by $85 billion to simply then hand this back to certain sections of the community by way of welfare-thats madness!! We should pair back the taxation welfare churn to a safety net, i.e. remove family tax benefit A&B, baby bonus etc and use that money to lower across the board taxtion levels.

Children, the government defines someone 24 years of age as being a child for family tax benefit calculations!!

I tend to agree with you.

I was just trying to present examples of why administratively it is much easier and cheaper to hand out this sort of 'welfare' to parents than it is to students.