Rudd to increase middle class welfare

Remove this Banner Ad

medusala

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts
Aug 14, 2004
37,209
8,424
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/childcare-bonanza-for-top-earners/2008/03/09/1204998283747.html

Child-care bonanza gives top earners $1000 extra help

March 10, 2008


HIGH-INCOME families will receive an extra $1000 or more a year to help with their child-care costs under the Federal Government's revamped tax rebate.

New figures show high-income earners will benefit handsomely when the rebate is lifted from 30 per cent to 50 per cent of out-of-pocket child-care expenses, as promised during the election.

Last week, low-income carers of disabled and elderly relatives learnt their $1000 and $600 annual carer bonuses could be scrapped, although the Prime Minister has since indicated taking a softer approach. But the child-care data, provided to the Herald by Peter McDonald, professor of demography at the Australian National University, shows high-income families will be big winners when the new child care rebate is paid in October.

For the first time, all Australian families, irrespective of income, will have more than half their child-care bill paid by the Government. While all families will get significant help under the complex system of assistance, a family on $100,000 with a child-care bill of $6720 a year - based on 20 hours of child care a week - will get an extra $1169. At present the family gets $2614 or 39 per cent of their child-care costs; under the new system it will get $3783 or over 56 per cent.

The rebate will be even greater the more child care they use - up to 50 hours a week.

A family on $35,000 paying the same child-care bill will get more than 74 per cent back under the new system compared with 63.7 per cent today. But in dollar terms the increase in help will be $712 - from $4280 to $4992.

Professor McDonald, an expert on the family and child-care payment system, said the Government should not scrap the carers' bonus. But the extra help for child care costs, even for high-income families, was "money well spent", not middle-class welfare. "Middle class welfare is a term used exclusively to refer to people getting family payments that help women return to work and pay taxes. It is never used to refer to other kinds of benefits that are also not income-tested, like the fuel rebate, benefits to business, and the tax breaks for superannuation."

Professor Deborah Brennan, a social policy expert from the University of NSW, said there was a high risk the increased child-care rebate would bring only short-term relief. "There is nothing in the payment mechanism to prevent this being very quickly absorbed into higher fees," she said.

Families are eligible for two payments: the child-care benefit, which reduces fees according to family income and is of greater benefit to low-income families; and the child-care tax rebate.

The rebate is not means-tested. Because high-income families receive only a small amount of child-care benefit, they have high out-of-pocket costs. These will be substantially cut by the increased rebate.
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/childcare-bonanza-for-top-earners/2008/03/09/1204998283747.html

[
The rebate is not means-tested. Because high-income families receive only a small amount of child-care benefit, they have high out-of-pocket costs. These will be substantially cut by the increased rebate.[/I]

This is the only middle class welfare i am for. If we could make childcare cheap enough for all we would increase workforce participation meaning

softening demand>>>reducing inflation>>>reducing the need for Immigration>>reducing demand for increased housing and services>>>Did I mention reducing inflation


Giving people money is stoopid, because most people are stoopid and don't spend it where its meant
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This is the only middle class welfare i am for. If we could make childcare cheap enough for all we would increase workforce participation meaning

Why are you for this without means testing?

High income families won't be deciding about putting kids in childcare based on this ie for them, it won't increase workforce participation. The extra money for them won't be a deciding factor, unlike struggling families.
 
Crap.

This is exactly the sort of thing that shouldn't be being done.

Agreed...

Rudd is just as bad as Howard re this middle class family welfare shit.

Doubt he'll means test Part B Family Allowance or the baby bonus either, or put a non-family home asset test on Part A.

With Rudd continuing the Lib's shocking private school funding as well, it looks like you've voted for a lemon.
 
Rudd is just as bad as Howard re this middle class family welfare shit.

Doubt he'll means test Part B Family Allowance or the baby bonus either, or put a non-family home asset test on Part A.

With Rudd continuing the Lib's shocking private school funding as well, it looks like you've voted for a lemon.
Oh crap you have done it now
 
With Rudd continuing the Lib's shocking private school funding as well, it looks like you've voted for a lemon.

How can it be shocking

2/3rds of the cash per child and delivering substantially better results

Better results for less cash

How can that possibly be a bad thing?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

my youth allowence got cut last week - now if i earn over $200 a week i pretty much get nothing. I am not a freeloader or a dole bludger by any means - im at university studying a double degree and already work about 25 hours a week just to survive - yes i live at home but my father is on disability pension and my mother works crazy hours for very low pay looking after old people in thier homes. but now im expected to live on $200 a week, supposedly since i am dependent on my parents - but they get no money to look after me - so that $200 i earn a week is all i have - so much for buying textbooks and saving up to go on exchange next year - i guess im just a drain on society and dont deserve a fair chance

but of course give out more money to richer families with no means test or anything, of course thats a good idea :rolleyes:
 
Yeah, instead we'll make quality of education a function of the wealth of a student's parents, rather than try to provide as good an education as possible to all students.

You'd think that considering Meds views on Muslim non-intergration that he'd be opposed to policies that were ghettoising our schools along ethnic and religious lines :rolleyes:

Public schools suffering 'white flight'

March 10, 2008 - 6:28AM

Public schools in NSW are suffering "white flight" as Anglo-European students avoid racially diverse institutions, a new report has found.
The 2006 survey conducted by the NSW Secondary Principals Council found that in some parts of Sydney and NSW the students were avoiding public schools in favour of independent ones.

The public schools were being avoided because they were predominantly attended by Lebanese, Muslim, Asian or Aboriginal students, Fairfax newspapers reported.

White middle-class students in New England towns such as Armidale were flocking to Catholic or independent schools, the confidential report said.

"This is almost certainly white flight from towns in which the public school's enrolment consists increasingly of indigenous students," the report says.

"The pattern is repeated in the Sydney region. Based on comments from principals, this most likely consists of flight to avoid Islamic students and communities."

A university of Western Sydney academic, Dr Carol Reid, said the education system was becoming polarised around ethnicity.

"What I have discovered is principals are losing the last of their white kids to Catholic schools across the road," Dr Reid said. "A principal in the Middle Eastern part of the city was saying that he had no white kids in his school.

"I'm concerned that social cohesion is going to be at risk through this. I see signs of that. You have a lot of segregation going on."
Some teachers and principles described the problem as "de facto apartheid", Fairfax reported.

The survey drew responses from 163 high school principals and the report was presented to the NSW government in February 2006 but never released.
AAP

http://www.theage.com.au/news/natio...ng-white-flight/2008/03/10/1204998312886.html
 
Dunno that giving rich schools (ie top tier ones) lots of cash by postcode is a real good spending policy.

So if you choose to put your kids into private schools you are not entitled to any support from govt yet if you sent your kid to a state school it actually cost the govt more. Higher income people pay a lot more tax and are entitled to get something back.

It can't be a one way street.
 
You'd think that considering Meds views on Muslim non-intergration that he'd be opposed to policies that were ghettoising our schools along ethnic and religious lines :rolleyes:

So called "white flight" has more to do with soft discipline and toleration of unruly behavior in public schools.

Not many parents are going to gamble on their children's future when there are generally better alternatives in the private sector.

We sent all of our children away for high school , all the boys went to a catholic Ag school and the student demographics were much the same.

The attitude to learning & discipline were poles apart though.
 
my youth allowence got cut last week - now if i earn over $200 a week i pretty much get nothing. I am not a freeloader or a dole bludger by any means - im at university studying a double degree and already work about 25 hours a week just to survive - yes i live at home but my father is on disability pension and my mother works crazy hours for very low pay looking after old people in thier homes. but now im expected to live on $200 a week, supposedly since i am dependent on my parents - but they get no money to look after me - so that $200 i earn a week is all i have - so much for buying textbooks and saving up to go on exchange next year - i guess im just a drain on society and dont deserve a fair chance

but of course give out more money to richer families with no means test or anything, of course thats a good idea :rolleyes:

It must be tough having to work those hours and go to uni as well, hope it works out for you.

As a 1st year apprentice I only cleared $250 for a 40h week and didn't have the option of living with my parents as I had to move to Perth. It's tough for many people when you start out but you'll reap the rewards later on. Thinking back I can't believe that I actually lived on such a small amount, but I don't recall struggling too much. (Rent has about doubled since '02' though)
 
So if you choose to put your kids into private schools you are not entitled to any support from govt yet if you sent your kid to a state school it actually cost the govt more. Higher income people pay a lot more tax and are entitled to get something back.

It can't be a one way street.

If there were no private schools and all children attended state schools would the cost for the govt to provide education be greater than it currently is?

Come back to us when you know what I'm talking about ie the current funding system. I didn't say that there should not be any funding of any private schools.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Rudd to increase middle class welfare

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top