Govt. wants to sponsor pregnancy

The system takes and gives back in lots of wierd and wonderful ways. :)

I suspect there would be very few that have not either made moves to avoid paying tax in the first place or sought benefits / refunds.

Some of us make more use of roads, education, libraries, public transport, public health systems etc.

Maybe each of us should have a look at how we are contributing to our community and what we are receiving back. Without knowing the details in others lives I don't think we are in a position to make a fair judgement. If you feel so strongly maybe have a think about giving up negative gearing. Afterall why should the general community support our personal investing?
 
Without knowing the details in others lives I don't think we are in a position to make a fair judgement. If you feel so strongly maybe have a think about giving up negative gearing. Afterall why should the general community support our personal investing?
Click to expand...

Because if they didn't the Government would have to do it. They know it costs a lot more to supply and upkeep public housing than it does to subsidize private investors to take the risk and also take on the extra outlay involved.


Having children is a personal choice we all make, it is not up to everyone else to help finance it. If you cannot afford children through your own effort. don't have them... because it's not up to me to support them. Been there done that .. without anyone else's help.
 
Novar said:
Having children is a personal choice we all make, it is not up to everyone else to help finance it. If you cannot afford children through your own effort. don't have them... because it's not up to me to support them. Been there done that .. without anyone else's help.
Click to expand...

As a society we need tax payers and we need housing.
 
Novar said:
Because if they didn't the Government would have to do it. They know it costs a lot more to supply and upkeep public housing than it does to subsidize private investors to take the risk and also take on the extra outlay involved.


Having children is a personal choice we all make, it is not up to everyone else to help finance it. If you cannot afford children through your own effort. don't have them... because it's not up to me to support them. Been there done that .. without anyone else's help.
Click to expand...

Fixed it for you :rolleyes:
Having an investment property is a personal choice we all make, it is not up to everyone else to help finance it. If you cannot afford investment properties through your own effort. don't have them... because it's not up to me to support them. Been there done that .. without anyone else's help
 
Not wrong about the wrong people breeding. License to breed ... wouldn't that be great ... or just restrict the bonus. All the smart people have one or maybe 2 kids max, the occasional outlier has three.

Have one kid while you're single? That's ok. Two? Could just be a slip. Three or more? You're on a habit here, no bonus. (different situation if you have 10 kids when married and then become single of course)

Two kids to different fathers? That's ok, you might have just remarried. Three, four or five different fathers (especially with a 10 month gap between each kid)? Habit.

Two of your kids have ADHD, autism, depression and learning difficulties and you're claiming the carer's bonuses? Could just be bad genes. All 4 of your kids have all of the above but just act like delinquent vandals, roam the streets constantly without you, constantly being expelled from school and you're never at home with them to see? You're just a bad parent and don't deserve all those extra payments. Here, have a free parenting course and a weekly checkup from a social worker.

Got three kids before you turn 20? No bonuses for any more kids until you turn 25. Have a break, 7 or 8 kids by 25 is a bit excessive.

Sadly, you can't get the snip on medicare before you are 30. Seen someone who had 5 kids at 22 (all the same father, very cute crowd of redheads) and was pregnant and had tried all the usual kinds of contraception who was told to sod off and wait till she was 30 before getting a tubal ligation. She was in public housing, a tiny 3br place, no chance of ever getting a job with that many kids. And this was before the baby bonus ...

Note that now you have to look for work as a single parent when your kid turns 8 not 16, or 6 if you have a partner (which literally doubled the case manager's load here), people are having more kids closer together, especially since if you have 4 under 16 you don't need to look for work at all.

You'll have to excuse my cynicism. I worked in a low-income area for several years (Elizabeth in Adelaide), I grew up in a low-income area (Whyalla) and now I live near the welfare capital of SA (Peterborough) and the number of frighteningly young looking girls with crowds of children following them around is scarey. Especially when the mother puts down her beer and ciggy just to yell "Oy Kristyal! Behave or I'll ****en tell ya dad on ya" Hey Sunshyne Rainbowye, you ****en shut up or I'll ****en tell YOUR dad on ya". :eek:
 
RumpledElf said:
Especially when the mother puts down her beer and ciggy just to yell "Oy Kristyal! Behave or I'll ****en tell ya dad on ya" Hey Sunshyne Rainbowye, you ****en shut up or I'll ****en tell YOUR dad on ya". :eek:
Click to expand...

this bit is my real pet hate - and was faced with it again yesterday.

i like to think i speak to junior (and all other kids) with politeness and respect, but don't hesitiate to "haul them up" when they're not behaving - although this is also done politely and with respect - and they listen.

but walking thru the park yesterday and there was a mother yelling abuse at her 3yr old child for getting sandy in the sandpit (doh) and telling her that she could walk home because she wasn't getting in the car covered in that ***.

bite tongue bite tongue ....

and every time i see this happen it's the scraggly, smelly or cheap and tarty looking parents. i feel so sorry for the kids - this is what they are being taught is acceptable.
 
Last edited:
And dont you just love the random 'y' in the spelling of the kids names!

My SIL works in Casualty of a large Public Hospital in SA. She sees things that should not be seen.

Anyway, a child was brought into Casualty and the child's name was Siobhann. Now, SIL knew that the correct pronounciation for this looks something like 'shivorn' so when she saw the name written down, that is the way she pronounced it. The mother looked at SIL like she was crazy and said 'No, it is pronounced Si O bahn, why does everyone say her name wrongly'..........sigh:(
 
Pushka said:
Anyway, a child was brought into Casualty and the child's name was Siobhann. Now, SIL knew that the correct pronounciation for this looks something like 'shivorn' so when she saw the name written down, that is the way she pronounced it. The mother looked at SIL like she was crazy and said 'No, it is pronounced Si O bahn, why does everyone say her name wrongly'..........sigh:(
Click to expand...

That's hilarious! There's a family here called Featherstonehaugh which everybody knows is pronounced fenshaw but no, they call themselves feather stone hore. I just about choke whenever i have to pronounce it incorrectly. Their name - their pronunciation, I guess. :)
 
Mark Laszczuk said:
In a wildly stupid move, the Govt. is now proposing to spend taxpayers' money to sponsor a woman/couples' choice to have children... They are also proposing that employers pay super to women on maternity leave, which is going to have absolutely no effect whatsoever on employers' decisions to employ women *rolls eyes*.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...8-week-parent-leave-JX8SL?OpenDocument&src=i2

Mark

Edit: this legsilation also very clearly discriminates against men, as women will be eligible for 12 weeks' paid leave and men only get two. How is that fair, exactly?
Click to expand...

Damn! Now you tell me!!! I already have 3 and not planning any more :)
oh yeah I don't have a job either, nor super so I guess it discreminates against women like me too ;). Absoultely not fair! ;):rolleyes:
 
Xenia said:
Damn! Now you tell me!!! I already have 3 and not planning any more :)
oh yeah I don't have a job either, nor super so I guess it discreminates against women like me too ;). Absoultely not fair! ;):rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Xenia you should go for another 2 - you'll have a full basket ball team! I hear making babies is fun!
 
Blue Card! said:
but...natmarie - you dont HAVE to work for a small business if you dont want to.
Click to expand...

No I don't anymore thank goodness! I have in the past though and it was horrible - low wages, no benefits, no training, no promotion etc etc. If I was planning on having a family no way would I work for an employer who didn't offer maternity leave.

Each to their own I guess but if you have the skills and talent that large multinationals will pay big bikkies for why would you sell yourself short for what a smaller business can afford.

I am just expressing my view that skilled women who have families will work for larger companies who can pay mat leave, provide carers leave, family leave, etc etc and don't mind that their staff have a life away from the office. Small businesses can't afford this and may not be able to attract and retain the sort of employees they would prefer. There has been quite a bit of research done in this area especially regarding female graduates and what they look for in an employer.

With female graduates outnumbering males in many areas, business owners who refuse to employ women because they may have children are shrinking their talent pool quite significantly.

I certainly don't think that small businesses should be forced to pay maternity leave though. Let them compete for skilled employees with the big boys who can afford leave and benefits.
 
P.S - has anyone been watching Life at One and Life at Three on the ABC? Very interesting research being conducted on child development particularly how parental stress affects young children.
 
Yes, fascinating show. Makes me realise how stressed I was with #1 and how I am so laid back I am almost horizontal with #2. Two back to back drawn-out court cases and then the victims of crime process and selling a house I really liked and moving as far away as possible from the ex has definitely taken a toll, I have two very differently behaved children. That $3000 compensation I got didn't really compensate for much at all ...
 
i was really impressed with the guy who lost his cleaning contract so trained to be a taxi driver, but all they could afford to rent was a (bleep) house in a (bleep) suburb, so they moved to a place in the country/seaside for the sake of the kids and that they could afford, and both him and her are going back to uni ... i don't mind paying benefits to those sorts of people because they will "go get".
 
I recieved single parents pension for 3 years after i broke up with my husband. well it was a part pension because i was working and studying at the same time. I think i'll pay back that in the next year or 2 in taxes.
 
lizzie said:
i don't mind paying benefits to those sorts of people because they will "go get".
Click to expand...
Vs here where there really isn't much incentive to get off welfare. Even if you don't have the cheaper option of owning your house, rent is very low ($50pw according to census), school is free and if you don't feel like feeding your kids they have breakfast and often snacks and lunch too, there's just not enough stuff to spend your money on, petrol can be stolen, cars and motorbikes don't need registering/servicing/tyres, dogs and cats just multiply by themselves and don't need any care, fines can be avoided by doing community service, and you can grow your own drugs if you're too lazy to buy ice.
 
Does anyone think this will get passed?
I think i will have just missed it as I'm due on the 11th of May.
Thankfully my employer pays 12 weeks at the moment and does not require me to return to work which I of course will be doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top