Saw this post elsewhere and thought it may be of interest.
" mention of the carbon dioxide tax brings a shiver down the spine of every disabled person who is on a government package called EACH. Extended Aged Care at Home. These packages are funded so disabled people are cared for in their home by 24/7 underpaid, worn-out carers instead of having to be supplied with a nursing home bed.
The EACH package is paid for by recipients at the base rate of 17.5% of a single pension. Every time there is a pension increase, part of that increase is taken back by the government because the 17.5% amount changes with each increase in income. Services are capped by the government for EACH recipients and the administration fees and costs of the private providers of these packages comes out of the allocated benefit and what is left is used to fund individual services.
When the carbon dioxide tax comes in and disabled pensioners are given the huge compensation package which is $10.10 to cover the estimated $9.90 increase in the cost of living leaving a buffer of 20c. , that will put disability pensions up but once again some of this compensation will be lost due to the 17.5% rule. How is that 20c. looking now! The people who have the extra medical, dental and health costs will once again be screwed. Add onto this the large increases in wages for community workers, these packages will be costing more and more and the services will begin to be less and less under this government as administration and respite hourly costs will increase and it all adds to the stress these good people live with on a daily basis.
In May 2009 the EACH base fortnightly fee was $96.18 and in March 2012 it is $120.54, an increase of $24.36 p.f. over 3 years. With the carbon dioxide tax the daily rate of this package will once again rise and even though there are concessions for various utilities you can see where the most vulnerable in the community are heading but I’m sure Labor put a lot of thought into this one.
Despair is now a common feeling in this community."
Well you think Labour taxes are bad,but wait for it if Tony Abbott gets his littlt nose past the point,God help us we will be lucky to get any pension at all,He cares for the paid parental leave,for both parents,but will rip out all the labour gov has put there to save us,he has not even got the money to put where his mouth is,when we were young we had to live with in our means,we got one pound A month for what they called child endowment,and we have the young ones of to day wanting more &more it would be A insult to them whatever they recieve,peole say they cannott live on the money they earn,and want more hand out's then we ever got.But we are pensioners and we are whinges,as we never get enough,when will society learn always put some away for Arainy day,even if it is 10 dollars A week,soon adds up in months down the track cannott always blame the govt,take some of it for being greedy and wanting more then you can afford.have ,we reared 4 children it was hard but we managed both working,my husband had 2 jobs,and Inever went to work till our youngest went to school. always there when they went to school &made sure we were there when they came home,But to day both parents are at work and children in playgroup,always wanting the best in life,we had it hard but we survived barely,but our children are stable parents now.all working for each other and A good stable family life,goes to show you money is not everthing,just stop for one second & get your priotries right & stop wanting every thing given to you on A gold plate,have Agood day ,cheers Mrs,Lynette Mitchell
Abbott talking of giving the payment to working Mothers ! When we should be trying to cut back on population! Also IMO if you have a child you should be at home looking after it once it is born.
PlanB, when you and I were churning out babies, the world was a simpler place. These days, in order to have a home and a reasonable standard of living, young couples both need to work. I agree that we probably need less population rather than more, but we cant ignore changing times.
These days, I do some work, but am able to do it from home. I look after my grandson most days so that my daughter can work. Its better than having a child raised by strangers in "child care" where parents have little control over the environment or care of their child.
I would much rather see the older generation (where they can) getting involved to allow those who WANT to work,to do so. Lets trim down the Centrelink budget where we can.
Lou, Can you tell me where you got the idea that the aged pension will be cut down, or cut out if Abbott wins the election? What has the Labor Government put in to save us, that he will rip out?
BTW, I think that the child endowment was first introduced in 1927 by the Bevan Government of NSW. (Nat/Country Party later Liberal/Cty)
Yes I think I got 2 Bob or 5 Bob --child endowment
The NSW Child Endowment was taken over by the Commonwealth in 1941 & set at 5 shillings per child under 16 YO which is looked upon as a joke today. However, the basic wage was just under 5 pounds P/W ($10), so the endowment for a family with the average 3 children of One Pound 10 Shillings ($3) was a massive amount at the time, especially when you consider that he claimed a huge tax deduction for his wife if she did not work. People like to claim how hard done by they were in the bad old days. BUT in 1955 the average tax on a single person on the average male income was 6% as against today roughly 20%. In actual fact, a man in 1950 on the basic wage with a stay at home wife & 3 dependant children under 16 paid no tax. I could not be bothered to do the sums, but to-day in Australia the total tax paid directly & indirectly would have to be over 60% of the Male average income. You cannot have a decent life in Australia without a car & the taxes & excise on a litre of fuel is over 70cents. It is no wonder that the family is breaking down in Australia, because you simply can't afford to raise a family properly any more.
The term of parliaments is too short and policy suffers because of it. As well, the mandatory voting encourages populism and protest voting.
People on pensions and fixed incomes always worry when Liberal leaders especially talk of savings to get rid of 'black holes' in budgets (a ridiculous, oversimplification and likely excuse for not implementing promises made during an election that any self-respecting media outlet should not leave unchallenged), because they believe with some justification that it will be their suffering that will produce savings.
Presently Tony Abbott is (rightly) suffering a credibility problem because on one hand he is talking about an expensive and inflationary parental sccheme that will hugely advantage the well-to-do and is likely to result in even more favourable benefits for public bureaucrats, whereas on the other, he is talking up the concerns about a budget 'black hole'. At the same time he appears reluctant to address a national disability insurance scheme.
It is little wonder that pensioners and low income earners are showing the whites of their eyes.
What is also apparent but not recognised by the Libs, is that the number of working poor is increasing and not always apparent in the multi-speed economy. As well, sooner or later young couples who have been having to put off having children because they cannot afford to live on one (non-permanent) pay will realise that the dice are peramenetly loaded against them and theer atre those in politics and business who prefer fly-in, fly-out overseas workers -for obvious savings.
There is no hope of improving the proper formulation and examination of policy until the terms of government (federal, State and local) are increased. At the moment it is like a TV reality show, which is not helped by news media that dumb down articles to suit text-heads with the attention span of a blow fly. It is only freedom of speech that might hold the media to account, as Channel 10 is finding out (re Stynes and others).
Abbots stupid maternity pay is not that good I agree but I reckon he did it as told by media and all that he is unpopular with women and has 3 daughters so thinks he is helping young women to have a career and a child too etc.
But dont forget Labor has put in one too which is based on the mimumum wage which is around $600 a week and not means tested like the age pension is. So OTT too as hubbie could be earning squillions etc.
So why pick out Abbott thought like me you're a swinging voter not that we have a lot on offer these days to pick from.
As for fly in workers - is not Labor already doing that or trying to right now so why point the finger at the Coalition who have not done it to date nor have I heard of a policy to do it only Labor and only Labor is bringing or brought in 457 workers in Qld to work and replace Aussie meat workers going back to 2008 lots of complaints on forums.
Lets be fair about it to date we havent heard a lot of the policies although ready for an election to be announced and never do - until recently when it has become a Labor cry to say they dont have any and theirs in 2007 consisted of ME Too by Rudd to all HowardsLabor didnt announce theirs either until election called and that is the norm. Not much point in stating what an opposition would do as Parliament is not a Reality show although today seems too many treat it as such - even Julia said so so must be true to rusted ons.
5 year terms in the UK are not that much better anyway but they do have the advantage that unlike tweaking here they still do not have mandatory voting meaning those who do think about what is on offer and dont fall for the old flannel many here seem to do.
Or vote as Dad did for Labor when Labor did represent Dad but not today as it no longer represents the working man just the middle class as Wayne Swann put today on the Today show whining about billionaires when at his fingertips is the answer - put them on Pay as you go like the rest of the population and a lot of their problems with income would be solved as harder to get it back!
My wording was sloppy on fly-in and fly-out and I agree with what you say.
However Abbott needs to realise that he will be applauded for being flexible on the parental leave, whereas at present he is judged badly for its excesses and for his likely reneging after election through the usual 'black hole' excuse. Either way and either Party, while I am happy to contribute something to encourage the continuation of the family unit and Aussie couples having children, I should not be directlly and indirectly subsidising the well-to-do.
I woulkd prefer to give the money to stay at home mums (and dads) who are often the stalwarts who provide the glue of society and provide voluntary work and the care of the vulnerable. The value of the voluntary work done by stay at home parents, largely women, is taken for granted by the community and by those who advise government.
I agree with the thrust of your last para as well.
Yep apart from making the gap between the single pensioner and the even less well off married pensioner grow out of all bounds- couldnt get rid of the pension supplement that Howard put into place but then gave the higher telephone allowance automatically to all even if not having the internet - so typical of Labor splash the money about and never think of the consequences and then start to panic and take if back wrongly.
So just what on earth has Labor done to help the pensioner?Lets hope Lou answers Innes enquiry - will be enlightening.
Labor has also cut out or made harder to gain a lot of the help that Howard had put in place for hearing aids and dental treatments for those with a disability or disease as 'too expensive" a
So waiting for Lou to anwer Innes enquiry too.
It is better to give the money to Aussie parents than give it to these back door invaders an their kids,at least our own Aussies parents have paid Tax, more than these back door invaders have done
Gillard never tells us how much is spent on the back door invaders each year, since Gillard and Rudd took away our border security and all these crooks have arrived on our back door step
As I said b4 I am all for the Mother staying home and looking after her--their kids--and if this is brought in--it will disadvanage the ones that DO stay at home--and struggle to live on one wage--better to give them extra rather that the well off