Quote:


You really dont have a decent contribution in you do you.

In your case, I would love to build a time machine, go back in time and pay your father $5k to leave you on the sheets.

Equitist wrote on Apr 28^th, 2011 at 1:23pm:




yeah yeah.. your right and what a pity you didnt put in that the rudd and Co didnt take into account the children when they

INCREASED THE BABY BONUS  AND NOT ONLY THAT CAME UP WITH THE LAME BRAIN PAID MATERNITY LEAVE... also to BUY VOTES..


what the!!!! are you talking about nem?.... the Lab s have made it ten times worse..

in your haste to put everything the Libs did down.. you tend to leave out the compounding... dont you?..

when this was first brought in our birthrate was dropping..and it was an insentive to have more home grown aussies than to have those imported from overseas.. and then to persuade them to become aussies..

like we were doing a few weeks before the Olympic Games.. so we had more non speaking english contestants..lol..

I agree it wasnt well thought out... in hindsight.. people get ugly they take advantage...it should only have ever been a one off..and most certainly have had more thoughts about what it would do to silly girls..but hindsight is a wonderful thing... I bet this stupid bunch we have in now wish they had it...lol

Most sensible arguments I have seen on here are from Verge and I completely agree with them.

People do NOT have children to grab a welfare payment increase, because simply the baby bonus does little more than cover the start of the additional increase in household expense.

The tax system as it stands in Australia heavily penalizes the single income family unit without doubt.
If there can even be a little move towards addressing that it is to be welcomed - if that is through a baby bonus then so be it.

We received the baby bonus for our first child as I have mentioned before - and we used it correctly.
Think for a second - we had for over a decade been a double income couple with the relevant lifestyle.
We all of a sudden needed cot, baby clothes x100, change table, nursery kitted out, stroller, baby car seat etc etc - double income no kids couples dont tend to have that - ask Buzz how many of them he has....

Therefore when we received the $5k, that's exactly what we spent it on.

Now also think - we now have our little girl for the best part of 18-21 years with us. How far has that $5k gone in that time?

Look at it the other way - we've gone from $400k gross income down to half of that.
So a $200k drop made up with $5k, so we're $195k in the hole first year and then $200k the rest until my wife returns to work in say 4 years time.....

All of a sudden that $5k doesn't quite seem like all the world does it?

Bit of perspective for goodness sake.

On those numbers, if anyone is having a child for the sake of $5k then they are either heartless, stupid, insane or all of those things.

I support a baby bonus and will continue to do so.

Quote:



and for once I agree with crook.. its a nonsence to give people on very high incomes $5k peanuts to them as you have pointed out andrei..$5k to someone on 30k would mean a great deal..I dont like means testing overall but in this case yes I do..imagine giving James Packer the baby bonus.

The whole concept of a baby bonus is flawed, as so many have pointed out, the only people who would be influenced to have a child for a 5k bonus, are so ill equipped to deal with their own life, let alone be responsible for an other, that they should probably be paid NOT to have kids.

As for the question of creating a better Tax system to relieve some of the burden on middle income Australia, most agree it is long overdue, yet when a proposal like the increased mining tax was announced, the people of middle Australia were swept up by Liberal Party politicking to support the super profits of the mining companies, rather than the rights of average Aussies who are seeing their country's finite mineral wealth exploited, with ever diminishing returns for the nation, and ever greater returns for multi nationals, and the obscenely wealthy.
Go figure.

The govt. have promised that the budget this year will be tough. Those entailed to medical research are deeply concerned about significant cuts to their budgets which are rumoured.

It is absurd to cut the budgets from necessary programs such as medical research whilst maintaining the funding for unnecessary programs such as the baby bonus.

The question should not be 'are people having kids just to get the money?' it should be 'is this money going to help the child?
I belive the answer is yes - even if they do spend it on a new TV - that's still a few hundred $ of their wages that they won't need to spend on a new TV down the track, freeing other funds up to spend on the children.  In my case, it was welcome but not really necessary, but for a single parent on minimum wage it could make all the difference.  Means testing it might be a good idea, but dumping it outright is cold heartedand will make the cycle of poverty that little bit harder to break.

The baby bonus is a key component in helping families to transition for a comfortable double income life as a couple into the single income family unit.

We needed (and used correctly) the $5,000 payment we received.

When you consider that we paid over $10,000 per month in tax as a couple it is not as if we didn't pay for it many times over is it?

Would you rather see decent, middle income families get help or would you rather drop outs, who contribute little and are basically just oxygen stealers who do nothing for their handout other than exist.

I know who I would rather help.

Decent, ordinary, hard working Australian families providing for the next generation.

How old fashioned eh?

Much better to give it to losers, deadbeats and other assorted scum who turn up in boats.