Having a baby in Oz
Apr 16th 2014, 9:31 am
#16
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: Having a baby in Oz
Because, say you are a couple and are on $400,000 a year collectively, split down the middle, $200,000 each, chances are you are both working your tits off to do it. For the pleasure you get to contribute more to the welfare, but so be it, you earn enough to all the good things in life and sacrifice a lot in time and stress to do so. You build your life around your earning potential. When it come time to needing some back off the state, like maternity leave, you are not asking for an exponential figure, you are jjust asking to be treated as an equal, so you can maintain that life you lead. After the maternity leave the parent is going to be going back into the workforce .... Well only if its encouraged, therefore contributing a large portion of tax back into the system. There needs to be some incentive. There needs to be some fairness. The needs to be some encouragement for the govt 'We will help those who help themselves'
Apr 16th 2014, 10:00 am
#17
Crazy Cat Lady
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 65,493
Re: Having a baby in Oz
Because, say you are a couple and are on $400,000 a year collectively, split down the middle, $200,000 each, chances are you are both working your tits off to do it. For the pleasure you get to contribute more to the welfare, but so be it, you earn enough to all the good things in life and sacrifice a lot in time and stress to do so. You build your life around your earning potential. When it come time to needing some back off the state, like maternity leave, you are not asking for an exponential figure, you are jjust asking to be treated as an equal, so you can maintain that life you lead. After the maternity leave the parent is going to be going back into the workforce .... Well only if its encouraged, therefore contributing a large portion of tax back into the system. There needs to be some incentive. There needs to be some fairness. The needs to be some encouragement for the govt 'We will help those who help themselves'
Apr 16th 2014, 10:27 am
#18
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Hills District
Posts: 1,399
Re: Having a baby in Oz
I totally agree with you moneypenny. Also anyone who has to pay $7-8k, without being assure of their chosen specialist or a private room must have pretty awful private health care. Never cost me a cent and even after Whitlam stuffing everything up, it hasn't cost my sons more than $3500.
Apr 16th 2014, 11:05 am
#19
Aussie Finn Mixture!
Joined: May 2005
Location: Leschenault WA (after few locations around WA and Around Europe!)
Posts: 1,151
Apr 16th 2014, 11:51 am
#20
Forum Regular
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 255
Re: Having a baby in Oz
Because, say you are a couple and are on $400,000 a year collectively, split down the middle, $200,000 each, chances are you are both working your tits off to do it. For the pleasure you get to contribute more to the welfare, but so be it, you earn enough to all the good things in life and sacrifice a lot in time and stress to do so. You build your life around your earning potential. When it come time to needing some back off the state, like maternity leave, you are not asking for an exponential figure, you are jjust asking to be treated as an equal, so you can maintain that life you lead. After the maternity leave the parent is going to be going back into the workforce .... Well only if its encouraged, therefore contributing a large portion of tax back into the system. There needs to be some incentive. There needs to be some fairness. The needs to be some encouragement for the govt 'We will help those who help themselves'
I got the feeling it was designed to be the better off that subsidise the worse off. Obviously not too the extent of the 1960/70's where the better off paid 99% tax in the UK. But still that principle.
Everyone on an income between $80,000 and $180,000 pay the same 37% tax on the amount over $80,000.
It increases to 45% on any excess over $180,000
Those on the maximum tax rate of 45%, on any balance over $180,000+, aren't on a substantially higher rate than the 37% on someone earning $100,000, who may also be "working their tits off to do it". An extra 8%.
Apr 16th 2014, 12:02 pm
#21
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: Having a baby in Oz
I understand your rant but I personally, as a parent, have issues with Maternity and Paternity leave and pay. Why should business and government and other tax payers pay you (obviously general not specific) to have time off because you chose to have a baby? It honestly pisses me off. Yes I know some of these people will go back into the workforce, still doesn't mean, in my eyes, that you should be rewarded for producing children. No one gets equal rewards for chosing not to have children.
Last edited by Beoz; Apr 16th 2014 at 12:04 pm.
Apr 16th 2014, 12:04 pm
#22
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: Having a baby in Oz
So the vast majority of taxpayers who earn closer to half that figure should help to subsidise the financially better off. ?
I got the feeling it was designed to be the better off that subsidise the worse off. Obviously not too the extent of the 1960/70's where the better off paid 99% tax in the UK. But still that principle.
Everyone on an income between $80,000 and $180,000 pay the same 37% tax on the amount over $80,000.
It increases to 45% on any excess over $180,000
Those on the maximum tax rate of 45%, on any balance over $180,000+, aren't on a substantially higher rate than the 37% on someone earning $100,000, who may also be "working their tits off to do it". An extra 8%.
I got the feeling it was designed to be the better off that subsidise the worse off. Obviously not too the extent of the 1960/70's where the better off paid 99% tax in the UK. But still that principle.
Everyone on an income between $80,000 and $180,000 pay the same 37% tax on the amount over $80,000.
It increases to 45% on any excess over $180,000
Those on the maximum tax rate of 45%, on any balance over $180,000+, aren't on a substantially higher rate than the 37% on someone earning $100,000, who may also be "working their tits off to do it". An extra 8%.
Apr 16th 2014, 12:48 pm
#23
Aussie Finn Mixture!
Joined: May 2005
Location: Leschenault WA (after few locations around WA and Around Europe!)
Posts: 1,151
Re: Having a baby in Oz
Actually, as earning more, and paying more tax I doubt you contribute more. Hence my earlier recommendation.
Most families, yes, get family tax benefit, but keep thousands things going that you don't, as I said, watch that doco and see where I'm coming from. Most of the economy runs because of middle income families, not because of singles, or high incomes. Why do you think Oz avoided recession....?? Because the middle income that keeps supermarkets, white goods, entertainment, schools etc going were given $900 each. They did just that. They shopped. Higher, or even lower income earner without family will only buy 2-4 pillow whereas family will have to buy 10-20... You will only drive one car, whereas family with couple of teens can be buying four cars.... Never mind super markets, it's not about the amount to buy but how much is spent. And as long as middle class is spending with their families, the economy keeps going. And to help them keep going they get tax breaks and $$. As I have said to you personally in previous threads, I came here with nothing and received nothing, I pay my taxes and work had, yet you seem to treat me less than you due to now being able to receive something. Most of things received are not benefits but tax breaks... Would love to be a fly on the wall when you meet your accountant!
Here's your previous rant in regards to the tax breaks towards school age kids. Again, not a benefit but a tax break... Just like you may get with investment property, investments, car leasing etc....
Funnily enough in that thread you yourself said "get back what you can!"
http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...=820339&page=2
Most families, yes, get family tax benefit, but keep thousands things going that you don't, as I said, watch that doco and see where I'm coming from. Most of the economy runs because of middle income families, not because of singles, or high incomes. Why do you think Oz avoided recession....?? Because the middle income that keeps supermarkets, white goods, entertainment, schools etc going were given $900 each. They did just that. They shopped. Higher, or even lower income earner without family will only buy 2-4 pillow whereas family will have to buy 10-20... You will only drive one car, whereas family with couple of teens can be buying four cars.... Never mind super markets, it's not about the amount to buy but how much is spent. And as long as middle class is spending with their families, the economy keeps going. And to help them keep going they get tax breaks and $$. As I have said to you personally in previous threads, I came here with nothing and received nothing, I pay my taxes and work had, yet you seem to treat me less than you due to now being able to receive something. Most of things received are not benefits but tax breaks... Would love to be a fly on the wall when you meet your accountant!
Here's your previous rant in regards to the tax breaks towards school age kids. Again, not a benefit but a tax break... Just like you may get with investment property, investments, car leasing etc....
Funnily enough in that thread you yourself said "get back what you can!"
http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...=820339&page=2
Apr 16th 2014, 12:58 pm
#24
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 14,040
Re: Having a baby in Oz
It was a great political stunt.
Here's your previous rant in regards to the tax breaks towards school age kids. Again, not a benefit but a tax break... Just like you may get with investment property, investments, car leasing etc....
Funnily enough in that thread you yourself said "get back what you can!"
http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...=820339&page=2
Funnily enough in that thread you yourself said "get back what you can!"
http://britishexpats.com/forum/showt...=820339&page=2
