AusGAF 2.0 - Twice the price, a year late but still moving forward

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bernbaum said:
The waitress who served me my steak sandwich at Caloundra yesterday had a 'Shane' tattoo on her wrist.

I haven't met Shane, but I bet he has a really nice ute.
Click to expand...

Hell, he could have an even better 'wrong un'

my apologies if I've used the wrong spelling for the term. I don't much do the sport thing
 
Omi said:
Sigh. How many families are in this situation though? really?

That is what I love about these sort of debates, they take the most extreme version of what *could* happen, instead of the vast majority and the benefits that come with that.
Click to expand...

omi of course its extreme. but the fact the Government is letting it happen and didn't realise it could happen is what pisses people off

the government makes shit quickly, doesn't think about all the impacts for everyone and wastes everyones money.
 
Omi said:
That is what I love about these sort of debates, they take the most extreme version of what *could* happen, instead of the vast majority and the benefits that come with that.
Click to expand...
Given than the $150k applies to the year prior to giving birth, I'm pretty sure his scenario isn't even an example of what *could* happen.
 
Fredescu said:
Given than the $150k applies to the year prior to giving birth, I'm pretty sure his scenario isn't even an example of what *could* happen.
Click to expand...

Ah, crap it is too. Just looked it up. Have to admit, my other half filled out all the paperwork for our applications, I just knew the figures. :D

I really don't understand how people can get worked up over the whole paid parental thing. It is a much better scheme than the 'baby bonus' I would have thought.
 
Choc said:
let me give you an example of waste VKS


Paid Parental Leave

mother earns 400k a year father 140k

mother takes paid parental leave

as the partner only earns under 150k, DESPITE the fact she earned 400k in the previous taxation year, she is still eligible for it

Chances are being on 400k a year she is an executive and has a maternity leave package built into her contract

so she gets her regular wage plus the PPL on top just because her partner earns less than 150k


Now society can surely expect someone on 400k to save enough fucking money themselves to have a kid.

geez.
Click to expand...
There's no question of situations like this being unfair and their being possible is an unfortunate consequence of using a blunt policy instrument.

What is more important, though, in my mind with a policy like this is whether or not the policy is effective. It's a policy designed to put bums in seats, so to speak. Whether or not these particular bums have silver spoons up them is beside the point. In that respect it succeeds.

Though, honestly, I wouldn't worry about it. The situation you're describing is still embarrassingly rare in this country, both because women are vastly underrepresented in the top income bracket and because the women who are tend to avoid "marrying beneath their station". Let's just say that Julia Gillard and her hairdresser boyfriend are the exception, not the rule. In the grand scheme of things, the money she gets is nothing.

EDIT: Aaaaand it's against the rules. OK. My post is irrelevant.
 
Fredescu said:
Citation needed. The scenario you've stated it against the rules. See: http://www.familyassist.gov.au/paym...eave-scheme/working-parents---eligibility.php
Click to expand...

Yes sorry i mixed up the example. change partner salary to 400k and the womans salary to 140 and the example still applies

they only take into account the mothers salary in the means test.

and before you say, so, that makes sense who cares. It's the ONLY Government benefit that does not take into account both incomes
 
legend166 said:
Middle class welfare in this country is a joke, to be honest.
Click to expand...
john_howard1.jpg
 
Choc said:
but lots of young people got pregnant just to get the 5k. And where did they end up generally? (talking school kids here)
Click to expand...

This sounds made up. Proof in the pudding plz.

that bit sounds like a generalisation and general hatred for gen y all over again choc.
 
If generating a new generation of humans to vote for them is one of their primary purposes, why does the government make it so difficult for people who want to adopt or have children through IVF? Wouldn't these people generally want to have children as much or more than our previous bogan example who gets knocked up because there's nothing else to do on Friday night?
 
codswallop said:
If generating a new generation of humans to vote for them is one of their primary purposes, why does the government make it so difficult for people who want to adopt or have children through IVF? Wouldn't these people generally want to have children as much or more than our previous bogan example who gets knocked up because there's nothing else to do on Friday night?
Click to expand...

Heh, don't get people started on the whole IVF/adoption debate. Some of the laws surrounding that are fucking ridiculous. Victoria in particular.
 
Megadrive said:
This sounds made up. Proof in the pudding plz.

that bit sounds like a generalisation and general hatred for gen y all over again choc.
Click to expand...

I know a couple of families that had another child sooner in order to take advantage of the bonus. I can't wait for the day that the children find out that they came into existence because of an incentive.

"You were born because mummy and daddy wanted another child... and $5000!! Ca-ching!!"

I'm not saying they were wrong to have the child sooner (heck, it's 5 grand) and they wanted another child (so it's not like it was a pure cash grab) but I'm not sure that if the children ever found out it wouldn't hurt a bit.

Hell, there were people delaying their c-sections until after the paid maternity leave kicked in to take advantage of it.

People do some crazy things for money.
 
I know, markot. That's the problem. It's a race to see who can hand out money to working families.

The problem, really, is the means testing for a lot of welfare seems completely out of whack.

All uni students know this. Everyone knows of people who somehow manage to get Youth Allowance/AusStudy for no reason at all. I knew kids in high school who got Youth Allowance instead of going and getting a part time job. It was literally used as an allowance from the government, like you'd get from your parents.

Heck, I was one of those uni students. I got Youth Allowance for one year, my last year of uni (95% went directly to my mum for rent), despite the fact I'd just done a summer internship with Mac Bank and was paid quite well. And I could have easily and gone and got a part time job, like I'd done for the first two years of uni. There was really no way I should have been given that money.

And then because I was on youth allowance, I got Ruddbucks. That made even less sense.
 
Planet_JASE said:
I know a couple of families that had another child sooner in order to take advantage of the bonus. I can't wait for the day that the children find out that they came into existence because of an incentive.

"You were born because mummy and daddy wanted another child... and $5000!! Ca-ching!!"

I'm not saying they were wrong to have the child sooner (heck, it's 5 grand) and they wanted another child (so it's not like it was a pure cash grab) but I'm not sure that if the children ever found out it wouldn't hurt a bit.

Hell, there were people delaying their c-sections until after the paid maternity leave kicked in to take advantage of it.

People do some crazy things for money.
Click to expand...

If you really think that couples decide to have a 2nd child quicker purely because of cash, I think you are well, well wrong.

But I will leave it at that, not going to rant and rave.
 
Omi said:
If you really think that sane couples decide to have a 2nd child quicker purely because of cash, I think you are well, well wrong.

But I will leave it at that, not going to rant and rave.
Click to expand...

fixed
 
Fredescu said:
Fwiw, I think sales posts are fine. A lot of the other regions have dedicated buy/sell threads, but we're not big enough for that.
Click to expand...
Do the mods even come in to this thread? :lol
 
I'd buy a second hand iPad for 350. Any more than that and I'd be better buying a brand new one from Apple for 450.

As for this child debate. There's a very logical reason why people are being paid incentives to have children. Because people in the world generate money, and economies would grind to a halt without population growth. The government know that middle income and higher earners are having trouble justifying the expenditure of having children, so they offer a bit of cash to sweeten the deal.

"Only stupid people are breeding" is a popular saying, and who knows it could be a larger percentage. But that argument is a ridiculous one no matter how true. There are a lot of mega rich people in the world right now that came from working class families that had nothing. A bit of financial incentives to breed the next Steve Jobs isn't so bad of an idea.

My family lives in housing commission. But I like to think I've done pretty well and contributed to the country and its economy just fine.

Now, having said all that. I don't like that the world is reliant on people breeding in order to keep moving. The world is addicted to money and it moves by its economy. This is bad in my opinion because as the population grows the planet becomes more stale. We are supposedly the most intelligent beings on Earth yet who is the species destroying it? Looking down on cities from above in planes, do you see a beautiful habitat or an ever growing cancer?

Personally, I wonder if humans will ever reach a level of consciousness where NOT breeding is encouraged or even, perhaps, voluntary assisted suicide.

I think the Australian government is doing a pretty good job in discouraging working people having children anyway. With the high cost of living and the long commute times, people don't have the time nor money to have children.
 
Mar said:
I'd buy a second hand iPad for 350. Any more than that and I'd be better buying a brand new one from Apple for 450.

As for this child debate. There's a very logical reason why people are being paid incentives to have children. Because people in the world generate money, and economies would grind to a halt without population growth. The government know that middle income and higher earners are having trouble justifying the expenditure of having children, so they offer a bit of cash to sweeten the deal.

"Only stupid people are breeding" is a popular saying, and who knows it could be a larger percentage. But that argument is a ridiculous one no matter how true. There are a lot of mega rich people in the world right now that came from working class families that had nothing. A bit of financial incentives to breed the next Steve Jobs isn't so bad of an idea.

My family lives in housing commission. But I like to think I've done pretty well and contributed to the country and its economy just fine.

Now, having said all that. I don't like that the world is reliant on people breeding in order to keep moving. The world is addicted to money and it moves by its economy. This is bad in my opinion because as the population grows the planet becomes more stale. We are supposedly the most intelligent beings on Earth yet who is the species destroying it? Looking down on cities from above in planes, do you see a beautiful habitat or an ever growing cancer?

Personally, I wonder if humans will ever reach a level of consciousness where NOT breeding is encouraged or even, perhaps, voluntary assisted suicide.

I think the Australian government is doing a pretty good job in discouraging working people having children anyway. With the high cost of living and the long commute times, people don't have the time nor money to have children.
Click to expand...


ding ding ding. winner winner chicken dinner.
 
Omi said:
If you really think that couples decide to have a 2nd child quicker purely because of cash, I think you are well, well wrong.

But I will leave it at that, not going to rant and rave.
Click to expand...

At one point I would have agreed with you. Some people don't put as much thought into having children as you or I would. By the way, these couples weren't friends but through work and other family member's work.

The beginning of Idiocricy is science-fact, not science-fiction, it seems.
 
Mar said:
Now, having said all that. I don't like that the world is reliant on people breeding in order to keep moving. The world is addicted to money and it moves by its economy.
Click to expand...
I think the reliance on growth is the scary thing. It's so entrenched into our financial system, that even if you personally avoid the share market completely, you're always going to be affected when it crashes.

Mar said:
This is bad in my opinion because as the population grows the planet becomes more stale. We are supposedly the most intelligent beings on Earth yet who is the species destroying it? Looking down on cities from above in planes, do you see a beautiful habitat or an ever growing cancer?
Click to expand...
Wildnerness is nice to look at, it's true, but it's useless. From a humankind point of view, we're not destroying it but making it more useful. I'm not saying this is a good thing at all, but if you were an alien anthropologist on the outside looking in, you would conclude that as beings, humans are thriving.
 
Fredescu said:
I think the reliance on growth is the scary thing. It's so entrenched into our financial system, that even if you personally avoid the share market completely, you're always going to be affected when it crashes.


Wildnerness is nice to look at, it's true, but it's useless. From a humankind point of view, we're not destroying it but making it more useful. I'm not saying this is a good thing at all, but if you were an alien anthropologist on the outside looking in, you would conclude that as beings, humans are thriving.
Click to expand...


thats what happens when the Government decides a fantastic way to manage peoples retirements is put money into the most volatile financial system in the world.
 
Planet_JASE said:
The beginning of Idiocricy is science-fact, not science-fiction, it seems.
Click to expand...
It's not, you know. People have been decrying the poor outbreeding the elites since the beginning of civilisation. All that ever happens is that the elites are replaced over and over by new elites whose heritage rose up from the poor. History is filled with the sound of silk slippers going downstairs and wooden clogs coming up.

Also, genetics and breeding aren't anywhere near as deterministic in humans as they are in animals. Naturally intelligent people but dirt-poor people are everywhere - it's education, culture and luck that separate them out.
 
Choc said:
thats what happens when the Government decides a fantastic way to manage peoples retirements is put money into the most volatile financial system in the world.
Click to expand...
Super annuation as such isn't volatile, just most of the big name funds that rely on share market growth. You can set up a self managed fund and invest in whatever you want.
 
viciouskillersquirrel said:
It's not, you know. People have been decrying the poor outbreeding the elites since the beginning of civilisation. All that ever happens is that the elites are replaced over and over by new elites whose heritage rose up from the poor. History is filled with the sound of silk slippers going downstairs and wooden clogs coming up.

Also, genetics and breeding aren't anywhere near as deterministic in humans as they are in animals. Naturally intelligent people but dirt-poor people are everywhere - it's education, culture and luck that separate them out.
Click to expand...
Well it's a good thing we have neither education nor culture here in Oz!

Boom tish.
 
viciouskillersquirrel said:
It's not, you know. People have been decrying the poor outbreeding the elites since the beginning of civilisation. All that ever happens is that the elites are replaced over and over by new elites whose heritage rose up from the poor. History is filled with the sound of silk slippers going downstairs and wooden clogs coming up.

Also, genetics and breeding aren't anywhere near as deterministic in humans as they are in animals. Naturally intelligent people but dirt-poor people are everywhere - it's education, culture and luck that separate them out.
Click to expand...

The beginning of idiocrity, for me, is not talking about the poor and the rich, even though it may seem to present it that way. It's more about how there are more people out there that don't plan their breeding (and don't care) than there are that wait for the right time.
 
Planet_JASE said:
The beginning of idiocrity, for me, is not talking about the poor and the rich, even though it may seem to present it that way. It's more about how there are more people out there that don't plan their breeding (and don't care) than there are that wait for the right time.
Click to expand...
Replace "poor" with "stupid" and "rich" with "smart" and you get the same thing. There are more real and present dangers to be worried about.
 
Fredescu said:
Wildnerness is nice to look at, it's true, but it's useless. From a humankind point of view, we're not destroying it but making it more useful. I'm not saying this is a good thing at all, but if you were an alien anthropologist on the outside looking in, you would conclude that as beings, humans are thriving.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting view.

By the way, I was surprised to learn that a guy that I think is pretty cool, Joe Rogan, comedian and MMA commentator, feels the same way as I do when it comes to people and humanity in general. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zyc12-neTjM

Not to say that it's right, but it's how I feel.
 
viciouskillersquirrel said:
Replace "poor" with "stupid" and "rich" with "smart" and you get the same thing. There are more real and present dangers to be worried about.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what we're talking about, anymore.

codswallop said:
Idiocracy?
Click to expand...

You know damn well that was what I was talking about. Damn you!! :)
 
I hate how 'means testing' is a dirty word in Australia >_<

For instance, the 30% private insurance 'rebate' that the government pays is not means tested. So people earning over 200k a year get the same rebate that people with lower incomes get.

The idea of welfare, and government handouts, has to be linked to need, not 'wants'. Hell, cancel all that rebate crap and put that money into public hospitals so we all benefit >.> $4 billion a year extra into hospitals. The people who can afford private insurance shouldn't be subsidized. This whole idea that government should give people 'options' by helping foot the bill for private schooling and private health care is just a joke.

And get rid of freaking negative gearing for fucks sake, its such a joke. Every government has been so freaking scared of going near that since Hawke tried it, yet they all know its a con.


Not to mention, the housing market in Australia looks like a huge bubble just waiting to be burst >_<
 
Planet_JASE said:
I'm not sure what we're talking about, anymore.
Click to expand...
Idiocracy proposes the notion that society as a whole is getting dumber thanks to the stupid outbreeding the smart while ignoring the fact that IQs as a whole have been rising generation upon generation since we started measuring (so much so that the whole IQ scale has had to have periodic "resets").
 
markot said:
I hate how 'means testing' is a dirty word in Australia >_<

For instance, the 30% private insurance 'rebate' that the government pays is not means tested. So people earning over 200k a year get the same rebate that people with lower incomes get.

The idea of welfare, and government handouts, has to be linked to need, not 'wants'. Hell, cancel all that rebate crap and put that money into public hospitals so we all benefit >.> $4 billion a year extra into hospitals. The people who can afford private insurance shouldn't be subsidized. This whole idea that government should give people 'options' by helping foot the bill for private schooling and private health care is just a joke.

And get rid of freaking negative gearing for fucks sake, its such a joke. Every government has been so freaking scared of going near that since Hawke tried it, yet they all know its a con.


Not to mention, the housing market in Australia looks like a huge bubble just waiting to be burst >_<
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure rebates for private health care and private schooling actually end up saving the government a lot of money, though. Giving people incentives to sign up to private health care is a good idea. Could the rate be adjusted marginally coinciding with your tax bracket? Probably. But the idea isn't wrong.

Similarly for private schooling. It costs more for the government to put someone through public school than private school. So giving incentives for people to go to private school isn't necessarily a bad thing.

This is coming from someone who went to public my whole life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Like The Witcher games? Join me in my quest to create a "readthrough" of the books GAF
4
2K
mindfreak191 replied
  • Locked
AusGAF 11 - Twice the price, a year late but still moving forward
397 398 399 400 401
20K
1M
Kritz replied
I’ve got 30 Euro to spend on the E.U. switch store help me choose a game.
3
1K
biglloyd37 replied
iOS Gaming July 2017 | A day late, and 32 bits short
2 3 4 5 6
269
44K
HotHamBoy replied
Looks like The Onion is Taking a Crack at Game Reviews
17
3K
Daniel Pacheco replied
Top Bottom