The Forum > Article Comments > Money for nothin’ and parental leave for free > Comments
Money for nothin’ and parental leave for free : Comments
By Jessica Brown, published 29/9/2008Lots of time to bond with the new bundle of joy, with money from the government paying the mortgage: a dream come true!
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
-
- All
There is a great deal of evidence to show that the childless – especially poor singles – are directly subsiding the childed. In 2006 Dr Craig Emmerson MP (Rankin, ALP)showed that monies flowed from the childless, no matter how poor, into households with children regardless of need. Both governments have promoted favourable treatment of so-called “working families” at the expense of the childless. Rankin is one of the very few MPs brave enough to speak out on behalf of the childless and said, “it is only a matter of time before taxpayers without children organise a tax revolt.” (See Elisabeth Coleman, “Tax Slug on Poor Singles” in The Australian, 14 June 2008)
Ross Gittens noted “The third of households with dependent children are roughly square because, though they pay a lot of tax, they get back a lot in family tax benefits, education and health care... So who does that leave to pick up the tab?...the 40 per cent of households composed of singles or childless couples of working age. They pay a lot of tax but get back nothing in family benefits and not much in education and health care benefits. ” (See Ross Gittins , “Just who is picking up the tax tab?” in The Sydney Morning Herald, June 20, 2007)
That the breeders are determined to redistribute money away from the childless rather than say, the profitable businesses that make up BRW’s top 100, is poignant. If breeders really deserve recompense for making these future fabled taxpayer then taxing the mega-profits of big business makes more sense. After all it is big business that is most set to benefit from this future working army. Is it possible real reason breeders want to make the childless cough up is to punish them for failing to toe the social-line; that the only “real” family is one that is married and heterosexual – oh and tired and sexless. Misery loves company I suppose.