Taxing the middle class and giving nothing back?

Isn't that the whole point - why "give something back" to those who may not need it at the expense of those who do?

What social group has more access to Health Care Rebates, Child Care rebates, Private School funding and Superannuation tax breaks?

Would society be better off and fairer if the wealthy paid less tax and the poor paid even more?

There's also more to the overall tax burden than just income tax, especially when you include the effects of a regressive GST.

I'm somewhat amazed that we have developed such a welfare state mentality and a sense of personal entitlement in this country over the last decade but it seems we're now stuck with it.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/single-parents-to-lose-pension-cards-20130112-2cmg1.html
This link is both painful and discriptive of our problem.
First yes rache I too want to know why we ever give welfare to middle class.
The they have the right, to get something back is blind to what welfare if not is, should be.
I have seen posters froth at the mouth, because the links actions are takeing place.
Both Give them more, and give them nothing views are held.
Note too, ALP caucus is thinking of a rise in the dole, probably taking up the savings made in the links case.
We must stop half hearted reforms,that do nothing.
If we make welfare a thing the needy get, not a reward for being single, and a parent, long term,we start to fix things.
I believe most folk want a job.
And too those things local government and the state once did, moweing nature strips, picking up rubbish, could be done by these folk.
I think if the welfare received is two days pay, at average wage, then those two days should be worked, as a community benefit.
Some on both sides, take bitter stance and say never.
Both hamper true reform, but believe me, we can not forever spill money on the greedy.
Reform in its self stops fraud as it is harder to hid.

Firstly

The term "middle class welfare" is a misnomer devised by labor to describe tax breaks incentives to encourage investment in private health and private schools which reduce government expenditure on public hospitals and health care.

The latest moronic action by labor has removed the private health incentives which recent estimates indicate have ripped nearly twice the tax "savings" out of private health, as hundreds of thousands reduce their schemes to the minimum hospital cover, which now goes on the public health system. The only win for Juliar is that the added burden falls on the states not federal.

SM respectfully, please do not use terms like MORONIC to insult Labor thinking and acting differently that you wish.
You are in fact, defending welfare [that is what the health insurance cuts you speak of are] for those earning far in excess of most.
And in introducing such terms you invite retribution, from me.
Another thread, well worth a look, from arjay, talks of what may appear unlikely events.
But this world is just a few steps not from recovery, but very real financial failure.
Welfare,born in England long ago.
First and in my view forever is about need not want.
We need to see only those in need get it.
Why give to those earning $80.000?
Fairness? feeble why give any one to beseen to be fair,not fair stupid in fact.
If the worlds economy does stop, so too will our economy, our exports will not be unwanted minerals but food.
We will not be able to be so free with welfare.
SM a truth, 42 years ago I found my self on the dole, this part of our country is no place to find a job.
8 dreadful weeks,of abuse and self loathing, I came near suicide
TRUE.
I still think most want to work, what is so wrong about rather than a hand out we give them a job? that returns something to the community.

Belly,

"moronic action by labor" is an oxymoron.

Just as the term "middle class welfare" is not actually welfare. This tax rebate is no more welfare than a shop offerring a discount to encourage sales.

The money that is spent on private health cover goes into hospitals and systems that the federal government does not have to pay for. The $2bn that federal Labor is going to "save" over 4 years is going to reduce money put into private health by an estimated $4-5bn. But Juliar does not care, as this added cost is for the account of the states, not the commonwealth.

A person earning $150 000 p.a. with the rebate is likely to buy a top grade health plan, without the rebate he is likely to buy the cheapest needed not to pay the penalty at a fraction of the cost.

Similarly the payment to independent schools saves the states a fortune in having to build and run new schools.

SM,

"Just as the term "middle class welfare" is not actually welfare..."

Correct!

The more accurate term is "middle class pork-barrel".