The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Rethinking Socialism

Rethinking Socialism

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Poirot,

Lets use small words and concepts that you can grasp, an example:

There is a low fee independent school in the Southerland Shire, where for fees of about $8000 p.a. you can send your child. Or for $0 you can send your child to the local public school.

At the public school the government pays about $13 000 p.a. compared to $8000 p.a. for the private school. Which one provides the parent with the greatest tax payer funded "welfare"? Even a labor tragic should be able to do the maths.

This was a coaltion stroke of genius. The cost to the taxpayer of education was reduced, and the quality of education increased.

The same applies to the health care rebate which Labor in a fit of spite and moronic delusion want to reverse.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Tuesday, 15 January 2013 9:24:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OK SM I am trying, but in truth you make it imposable not to return your serve.
Bloke I am trying harder than ever to change my style,not reduce my hard thoughts, but not to return serve to such as you.
I have, time and again, said you get away with far too much.
YOU, no one else, brought the political insults to life here.
Moronic? PLEASE! bloke it need not be said, But no heat intended no retractions a truly held view, a person known to you.
Is best described by that term, he lives in your mirror.
ALL unneeded welfare, payments to those who do not need it to survive is waste.
Liberals always cut first the poor and lower classes they tax them first, they, by the intended baby leave to high income,up to $150.000 a year incomes is welfare!
And in fact look and see undermines their right to cut any welfare.
SM heard of Sir Robert Menzies? maybe Pig Iron Bob?
He started a party that took middle Australia by storm, like his successor and admirer John Winston Howard.
What happened to that party?
Well in Howard's case he made WAR on his middle Australia with Work Choices.
You advocate your party do just that, reward the well off and make WAR on the less well off.
More Tea Party than Liberal me thinks
Posted by Belly, Wednesday, 16 January 2013 6:33:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Belly,

There are no welfare payments made to the middle class.

Not one red cent of subsidy is received without the expenditure by the recipient of several times more in a such that saves the government money more than the subsidy. It makes pure businsess sense where the government saves more than it pays.

The removal of the private health subsidy is a pure federal money grab where the states will have to cough up much more to compensate.

It is not just moronic, it is greedy and devious.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 16 January 2013 6:53:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Howard found the provision of middle class welfare a great vote winner. However welfare is a means to redistribute income in society and not a tool to be used to win votes. Middle class welfare is something Australia cannot afford and is not necessary. Paying family benefits to households with incomes of $150,000 plus p/a is senseless, as these people are not poor, they may struggle at times with mortgages and lifestyle commitments etc, but by no stretch of the imagination could they be categorized as poor and we should not be redistributing income to those that are not poor.
Middle class welfare does not make for good economics, taking with one hand and giving back with the other. Australia instead of making handouts to the middle class, should be making provision for when the mining boom is over. This money would be better spent on education, Infrastructure, transport etc and not buying short term votes.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 16 January 2013 7:57:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

Once again, you've openned your mouth without engaging your brain or bothering to read what has gone before.

Family benefits have never been paid to those earning over $150 000.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 16 January 2013 10:17:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wrong SM, are you saying families with a combined income over $150K p/a can not get family benefits such as Family tax benefit part A, large family supplement or rent assistance. Family with 5 kids under 10 paying rent, day care and after school care income $150,001, no welfare benefit? According to you no, wrong.
"you've openned your mouth without engaging your brain"
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 16 January 2013 7:28:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy