libs welfare gone mad., page-27

  1. 1,363 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1
    Big business will pass on the cost so it is the ordinary taxpayer that will pay for the scheme. It is WAY to generous. I had 3 babies & from memory got nothing for the first 2 and about $500 for the 3rd (around 13 years ago). Yes it was hard but having my babies was not based on a monetary consideration but because we wanted to love and raise children. It should not be the up to society to pay for you to have a child.

    Someone posted: "Higher earning women?

    $75k is less than average weekly ordinary time earnings." Are you joking??

    This is what a woman can get in 6 months not per annum. It works out to around $2,885 per WEEK!! Waaay above ordinary earnings.

    Don't forget that this money is paid while a woman is at home being non-productive (and I mean this in terms of not contributing in the work force). So why on earth should one mother be paid a lot more than another mother when essentially they are both doing the SAME thing-caring for their babies AT HOME!!

    Also, what about mothers who are working full time but on a casual basis. Do they get nothing? Why are their babies worth less? The birth rate is not declining and the average salary has increased around 5% in the last 2 years. If you can't afford to have a baby then don't have one!! If you're earning $150,000/year then there definitely shouldn't be a problem and we shouldn't need to pay you $75,000 to do so. The school kids bonus is only $400-$800 per child. It is INCOMPARABLE to this kind of handout. Don't forget that the majority of us receiving the school kids bonus are the ones that didn't receive a brass razoo when our babies were born-NO govt maternity pay & NO baby bonus (also no 1st home buyers grant) etc. As I was casual, also no maternity pay from my employer at the time. Labour's scheme is generous enough and fair. Remember a woman is being paid while she is at home looking after her baby, the same as any other mother-she is not a productive member of the workforce at this time so should not be paid more than anyone else. Abbott's scheme is welfare on steroids!!
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.