Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rachel800

Centrelink payments

Recommended Posts

But i never said i should receive it, the fact is i do. Automatically actually.

The fact is, there are many many people in the same situation as I am who receive payments they dont need. Back when my son was born the baby bonus was not means tested, so I got that too. I didnt get it with my daughter as it became means tested at that point and i certainly didnt care.

So maybe the real issue is that people are receiving payments they dont need? I probably think thats the heart of everyones issues but it has somehow gotten mixed up with the child abuse dilemma.

Maybe you could give it to someone in need...

I don't think it got mixed up...it was just a point of view from someone who has been on the receiving end of abuse of the system...which takes different forms...as yours may be considered - given that you receive money you don't need. The overall problem is that...if you're receiving money and spending it on things not related to raising your family...then the welfare system is drained and people who really need more don't get it because the federal government can't afford to raise it (given the improper distribution and spending of it).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To you and me both. Granted, work wise wasnt the greatest year for our business but we did make significant purchases therefore reducing revenue but increasing assets. So yeah, our taxable income was lower then it has been in the past hence why we received the supplement.

We all receive assistance through some means, be it tax offsets, medicare levy, family tax benefit, child care benefit, private health insurance rebatet.

Yes, but if people can't handle the Centrelink topic we should probably leave the rest for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you could give it to someone in need...

I don't think it got mixed up...it was just a point of view from someone who has been on the receiving end of abuse of the system...which takes different forms...as yours may be considered - given that you receive money you don't need. The overall problem is that...if you're receiving money and spending it on things not related to raising your family...then the welfare system is drained and people who really need more don't get it because the federal government can't afford to raise it (given the improper distribution and spending of it).

Maybe the federal government need to address the criteria for handing out these payments. I mean, the labour party sure have a stellar record for handing out cash.

You still haven't addressed my questions though? What is going to stop the wealthy from abusing their children? Are you going to regulate their money too?

My husband grew up in a leafy inner city suburb, attended a private school, yet was neglected by his mother for his whole childhood.

Im sorry you were abused as a child Teebee and anyone else. But children are not abused because their parents receive family assistance payments, they are abused because their parents a low life scum who put their own needs ahead of their childs needs. This is low life scum behaviour does not discriminate, it occurs throughout all income brackets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your right teebee common sense isnt so common anymore you've just reminded me of that, neither is empathy of others feelings so it seems.

Too right! Because empathy would go hand in hand with allowing others to express their views and being able to do so without abuse and nastiness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I await the day the gpvernemet has the balls to clean up centerlink and start thinking about the hard working Aussies who bust their asses to produce these taxes.

Don the majority of the people receiving payments are people who work and contribute to the taxes themselves. And if they dont currently work, im sure they have in the past and therefore have made an economic contribution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the federal government need to address the criteria for handing out these payments. I mean, the labour party sure have a stellar record for handing out cash.

You still haven't addressed my questions though? What is going to stop the wealthy from abusing their children? Are you going to regulate their money too?

My husband grew up in a leafy inner city suburb, attended a private school, yet was neglected by his mother for his whole childhood.

Im sorry you were abused as a child Teebee and anyone else. But children are not abused because their parents receive family assistance payments, they are abused because their parents a low life scum who put their own needs ahead of their childs needs. This is low life scum behaviour does not discriminate, it occurs throughout all income brackets.

Abused as a child? No...just bullied...but I think we all have been. Nice work.

Answered your questions? I didn't think you required me to? Surely I can't answer every single rhetoric question.

You can't stop some things but manage things like family assistance. You were confused about the abuse part, but it's good that it now seems you can draw on more analogies and understand that people surely hold a different view to yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can handle the topic, its just that the poor lady who posted last time may not, I think her feelings should be considered, have we not learnt anything from the earlier episode of the low income thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like the soul purpose of this thread is to stir trouble.....again!

Amie, if u feel the soul purpose of this thread is to start trouble - dont read it! Simple....

If I wanted to create a thread that would stir trouble I would make the topic somewhat different....

isnt a thread meant for discussion and opinions?

So is CENTRELINK a forbidden topic?

Geez.... Grow up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too right! Because empathy would go hand in hand with allowing others to express their views and being able to do so without abuse and nastiness.

Tee bee its time to calm down, im suprized that you have learnt nothing from last time when just about everyone in the last thread came down on you, and for good reason. Its time to consider the common denominator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abused as a child? No...just bullied...but I think we all have been. Nice work.

Answered your questions? I didn't think you required me to? Surely I can't answer every single rhetoric question.

You can't stop some things but manage things like family assistance. You were confused about the abuse part, but it's good that it now seems you can draw on more analogies and understand that people surely hold a different view to yours.

lol Im sorry to laugh, i just dont understand what your trying to say here???

Are you being passive aggressive right now or am i misinterpreting the tone of this? Because the implication im getting from your above post is that in the past i.e. previous thread. i couldnt handle an opinion thats different to mine. Which i might add, was an implication that was littered all throughout your thread in which you expressed your discontent with having a thread deleted. It appears you have not understood the reasons for that occurring despite having been told several times now.

I resent what you are implying about me Teebee, your thinly veiled stabs at my persons character has not gone unnoticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol Im sorry to laugh, i just dont understand what your trying to say here???

Are you being passive aggressive right now or am i misinterpreting the tone of this? Because the implication im getting from your above post is that in the past i.e. previous thread. i couldnt handle an opinion thats different to mine. Which i might add, was an implication that was littered all throughout your thread in which you expressed your discontent with having a thread deleted. It appears you have not understood the reasons for that occurring despite having been told several times now.

I resent what you are implying about me Teebee, your thinly veiled stabs at my persons character has not gone unnoticed.

As I resent yours. This must be the part where you neglect to read your own messages and project your own standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I resent yours. This must be the part where you neglect to read your own messages and project your own standards.

I am sorry, but ??? Im truly not following here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so many different variables to this topic it's impossible to sum it up in one sweeping statement. It is very easy for someone to say (and hey, I would say the same), that the children's needs should come first etc, and they should, but how do you monitor that for the hundreds of thousands of people who have children and receive welfare? I think it goes without saying that if you just hand out money to someone who perhaps has little education or life skills or parenting skills, then the children aren't going to come first. And there is part of the problem. Many people who receive welfare do not have the education or understanding to use it wisely. So perhaps more of that should be provided. Do you think these people budget? I doubt it. But unfortunately we live in an "instant gratification" society that perpetuates living week to week. They know when their next handout is coming so that's what they live for. Many of our parents survived on far less money and material things than we need now, and had quite a good life. I don't think anybody ever lay on their deathbed saying "I really wish I'd bought that PS3." As an aside, there should be more financial education in general - there are so many girls in their early twenties with credit card debts in the thousands - why do they think they have to live like Kim Kardashian without the means to pay for it? It's lunacy. I feel that there should definitely be some sort of work done in exchange for full welfare. I also think there should be a cut off in certain circumstances after a certain period of time. And I really do wonder why some people who survive on welfare have more children than they can afford, who will have a higher chance to then end up being a burden on society also. I just feel sad for the children at then end of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when this forum was supportive and everybody was so kind and friendly.. Although it seems now that certain woman on here have nothing better to do then cause trouble.. Put people down and ***** like there's no tomorrow! Go back to high school or at least get a new hobby!

Ps well said foxy and tango!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And to prevent an reoccurrence of last weeks debacle, this thread will now be closed.

Rachel, I guess the answer to your initial question is, yes, its too soon.

Maybe we can revisit this in a few hundred years :)

Thank you to everyone who took the time to contribute to this thread

*NB if anyone has an issue with this feel free to send me a PM or contact Emily otherwise please keep it off the main forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...