That's doesn't mean I know nothing of the scheme, I don't need to know every detail.
I would suggest that funding the NDIS is not not just a "detail", but the means by which the
scheme will run effectively, and allegedly at a cost to the taxpayers in the form of another tax, or discontinuing a current/proposed scheme of some sorts.
"People aged over 65 years at the time they request NDIS support will not be eligible. However, future participants can choose to continue with NDIS once they turn 65."
Fair?
|
Hi John.
I have nothing against the NDIS in principle, the concept IS good and IS needed, my problem with it, and many of the other policies "sold" to us is the manner in which it is regardless of which party is the salesman - I am not in disagreeance because this is a Labor initiative,
We were told that Medicare would cater to our health needs in exchange for a contribution via percentage of our wages.
What gets to me is that no one has the balls to point out the elephant ion the room and just say - "We know you werer promised in the past that your medicare levy would provide you with the care that you need, but the FACTS are for whatever reason, the demand on that structure is much higher than ever expected and the costs are far more than we anticipated, and we just don't have the money to continue with it like it is.
We need to inject more money into the healthcare of our nation, as it is approaching sub standard levels, but we don't know where to get the money from, so we just need everyone to contribute a bit more of their income. Consequently we are raising the Medicare Levy to X which will assist in stabilizing things in the short term.
Instead, they choose to disguise this by subdividing a system of past promises that can now no longer be kept.
They used an emotive card such as in this instance, those people with a disability to create specific justification for raising the taxes and levies because no one is going to object to funds directed to those with a disability, whereas in reality, it just means that our medicare dollar as it is now nolonger has to service those with a disability, that dollar is now spent servicing "less people". Our medicare dollar as it was, was already supposed to service EVERY Australian, but it just can no longer do that, so they limit what that money does provide and get more funds for a group that should already be under the Medicare umbrella, but funding doesn't allow for that.
It is no different to backtracking and saying that when they said that every child will have access to a free education, they didn't mean EVERY child, just the 80% majority, so now that we can no longer adequately fund the education system like we promised to, we atr going to quarantine those funds only for the majority 80% of kids who fall within the "norm" and we are going to charge an extra levy to cover the cost of educating those kids who fall outside the 80% norm.
same for pension vs superannuation.
It all boils down to they don't have the balls to call it what it is - a way to extract more money to sustain past promises that cannot be kept so that they can continue to inject other money into other things before we can pay for them in order to buy some votes.
Some people can go their whole lives and never really live for a single minute.
