THE BUDGET

[nero_bolt]

Just how bad will the budget be tonight, how much DEBT has Julia and Swan and Labor run up and how many decades will it take to pay this massive debt back?

-------------------------------------------------------

ALMOST $200 billion of red ink spilled across the nation's balance sheet looks to be Treasurer Wayne Swan's legacy, as forecasters predict budget deficits "as far as the eye can see".

In five previous budgets, the Treasurer has racked up deficits of $173 billion and analysts tip the promised $1.5 billion surplus in last year's budget papers will be replaced a deficit of between $10.9 billion to $22 billion.

The size of a deficit will come under heavy scrutiny when Mr Swan stands up tonight at 7.30pm, as Treasury forecasts have been exposed as being based on too-optimistic outlooks.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/federal-election/federal-budget-get-used-to-deficits-economists-warn/story-fnho52jj-1226641538690

[cherry*135]

And, the person earning the high income should be well able to afford to have a baby without any assistance ... 

If they take 3,6 months of to look after the baby they will suffer loss of income, just like anyone else in paid employment. If they earn a high income their mortgage repayments

might be twice as high as someone earning $60 000. The point of paid parental leave is for a parent to be able to afford to stay home and look after their baby in its first few months.

If they mother is on Govt benefits they will still get the same payments. They don't work so are not suffering any loss of income by having a baby.

True, but they will be less able to look for work ... 

No they won't. They will be still receiving the same income as before (probably more with FTB & the lower baby bonus of $2000 for first child etc that having a child brings). How would that stop them looking for work 0-6+mths after their baby is born?

[cherry*135]

I don't see why I should be subsidising someone on $150,000 a year.  Do you? 

Yes, if it concerns paid parental leave.

[cherry*135]

When the working parent on $150 000 is not on parental leave (a limited amount of time) how much tax are they paying when they are working, to allow the Govt to distribute the tax paid to social welfare, hospitals, schools etc .

Wouldn't take the worker long to put the money they received for parental leave back into the system via their tax paid.

[katydidthat]

Well, we all have our views.  I just can't understand how single mothers (and fathers) who are unable to get jobs and have to rely on PPS and NewStart are given less money, and those who are well off are given more.  Single parents recently had a $160 plus pf cut in their benefits, now the baby bonus looks like it is falling.  Meanwhile, people on high incomes will be getting better off if the Abbott scheme comes to fruition.  

[cherry*135]

Yes we do have our own opinions:-). People on high incomes pay more tax. People on Govt pensions are on the receiving end of that tax paid.

The baby bonus has been reduced and will still be paid to parents who are eligible for FTB (not high income earners). It wont be reduced unitl 9mths and 2 weeks from now.

$2000 for first baby and $1000 for 2nd etc. 

There is an increase in the amount of money some beneficiaries (newstart is one) can earn before they have their benefits cut also. From $62 to $100 a ft night from memory.

[cherry*135]

No large baby bonus lump sum, no parenting payment paid forever etc, does or should send the message to some young teens, who previously saw, having a baby and collecting Govt benefits as a way of life.

[cherry*135]

The parents on high income are only getting more paid parental leave for a very limited amount of time, then back to their jobs, earning high income and paying a lot of tax. Maybe only 18mths -3years over a 30 year career?

[twinkles**stars]

The parents on high income are only getting more paid parental leave for a very limited amount of time, then back to their jobs, earning high income and paying a lot of tax. Maybe only 18mths -3years over a 30 year career?

? 30 year  career would make most folk into their 50's?

[newstart2380]

? 30 year  career would make most folk into their 50's?

I am sure twinkles is not suggesting high paid women have babies in their 50's, just commenting that only 18 months to 3 years out of the 50 years they would be working would be taken off for PPL. I am sure highly paid women would be no different to women earning less and would choose to have their family at a similar age.