We all need look after the disabled.

And not just because it would make us all feel warm and fuzzy. There are good, hard-headed economic arguments for increasing our disability spend which is currently below many OECD countries.


 


 


 


PAUL Prendergast is the father of a 26-year-old daughter who - he states proudly - enjoys an "active social life, attendance of a drama group and a dance group and 10-pin bowling".


But Mr Prendergast's daughter also has Down syndrome and, like many ageing parents of a disabled child, he worries about his daughter's future. He fears she will end up in an aged care facility when he and his wife die.


 


"This thought fills us with dread as our daughter's quality of life would evaporate should she be housed far from her friends and activities," he wrote in a submission to the Productivity Commission's 2010 inquiry into disability care.


 


Trevor and Trish Browning's daughter died at just 13. In their submission, they describe the "constant battle to get assistance" for their daughter who suffered Rhett syndrome.


"We had to fight for every aid and facility" they wrote. "We saw so many people just give up in despair as they did not have the stamina or time to take on the myriad Government departments and agencies that purport to provide services."


 


These are just two of the heartbreaking stories contained in the more than 1000 public submissions to the Commission's inquiry. They detail the "emotional and financial roller coaster", the "humiliation and isolation" and "unrelenting and huge" stresses of living with a disability in this country.


Truth is, disability could happen to any one of us, at any time.


 


All of us face the very real possibility of having a child with a disability or suffering from a catastrophic injury ourselves.


 


So all Australians have an interest in providing better services and care for the sick and the disabled.


And not just because it would make us all feel warm and fuzzy. There are good, hard-headed economic arguments for increasing our disability spend which is currently below many OECD countries.


Australia has the seventh lowest employment rate for people with disabilities in the OECD.


 


Better support for disabled people wanting to enter the workforce could lift gross domestic product by a full percentage point by 2050, or $32 billion in today's prices, according to the Productivity Commission. Not only would these new workers pay income tax, they would require less income support.


There would be other benefits, too, from improving the wellbeing of people with disabilities and their carers, efficiency gains through better provision of services and reduced strain on hospital budgets from caring for disabled people.


 


"The bottom line is that benefits of the NDIS would significantly exceed the additional costs of the scheme," the Commission found.


 


Which leaves us with the thorny question of just who is going to pay?


In outlining the extra $6.5 billion a year needed to bring disability care funding up to acceptable levels, the Productivity Commission did not stipulate how this should be funded. But it did stress the funding would need to be secure and stable into the future.


 


Raising the GST was one option canvassed. A Medicare-style levy was the other and it appears the Government is readying to do just that in the May Budget.


 


The Government currently raises $9.6 billion a year through the Medicare levy which is a 1.5 per cent tax on all taxpayers earning more than around $24,000. Boosting this levy by 0.5 percentage points would raise an extra $3.2 billion a year. A person earning $50,000 would pay about $250 more a year.


Alternatively, the Government could impose a separate 1 per cent "disability care and support premium" which would raise around $6.4 billion a year - enough to fund the NDIS in its entirety.


 


There are several advantages to such a levy, particularly if badged as an insurance premium. According to the Commission: "There is some value in using the word `premium' instead of tax or levy because it would make it clear that every taxpayer is getting a service - namely an insurance product, that provides him or her with disability supports if they are required."


But let's not sugar coat it.


Any new levy would essentially be an increase to all personal income tax rates.


 


Such a hike would go some way to taking back some of the unsustainable tax cuts handed out by the Howard and Rudd governments which were funded by a once-in-a-century mining boom which has just run out of puff.


 


The downside of a levy is that it would add more complexity to the already complex tax system. But given the unpopularity of raising personal income tax rates, such chicanery may be necessary.


 


There is also a risk that a disabilities levy would make people less inclined to make separate charitable donations to disability care. But the certainty of funding would be worth it.


 


If set too low, the levy could also risk giving the false impression that it fully funds the cost of the scheme. Indeed, the Medicare levy doesn't come close to funding all Medicare linked services. 


The bottom line is that the money for disability care must come from somewhere. And that somewhere is us.


 


The Government must make every effort to cut wasteful spending and remove unfair tax concessions. But it's clear that taxes must rise too to meet the Budget challenge.


 


So how about it? Are you willing to chip in a little extra to support those suffering the most in our community, like the Prendergasts and the Brownings?


 


Are you willing to pay a little insurance for the fact that it could be you, or someone you love, one day? I am. 




 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/we-all-need-look-after-the-disabled/story-e6freuy9-12266325529...


 

Message 1 of 261
Latest reply
260 REPLIES 260

Re: We all need look after the disabled.


 


 


The ME ME ME ME crew don't want group homes in their burbs either. Take them out bush away for the normal folk!



 


Dont we have normal people in the bush?


 


I am one of those ME ME ME people you are referring to on this topic ( i assume)


 


I worked the first 26yrs of my career looking after other people (enrolled nurse) I am now not working in that field.


I also did active charity fundraising for 13yrs, for the cancer council.


I currently financially donate to 3 charities, being RSL Art Union. (still a charity, I never win, but still a charity), Diabeets Australia, CareFlight. I have also bequeathed (sp) 10K in my will to the Cancer Council.


Im not ashamed by my opinions on this proposed Medicare levy. Im not ashamed to have a ME ME ME attitude either. Its time for me to put myself as no 1. 
Doenst make a cold hearted B, just my $$ and my priorities are different to yours!

********* *********** *********** ************ ************ *********** ***********
Be Kind To Nurses....
They Stop The Doctors From Killing You.
Message 101 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.

I want to say thank you Iza for the thread.  This issue is so often hidden and ignored and pushed under the table.  


 


And often, when it is addressed, it's not addressed in a practical and practicable way.  


 


It's given me a venue to have my rant ... or two or twenty.  


 


 

Message 102 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.

Myer apologises after boycott threat


 


by: By Miles Godfrey, AAP Social Media ReporterFrom: AAP May 02, 2013 12:51P


 


Myer is facing a backlash as CEO Bernie Brookes said increasing the Medicare levy would hit profits.


 


DEPARTMENT store Myer has apologised after CEO Bernie Brookes suggested increasing the Medicare levy to help disabled Australians would damage his company's profits.


Mr Brookes sparked outrage and threats of a store boycott after telling a business conference the planned $350 annual household increase to the Medicare levy "is something they would have spent with us".


 


The increase, which would part-fund the federal government's planned national insurance care scheme "is not good for our customers and may have an impact", Mr Brookes added.


The comments sparked anger on social media sites, with some people pointing out that many disabled people shop at Myer.




Read more: 
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/myer-faces-backlash-over-ndis-comments/story-e6frfku9-...


 


 


 


Gillard welcomes Abbott support for NDIS


From: AAP May 02, 2013 1:11PM


 


PRIME Minister Julia Gillard says she will legislate to increase the Medicare levy to support Labor's national disability care scheme before September's federal election.


 


Ms Gillard was responding on Thursday to an offer by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to "consider" supporting the Medicare increase.


 


"I am very pleased that today the leader of the opposition has said ... he is prepared to support an increase," she told reporters in Launceston.


 


"The leader of the opposition has changed his mind on this matter.


"On the basis of that change of mind by the leader of the opposition, I will bring to the parliament the legislation to increase the Medicare levy by half a per cent."


 


This means the bill to enact the increase will be introduced to parliament before the September federal election.


 


It would ensure the disability care scheme had the early funding it needs.


 


But Mr Abbott's offer was not made without conditions.


He says the government needs to "come clean about all the details" of how the scheme will be funded and who would be covered.


"At the moment we have half the funding and I think the people with disabilities of Australia deserve to know we are going to have a full scheme and not a half scheme," he said.


 


Ms Gillard said many of the issues Mr Abbott raised had already been met or were being worked through.


 


The Medicare levy increase to two per cent, from 1.5 per cent, will raise about $3.3 billion a year.


The scheme will cost about $8 billion a year or more when it begins full operation from 2018/19.


To make up the funding gap, Labor needs to make further budget savings and the states and territories will also need to contribute.


 




Read more: 
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/gillard-welcomes-abbott-support-for-ndis/story-e6frfku...


 


 


FANTASTIC 😄


 


 


 


 


Hi Katy, It is an important issue for so many people .

Message 103 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.


 


And just how much money do you think I might need to ensure I am personally cared for in a manner I would wish for?


Billions of dollars?


 


My personal needs are small, and I have insurances to cover a great deal of what I may need in such a situation.


If I needed a full time personal carer it WILL be covered without looking for a single cent from the public purse. Of that I assure you.



 


You might need 3 carers (8 hour shifts), machinery, medication, housekeeper, physiotherapists, surgeries, ....the list is endless.


 

Message 104 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.

all deaf , for their own sake.

Message 105 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.

My personal needs are small, and I have insurances to cover a great deal of what I may need in such a situation.


If I needed a full time personal carer it WILL be covered without looking for a single cent from the public purse. Of that I assure you.


 


I can believe that. I had an Aunt and Uncle who prepared for the same. It wasn't needed in the end but it would have been possible for them to pay from their own savings for a full time live in carer  (obviously the full time carer would have time off and  another person would be employed  to do those shifts).


 


Private health insurance pays for surgery, phsyio, etc.


 


Carer may prepare meals and do light housekeeping duties.


 


 


In Australia,the Government collects money from tax payers & from GST and distributes it to other areas of need (social welfare benefits, schools, hospitals etc). That is the tax system we have here.


 


No taxpayer can opt out and tell the Govt not to use any of their tax paid on schools (because I don't have children) or hospitals (because I am never sick) or on disability pensions (because I am not disabled) or roads (because I don't have a car) or Family tax benefits (because I don't have my own family).


 

Message 106 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.


 


You might need 3 carers (8 hour shifts), machinery, medication, housekeeper, physiotherapists, surgeries, ....the list is endless.


 



you will need more than 3 carers to do that as they have days off and holidays. We looked at doing this with my FIL as my OH didn't want him in a nursing home.


We worked out that we would need 4, as well as ourselves.


 

Message 107 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.


My personal needs are small, and I have insurances to cover a great deal of what I may need in such a situation.


If I needed a full time personal carer it WILL be covered without looking for a single cent from the public purse. Of that I assure you.


 


I can believe that. I had an Aunt and Uncle who prepared for the same. It wasn't needed in the end but it would have been possible for them to pay from their own savings for a full time live in carer  (obviously the full time carer would have time off and  another person would be employed  to do those shifts).


 


Private health insurance pays for surgery, phsyio, etc.


 


Carer may prepare meals and do light housekeeping duties.


 


 


In Australia,the Government collects money from tax payers & from GST and distributes it to other areas of need (social welfare benefits, schools, hospitals etc). That is the tax system we have here.


 


No taxpayer can opt out and tell the Govt not to use any of their tax paid on schools (because I don't have children) or hospitals (because I am never sick) or on disability pensions (because I am not disabled) or roads (because I don't have a car) or Family tax benefits (because I don't have my own family).


 



 


people choose to have a family why should i have to contribute towards their FTB, childcare and paid maternity leave?


the rest I can cop contributing towards.


 


was just reading that NDIS will not be distributed to the states on a per capita basis.


western australia will only recieve about  a one sixteenth share, when we have amost  one tenth of the population......that seems fair

Message 108 of 261
Latest reply

Re: We all need look after the disabled.

http://www.taxreview.treasury.gov.au/content/Paper.aspx?doc=html/publications/papers/report/section_...


 


 


What is a TAX ?


 


Box 2.2: What is a tax?


 


The ABS defines taxes as 'compulsory, unrequited transfers to the general government sector' and taxation revenue as 'revenue arising from compulsory levies imposed by government' (ABS 2005). This is consistent with the International Monetary Fund definition, which is based on the United Nations description of taxes as 'compulsory unrequited payments, in cash or in kind, made by institutional units to government units' (United Nations 1993, paragraph 8.43).


 


It is difficult to determine the precise number of taxes. Statistical agencies are concerned with classifying revenue rather than counting the legal or administrative mechanisms by which it is raised — the individual taxes. While personal income tax, the GST and company tax are clearly separate taxes, there are many cases where a particular type of payment could be regarded as a separate tax or as a subset of a broader tax. For example, capital gains tax (CGT) could be regarded as a separate tax or as a part of the income tax. This paper takes the latter view. Superannuation guarantee payments by an employer (other than the superannuation guarantee charge) are not payments of tax because they directly benefit the employee and are not made to government. The penalty component of the superannuation guarantee charge can be considered a tax but not the amount that is transferred to the employee's account.


 


A core characteristic of a tax is that there is no clear and direct link between the payment of the tax and the provision of goods and services to the taxpayer. The funds that the government raises from taxes may be used to provide goods or services to the community as a whole, and this may provide a benefit to the taxpayer, but the payment will still be considered a tax if there is no direct relationship between the amount of the payment and the benefit to the taxpayer. Where a government agency recovers the costs of supplying a product or service to an individual, the revenue is classified as non‑tax revenue. Only if the fees charged exceed the agency costs are the payments (or part of the payments) classified as a tax.


 


The economic definition of a tax used in this paper may differ at the margin from the legal meaning of the term.


In the context of the Commonwealth Constitution (s 51(ii)), a tax is 'a compulsory payment raised for government and public purposes which is not a payment for services rendered or a penalty, the exactions of which are not arbitrary and the liability for which is not incontestable' (LexisNexis 2008).


 


 

Message 109 of 261
Latest reply