So it's ok if Gina does it?

Anyone who earns more than $100,00 per year can have no justifiable claim to publicly funded wlefare.

Anyone who earns even half of that can have no such claim.

Anyone who buys a McMansion and gets themselves into a debt hole dug with the help of their (optional) three or four children, deserves no assistance from the average tax-paying Australian.

The average tax-paying Aussie doesn't want to to be obligated to support the lifestyle which is chosen by those who choose to live beyond their means.

What welfare does Gina get ? I seriously doubt Gina gets any welfare at all.
Provide the proof, facts and I'll change my mind.

"Anyone who earns even half of that can have no such claim."

I disagree with that, $50,000 less tax is not that much.

Kids, mortgage, even on a small house.

---

@iapetus_rocks wrote:

Anyone who earns more than $100,00 per year can have no justifiable claim to publicly funded wlefare.

 

Anyone who earns even half of that can have no such claim.

 

---

Households in the top quintile receive only 2 cents in government support payments for every $1 of income and

consumption taxes paid.

Those in the bottom quintile receive $2.50 for every $1 in income and consumption taxes paid.

---

@iapetus_rocks wrote:

 

The average tax-paying Aussie doesn't want to to be obligated to support the lifestyle which is chosen by those who choose to live beyond their means.

---

You mean the 45 per cent of those filing a tax return paid less than 4 per cent of all income tax.

a 6th of all individuals filing income tax returns paid nearly two-thirds of all income tax.

Significantly, the taxable income threshold to fall within that two-thirds was $80,000

2 per cent of individuals paid about 26 per cent of all income tax

It looks to me that the top people pay their way in Australia.

---

@iapetus_rocks wrote:

People claim "Oh, but i have a $500,000 dollar mortgage and four kids to put through (private) school. Suck it up. . . those are your life choices and the public purse shouldn't be called upon to subsidise them.

 

 

---

The thing is that some cites $500,000 would  not buy you outside dunny..  People's jobs are in these cities and they need to live there; other people are lucky to have a job paying just as much and living in smaller town where real estate prices are fraction of those in Sydney or Melbourne.  I agree on the private schools though;

---

@am*3 wrote:
The Spectator is a weekly British conservative magazine. Editorship of The Spectator has often been a step on the ladder to high office in the Conservative Party in the UK.

---

Right around the world everyone knows what the media are doing trying to dump our elected Prime Minister and worse still the world is awake to the reason why.

What did they keep saying about Gillard when Abbott, Rudd and the most of the Press were trying to get rid of her?  If you can't stand the heat?  

After the way the bully boy behaved for the entire time he was LOO he deserves every bit of discomfort that comes his way.

---

@icyfroth wrote:

  

The Harlot Throughout The Ages

 

---

From the same article:

Don’t be at all surprised that the polls prefer Bill Shorten as prime minister. Most working people have neither the time nor the taste for detailed political analysis.

What a condescending prat the author is. If Labor is ahead it must be because the majority don't "understand" politics. This is similar to the LNP line - Hey! Our policies are great, we just haven't communicated them well (or you lot are too thick to get it).

More: So they (the media) have massively downplayed all of Abbott’s many successes..

Really? We need the media to remind us? Seems like almost every time a government minister is interviewed they give us the same well-worn line: "We've stopped the boats, axed the carbon tax and are building the roads of the 21st century" (before going on to blame Labor for the countries woes).

Faulty memories?

Right on there, crosby.