Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Ask RiotACT

Experts in Wills, Trusts
& Estate Planning

Budget fears

By Emily Morris - 29 April 2014 92

It seems to me that every day we are now hearing new ‘worst case’ scenarios in preparation for Joe Hockeys big moment in the sun.  Increased taxes, rising pension ages, changes to university funding – the list goes on (funnily enough no talk of changes to paid maternity leave which I find surprising).  It seems to me we are all in the firing line.

What do you think would be the worst case details for Canberra?  What are the areas to watch come budget night?  Is there anything you hope to see included?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
92 Responses to
Budget fears
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
5
Neergnevets 9:33 pm 14 May 14

Hey – great infographic of the Budget here:

http://excelschool.com.au/Photos/2014-15%20Budget%20by%20Excel%20School.pdf

Done by local Excel guys.

dungfungus 8:32 pm 06 May 14

Funky1 said :

dungfungus said :

Anna Burke made much of her “free” education under the Whitlam Labor Government on Q&A last night and a contributor to the Canberra Times letters to the editor did the same in the today’s issue.
What hope have we got when people with tertiary qualifications still do not understand that there is nothing “free” in this country?
The same people b%*ch about having to repay their HECS and HELP loans which only represent a small amount of what the actual cost of tertiary education is.
It costs under $20000 for tuition fees to get a BA in Arts at ANU and yet some people go to great lengths to avoid paying even this small amount. There are billions of dollars outstanding in unpaid HECS/HELP loans already.
I am in favour of the government getting a bit more commercial minded in granting and managing education loans. Why should the taxpayer bear the burden for a few who think they are entitled to “free” education?
I am sure the majority will support Hockey if he changes the current system.

And I’m sure they won’t!!

Well, if they don’t, prepare for spending cuts like we have never seen before.

Funky1 2:21 pm 06 May 14

dungfungus said :

Anna Burke made much of her “free” education under the Whitlam Labor Government on Q&A last night and a contributor to the Canberra Times letters to the editor did the same in the today’s issue.
What hope have we got when people with tertiary qualifications still do not understand that there is nothing “free” in this country?
The same people b%*ch about having to repay their HECS and HELP loans which only represent a small amount of what the actual cost of tertiary education is.
It costs under $20000 for tuition fees to get a BA in Arts at ANU and yet some people go to great lengths to avoid paying even this small amount. There are billions of dollars outstanding in unpaid HECS/HELP loans already.
I am in favour of the government getting a bit more commercial minded in granting and managing education loans. Why should the taxpayer bear the burden for a few who think they are entitled to “free” education?
I am sure the majority will support Hockey if he changes the current system.

And I’m sure they won’t!!

dungfungus 8:42 am 06 May 14

Anna Burke made much of her “free” education under the Whitlam Labor Government on Q&A last night and a contributor to the Canberra Times letters to the editor did the same in the today’s issue.
What hope have we got when people with tertiary qualifications still do not understand that there is nothing “free” in this country?
The same people b%*ch about having to repay their HECS and HELP loans which only represent a small amount of what the actual cost of tertiary education is.
It costs under $20000 for tuition fees to get a BA in Arts at ANU and yet some people go to great lengths to avoid paying even this small amount. There are billions of dollars outstanding in unpaid HECS/HELP loans already.
I am in favour of the government getting a bit more commercial minded in granting and managing education loans. Why should the taxpayer bear the burden for a few who think they are entitled to “free” education?
I am sure the majority will support Hockey if he changes the current system.

wildturkeycanoe 6:44 pm 05 May 14

Golly, didn’t I open a can of worms there. Perhaps we leave this one for a different forum and go back to the ridiculous budget that is going to make everyone’s life a living hell for the next, fifty years or so? Or, maybe it will only last till next “forced” election some time later this year, then everything gets back to normal.

dungfungus 3:41 pm 05 May 14

neanderthalsis said :

dungfungus said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As I said earlier, having children in some countries is not a lifestyle choice. Remember the one child policy in China?

They don’t make you have children in China, you are free to have none at all. You can even have more than one if you are prepared to pay the social burden levy or a farmer, or well connected…

I think you have misunderstood this. The “one child policy” means “only one child” so if a couple want more children it is not a “lifestyle choice”. There may be ways the wealthy can circumvent this as you have alluded to.
Only non-democratic countries with extreme cultural/religious doctrines compell their subjects to have large families. They will be coming to a town like ours soon.

bigfeet 3:18 pm 05 May 14

dungfungus said :

As I said earlier, having children in some countries is not a lifestyle choice. Remember the one child policy in China?

You could still choose to have none if you wished.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-children, and don’t have anything against anyone who chooses to have them. If they work within your lifestyle, well good for you. I even have no issues with the state subsidising to a small degree those who choose to have children.

The concept didn’t work with my wife and mine’s lifestyle, so we chose not to have them. That is our choice and having children is other peoples lifestyle choice. Fine by me!

neanderthalsis 2:41 pm 05 May 14

dungfungus said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

As I said earlier, having children in some countries is not a lifestyle choice. Remember the one child policy in China?

They don’t make you have children in China, you are free to have none at all. You can even have more than one if you are prepared to pay the social burden levy or a farmer, or well connected…

Maya123 1:41 pm 05 May 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

Maya123 said :

Tough, your teenagers want cars. Tell them to wait until they are adults and have an income and can buy their own. Spoilt, if they expect others to buy cars for them.
I also wondered about the above. If one child puts you into a difficult debt, why number two and three child?

Debt problem fixed prior to arrival of #2, then things went south again. It happens. I never have said that having the children put any extra financial burden on us. Even without the kids the circumstances that caused the problems still happened and had their impact. My partner not working had nothing to do with the arrival of our baby, it had already happened. It also coincided with the Liberal government taking power. Funny that things have gone south again, with the Liberals taking the helm.
BTW, having children is not necessarily a financial decision only for a lot of people. Perhaps it is to keep the family line going. I was the last male in my family and if I hadn’t had children, the family name would die with me. [Only one male born, that also fathered children, in each generation going back as far as records show].

The family line (genes) would continue no matter what surname they bore. Males, who place such importance on the male line, think less of the females in the family. You might argue you don’t think this way, but your statement says otherwise, because if you only had a female child you would be disappointed, because she wasn’t male to pass on your surname. (But she could if she chose.) But what about your partner? What about her not passing on her family name? What if she wanted to? Would you argue against this; tell her she can lose her family name, but it’s important you don’t? Anyway, how can you be sure that the males going back through history were really the sons of their supposed fathers? The number who weren’t makes a joke of the male line thing.

dungfungus 1:22 pm 05 May 14

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

BTW, having children is not necessarily a financial decision only for a lot of people. Perhaps it is to keep the family line going. I was the last male in my family and if I hadn’t had children, the family name would die with me. [Only one male born, that also fathered children, in each generation going back as far as records show].

So it’s a vanity thing?

What’s vain about that? Seriously? I just don’t want the pompous rich people being the only ones who are allowed to breed, “cause they can afford it”. Isn’t eligibility for parenthood based on financial capacity a form of genocide, whereby only a few wealthy families will be the only ones around in future generations? Imagine a century from now, when there won’t be any lower class and the rich folks’ kids will have to do demeaning things like plumbing and garbage collection.

I go back to my original point. Having children is always a lifestyle choice. Nothing wrong with that at all but people need to accept it instead of coming up with altruistic justifications.

BTW, I am also the last male of a line and the family name will die with me. I’m not that vain to think that really matters. It will make no difference in the scheme of things whether there is someone with my last name on this planet or not.

As I said earlier, having children in some countries is not a lifestyle choice. Remember the one child policy in China?

bigfeet 12:02 pm 05 May 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

BTW, having children is not necessarily a financial decision only for a lot of people. Perhaps it is to keep the family line going. I was the last male in my family and if I hadn’t had children, the family name would die with me. [Only one male born, that also fathered children, in each generation going back as far as records show].

So it’s a vanity thing?

What’s vain about that? Seriously? I just don’t want the pompous rich people being the only ones who are allowed to breed, “cause they can afford it”. Isn’t eligibility for parenthood based on financial capacity a form of genocide, whereby only a few wealthy families will be the only ones around in future generations? Imagine a century from now, when there won’t be any lower class and the rich folks’ kids will have to do demeaning things like plumbing and garbage collection.

I go back to my original point. Having children is always a lifestyle choice. Nothing wrong with that at all but people need to accept it instead of coming up with altruistic justifications.

BTW, I am also the last male of a line and the family name will die with me. I’m not that vain to think that really matters. It will make no difference in the scheme of things whether there is someone with my last name on this planet or not.

Postalgeek 11:49 am 05 May 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

bigfeet said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

BTW, having children is not necessarily a financial decision only for a lot of people. Perhaps it is to keep the family line going. I was the last male in my family and if I hadn’t had children, the family name would die with me. [Only one male born, that also fathered children, in each generation going back as far as records show].

So it’s a vanity thing?

What’s vain about that? Seriously? I just don’t want the pompous rich people being the only ones who are allowed to breed, “cause they can afford it”. Isn’t eligibility for parenthood based on financial capacity a form of genocide, whereby only a few wealthy families will be the only ones around in future generations? Imagine a century from now, when there won’t be any lower class and the rich folks’ kids will have to do demeaning things like plumbing and garbage collection.

I think idiocracy is closer to the mark.

5

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site