Uneducated, but can google at least.

Posts Tagged ‘bonus

Rudd is a four letter word

leave a comment »

Quite a day in the news. When Minister’s aren’t resigning over the fact that they are merely human… repeatedly merely human, the Prime Minister comes forward with a startlingly fresh idea. Honesty.

Yep, it seems that Australia isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be, and all the magic of The Secret isn’t going to help us out, either. And with such harsh times bearing down on us like a runaway locomotive upon a fragile bunny, the people rally behind our honourable and honest leader.


Yeah. He hasn’t said one positive word. Totally.

There’s that fucking Secret method of approaching economics again. Yes, I can understand that sentiment plays a rather large role with the demand side of the equation, but I think that people don’t study these kinds of things at university year upon year just to walk out the other side with the conclusion that spend = good. Heaven forbid that things as academic as job prospects, debt serviceability, and job market strength might have an impact upon households’ willingness to buy four cent shite at vastly inflated (but discount at the retailer) prices.

And I’m not an economist by any stretch of the imagination.


I think he might be talking about the $900 vote-bribe that’s coming to all Australians who paid tax last year. Or maybe the Christmas bonus that was handed out to (gag) “Working Families”, and pensioners.

Even as a childless non-pensioner, I can see the rationale behind plying the populace with free cash. That’s not to say I agree with it. However, isn’t slagging off these orgies of cash on the basis that they were giving much of it to those who didn’t pay tax, is to also suggest that maybe the other “much” part of it was also given out to those who actually… well… did…?

It’s heartening to know that even during times of decline, where we could end up feasting upon cans of dog food as we huddle beneath the underpass, there will always be an armchair there, where we can sit and be experts.


Written by Andy

April 21, 2009 at 12:10 am

Mean means testing screwing the “poor”

leave a comment »

With the amount of money that breeders get in this country, it’s kinda difficult to not feel a little perturbed. However, after you spend half an hour walking around a supermarket, listening to the gripes, grizzles, questions, tantrums and general disobedience you get this nice little inner glow as you begin to understand what it’s really about. The Government’s baby bonus isn’t there for plasma screens, and nor is it for obstetricians or pediatricians. Nope.

It’s compensation for emotional damages and distress.

This week marks the introduction of means testing for the Federal Government’s baby bonus. This means that those families who have a household income of $150,000 are not eligible for the $5,000 one-off payment per sprog. Whilst this story talks about the confusion surrounding the 1 January deadline, comments seem to revolve around the merits of having a baby bonus at all.


Weirdest Straw Man of the Week Award goes to this little nugget. Stay-at-home Mum’s are all gambling drunks? Heaven forbid that stay-at-home-Mums (or Dads) get a little bit of help. With housing affordability at all time lows, rents going up (apparently), and inflation still running a little high, I guess those people who elect to actually spend time raising their children instead of hurling them into child care don’t need the help, huh?


Wait, wait, wait. “Steal from the rich and give to the poor”? You mean that noble rogue of a begone era Robin Hood, the Prince of Thieves, wasn’t actually a fighter against injustice and tyranny, and he was actually a scumbag pinko commie? All this time, Cary Elwes, Kevin Costner and Disney have been lying to me. Bastards.


A hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year isn’t a “high income earner”? How about that… I’m curious to know what Marie considers a “relatively small mortgage” too. Curious about Marie’s life of destitution, I did some quick calculations and a budget. It’s a very rough budget, though, so I won’t draw any conclusions here. I also couldn’t be stuffed chasing up quotes on home and contents insurance premiums and the like so I made some rough assumptions.

Okay, let’s assume that Marie is living in Australia’s premier city, Sydney. According to this place, the median house price in Sydney is roughly $560,000. Let’s also assume that she and her partner whacked up a fair deposit, as she sounds like the kind of fastidious and smart saver that budgets down to the final pennies in order to keep buying the two-minute noodles.

Let’s also bump her wage down to a mere $150,000 per year, just because we’re feeling mean. Using an HR method of calculation which is to take the annual wage, times it by 313 and then divide by 12 (don’t ask me, it’s not my formula) gives us a pre-tax figure of $5,750. After taxing at the highest rate of 45 cents on the dollar, we’re left with a paltry $3,162.94 per fortnight.

So, using a regular bank’s mortgage calculator, the (rough) fortnightly payment on a $525,000 mortgage with interest rates at 8.5%, at 30 years looks like this:


Okay, no doubt that with a wage like Marie’s, she needs a car befitting someone of her standing. Let’s give her a BMW 320 Exec. You know, something humble and unpretentious. Let’s assume she managed to eke out a deposit like the responsible person she is, but because she’s working from pay to pay, they’ve extended the car loan out for as long as they can, ie five years. Also, let’s assume a car loan interest rate a little higher than usual. Fortnightly payments come out looking like this.


But, she’s got internet as well (obviously, unless she’s irresponsibly posting comments from work, which doesn’t sound like the thing Marie would do). Internode offers 5 gig of downloads at $40 per month. Her car needs to be run as well, as she probably works on top of a hill. That means the car would drink like it’s an eighteen year old at their first “last drinks” call.

So, with a few other assumptions, her monthly budget might look a little like this (assuming two pays per month).


Like I said before, I’ve taken quite a number of liberties here, so I won’t formulate a conclusion here. This budget is missing minor things like… food. But that might come out of the left over $200 each fortnight. Also… figures are for illustrative purposes only, blah, blah, blah.

… alright, maybe a little conclusion… I wish my household was earning a figure “not representative of a high income”

Written by Andy

December 29, 2008 at 4:24 pm