Why Does Centrelink Reward Laziness?

Since I turned 22 a few days ago, I became eligible for youth allowance (YA). I work part time at two local pools, averaging about 10 hours a week. I crunched the numbers to see what the maximum hours of work I could do before my payments would get cut and lo and behold - I found that Centrelink rewards laziness by not enticing YA recipients to work more lest they lose their payments! For example, if I worked no more than 7.8 extra hours a week I would be able to get about $44 a week on YA (on top of my usual hours), but the moment I exceeded 7.8 extra hours I'd lose money - it would take me two hours to make $16 (2 hours of work @ $30/h versus $44 for free, doing nothing). Of course, during the schools LTS season I would gladly work 35 hour weeks and forgo the YA, but there's seriously no incentive for anyone to do more than the bare minimum unless there's seriously good hours on offer. I'm aware there's a load of codswallop that is the income bank, but that only really rewards seasonal workers, not people that work regular jobs in between full time study. It's otherwise useless for someone that is employed most weeks of the year.

My parents built up their wealth by working hard. Before I turned 22 I paid tax (not a great amount, but still got taxed). I used to think claiming any government benefits was shameful, but now I feel that legitimate taxpayers not claiming what they're entitled to is just plain wrong. Why let real dole bludgers take a slice of the pie when those that contributed won't or can't?

Why is it that Centrelink encourages laziness and not hard work? I find it slightly ridiculous this system can even exist.

Related Stores

Services Australia
Services Australia

closed Comments

  • +12

    I don't think its rewarding laziness personally, it's like when someone is earning around ~$83k in income, does that person reduce their income by a few thousand by working less so that they change tax brackets? Does that then become the ATO encouraging laziness?

    • +1

      It would be lost productivity and denying government coffers money

      • Oh now I feel great. I'm just a bag of $$$ to the government. Cue the pending growing disillusionment

        • Don't worry mate, the higher tax bracket is moving from $80k to $87k in this year's budget. You'll be saving a couple of hundred in tax on $83k :)

    • +52

      That doesn't make sense because tax is only charged on the money made within that bracket. If you go a dollar into the next bracket you only pay the higher amount of tax on that dollar. You will never lose money by going into a higher tax bracket.

      • +14

        While this is true for pure income taxes, it may not be for other "taxes". For example, medicare levy surcharge rate and the compulsory HELP loan repayment rate applies to your entire income. This can potentially create situations where you can be better off by earning less.

        • +1

          I only agree with your point on MLS, however it is made with the intention to curb you to get your Private Health Insurance. Sure you effectively have less money to play with, the benefits of PHI is a win-win for both you and the government (generally). They even incentivise you more with the PHI rebates.

          For the HELP loan repayment, I wouldn't consider it as a tax. You owe them money so it's a debt, and hence you're paying off a debt. It shouldn't be seen as a tax, as tax is for a communal benefit, but the HELP debt is based on your personal benefit, i.e. tertiary education.

        • +1

          @Doggiie: My comment above comes from a purely financial perspective, assuming that the individual's goal is to (a) minimise all tax expense, and (2) make the optimal use of debt. Given that HELP loans have no real interest above the inflation rate, we may be better off investing or spending our funds, or simply work fewer hours, and delay the repayment of the loan.

          Having said that, I still agree with your arguments. I do believe that we should pay our own debt, and I would also extend your point on MLS to other taxes such as income tax as they are all collected to benefit society, including both yourself and the government. I think that while most people believe in the benefits of taxation, they would nevertheless act with self-interest when it comes to paying their own share.

    • +2

      no they buy investment properties to drop their income.

      • As I know Centrelink doesn't doesn't consider negative gearing as a deduction to your income. It clearly says to report taxable income before negative gearing.

    • Breaking through that income tax bracket means that you lose 37c in the dollar compared to 32.5c in the dollar. I.e. an increase in tax of 4.5c / dollar for every dollar earned over $80k.

      However, breaking through the Centrelink income threshold for YA means 50 cents / dollar you are effectively "taxed"… So going from 0c to 50c is a huge leap! (Note: Not sure if it is still 50 cents to the dollar - it was when I was receiving YA back in 2010).

  • +19

    Is FT A&B rewarding laziness or encouraging breeding?

    It exists to help maintain a standard if living by providing families with additional $$.

    It is also beneficial for the economy as that money is spent which in turn benefits businesses. Think john Maynard Keynes.

    I totally understand where you are coming from with the 1) guilt at receiving "free" money; 2) anger/puzzlement at rewarding lazy behaviour.

    There are many people out there who'd rather work than not work. And working and earning your money is rewarding, and doing that will get you more $$ than what centrelink will "pay"

    • +1

      As an aside, these sort of payments do result in perverse outcomes, well beyond just laziness. The system becomes a game to be played, and played well it is!

      My old career was in manufacturing where "lurks a plenty" were shared. Just one example was a husband who would live in a separate house so his wife could claim a single parent pension but the rules at that time were the husband could live in the marital home 2 days a week. He drove a performance Commodore and his kids were in Catholic private school. Hopefully that loop hole was closed. He was also the Union Delegate and somewhat of an untouchable in the 1987 Movie sense…

      Regardless of how he made it work (I never fathomed it), the system created bizarre outcomes for any prepared to "work the system".

      Another way of looking at the means tested FT A&B plus single parent payments is that it encourages poor families to keep having kids - my ex-sister in law is taking advantage of this right now… And by corollary, better off families have fewer kids as they get no benefit due to means testing. Now I couldn't possibly say that poor people with constrained resources breed more poor kids than better off families causing a general "averaged" dumbing down of the population, however Australia's ranking of school children has certainly been dramatically falling over recent years… Make of that what you will!

      My advice to "niggard" is to not fall into this way of thinking because it limits you! Do your course, get a job in the career you are chasing and make something of yourself. Once you lock yourself into gaming the system you are one governmental decision to change the system away from personal hardship.

      Chase your dream, fulfill your career and work hard to make something of yourself!

      • -1

        There was nothing stopping you reporting this person to Centrelink, if you felt that they were rorting the system. Someone would have reviewed their circumstances and done an evaluation.

        Remember also that ANY system can be rorted, and is - and not just by those who are not working. Panama Papers, anyone?

        • Why should people have to report rorts to Centrelink?

          It would be like threading wiring for a electrician. It is Centrelink's job to go out and find rorters.

  • +18

    Centrelink does not reward laziness, they just administer the social welfare program that exists under various pieces of legislation. It's the government that creates these policies.

    • -3

      In other words it's stupid system or half baked system.

      • +18

        Did you just say the welfare system is stupid? If so, I think you need to educate yourself. Australia isn't one of the most livable places, and a country with very low poverty, for no reason

        • +4

          @fm:

          Its pretty close. its not quite as good as some of the European alternatives, but their social attitude to taxes and government is different to ours. Australia is quite conservative.

    • -1

      I think youth allowance is a classic example of how it is impossible to get welfare right.
      Go back about 5 years and the requirements to qualify for youth allowance were much stricter. The down side was people who really needed the money to get through uni needed to either take a gap year and work for 18months large hours to qualify, marry or work large hours whilst studying or work in lucrative but not ideal jobs.

      Currently, youth allowance is available for many people who don't need it. (e.g. I'm sure its just extra pocket money for uni students who live at home)

      But if you think about it government funding of schools, hospitals and uni is available to many who should be able to financially afford it and I think welfare payments like youth allowance are similar. Sometimes to provide a service to those who need it we need to make it available to all.

      The only difference with welfare vs providing hospitals is that when the government pays for medical costs for a person who could otherwise afford it they providing what is intended. With welfare payments gov gives the money and there is no control interms of what happens with it. THat is the big problem with welfare, we know some people waste it on gambling, drugs, ethanol and cheap pizza.

      • +2

        Wow this is the biggest post you ever written I believe.

        One of your passions centrelink is?

  • +1

    In Australia studying hard and work hard is punishable by taxes and levies.
    Show attitude, be a lazy and you pay not tax, get allowances, discounts, concessions rates .. you name it.
    I still haven't learned that lesson yet, but the temptation is there to just join the club.

    • +7

      Have you ever meet a person who has been on the dole and also had an $80K job and they'd told you they'd rather be a dole bludger?

      I haven't. Seems to answer the question for me.

      • No, but we just met the OP who has found it is better to stay at home and do nothing to earn more than go out and do a couple more hours work. The proof is in the OP's actions, that answers the question!

        We aren't talking about $80K per year jobs here, we are talking about unskilled jobs which few Australians seem to want to take on here.

        I know of businesses that can't find people for unskilled or mundane jobs - they end up with lots of people from overseas working on Visas doing these jobs, because Australians are eligible for Centrelink benefits and would rather take that. Perhaps they are seeking a more highly paid job or should be up-skilling, but the economy could benefit from them working and gaining experience during this time.

        Go to China and have a look around, people are literally manually sweeping the streets to earn a living - because they don't get a hand out if they don't do some sort of job - people will also go out and do fruit picking or go to labouring in manufacturing there. It reduces the cost of producing those products and increases economic GDP as well as easing tax burden - Win Win Win! We struggle to fill those positions permanently here - I have seen it. People also won't move here to where the jobs are in Australia - regional and rural industries struggle to get staff.

        We are losing manufacturing industries, cost of living is increasing, government is having trouble making ends meet - its all related! If we have to pay more and more to get unskilled tasks completed, cost of living goes up, jobs and money go overseas. Competing against welfare payments is a double hit - money for no productivity goes out, and is paid for out of the pockets of people who do work, reducing incentives to work further.

        Sure, live in your bubbles and think it doesn't matter - but in the long run and an ever growing deficit - our children will pay for it.

        • But if the government starts forcing people to sweep the streets for their handout, what happens to the bloke who sits on the sweeping machines and pays his taxes? I'm sure he'd rather mumble and complain about giving up his hard earned cash than be in the same line all the other unskilled workers are in.

        • What happens to the street sweepers when they make machines to do it? That's why education is important. He shouldn't be working 15-20hours a week and studying. The government is paying him to study, why would they creative incentive to detriment the success they are trying to provide?

      • So true why would you. dole is not lifestyle it exstants

  • -1

    Please stick to your 7.8 hours and claim the full benefit. I'm happy to subsidise your youth allowance. Let someone more grateful have the work.

    • I'm very grateful for my job thank you very much. You've got no idea what you're talking about. If you were to dig up my employment history you would see I finish at the top of the ladder consistently since I started. I've only just found out about this youth allowance stuff since I turned 22.

        • +1

          I'm talking about an extra 7.8 hours on top of my standard 10 hours…if there was 20 extra hours on offer during high periods of employment like in term 4 I would jump all over that.

        • @grasstown: you don't know my industry or particular work situation. The hours are there, I can assure you of that. I can easily gain an extra 10 hours a week if I desired by covering other people's shifts. There's always extra work going around, especially when schools book in for LTS lessons that run during school hours in term 4.

        • +5

          @niggard: why are you complaining about working? That is my point, not everyone is so lucky

        • -8

          @niggard: I am asking that you quit your jobs and let someone more grateful work them. I am asking that you take up full welfare and that my tax dollars be used to fund your youth allowance.

        • +2

          @grasstown: yeah piss off mate. You're assuming I'm not grateful and would rather I be on welfare. That couldn't be further from the truth.

        • +8

          @grasstown:
          What are you prattling on about grasstown? What does gratitude have to do with anything?

        • +7

          @grasstown: learn to read. I'm not whinging about working. I'm perplexed as to why the system rewards working less.

        • -7

          @niggard: work is a privilege and you are fortunate. Welfare is not a reward

        • +2

          @grasstown: yeah, I guess I am quite fortunate and lucky I come from a great family.

        • +5

          @grasstown:
          Thankful? To who? Employers? Why? Are they paying him more than they should be? Are they letting him work less hard than they could? I'm at a loss to see were you think the favor is being given that niggard that he should be grateful.

          So many people seem to be misunderstood as to what a job is, so allow me to put you straight: a job is a place you trade your labor for money. The only reason the employer wants your labor is because she can resell it for a higher price to somebody else.
          It might get confused on its application to the real world, with strange laws and misaligned personal motivations, but at its heart thats the system we use. A job is not a favor, and when it becomes a favor things are worse for everyone.

          Personally I would prefer niggard get the job over someone else. By looking at the numbers and constantly following the more profitable course she has started down a path that will hopefully one day see her trying to make even more money by running her own business, thereby providing job opportunities to others.

        • -6

          @outlander: not to employers. Thankful that they have a job. Just thankful, knowing that there are many people who want jobs who are without jobs

        • @outlander: I'm a he!

        • -1

          @niggard:

          I'm a he!

          I'm gonna need to see some proof before I can attest to that. A genital shot with your username written on the side should suffice.

        • +1

          @grasstown: I'm thankful for the doors my parents have opened for me. I don't think I could've done anything myself if they didn't pave the way.

        • +1

          @niggard:
          Imperfections are in any system. Like getting a higher fine for not wearing a seatbelt(Harmless) at easter, than if reversing over the speed limit through a red light(Dangerous).
          This particular example is probably wrong, but there are examples somewhat like this.
          Anyway arbitrary limits any many rules are often just plucked from thin air.
          Perhaps just use the system as it's meant to be used and don't bother to question it's idiosyncrasies. Authenticity of the system itself. That's a question I grapple with.

        • @grasstown:

          True comment, there are lots of complications with a job.

          I don't see why you got down votes..

      • +2

        finish at the top of what ladder? does your swim school put lifeguards/instructors/ whatever else in a ladder or anything that would remotely resemble that?

        • -1

          They keep tabs on how many swimmers get promoted and meet key competencies and tell you at the end of the year. You know if you're a preferred instructor by the ease of getting shifts and the way there's nothing in your path. My sister works there as well and she doesn't have a clear run.
          At my other workplace it's very obvious because they told me I was sitting at the top - I'm the only one there with proper competition experience at nationals and it's not hard to see who knows what they're doing and those that are bumbling their way through.

  • -4

    I know this kid from a wealthy family. He is at uni. Moved out from his parents home. His father is paying for his rent, utilities and uni fees. Now he gets youth allowance. He has bought a nice sport car and uses youth allowance for the monthly payments.
    I suppose at least he is getting back some of the big tax bill his father pays.
    It is all a joke and tax payers get screwed.
    Welfare payments like YA or the dole should be for a limited time only. To front an emergency like losing your job. After say 6 months payments should stop because that is more than enough time to find a job. Any job, not the "dream" job. Something to pay the bills and put food on the table.

      • I did not know you could get YA while still living at home! That is really crazy! Not having a go at you, it is the government and the system allowing it that is completely wrong.

        • It's only because I turned 22 and I'm now classed as being independent despite nothing really changing except a number.

        • +1

          @niggard:
          With regard to the car your parents are right…young kids and powerful cars are not a good mix.
          Not too sure what you consider a "turd" car, but hopefully big, slow and safe.

        • +21

          @niggard:
          I could not agree more with your parents. They gave you a free great appropriate car. And yes you "ought to be grateful" as you say.
          As per the "2006+ BMW 328i or equivalent" you should wait to have your hard earned money to buy it…
          I would not mind one too, but it is more difficult to spend it when it is your own hard earned money.

        • +6

          @niggard: comfortable, reliable car to get around in that you got for free. You should be grateful. A cheap car that is owned is a lot better than a fancy car with payments coming out of your bank for years. No one really cares what car you drive anyway.

        • +2

          @nubzy:
          Completely agree with all you said except the "No one really cares what car you drive anyway" part.
          Unfortunately most people do. The trick is not to care about what they think. Those who can master that skill are the clever ones…imho.

        • +6

          @niggard:
          Maybe they thought the ROI was too low. What would you do with a 10 year old BMW that you can't do with your econobox? Do you have any idea the maintenance costs of a BMW? It aint cheap. If you really want it maybe you should ask to borrow the money, but if you're rockin the same attitude IRL as here I don't fancy your chances. You come across as a little bitter and entitled from where I'm standing.

          I might be a little biased though. I drive a 4cyl corolla hatch from the 80's, a time when air conditioning and power steering were luxuries reserved for the queen and such. Its older than I am! You don't know what a shitbox is!!

        • +3

          @outlander: In rehab and through working the twelve steps I learned a lot about myself. You're right, I am a little entitled but I'm learning now that my parents are the ones that own their money, and how they spend it is their choice. They have helped me out heaps so I'm being a bit unreasonable at times demanding better things.

        • +3

          @niggard:
          Yeah I get it man, your just blowing off steam. Good for you kicking the habit, everyone has one.
          I think its important to note, that while entitled has become a bit of a buzz word, especially around here, it doesn't refer to whether your actually deserving or not.. just that you think you are. I don't know your situation, you might well deserve to have a nice car, but if you don't have the power to enforce that belief then your going into a battle without any weapons.

        • @maxi: I've driven numerous powerful cars on the road since 16 and never had a problem. Infact at the time of my youth older people were running into me. It all comes down to driver ability.

          A turd car may actually be unsafe.

        • @niggard:

          Thats something seriously ungrateful to say. You are not entitled to anything your parents provide for you past the necessities, especially when you are over the age of 21. My parents donated my sisters learner car to me ($1k shitter) and i drove that humbly for 3-4 years until I could afford to make my own way and purchase a car I wanted.

          And university is no excuse - I am a fulltime uni student and work full time, so I say there is no reason for you to take youth allowance at all so long as you are capable.

        • -1

          @niggard:

          I want a BMW so i can pay a visit to that nice pole over there provided to my on behalf of my parents.

          Lol if you're as good as you claim save/buy your own Ride.

        • -1

          @Godric: and what do you think I'm aiming towards? I don't want to spend a huge chunk of my money on something my parents can provide in a blink of an eye. Selfish, yes. But pragmatic. I know they'll come up with a slightly worse counter offer sooner or later. Probably just an FG Mk2 XR6 and not the XR6T I want. They hit back with a low offer of $15k assistance but I know they'll change their tune come Christmas.

  • +10

    You're forgetting one minor detail. Employment figures mean a LOT to a government's image.

    So from their point of view, putting 4 people into part time jobs for 7 hrs a week is better than putting one person into a full-time job at 35 hours a week.

    For a government "fighting unemployment" they get FOUR TIMES as many people off the "unemployed" lists, while not actually creating any additional jobs or wealth.

    • +3

      That probably explains their intern idea. Interns won't show up on ABS data because they'll technically be employed. Can't wait to see all the opportunities that are created for Coles and Woolworths interns.

      The problem with talking about welfare is that everyone takes their own circumstance and then uses that as proof that the system is flawed or fine. If the OPs situation was reversed and he or she was being forced to work additional hours that they couldn't because of some other responsibility (education, caring, etc.) the post wouldn't be about the system encouraging laziness it would be about the system being unreasonable and unfair.

  • +2

    niggard:

    Take 5 minutes, sit down and seriously think about what your situation will be in 5, 10 and 15 years.

    Make a plan for when those 5/10 and 15 years arrive and how happy you want to be.

    No life plan equals misery.

  • +2

    There is certainly an issue with tax/welfare being structured in such a way that there is no incentive for many people to return to work or increase their work.
    For some people the cost of childcare would be higher than their low-skilled employment would bring them.
    For some people the additional income of work would not be larger than the cost of doing the work plus the loss of benefits.
    For many/most people it works reasonably well - but it could do with a restructure to ensure that there is a real incentive for everyone to work.

  • Niggard curious what is the full rate if you didn't work at all?

  • -3

    $238.20 a fortnight which is too much for not working. There should be zero dollars for zero work.

    • -2

      That is not bad at all!

      Do you have to meet up with CL? or is this payment just paid?

      • I think you just need to give them payslips and a tax return

        • I see.

          I have always wondered how so many teens that never worked could party every weekend whilst studying.

        • @GameChanger: I know a fair amount of people from high school from low SES backgrounds that sell illegal substances on the side to supplement their dole bludging ways.

        • @niggard:geez how ungrateful are these kids. Free money from the govt and they still sell!

        • +6

          @niggard:

          If there was no allowance and they couldn't get a job, there'd be a lot more kids selling illegal substances to make money. You see there's a place where they do this, it's called America. Although this place has 4.4 percent of the world's population, it houses around 22 percent of the world's prisoners. Is that a better system? The world is an imperfect place…

          Maybe you were raised well and are reasonably intelligent. That's a fortunate combination which makes it far easier to get a job. These people from low SES backgrounds - would you give them a job if there was someone like you also going for the job?

        • @dazweeja: i don't know there are many other countries without social wellfare and strict laws on drugs in which people find other ways to make money.

          Well, i do believe in wellfare, and when i give a beggar some money in the street, i don't put conditions on the donation, meaning he can choose what to do with it smokes, booze, drugs, women/men or food, although it is sad that life brought them to make some of those choices.

          going to centrelink is such a burden, just about qualifies as a job =)

          for those true penny pinchers out there, not to worry, many of the people choosing to drink and smoke won't be getting anywhere near the retirement share…

          personnally i'd much rather tax entities such as companies, rather than people. As the value is created by a group it's less a burden to be shared within a group instead of a feeling of individually participating to funding your neighbours cancers.
          but eh, i ain't got no educationz as many of yous so just take my comment as something to kill time (can't afford any other pleasures anyway)

    • +9

      "There should be zero dollars for zero work."

      go educate yourself

      • +2

        imagine how many CEOs and politicians would find themselves broke XD

    • +3

      $238.20 a fortnight which is too much for not working. There should be zero dollars for zero work.

      It's designed to assist your studies. Books are hella expensive, then there's travel costs, food, and any other essentials you might need to be paying for.

      Not everyone has a job. If you can't support yourself, it's going to be hard to get that tertiary education needed for the workplace where you pay it back in taxes.

      • -2

        Books aren't that expensive…if it's such an issue just don't go out drinking for a few weeks

        • +4

          How much are they for you? Because for me they were about $150 for a fairly thin book. And the universities are clever. Each year they change switch to a new edition of the book so you can't just resell it or buy one second hand.

          I suspect the textbook publishers and the universities are colluding on this. You can't buy your text books from cheap book stores, and they are way overpriced compared to other books. They charge you this much because they can and made sure you can't get it anywhere else. Simple as that.

          if it's such an issue just don't go out drinking for a few weeks

          If you have no job, even if you don't go drinking you have no money. You wouldn't be able to afford drinks in the first place. You're screwed unless your parents pay for everything.

          There should be zero dollars for zero work.

          This is the antithesis of how things actually work. If you do work, you have money already, so why do you need more? If you don't do any work, you are going to need money more than the person who does. Quite a simple concept really. So why would the government give money to the one who already has money, and deny it to the one who doesn't and who happens to need it more?

          This would be like charging less tax % to rich people and more to poor people because poor people don't pay as much tax as high income earners due to lower wages.

        • +1

          @lostn: my books cost me about $500-600 a semester.

        • +1

          Piss off, Joe hockey.

        • comment redacted

        • @niggard:

          U can rent the books @ the library ~ never buy textbooks ~ survived on a 6+ GPA without it

        • @blehgg: I just buy them new because I can't be bothered driving back and forth to uni just to get my hands on a few books I actually need, or search through the second hand book lists. Print is too small/too messy/too disorganised.

        • @niggard: and nobody in this country sells illegal copies of them, such a disappointment, this place needs more tightarses :p

    • +3

      Just like every third world country!

      Which is..

      No income is a one way ticket to the slums.

  • +1

    Mate, I feel you, coming from someone who have been where you are at and looking back now. Like I said somewhere above, the system is half baked and they didn't think it properly enough. Would be better if the payment has grading or some sort. 1-3 hrs a week get $44, 4-6 get 33, 7-9 22, and so on.

    If I were u, I'll see it as opportunity to find a job that pays higher per hour, to make it worthwhile, or use the extra time to work voluntarily, return the favour to the community.

    • It's not about the hours. It is the dollar amount that Centrelink refers to when they assess your income each fortnight.

      E.g. Working 10 hours a week @ $15 = $150 and no cut offs.
      Working 10 hours a week @ $30 = $300 and YA gets reduced per dollar over maximum amount.

  • +19

    It is ok dude, I am happy to pay for you to not work.

    Also as a rule always kick up, never kick down. You want to feel outrageous about something, feel outrageous about the corporations that pay little tax (by having quarters in Singapore, hi Google), feel outrageous about people that move their obviously Australian business to Bali to they pay less taxes, etc. Those are the people that you should be upset with (again kick up).

    What is the alternative? let those people have no money? You would be afraid to walk on the street because desperate people do desperate things. And nothing makes you more desperate than hunger.

    "real dole bludgers" are rare, you know a guy that knows a guy that he thinks he knows somebody because they do not work and they have a boat.

    There should be a balance of course, do not give them enough money to make it attractive to be there forever, but no money would be way, way worse.

    Now for the downvotes to come (just making sure I get the maximum).
    Unless you are planning to give up your inheritance please do not talk about "working hard to build your wealth". Your parents can from what you say, but you will inherit most of your wealth, you will probably not work for it. Enjoy the fact that there is no inheritance tax (again something that obviously benefits the rich).

    • Dont know about inheriting wealth, more like inheriting a headache.

    • -4

      Unfortunately I do know a load of people that are the typical type of derros portrayed in housos. I was a cadet during early high school years and I made many friends from all kinds of social backgrounds, some really dodgy and some wealthy. One girl comes to mind: she came from a dysfunctional family that couldn't even have a family tree drawn because it was that messy. Half the side of the family was in jail and the other side were all trying to get disability payments for extra cigarette money. AVOs were always being taken out against one another, and DOCS was always knocking on their door. They would constantly search under the sofa for extra money to buy cigarettes. There was one point last year she tried hocking off stuff to me for packets of cigarettes. To her, $50 was a lot of money. To me, $50 is loose change.

      • +3

        An extra $50 would be amazing. Some of us are genuine Aussie battlers who work but don't earn enough to stay afloat. Please send your 'loose change' to me.

      • If $50 to you is 'loose change' why are you even on Youth Allowance?

Login or Join to leave a comment