Newstart and Pension Recipients to Get $500 Stimulus Payment (Update: $750)

jimbobaus on 11/03/2020 - 15:05
Last edited 12/03/2020 - 11:42

The government is set to announce a range of methods to stimulate the economy
among the expected announcements is one off payments of $500 to Newstart and pension recipients

https://www.skynews.com.au/details/_6140338515001

"Australia’s battlers on Newstart or the pension will each get a one-off $500 payment from the Coalition’s multi-billion-dollar coronavirus stimulus package"

Update : Those on government payments including Newstart, FTB, pensions and carers allowance will get one off payments of $750
https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/c…

Financial

Comments

    • AussieDolphin on 12/03/2020 - 22:35
      +3

      Exactly! Because we work full time it doesn't mean we don't need a one off payment.

  • TEER3X on 11/03/2020 - 19:39
    +1

    Is it for existing recipients only or for those that are about to apply?

    Asking for a (very lazy) friend.

    • capslock janitor on 12/03/2020 - 21:02

      i applied before the announcement, awaiting outcome, let's see

  • Sage on 11/03/2020 - 20:01
    +3

    Man, I could use that money but I'm not a dole-bludger.

    • [Deactivated] on 11/03/2020 - 20:21
      +1

      Should of been a battler than.

      • darkmoss on 11/03/2020 - 20:37

        luv an Aussie Battler

    • outlander on 12/03/2020 - 22:28
      +2

      If you found someone on the dole and beat them with a stick you may be able get some of it.
      You could call it your dole-bludger-bludgeoner

  • chumlee on 11/03/2020 - 21:20
    +1

    Stimulus products will get a boost in sales

  • Sofie519 on 11/03/2020 - 23:23
    +3

    Why would giving pensioners and newstart recipients extra money help in any way? Isnt the issue with people having either an income reduction or no sick leave, business having no customers, struggling to pay rent and staff etc where there is actual impact? I mean, pensioners and new start recipients, like the public servants, all get paid by the taxpayers regardless right? Sorry am I missing something here? (Genuine question)

    I would rather see a nationwide debt servicing suspension if you REALLY want more money in people's pocket during this crisis. (if the nation has to be shut down that is)

    • nomoneynoproblems on 12/03/2020 - 14:20

      They're the most vulnerable. People with jobs can still do all the above you've just mentioned.

      • SlickMick on 12/03/2020 - 17:51

        I don't understand your point, but totally agree with Sofie's. I get paid if I work and not unless. If my company tells me to stay home 2 weeks (like some are), I earn $0. As clearly stated above, your "most vulnerable" get exactly the same income regardless. I repeat the question: how does this situation mean your "most vulnerable" need more money? Because the cost of toilet paper has sky rocketed?

        • nomoneynoproblems on 12/03/2020 - 20:18
          -2

          Think about it for a second. So someone that works should be prioritised over someone that gets paid a pension or handout? They're more likely to spend that money because they don't earn an income, where as the majority of workers would save it. It's explained here https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-12/coronavirus-stimul…

          Lol at the neg

          • SlickMick on 12/03/2020 - 21:30
            +1

            @nomoneynoproblems: Here's another. I considered your point and refuted it. You neg me and just say the same thing again. In the scenario we're describing, the unemployed keeps exactly the same income, the "was employed, now not" has no income.

            • sir_bazz on 12/03/2020 - 22:17
              +1

              @SlickMick: Think that sick person is expected to follow the process for sickness allowance.

              https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/12/australian-uni…

              Looks a pita process for short term needs though.

            • nomoneynoproblems on 12/03/2020 - 22:21
              +2

              @SlickMick: Refuted with what? It's unfortunate your employment situation doesn't cater 2 weeks paid. I'm lucky I'm in a role where I can work from home to still get paid in the event I need to self quarantine. Having said that, we both have jobs which I'm pretty grateful for and as we're on ozbargain, I'd assume pretty financially savy enough to put some away for rainy days like today. More often then not, those on pensions and government hand outs aren't in that situation and are more likely to spend that money. It's in the link. Also depending on circumstances you may be eligible for payments in case you need to self quarantine, also in the link. (That I'm sure you read)

    • Scantu on 13/03/2020 - 01:11
      +11

      You're actually getting at the opposite to the intention of the stimulus - the last thing they want is for it to go to your pocket. They want you to spend it. The poorest people in the country get the money, they are likely to spend it on goods and services etc. stimulating the economy. If a richer person gets it, it goes into their bank account and does FA for the economy.

    • OzCheapo on 13/03/2020 - 08:54
      +5

      I know people who will welcome the payments and will be able to afford to pay their groceries and bills a little easier.

      But there's always going to be the people who shoot it up their arm or their liver.

      $750 ain't going to do much but it'll make a difference in their lives (at least for the next month or so.)

      Bottom line, either these people cannot work or haven't been able to find work. And those who are less busy, have more time to worry or complain. The $750 will help temporarily remove the issues.

      From this perspective, if I had a grandfather who was on pension and couldn't afford the bills, and I couldn't afford to help pay… It means a lot for Gramps and I.

      As an addendum… those toilet rolls and sanitisers are getting pricey! This will help

  • [Deactivated] on 12/03/2020 - 08:38
    +1

    Too bad all these vulnerable people are paying through the nose for basics and can’t access items they need and often need to make multiple trips. Of course it will help the most vulnerable, but isn’t a stimulus to the economy.

    If the government truely wanted to stimulate the economy they would provide those with median incomes with a tax break.

    • Scantu on 13/03/2020 - 01:12
      +2

      Median income = worst place to give money during a recession. A large amount of people who will just pay off their mortgage and not stimulate the economy. That is even more so just giving out free money, the poorer people will actually spend it.

      • [Deactivated] on 13/03/2020 - 07:51
        +3

        I didn’t say free money, I mentioned a tax break. Most people who don’t have a clue will get anything if they think it’s a tax write off.

        Also if you think the majority of median income earners are owning houses then you’d be wrong.

        • Scantu on 13/03/2020 - 12:16
          +5

          Tax break or handout, it's still money coming from govt. coffers. A tax rebate to the middle income earners is not an effective way to jump start an economy, hence it is never done.

          I mean you can just say I'm wrong or you can go and look it up:
          https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Depart…

          See: Trends in home ownership rates in Australia by income, where the median category places home ownership at 65%, very firmly in the majority.

          • [Deactivated] on 13/03/2020 - 16:54

            @Scantu: ABS take into account anyone who claims to own a home, those who own homes and have an income (pension, super etc). All statistics have flaws.

            It also depends on what you decide median income is and where people live etc. Personally, I don’t think the stimulus will do anything more than fill in the pre-existing gaps. There are more effective ways in which the money could be spent.

            • Scantu on 13/03/2020 - 17:27

              @[Deactivated]: Nup. You can't discredit ABS statistics with a totally spurious claim of "Nah it's not accurate aye". Give me a source for that or it's totally invalid.

              You don't "decide" what the median is. Median has a statistical definition - the middle datapoint in a set of data. I personally think your opinion on what it do isn't worth much because you believe that a median is subjective and that ABS statistics aren't worth making decisions on (Which is what the government does. Which is why it exists in the first place.)

              Furthermore a nebulous claim of "some other ways" is not even worth mentioning.

              Sorry mate… I don't think anyone's going to be calling you up for any economic advice anytime soon.

              • [Deactivated] on 13/03/2020 - 18:45

                @Scantu: You can’t take the ABS as gospel, like any source. I don’t think that the Keynesian ideology of economic stimulus can be the only approach the government has in addressing the issue is what I was suggesting. The small business package and promotion of the tax write offs for small to medium businesses will be more effective. Again I’m no expert, just an opinion.

                This money will be an ‘equaliser’ especially for those people who will not be able to work as per usual. Giving people who don’t have a disposable income won’t necessarily prompt spending.

                • Scantu on 13/03/2020 - 19:12
                  -1

                  @[Deactivated]: No, but unless you can verifiably dispute it, it's a logical fallacy to just generically claim "well all statistics have some sort of error".

                  It does absolutely prompt spending. People without disposable income spend it by the very nature of their situation. You can check many many years of economic theory to support this.

        • cloudy on 14/03/2020 - 06:14

          Tax breaks are too slow, most people don’t see tax breaks as lump of money to go spend, they see it as part of their tax return as they might normally in July/aug.

          Plus any break like that might be seen as on going and be disappointment the year after when taxes go up.

          Lump sums cheque’s feel very different, bit like lotto wins where people feel less ongoing entitlement and celebratory and would be willing to splash out a little, that’s stimulation in a economic sense.

  • worldwidehappiness on 12/03/2020 - 08:42
    +5

    The point of this is to increase the velocity of money in the economy. Poor people will spend it quickly on necessities (hopefully), and then the retailers or whoever will spend what they receive, etc. To stimulate the economy, it's best to focus government expenditure on things that increase the velocity of money more effectively. But many poor people need some relief with high rents, etc.

    • SlickMick on 12/03/2020 - 17:53
      -4

      I've noticed all the rents increasing since the virus outbreak, not.

      • tryagain on 13/03/2020 - 03:14
        +3

        I've noticed all the rents increasing since the virus outbreak, not.

        They said high, not increasing.

  • popsiee on 12/03/2020 - 08:43

    Not going to go too far if buying toilet paper at only ready available place Ebay at 2-5 times RRP .

    • brendanm on 12/03/2020 - 17:40
      +2

      There were hundreds of packets of toilet paper at woolies when I went today.

  • Hirolol on 12/03/2020 - 08:52
    +4

    Years ago, when everyone was given $900, spending on pokies went up quite a bit.

    Statistics show that pokie players are majority low socioeconomic areas.

    Not sure if this is a good idea.

    • 900dollaridoos on 12/03/2020 - 13:44

      Most of the pokies are owned by woolies/coles so I guess thats still a stimulus?

    • Cluster on 12/03/2020 - 15:47

      Pokies are heavily taxed by state governments, so people wasting their money that way isn't too bad. Most of it goes back to government.

      Any cash hand out can be abused by people. It's just the way it is. Government doesn't control what people spend money on.

      • GG57 on 12/03/2020 - 16:04

        "Government doesn't control what people spend money on."

        Yes they do; have a look at the DSS Cashless Debit Card

        • [Deactivated] on 13/03/2020 - 20:51

          And that's a good thing. You don't get to decide how to spend money you didn't earn.

          • mutantx on 14/03/2020 - 16:10
            -5

            @[Deactivated]: very few people actually "earn" their money … they shirk, are sly and conniving, are much more concerned about preserving their jobs when they really aren't up to the task, and would be justifiably replaced if they weren't so successful and well practiced at social lying.
            In my experience, the people who actively hate the unemployed, who show no compassion or understanding that more than 25% of the unemployed have a disability that lessens their appeal to potential employers, or who begrudge the pathetic pittance that Australia throws in their direction, well … like the saying goes .. they "Doth Protest Too Much".
            These people are far more likely to be the true thieves, but hidden in the workplace .. dishonorable people who think nothing of stealing from their workplace, and who need to deflect from their own selfish dishonesty by playing the "My Taxes!" card.

            • [Deactivated] on 14/03/2020 - 16:16
              +1

              @mutantx: Yeh, I'm gonna need to see a peer reviewed source for all those claims.

              • mutantx on 14/03/2020 - 16:28
                +1

                @[Deactivated]: have a quick google ..
                i just did then and i have to admit i got the figure completely wrong
                42% have an illness or disability

                • [Deactivated] on 14/03/2020 - 16:49
                  +1

                  @mutantx: The onus is on YOU to provide proof for ALL your claims, not me.

                  • mutantx on 14/03/2020 - 17:07
                    -1

                    @[Deactivated]: are you equally as lazy when you are at your paid place of employment ?

                    • [Deactivated] on 14/03/2020 - 17:51
                      +1

                      @mutantx: Straw man. Come back when you have proof to back up the claims you made. I don't present my findings at work to my superior and tell them to go prove it them self if they want evidence of how I reached that conclusion.

  • Boogerman on 12/03/2020 - 09:32
    +12

    Well, well well. Isn’t this delicious
    The Conservatives have done the exact thing they lambasted Labor for in 2008/09.
    So not only they lied about a surplus & have governed the longest string of deficits in modern history, but we are about to cop the first recession in 29 years (let alone the per capita recession that has been ongoing for over a year now)
    So when does it finally become appropriate to give the Conservatives the title ‘the incompetent economic managers’?

    • nomoneynoproblems on 12/03/2020 - 14:32
      +6

      If you think libs caused this recession I have a bridge to sell you. It doesn't matter who's in government, as long as China are buying our shit we'll always stay afloat. The one time they don't it's suddenly the governments fault? The whole world is about to hit the fan.

      • Boogerman on 12/03/2020 - 20:52
        +1

        According to the Libs (& their simpleton followers), the recession will be Labor’s fault

        • tryagain on 13/03/2020 - 03:19
          -1

          And according to your site simpleton take above though it will be the libs fault.

          • Boogerman on 13/03/2020 - 05:07
            +4

            @tryagain: Former treasurer Joe Hockey in 2013: “There will be a surplus in the first year of a Liberal government & every year after that”
            Current treasurer Josh Frydenberg 2019, after 6 years of deficits with the obligatory blaming on Labor: “the budget is back in the black”

            • cloudy on 14/03/2020 - 06:19

              @Boogerman: To be fair, comments like that come from both sides, and are often wrong.

            • brendanm on 14/03/2020 - 17:54

              @Boogerman: Politicians are liars, more news at 7.

              • Boogerman on 15/03/2020 - 07:17

                @brendanm: And millions of unquestioning simpletons vote for said liars, more news after the break

                • brendanm on 15/03/2020 - 10:13

                  @Boogerman: You do realise voting is compulsory in Australia?

                  • Boogerman on 15/03/2020 - 10:30
                    +1

                    @brendanm: Ahh, now I get it. The intellectually lazy “ALL politicians are crooks” cop out
                    FYI, voting isn’t compulsory. Getting your name ticked off at the ballot box is

                    • sarahlump on 15/03/2020 - 12:22
                      +1

                      @Boogerman: boogerman, do you go to the ballot box, get your name ticked off and then don't vote?(You literally don't have to answer this, and as part of our anonymous voting system you probably shouldn't but plz tell me)

                      If you do, how does it feel? exciting? like you're cheating the system? Like you're about to exit the matrix?

                      • Boogerman on 15/03/2020 - 13:07

                        @sarahlump: I suggest you re-examine my comments & re-evaluate whether I vote or not

                    • brendanm on 15/03/2020 - 13:52
                      +1

                      @Boogerman: They are all crooks, they are in it for themselves, not "the good of the people".

                      So not voting is better than voting? Odd logic.

      • FallaM on 13/03/2020 - 09:48

        The fact that the entire world will face significant economic issues, especially China, makes this not a "non issue" but if we are relatively (profanity) as well as everyone else, I guess it's not bad right?

        • Boogerman on 13/03/2020 - 13:10

          I’m just couching it in terms of the conservatives’ worldview, to highlight their hypocrisy.
          The Conservatives keep thumping on the table that the government budget is the same as a personal credit card. It isn’t.
          The truth is both they & Labor have structurally (profanity) our economy, by pumping up housing prices through housing purchase incentives & excess immigration, which has decimated the working & middle class & also sold out Gen Y & Z. And let’s not forget what’s been done to the environment in the process

  • farknos on 12/03/2020 - 09:53
    -1

    Pensioners for sure, personally cant see why we should be donating extra to people on the dole

    • Griffindinho on 13/03/2020 - 14:23
      +8

      People on the dole have it hard enough buddy

  • OzHunterNSW on 12/03/2020 - 09:57
    -1

    It better be $500 now…. now that we have all been enticed.

    In fact, I would elect to forgo the $500 if it meant that Newstart received a proper rise.

    How utterly ridiculous in this so called caring society to subject individuals on a woeful subsidy so inadequate many starve to death.

    • Deridas on 12/03/2020 - 10:29
      +1

      Can you name me "many" someone who has starved to death on Newstart?

      The last time I checked, you could afford a lot of rice with $559 a fortnight.

      Not that I think those on Newstart are on too much, but certainly not "starving to death".

      • JohnHowardsEyebrows on 12/03/2020 - 21:37
        +8

        If you had no rent, no power bills, phone bills, need for clothing etc., Not sure how anyone would survive.

      • Zachary on 14/03/2020 - 19:54

        JohnHowardsEyebrows got a point….unless you're homeless (or smooching off someone's place for free), getting free food and drinks, don't wear clothes at all and go out naked which means there's no need to wash anything, well except yourself unless of course you don't want to just to save money, and have no bills, loans or and other expense to pay, then yeh, $559 a fortnight is plenty….more than plenty I would say….in fact I could say you could be rich at this level!

    • brendanm on 12/03/2020 - 17:42
      +2

      The only way you could starve to death on Newstart, is if you spent it all on meth.

      • sarahlump on 15/03/2020 - 12:25

        How much do you pay for your meth?

        • brendanm on 15/03/2020 - 13:50

          $50 a hit.

  • GG57 on 12/03/2020 - 10:05
    +3

    Still not formally announced? (or did I miss it)

    Have we seen the LNP's strategy of 'leaking' some info to their preferred media (Sky) and then monitoring what the public reaction is, before they confirm or change the policy?
    If so, not really strong leadership is it?

    • Boogerman on 12/03/2020 - 10:30
      +3

      Spot on. Gutless

    • theoaus on 12/03/2020 - 11:14
      +1

      "More than 6 million welfare recipients, including pensioners, carers, veterans, families, young people and jobseekers will get a one-off cash payment of $750 from March 31."
      https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-12/federal-government-co…

      • GG57 on 12/03/2020 - 11:21

        Thanks.
        So now it is $750, not $500 as 'reported' by Sky, and the range of recipients has broadened.

        • jimbobaus on 12/03/2020 - 11:49

          its always been all on government payments my post just didn't clarify that point

    • LFO on 12/03/2020 - 13:14

      Still not formally announced?

      Well, plenty of "News sites" blubber about it but where is the official government announcement?

      I am sure there has to be a lot of bureaucratic paperwork before releasing tax money to the tax payers. Tight-fisted (except for politicians themselves).

        • LFO on 12/03/2020 - 20:44
          +3

          Yes, it is ABC News not a government website.
          That is the problem. The government could change their minds and just said it was a news error.

          Announcements of this magnitude should not be done via news agencies but governmental instead.

          Like Trump and Tweeter.

          But thank you for posting the ABC link.

    • BertieBrown on 12/03/2020 - 15:31
      +1

      Thanks for posting this Costanza. :)

      Straight up facts from the horses mouth. Can’t believe as of writing this has zero upvotes.

    • djprima on 12/03/2020 - 15:46

      this needs to be pinned

    • LFO on 12/03/2020 - 20:47
      +2

      … made automatically from 31 March 2020 (subject to the passage of legislation).

      So it is "almost there" … or not?
      What if doesn't pass?

  • the Unforgiven on 12/03/2020 - 13:26
    -7

    Will us pensioners get the money before Scumo closes all the shops like Trumpet just did in The States?
    We will have to shop online then, may as well shop value for money - China

    • theoaus on 12/03/2020 - 13:40

      "The one-off payment will be paid automatically from 31 March 2020 by Services Australia or the
      Department of Veterans’ Affairs. Over 90 per cent of payments will be made by mid-April 2020."

    • LFO on 12/03/2020 - 20:49
      +3

      Sorry, even pensioners eat food.

    • Griffindinho on 13/03/2020 - 14:24

      Pensioners spend it on the pokies

      • LFO on 13/03/2020 - 22:35

        Pensioners spend it on the pokies

        Only gamblers do.

        Well before that group is those that visit a bottle shop and get liquid "supplies" for the fortnight.

        It is good for business, it is still spending.
        Sellers sell, buyers drink to it.
        Win-win situation.

  • JuryWheel on 12/03/2020 - 15:23

    Any idea WHICH Family Tax Benefit this is for…?

    • Aerith-Waifu on 12/03/2020 - 18:05

      I am gonna guess any FTB

  • wonderboy on 12/03/2020 - 15:29
    -4

    What's the point in giving money to businesses if there's no one with money to buy from them? Such BS. Too young to get the $900 last time and now there's nothing. I make okay money but haven't bought anything this year and don't plan too.

    Aren't these pensioners gonna die from the virus before they even get the money? Gimme the money. (Yes, I know pensioners doesn't just mean old people.)

    • cloudy on 12/03/2020 - 15:55
      +1

      Gimme the money.
      I make okay money but haven't bought anything this year and don't plan too.

      so why do you need the money again?

      I should say, I didn't neg you :)

      • wonderboy on 13/03/2020 - 04:11

        Because I want money to spend. We we're already heading towards a recession for later this year prior to this outbreak. A real stimulus package should have happened sooner.

    • Zachary on 14/03/2020 - 20:01
      -1

      Hahahahaha wow….sure, just let all the disabled and retired pensioners to just die from the virus…that'll certainly help the case…

  • Aerith-Waifu on 12/03/2020 - 18:04

    So small business can get $2000+ grant? Does that including people who selling item on eBay with a registered business?

    • jason101 on 12/03/2020 - 18:51
      +3

      https://www.pm.gov.au/media/economic-stimulus-package

      "$6.7 billion to Boost Cash Flow for Employers by up to $25,000 with a minimum payment of $2,000 for eligible small and medium-sized businesses. The payment will provide cash flow support to businesses with a turnover of less than $50 million that employ staff, between 1 January 2020 and 30 June 2020. The payment will be tax free. This measure will benefit around 690,000 businesses employing around 7.8 million people. Businesses will receive payments of 50 per cent of their Business Activity Statements or Instalment Activity Statement from 28 April with refunds to then be paid within 14 days."

      Looks like you may have to have "employees" therefore not a sole trader operating under a business name.

  • SydBoy on 12/03/2020 - 18:32
    +4

    Moral of the announcement today that you don't work, stAy home, get doll and then get more free money…!

    If you work hard and pay tax then you don't get any help !

    • Sage on 12/03/2020 - 19:14
      +18

      True but $500 a fortnight compared to $1000 a week. We're better off with jobs.
      The dole life is not glamorous.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join