Economy gets big tick (TheAge) | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Economy gets big tick (TheAge)

willo said:
So how is "middle class welfare" defined if "middle class" can't be defined?
Plenty on here refer to it, but I've yet to find out its actual "term'.
Is it just a throwaway line, just some *smile* jargon or is it something like ...a person receiving some government money that doesn't really need it? (Means test or not, such as the back to school bonus?)

mld said:
'Middle class' can have many definitions, depending on the context it is used in. The phrase 'middle class welfare' refers to government payments being given to people who don't need those payments to live.

I wouldn't call it a '*smile*' phrase, I find it quite effective in communicating what it is intended to. 'Middle class dole' might be better, with recipients being referred to as 'middle class dole bludgers'.

willo said:
So in actual fact, you could have someone who is a low income earner but has low cost of living expenses.
Or alternatively someone or a household with a goodly size income but has higher cost of living expenses.
Either could be defined as "middle class welfare" recipients if they receive government payments? That doesn't seem logical, does it?

mld said:
Seems quite logical to me.

So really what you're saying, the term "middle class" as in "welfare" is meaningless.
It doesn't matter whether they have a low, medium or high income. It depends on "their" cost of living expenses.
It may seem logical to you, but I find it a bit hard to believe that you can be on a low income (or a very high income) but can still be referred to as "middle class". Doesn't make sense.
 
mld said:
I don't recall mentioning anything about 'cost of living'.

I asked the following
willo said:
So in actual fact, you could have someone who is a low income earner but has low cost of living expenses.
Or alternatively someone or a household with a goodly size income but has higher cost of living expenses.
Either could be defined as "middle class welfare" recipients if they receive government payments? That doesn't seem logical, does it?

You replied
mld said:
Seems quite logical to me.
 
So really
"middle class welfare" is government money given to anyone who doesn't need it, regardless of income. Is that it?

Sounds like it's a catch phrase more than anything.

It probably should just be "government welfare". Which is why all government welfare should be means tested rather than just handed out willy nilly. I believe that when they (all governments) do that, in effect they're admitting to taking too much tax and want to be seen to be giving some back as government largesse.
 
willo said:
So really
"middle class welfare" is government money given to anyone who doesn't need it, regardless of income. Is that it?

Sounds like it's a catch phrase more than anything.

It probably should just be "government welfare". Which is why all government welfare should be means tested rather than just handed out willy nilly. I believe that when they (all governments) do that, in effect they're admitting to taking too much tax and want to be seen to be giving some back as government largesse.
Since we can't come to an understanding as to who does or doesn't need government handouts, how exactly would you propose to means test it? Against what criterion exactly?
 
1eyedtiger said:
Since we can't come to an understanding as to who does or doesn't need government handouts, how exactly would you propose to means test it? Against what criterion exactly?

That's why I asked for a definition of middle class so that "middle class" welfare can be determined. Which doesn't seem feasible. As I said, some posters (and media types) refer to middle class welfare, but nobody can give me the meaning. Some say it can't be measured in income, some say it's regardless of income. So who really knows? I'm sure I don't, seems there is no definition, so that's why I said it was "*smile* jargon"

Are any government handouts means tested now? How is it done now?
 
willo said:
That's why I asked for a definition of middle class so that "middle class" welfare can be determined. Which doesn't seem feasible. As I said, some posters (and media types) refer to middle class welfare, but nobody can give me the meaning. Some say it can't be measured in income, some say it's regardless of income. So who really knows? I'm sure I don't, seems there is no definition, so that's why I said it was "*smile* jargon"

Are any government handouts means tested now? How is it done now?

If you're living in paradise, you're the 'higher class', if you're living on the edge, you're the 'lower class', and the rest is middle.

The fat (major) side of the population. ;D
 
TigerForce said:
If you're living in paradise, you're the 'higher class', if you're living on the edge, you're the 'lower class', and the rest is middle.

The fat (major) side of the population. ;D

Define what 'paradise' is? Where is the line drawn?
 
willo said:
That's why I asked for a definition of middle class so that "middle class" welfare can be determined. Which doesn't seem feasible. As I said, some posters (and media types) refer to middle class welfare, but nobody can give me the meaning. Some say it can't be measured in income, some say it's regardless of income. So who really knows? I'm sure I don't, seems there is no definition, so that's why I said it was "*smile* jargon"

Are any government handouts means tested now? How is it done now?

This seems to be a case of trying to define the phrase away. It is pretty simple what is meant by the phrase, it is simply short-hand for the family tax benefits, schoolkids bonuses, basically any direct cash payments to anyone that has a full time job.

You may not like the phrase, but for most it is effective shorthand for communicating what is meant.
 
mld said:
This seems to be a case of trying to define the phrase away. It is pretty simple what is meant by the phrase, it is simply short-hand for the family tax benefits, schoolkids bonuses, basically any direct cash payments to anyone that has a full time job.

You may not like the phrase, but for most it is effective shorthand for communicating what is meant.

This.

Don't get hung up on how we define the middle class. It's essentially about refunding taxes paid through rebates, refunds, etc.
 
Australia's credit rating still AAA-OK
Date
March 29, 2013

Global ratings agency Fitch has confirmed Australia's AAA credit rating, making the country one of only eight members of the ''9As Club''.

The club is made up of countries with the highly sought after AAA rating, with a stable outlook, from all three global agencies, S&P, Fitch and Moody's.

Treasurer Wayne Swan hailed the outcome in a statement on Friday.

''Despite the ridiculous scare campaigns we've seen on the economy this week from the opposition, being an elite member of The 9As Club shows the resilience of Australia's economy,'' Mr Swan.

''No Liberal government has ever achieved this coveted trifecta from all three global ratings agencies.''


Fitch Ratings said Australia had remained one of the strongest performing economies since the global financial crisis began.

''Australia has built up the capacity to absorb shocks due to a combination of low public debt, a free floating exchange rate and liberal trade and labour markets,'' the agency said.

This allowed authorities to run strong countercyclical policies during downturns, and the economy to adjust.

Fitch said its rating assumed Australia's high level of political stability and governance was maintained, supporting the country's ''attractive business climate''.

The global pool of government bonds with triple A status, the bedrock of the financial system, has shrunk more than 60 per cent since the financial crisis triggered a wave of downgrades across the advanced economies.

Financial Times analysts say the expulsion of the US, the UK and France from the 9As club has led to a contraction in the stock of government bonds deemed the safest, from almost $US11 trillion at the start of 2007 to just $4 trillion now.

They say the shrinkage, largely a result of America's downgrade by S&P in 2011, is part of a dramatic redrawing of the world credit ratings map.

Topping the list in the scale of credit upgrades since January 2007 are Uruguay, Bolivia and Brazil. The biggest downgrades were in crisis-hit southern Europe, mainly Greece.AAP dc/ldj/was

AAP

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/australias-credit-rating-still-aaaok-20130329-2gyct.html