|Home | Bookmark | Tell||Active petitions in over 75 countries||Follow GoPetition|
Petition Tag - income
It is heart breaking hearing parents say that they do not send their kids to school because they have no money to give them for lunch or no food for a packed lunch.
It's saddening that children from low income families or single parents are not getting the education they need because there is no money for lunch.
I think the government should introduce Free School Lunches for children that do come from low income families and or single parents.
Children have the right the learn, they are our future. Don't we want children to be able to go to school and not grow hungry. They need their lunches to help them get through the day, and concentrate on their work. For some children that may be the only meal they have that day.
Better prepared children, means better test scores, brighter future for the children and the Australian society.
In the UK there is a system put in place, that if the child comes from a low income families and or single parents, that are entitled to any government support, they get free school meals.
Doesn't it make sense that the Australian government implements a similar system.
Please help us get the signatures for this issue to be take to the parliament, then hopefully we can help out those children that really do need it.
As Americans we are already paying too much in tax. Our founding fathers argued that they did not want to put a ceiling on a 10% tax rate for citizens because a future Government might have the audacity to impose such a high rate.
History supports less intrusive Government, free enterprise, and less than a 10% tax rate for all.
The PUT FOOD IN THE BUDGET CAMPAIGN represents 30 communities across Ontario that promote the implementation of a $100 Healthy Food Supplement for all adults on social assistance in Ontario. The Supplement will serve as a down payment in closing the monthly income gap.
10, 000 + Ontarians and 50 MPPs of all political parties have completed the 'Do the Math' Budget Survey which calculates the monthly living costs for a single individual. The average monthly cost arrived at was $1,350. The current poverty line for a single individual is approximately $1,600/month. An individual on social assistance receives $592 per month. Once rent is paid, there is little if anything left, forcing thousands of Ontarians to rely on already over burdened food banks.
The basic needs allowance is set far below actual market costs. This negligence has created a widespread food insecurity crisis and increase in chronic illness related to poor nutrition. These issues are a cost to society, where as putting money in the hands of low-income individuals will immediately benefit our communities ("How paying people’s way out of poverty can help us all" Globe & Mail)
The government has created its Social Assistance Review to evaluate the true cost of living in communities across Ontario and we are asking them to establish a new benchmark for income adequacy in setting benefit rates. In the meantime, individuals living in deep poverty cannot afford to wait any longer to have a place to live and enough money to purchase healthy food.
The PUT FOOD IN THE BUDGET CAMPAIGN is in partnership with Association of Local Public Health Agencies, Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition (ISARC), and Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario.
Regarding street artists and vendors at the Second Saturday art walk. These hard working artists make most of their money on this night - and used to make most of it between the hours of 8 and 10 pm.
With the art walk closing at 8 pm - it has greatly impacted many people. The customers coming in through the art walk are also disappointed that they don't get done with dinner in time to come out and buy.
During the Summer, many people will not come out until the later hours due to heat, thus impacting artists even more.
B.C.'s current income assistance rates for people with disabilities fall well below the poverty line.
The current benefits program does not provide sufficient financial assistance for recipients to obtain adequate food, shelter and clothing or to obtain supports for their meaningful participation in community. The program offers limited support for people who wish to find work.
People with disabilities face serious systemic and attitudinal barriers when it comes to accessing employment opportunities and earning an independent income.
As a result, many adults with disabilities require income support to meet basic living costs and to compensate for the extra costs involved in living with a disability. The social effects of poverty, including isolation, loneliness, and alienation from community life, contribute to both physical and mental health problems.
The savings created by limiting access to disability supports create greater costs in other parts of the social service system. Keeping people with disabilities poor is a false economy!
The President, The Retiring Majority in Congress have proven they do not know how or why 40 Million people are not as secure in their lives, along with 40 Million already poor, have become no better off in the last 30 Months.
While they all argue how to divide the too rich from the not rich enough, WE the People are praying and crying out for the Uniting in Pursuit of Prosperity promised by the Constitution, and all who take the Oath of Office.
A future cashless society will have several benefits for the community. Firstly, it will increase the detection of crime and be a catalyst for its reduction. As a consequence, it will lower violence in the community.
Secondly, it will reduce the black market that is based on cash and promote the integrity of the income tax base. This will give governments the funds to implement social welfare programs, pay off debt, as well as increase spending on all forms of needed infrastructure.
Thirdly, it will promote greater efficiency in the economy by eliminating the costs of managing cash in terms of counting, securing, and transporting it to banks and other commercial establishments.
The privacy of all Australians is currently protected by national privacy laws. National privacy legislation can be strengthened if needed before the introduction of a cashless economy.
There is absolutely no need for any person or business to apply for any form of credit from any institution, in a proposed Australian cashless society, in order to execute day to day transactions. All Australians can currently apply for and obtain Eftpos Cards, Visa Debit Cards, or Mastercard Debit Cards from any bank or credit union.
The technology for cashless transactions for the visually impaired can and will be developed so that they are not left-out of the means to excecute cashless transactions.
The use of the internet and mobile phone to perform cashless transactions are with us already, or in the case of mobile phones, will be further developed in future using currently available technology called radio frequency identification (RFID).
Australia currently has the technology to become a cashless society. With future research, current cashless methods can be refined while new cashless methods of making purchases can be developed.
TO THE HONOURABLE PRIME MINISTER, JULIA GILLARD, THE SPEAKER AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
This petition supports the citizens of Australia with permanent or severe disabilities on the Disability Support, DSP, draws to the attention of the House: all citizens of Australia with permanent or severe disabilities on the Disability Support, DSP are particularly disadvantaged in regard to finding and maintaining meaningful open employment and must be allowed to retain their full Disability Support Pension, DSP without being unfairly income and assets tested by Centrelink.
Cal Grants are awarded to older, low-income and higher acheiving students who are returning to school.
The new budget proposals are trying to cut out the Cal grants.
Low income seniors need your help – take one minute and send an email – that’s all.
Thanks to the 2008 budget - the tax free savings account may help head off future problems.
But low income seniors still lose 25% their savings in addition to income taxes on RRSPs, is that fair?
If they hadn’t bought RRSPs they would not lose a quarter of their savings. The government has enticed them to buy RRSPs by offering a tax refund and then confiscates ¼ of that money when they withdraw it.
This “bait” and “trap” policy used by Canada on the most defenceless in our society is a shame!Low income workers buy an RRSP and get 25% tax refund. When they withdraw the RRSP they pay back the 25% taxes (so far that’s fair). That RRSP withdrawal is classed as ‘income’ on their tax return. The following year those low income seniors have their GIS reduced by 25 cents for every dollar of ‘income’ from their Guaranteed Income Supplement. (Guaranteed Income Supplement is assistance for the lowest income people over age 65 to help provide a minimum standard of living.) It shouldn’t be used to rob seniors of their meagre savings, especially when those who by-pass RRSPs are not trapped this way!
Aqua Missouri, Inc. submitted a request to the Public Service Commission on December 7, 2007, to increase our water rate by 50.45% and sewer by 35.74%.
To our knowledge there have been no substantial renovations, repairs or modifications to our systems to constitute this type of rate increase.
Furthermore, this proposed increase would be financially devastating on our residents who are on fixed income and other low income families.
Every citizen of the USA should be entitled to healthcare regardless of weight or income. I have personally tried to get health insurance for over two years, but am unsucessful. Private insurance companies use statistics to gauge your "risk factor".
I am a 24 year old female that is 5'10 and because I don't weigh less than 210 pounds, based on these "statistics" I'm uninsurable. People that weigh just under are forced to pay practically a fourth of their income just to be insured. If Americans can be too fat to insure, then being overweight should be categorized as other pre-existing medical conditions for state insurance.
I believe private insurance companies should have to base the "risk factor" on an actual physical. As for state insurance, I make to much money to qualify. There are millions of people that are stuck in this same gray area as I am. Healthcare should be granted to every citizen.
Insurance should be affordable and attainable for every tax paying citizen. Why not? We pay for those that aren't.
A low income rental community is proposed at the corner of Elrod and Clay Rd. The suggested annual income of property renters for a family of four is $11,310.00. They must fall into the 40% poverty level.
This proposed community poses the threat of increased school crowding, possible increase of crime and lower property values.
We, the residence of Sagewood Apartments at 10000 Rushing would like to see our electric bills lowered. All of our electic bills have tripled within the last 2 months. Many of us living here are on a fixed income and can not afford these outragious bills.
We have no free cable living here, most places furnish free cable. We don't need the place well lightened up, if we are going to have to pay for it. We just can not afford this hike in our electric bills. We will not be able to run the air conditioner in the summer with these prices. We need something done about this ASAP.
Charlotte has allowed a construction company to buy the golf course and passed zoning on building low income government supported housing.
Our neighborhood has already been subjected to increased crime rates and lowered property value.
If these low income government supported houses/apartments are allowed to be constructed in our predominately working class privately owned suburban neighborhood, then our property value will plummet. We will become what Charlotte calls a challenged neighborhood. The values will go down and crime will definately increase. Drugs will infiltrate our neighborhood, dealers will line the streets and crime will increase to high proportions.
We do not want anymore trouble. This project has to be terminated. The golf course is the supposed construction site. Those houses used to be worth at least 120,000 plus. After the government housing arrives those houses will be lucky to sell at all.
The city steadily increases our taxes, but wants to take away what we worked hard to achieve and will make our investments worth less than what we paid.
Please help by signing this petition to stop the construction of government housing in our neighborhood.
July 19, 2006
To reform the Dependent Policy to qualify for Federal Financial Aid (College). This would change how an indivdual is classified when applying for aid to fund post-secondary education.
Those not eligible as a dependent on their parents' tax returns wold no longer be classified as dependents on the FAFSA.
This would allow those young people who do not recieve financial support from their parents to qualify for many more grants and loans.
June 9, 2006
I live in a small city in Ontario where there are many low-income families.
Our local Goodwill store has been a place we have been able to count on as a resource for a range of household items which we would otherwise be unable to attain.
Recently a VP from Toronto announced
that they would be closing our retail outlet and moving it to another city.
We are very upset.
May 03, 2006
Why do people on such low income have to pay council tax?
This is not acceptable. I was claiming JSA and I had to pay £2.30p pw not a lot but now I have no income. I live with my mother and I am expected to still pay as are many other people by law.
So let's get us unite and try and put an end to this stupid law that just legalises theives.
JULY 14, 2005: THIS PETITION IS A DIRECT REQUEST TO GOVERNMENT FOR PROCESS REVIEW CONCERNING NEEDED REFORMS IN THE AREAS OF SOCIAL SECURIETY AND MARITAL DIVISION OF ASSETS.
PRESENT SIGNATURE COUNT AT OLD SITE WAS 219 BUT THAT SITE IS CURRENTLY BEING SOLD. THIS HAS MADE URGENT RELOCATION A MUST.
SAMPLE COMMENTS APPEAR HERE:
219 Curt I get disability and it took over a year to get then medicaid wouldnt cover the hospital bills more than 90 days back leaving me screwed drowning in medical bills.
218 Adrienne Smith It is hard enough to get disability and has taken me two yrs to get before a judge. Now you want to change everything that people on disabiity need. We are still people. Most of us have worked very hard in our lives, and no one asked to get sick or disabled in anyway. Some day I would hope to re-marry, however, it seems that you are forcing people to live together instead of the instiution of marriage which is sacred. We can not lose money because we want to marry and live some kind of life. Please do no go through with any kind of "taking away from the disabled people of the United States". Our goverment seems more concerned with giving money to people in other countries than taking care of the born and raised US citizians.
217 Wendy Gantos I am a disabled attorney and cannot practice due to my disability. I had to wait 2 years for my employer to give me long term disability. During that time, I tried to get food stamps, and the process was so ridiculously long and hard, I never got them! Now if an attorney can't figure out the system, how can the rest of the country figure it out. I live now on disability and my bills are way more than my income every month. I can't even afford to pay my student loans. Great country, huh?
216 Ron Bones My wife is on ssi&ssd,I'm a disabled Vet with only 30% and we barely get through the month. food stamps only go so far when what you get isn't even half of what a single friend gets because she lives in a different part of the State. Tehy need to get the system worked out so that everything is equal. But I doubt we'llsee it soon. You know the old saying: SURE YOU CAN TRUST OUR GOVERMENT...JUST ASK ANY NATIVE AMERICAN!
215 Liz DeWitt Please, do not abolish social security. We need it.
214 Katherine M. Aaron Please support the disabled in this country. They already have to jump through hoops just to be approved and it certainly causes financial hardship on a family that are unecessary.
213 Joyce A Spencer People who marry they have disabilities. They end up losing some money. How in this country can they live could.When they pay more out of there checks every month.People should not have money taken away from them.Just because they marry.
212 rita stafford-bones Execellent point
211 Sophie D.
210 Teddy G. Bryant How far will this govt. go to be out of control and to take away benefits taxpayers have paid the govt., and to which they have the right?
209 Kathy Rogers I'm the mother of a disabled young adult. Our people in the US should taken care of before others. Forcing people to live alone or divorce a spouse to receive benefits is inhumane.
208 John Davis Remember Tim Cratchett? (Dickens-A Christmas Carol) You don't really want to see a nation of them do you? Give us the tools to maintain our dignity and ability to still be productive citizens!
207 Jacqueline McVicar What happened to taking care of our own? Shouldn't citizens of the United States receive aide before any other country?
206 Mike Pearson We can afford WAR , but we can't afford those with diabilities. and we say we are a Christian Nation???
205 Joanne D. Ferguson This is so important!
204 Dixie Boyd I am on disability. I cannot get glasses. I cannot get dental. I don't have transportation. If I marry I will loose my own benefits... WHAT KIND OF COUNTRY IS THIS?
203 Mary Runyon The disabled in this country deserve so much better and humane treatment.
202 Adriana Lortia
201 LINDA THE GOV SUX !!! GOOD LUCK KENDALL
200 Paul Manning
199 Priscilla Peters It seems to me That the Government makes it almost impossible for people to be Married...Please Help Us
198 Debi Koscielski My goverment supports & pushes its religious beliefs on me by promoting marrage & its religious right, yet punishes me by taking my disability when I comply. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
CHANGE THE LAW BEFORE i DIVORCE MY HUSBAND & YOU FORCE ME TO SIN EVEN MORE BY LIVING WITH HIM!
197 Barry Berger
196 Diane Grugan-Duvall I am the mother of a child with a disability.
195 Laurie Furlong I am the parent of a young adult with disabilities and I volunteer working with disabled. I support reform of the marriage penalty to SSI recipients.
WOULD GREATLY APRECIATE FURTHER SUPPORT FOR THIS CAUSE ON BEHALF OF AMERICA'S DISABLED.
The Liberal Party of Australia will have absolute legislative control of Parliament as from June 2005. One of the Government's first acts will be to slash the entitlements of people with disabilities.
The major change will be classifying anyone able to work 15 hours per week as no longer eligible for disability support, and instead, being classified as unemployed. This will subject an estimated 60,000 Australians already living in poverty to even worse poverty.
My name is Anne L. Halverson. I am a 21-yr-old mother of a one-year-old son, Aidan. I take motherhood very seriously and I take my employment seriously. In order to be employed and provide the best childcare environment for my son, I rely on a state funded child care subsidy. That means, based on my income, I pay a percentage of my son's child care expenses and the State of Minnesota subsidizes rest.
My son thrives at his day care center, Noah's Ark, in Hopkins, MN. He is cared for by well trained providers who, like me, want him to meet his growth milestones, be happy and well adjusted, understand about sharing, learn about tolerance, and be prepared for kindergarten. My son and I also rely on state subsidized health care. His pediatric clinic monitors his growth, advises me about his medical needs and has helped me become a confident parent. I know how fortunate we are to live in a state that values children by providing these opportunities.
Minnesota's governor, Tim Pawlenty, has proposed a budget that will slash child-care and health care subsidies for single mothers like me and our children. Without the aid of these subsidies, I will be forced to quit my job, surrender my opportunities to advance in the workforce, stay home full time with my child and apply for welfare benefits.
If you believe in and support mothers with young children who want their children in safe, regulated childcare centers; women who are proud to be part of Minnesota's workforce, please sign this petition.
I will present this petition when I speak before a Minnesota Senate Committee that is convening on Tuesday, February 22, at the Minnesota State Capital.
Anne L. Halverson
Please forward this to your friends and family. Thanks.
June 10, 2005
We have set up an Independent Inquiry by Sir Michael Lyons to consider the detailed case for changes to the present system of local government funding, including reform of council tax to make it fairer and more sustainable.
The Inquiry will also consider options other than council tax for local authorities to raise supplementary revenue, including local income tax, reform of non-domestic rates and other possible local taxes and charges. The Inquiry is due to report by the end of the year and will make recommendations on any changes that are necessary and how to implement them.
Help with council tax bills is available to people on a low income through Council Tax Benefit (CTB). The Department for Work and Pensions is taking active measures to ensure that people are made aware of CTB and are encouraged to take up their entitlement to what is in effect a council tax rebate.
Alongside CTB for the poorest pensioners, we are helping many more elderly people with their council tax bills. We gave £100 to households with someone 70 or over for 2004/05. In 2005/06 households with someone aged 65 or over will receive £200, unless they are receiving the Pension Credit guarantee. People getting the guarantee element of Pension Credit are already entitled to a 100 per cent rebate on their council tax bills. Households with someone aged 70 or over getting the Pension Credit guarantee will receive £50 to help with living costs.
Our generous grant settlements to local Government, and considered use of our capping powers, have led to an average council tax increase in 2005/06 of 4.1 per cent - the lowest increase in more than a decade - and the second lowest ever.
June 10, 2005
The year on year inflation busting rises in Council Tax causes hardship to the many, but particularly those on low or fixed incomes. With council tax being based on property values, it takes no account of people's ability to pay.
Council Tax can take as much as 30% of the income of a person on a low income and less than 2% of the income of a high earner.
In Florida under the current laws they can take/make you pay up to 55% of your income in child support. Though I believe that parents should support their children I also believe that the support payer should be allowed to keep enough money to live.
The Court system doesn't care if you have children living with you or not or if you have a new family there is no consideration of these issues.
The paying parent must pay this amount plus pay for the costs of Insurance, Daycare and what ever else the Courts add on.
This is not an attempt to allow parents to not pay support, but an attempt to get the laws changed to a more fair percentage of 20 to 30% of net income.
According to a Marketing profile on the Eastern College Athletic Conference, (http://www.ecac.org/Marketing/College_Market_Demographic_Profile.pdf) Most college students live away from home, and of those who are employed, (66%) most only work part time. [There were no explicit figures available on average college student income, however I believe it is common knowledge that part-time wages are quite low.]
In her article: "College tuition rising faster than the average income", USA Today writer Mary Beth Marklein notes that college tuition rates increased 107% from 1980 to 2002. This increase makes affording food a challenge for college students.
But the real problem is not being able to afford healthy food. According to Ted W. Grace of the Journal of American College Health in his article: "Health Problems of College Students", students' eating habits get much worse in the college years, where students often turn to the convenient, cheap, fast food industry to sustain them.
One February 25, 2004 article of The Daily Orange (the school newspaper of Syracuse University) tells of the growing trend of students who desire to eat healthy but find themselves only able to afford unhealthy fast food items.
Providing food stamps to college students who meet the requirements I listed would be a step in the right direction for our nations future. The college years are the time in the lives of young Americans where they make formative habits that stick with them for the rest of their lives. If students are forced into the habit of poor eating choices due to financial constraints, then they will continue with those habits, and the health of this nation will continue to deteriorate in a very negative way. However, having a steady source of food would set many students at ease, knowing that expenses such as rent and tuition can be prioritized on their personal budgets, without having to sacrifice good eating.
Thank you for your consideration,
In too many cases, California fathers end up paying child support on other men's children AND DON'T KNOW IT! Often the mother involved DOES know that the child or children are not the children of her husband, but she claims that they are his children because she is mad at him and she likes the children's father. This is fraud.
When she makes that claim to a court in a divorce or a child support action, she is committing perjury. She may claim to be doing it "for the children". A crime committed "for the children" is still a crime.
The #1 one targets of such frauds are our Military Man who proudly and voluntarily serve our country. It is not fair!
Write to Congress and express your concerns of this wrong doing.
Soldiers Risking Their Lives in Iraq Might Face Prison Over Child Support Upon Return
By Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D.
Soldiers Risking Their Lives in Iraq Might Face Prison Over Child Support Upon Return
As America's servicemen risk their lives to protect their families and ours, the federal government is preparing to put them in jail.
That's right; you heard correctly. Most societies honor their returning heroes. In America we punish them.
Soldiers who ship off to Iraq risk not only their lives but arrest and jail when they return. Those who accept a pay cut to defend their country can be incarcerated when they are unable to pay the impossible child support burdens imposed on them by the federal government's divorce machinery.
It is mind-boggling that servicemen who risk their lives to protect us will face arrest as they step off the plane. Yet this is precisely what happened after Desert Storm, and it will happen again this time.
The federal government has issued the usual PR smokescreen, urging soldiers to contact their local child support agents to request a modification. But such requests are almost never granted. Child support fills government coffers with federal taxpayers' money. Governments have no incentive to give these soldiers a break and plenty of incentive not to.
The Christian Science Monitor reports that a soldier whose domestic job pays $31,000 must pay $900 a month in child support. His reserve pay will reduce his income to $27,000. The Monitor neglects to point out that even at the higher pay, this is about half the man's take-home pay, and that he is likely to be living on less than $1,000 a month. Another father's child support comprises 73% of his income, leaving him $200 a month to live on.
Do we really believe that these heroes are "deadbeat dads" who went to Iraq to avoid paying child support? If not, perhaps it is time we began to examine whether the entire child support system is anything other than a fraud. If these men are not "deadbeats," then who is? If these arrests are an abuse of government power, why are not all the others?
Attempts to protect our civilization from external threats will be pointless if we allow it to be undermined from within. How long do we expect men to sacrifice their lives and livelihoods for their country when their government steals their children and uses those children to extort huge sums of money from their fathers?
What kind of morale can we expect in our armed forces when the same brave men who risk their lives to protect their families from invasion by terrorists are powerless to protect their families from invasion by their own government.
Now imagine this happening to you or one of your love ones. To add insult to injury you find out that the child you are being forced to support is not even yours and your ex-wife or ex-girlfriend knew about it since day one!
For FCF News on Demand, this is Stephen Baskerville.
Put a cap on the amount of money ex-spouses are entitled to as a result of divorce involving children. Former parents are punished by bettering themselves as they carry-on with their lives after the marriage is over. There should be some sort of cap on the amount of child support a former spouse receives after the marriage is disolved.
If a former parent gets a raise / promotion or a better job, that parent is once again dragged into court by a vengeful or greedy ex-spouse in order to cash-in on that benefit. A former spouse should have no right to any of that added income since the gain came after the marriage was over with. The ambitious parent is again targeted by the court system to give up 20% of his newly found income.
There should be some sort of cap on the 20% child support rule as well as a recuction in the percentage. Former spouses do not deserve 20%. Why not 10%?
In today's society we are bombarded by taxes. We pay approximately 8% in sales taxes. As employees, we pay anywhere from 20% to 30% in taxes, depending on if you are your own boss or not. As a property owner, one is taxed about 10%. Some states also have a state tax on top of that. The church wants its 10%. Then on top of that, we are supposed to pay 20% in child support? If you calculate those percentages, in a worst-case scenario, one would have to live off of only about 21% of the income! Now, that is no way to live. What kind of message is that sending when, as soon as one gets a raise, it is widdled away by a former spouse?
A former spouse can keep tapping a the other's income as long as the child is of age to qualify for child support. It gets out of hand when successful people end up having to pay anywhere from $5,000 to $8,000 a month or more!
Now, why would any former spouse need so much money? The Government itself puts a cap on the amount of money it provides to single parents, and even then, it does not give the money in full. Some of the money is issued out in the form of food stamps or something of the like.
We need to put a cap on child support per year. the cap needs to be a percentage of the minimum amount needed to support the child for one year/ per year in that area or state. Better yet, a percentage of the national poverty level per year. That would be a fair and impartial process for all.
If the spouse says they still can't provide for their child, then the child should go to the parent who can.
Let common sense prevail!
Thousands of Australian families are being put into debt because they are unable to predict their taxable income a year in advance. Family Tax Benefits and Child Care Benefits are calculated on predictions of taxable income. Pay rises, working overtime or going back to work early after leave are not taken into account and often lead to debts in the THOUSANDS of dollars for already struggling families.
Income should be assessed on weekly earnings and updated quarterly so payments can be adjusted and debts not accrued.
Families should not have to pay back Benefits received when their salary was lower or they were not earning any money at all.
Do you know that the government can take your tax refund check to recover these "debts" without your prior knowledge or consent? This should NOT be allowed to happen.
Take this case study ( my own experience ). A mother takes the whole tax year off on maternity leave and makes a low estimate of income as she does not expect to go back to work until the following tax year. Ten months later money is very tight and work asks her to come back part-time. She agrees and notifies Centrelink immediately. Centr elink stops payments (Fair enough). Two months later she does her taxes. Her tax check is taken because she "owes" over $2500 in Family Tax Benefits overpayments because she earned more than her original estimate.
After ten months of struggling financially how is this affordable?
Why should we have to pay back Benefits received when we really needed them because our circumstances have changed?
How can we expected to plan our lives a year in advance and why should we be penalised for saving them money by going back to work?
Thousands of honest Australians are in debt because THE SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK.
If you or someone you know has been affected by this system I urge you to sign this petition or email Senator Kay Patterson and maybe we can make a change that will benefit all Australian families.
This petition is drawn up to better support the children by increasing child support. We would like child support to be increased to a minimum of $100 for fathers that are/ are not working and/or receiving a source of income of at least $300 per month. Therefore, some fathers may decide to work instead of depending on state or federal assistance because of the decrease in income. This will be putting more money into society and creating more jobs.