Skip to comments.Australians told to immunize children or loose family tax breaks
Posted on 11/25/2011 10:21:19 AM PST by JerseyanExile
Parents who do not have their children fully immunised will be stripped of family tax benefits under a scheme announced by the Federal Government.
The Government says 11 per cent of five-year-olds are not immunised and has announced a shake-up of the system which will take effect from July 1 next year.
Under the changes, families who refuse vaccinations face losing up to $2,100 per child in benefits.
Families will need to have their children fully immunised to receive the Family Tax Benefit (FTB) Part A end-of-year supplement.
A new immunisation check will be introduced for one-year-olds to supplement the existing immunisation checks at two and five years of age.
The FTB supplement, worth $726 per child each year, will now only be paid once a child is fully immunised at these checks.
Families are already required to have their child fully immunised to receive Child Care Benefit and the Child Care Rebate.
Children will also be required for the first time to be vaccinated against meningococcal C, pneumococcal and chicken pox.
Children will also be immunised against measles, mumps and rubella earlier, at 18 months instead of the current four years of age.
Health Minister Nicola Roxon is also announcing today a new campaign to advise parents and healthcare providers on what they can do to protect babies from whooping cough.
All parents of newborns will receive letters providing information on immunising against whooping cough and how to identify the disease and prevent it spreading.
"We know that immunisation is fundamental to a child's lifelong health and that's why we want to make sure children are immunised at the right time," Ms Roxon said.
The Government says the changes will deliver savings of $209.1 million over four years.
Ummm, and why should people get benefits from the government—if they’re:
A) Neglecting their children’s health
B) Making their kids a danger as carriers to others
C) Putting their own superstitious anti-science bias above their own family’s health and the health of others?
“Australians told to immunize children or loose family tax breaks”
Do the Aussies spell “lose” as “loose”?
Take the King’s Coin, do the King’s Bidding.
The actual title spells “lose” correctly.
Some tard changed it.
But how bout “loosed’?
Is that a good thing or what?????
Some tard changed it.
It remains a mystery to me how some Freepers continue to misspell "lose" and "loose" in context. So few can get "it's" and "it" right, either. Darn it, people. "It's" is the contraction of "it" and "is" and "its" is the possessive pronoun as in "This was its destiny." What is so damn hard about that?
Journalists have many faults, but spelling usually isn't one of them.
Forcing people to inject known toxins into their children at the most vulnerable time in their lives ...hmmmmm particularly irrational vaccines for homosexual drug addicts like Hep B. 3-doses of this poison and no harm????? Right. No connection with Autism and vaccinations when the “epidemic” coincided with the tripling of vaccines and the mass grouping of toxins in one shot....hmmmmmm.
No one is logical anymore....they think this is ALL “good” and govt. does what is “best”. hmmmmmmm
Very Sick and fascistic.
They elected a socialist. What did they expect?
Zero and Julia Gillard got along very well on Zero’s recent waste of jet fuel.
Gillard, however is prolly a moderate socialist - on social issues- compared to Zero. She does not support gay marriage but is pro-abortion with a wink to “understanding the moral issues”...
The very concept of vaccination is based on the assumption that the vaccinated are not threatened by the disease. Therefore, the unvaccinated cannot be a threat to the vaccinated. The risk they assume is their own only.
Amazing how most people can’t understand that simple reality.
Not sure I understand the headline, but I assume this means that if they don't immunize children, more choices as to tax breaks will become available to them.
I agree that its a hugh and series problem.
Alright, alright. I was in a rush when putting this up, got a bit sloppy on the title.
Next they will require Gardasil and fun can really begin for those tennie-boppers...just like here in Texas (almost).
Not true. No vaccine is 100% effective. Plus, some vaccines lose their effectiveness over time. So yes, the unvaccinated can be a threat to the vaccinated.
Ah, a gnat was found.
What known toxins are you talking about? And don't tell me you aren't aware that the so-called vaccine-autism link has been thoroughly discredited.
I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.
And live-virus vaccines can be a threat to the unvaccinated, so you should never use those either.
LOL, OK, you win. I bow to your rhetorical superiority.
Big government tyranny strikes again.
Versions of this same tactic abound all over the globe, especially here in the United States.
“Purse strings”, they’re called.
And I bow to your ability to find a gnat in a hurricane...
Ah, but which of us will bow lower?
The one who pretends to be a conservative but uses liberal arguments to force other people into behaviors that they support.
Actually it is a common mistake seen often here on FR. While it is incorrect it does not seem to me to be worth the self righteous nitpicking that some FReepers see as necessary.
And one tard is worried about it......get a life.
I've pointed out your argument many times on FR vaccination threads and get many hysterical arguments why ALL should be immunized. One argument was that vaccinations are not 100% effective so therefore everyone should get one. Talk about a circular argument.
To be serious for a moment, I should tell you I'm a bit biased here. As a physician, it is wonderful that I have never seen a case of acute poliomyelitis and have virtually never encountered pertussis, hepatitis B and many other preventable illnesses. This is a miracle my colleagues of previous generations could only dream about. To deny children protection from these awful diseases is, IMHO, incomprehensible.
Thanks for the interesting link.
I was responding to post #3, in which it was first brought up.
Since you axe, no.
Snort.....you lose again....thread monitor boy.
It’s that liberal mindset that always seeks to expand it’s circle of power.
Liberalism says I can make laws to impose my beliefs onto others for my benefit.
Conservatism says I take responsibility for my own well-being.
Lots of people who think they are conservative really aren’t very...
Bless your heart.
Even he doesn't go towards a "Government-as-god-Pharma" in control of peoples' children.
Just because it’s incomprehensible to you doesn’t mean that you can force your beliefs onto others. That’s not convervatism, that liberalism and it never ends. Somebody always knows ‘better’.
Doesn’t Obama know ‘better’ than you and is proceeding to destroy not only your profession but the actual health of millions because he knows ‘better’?
I thought it was pronounced ‘axed’? :-)
Thanks, wouldn't want you to lose patience with me....you might deem me a loser.....
The awfulness of Obamacare doesn't change the awsomeness of vaccinations. The development of mass vaccination was the single most important medical advance of the 20th century. In 1953 there were 53,000 new cases of polio. You would want to go back to that? I remember elementary school classmates in leg braces. When was the last time you saw such a thing at an elementary school? I remember my medical school professors talking of children dying of whooping cough in their arms. You would want to go back to that?
Nobody said it did except you.
Here is a link for a chart that lists vaccines in which aborted babies’ cells are used: http://www.cogforlife.org/fetalvaccines.htm
Sick. Maybe not a toxin, but sick indeed.
Its simply amazing that not only here on FR but in general we read the term ‘lose’ spelled as ‘loose’. Drives me nuts. Also the term ‘dining’ spelled as ‘dinning’. Ok all done with the spelling bee rant.
...All health authorities agree that both the Salk Inactivated Polio Vaccine (IPV) and Sabin Oral or live Polio Vaccine (OPV) were contaminated with SV40 up until 1961. The contamination has been estimated to have exposed up to 30 million Americans and millions more in the USSR (where the OPV clinical trials were conducted) and other countries...
...In the U.S., federal law did not require that SV40 contaminated vaccines be discarded if they were manufactured before the new regulations went into effect. This meant that vaccines contaminated with SV40 were administered to children and adults until they were used up...
Although its name includes the word ‘tax’ to misleadingly suggest some sort of connection with productive activity, the “Family Tax Benefit” referred to is a welfare scheme for families with children, paid and administered by the welfare agency, separately from the tax system. There is no requirement to work to get it, the amount of the welfare payment decreases as a family earns more money, and it is entirely possible to get paid more than you paid in taxes. It really is a benefit.
The problem is that people don’t pay attention to how words are spelled as they read.