You guys, I’ve just had the most brilliant idea.
I’m going to get up the duff – impregnated, if you will – so I can get my grubby mitts on some sweet, sweet cash.
“Get a career you crazy sack of potatoes,” I hear you all say, but pah! Haven’t you heard? Jobs are for losers. Breeding is for millionaires.
Yep. I’m shooting a tiny human out my wazoo for the sole reason of paid parental leave. It’s a lucrative scheme I really, really want to cash in on, okay? And I’m one of so many Aussie women doing the same.
Just ask Senator Pauline Hanson, who informed The Australian of our grand plans on Thursday.
Listen: How to respond to the inevitable, ‘So, when are you having a baby?’ question. (Post continues after audio.)
“They get themselves pregnant and [the government will] have the same problems they did with the Baby Bonus, with people just doing it for the money,” the mother-of-four said, later adding: “We have such a welfare handout mentality.”
She’s totally right. I can feel my belly and my bank account growing right now.
Let’s crunch the salivating numbers, shall we?
At a rate of $672.60 per week for a new extended maximum of five months, I’m looking at making a cool $13,452.
Ca-bloody-ching, amiright?! What a WHOPPING SUM for pushing a living watermelon out of something that’s the size of a macadamia nut and then, you know, raising it to, you know, contribute to the Planet Earth etc etc etc.
A man is not a financial plan, but a baby most definitely is.
Of course, none of this money will go towards my tiny infant human thingymajig. It won’t go towards nappies, or breast pumps, or cribs, or any of that unnecessary baby sh*t. Maybe I’ll put it towards a new Mercedes Benz. Or a beachfront mansion in Darling Point. Or, like, $13,452 worth of Golden Gaytimes… because yum.
Let's ignore the $406,000 it typically costs for the average family to raise a child in Australia from infancy to adulthood because, um, that's not important. I'm a greedy owner of fallopian tubes who lives in the moment.
Sure, over the next couple of decades I'm gonna come up $392,548 short... but I really want Golden Gaytimes. And I want them now.
I'm getting knocked up so I can get cashed up, people. And not even Pauline Hanson is gonna stop me.
For more from Michelle Andrews, follow her on Facebook.
Top Comments
@Nell - it's just a little thing but people who refer to Centrelink payments as "Income" or "earnings" or similar, mildly annoy tax paying workers when they use those terms. They aren't the welfare recipients earnings, they are someone else's earnings.
Personally I think we would have a better society all round if having a baby was supported through income tax credits, which the woman or her partner could claim, rather than through direct welfare payments. The objection being what about parents who aren't working... well, that's my point.
Welfare recipients pay tax too. It's called GST.
It annoys me as a tax payer when people think those who receive social security don't pay taxes. It's inaccurate.
Nobody said they don't pay taxes. They don't earn an income, they get given someone else's.
Income = money that is incoming.
Technically it is income, even though they didn't work for it. Some might say battling Centrelink is a fulltime job.
If you resent a small part of taxes going towards social security (that also includes Medicare and the PBS), go to a developing country. See what happens when there's no welfare.
To someone already on welfare, $672.60 a week is a decent income. Sure, for someone like you and me who earn a well-above average wage paying taxes every year, that's peanuts, but to some people already on welfare...that's not so bad. I know people who have done it. It makes me sick. I admit, it sounds ludicrous at first, but I think you kind of missed the point.
Someone already on welfare would not be entitled to this payment, it's only for women who have been in the workforce for 12 months (I think) prior to the birth.