'No jab, no pay' legislation passes through Australian parliament - Polidicks

[quote=SBS News]Parents who don't immunise their children will stop receiving childcare benefits next year but one senator believes welfare for all parents should be stripped back. The federal government's no-jab-no-pay laws will remove childcare benefits, rebates and the Family Tax Benefit A end-of-year supplement from parents who don't immunise their children. [b]The changes start on January 1, 2016, with exemptions for medical reasons[/b], after legislation passed the Senate on Monday. Liberal Democrats Senator David Leyonhjelm, speaking in support of the measures, said childless families should not have to subsidise the lifestyles of those who choose to have "little blighters". "The government is not your parent or your spouse - get over it." Senator Leyonhjelm thanked and apologised to childless Australians. They get next to no welfare, pay more tax and use less health services but are forced to subsidise the lifestyles of those who get pregnant and take time off work to care for children, as well as all the medical and education costs incurred in the years that follow. And in the case of those who want to have children but can't, forcing them to subsidise those with children is like making people in "wheelchairs pay for other people's running shoes", he said. The no-jab-no-pay laws sailed through with the backing of Labor, the Greens and crossbench senators.[/quote] [url]http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2015/11/23/no-jab-no-pay-laws-pass-parliament[/url] Good. If you're going to take benefits from the government, you should at least be ensuring that your kids will not be a threat to other kids who genuinely can't be vaccinated for actual medical reasons.

Good, You shouldnt be supported by society if you wont support said society.

wow i was thinking they were gonna completely remove welfare or something for a second there

I have mixed feelings about this. I agree it should happen however at certain ages not when the child is still a baby.

[QUOTE=Passing;49169990]I have mixed feelings about this. I agree it should happen however at certain ages not when the child is still a baby.[/QUOTE] There's no more important time. Babies have terrible immune systems, getting those up to snuff as soon as possible is what keeps western infant mortality rates so low. If you don't get children vaccinated that early, they can catch things like Whooping Cough the first time they come into contact with another person, and that's a month in the hospital. We've developed immunization guidelines the way we have for a reason. It's the safest and most efficient method of immunizing people.

I wish we had this here, since people are being paid for having children here and have no obligation to make them study or immunize them. Also, I read that as "no job, no pay".

[QUOTE=Passing;49169990]I have mixed feelings about this. I agree it should happen however at certain ages not when the child is still a baby.[/QUOTE] ...You mean the age where you get most vaccines? I don't follow. Besides medical reasons (Allergies/auto-immune deficiencies) there is NO valid reason to oppose vaccines. None, zero. Any other reason posited by a person just makes them selfish, if not a danger to society at large.

[QUOTE=Ragekipz;49170038]Also, I read that as "no job, no pay".[/QUOTE] For some people centerlink is a job. [QUOTE=woolio1;49170023]We've developed immunization guidelines the way we have for a reason. It's the safest and most efficient method of immunizing people.[/QUOTE] You know i was always under the impression it was the other way around. Thanks for opening my mind.

This supports my reason why we have the state. Idiots equal need for a law thus creates a state. If we had no stupid people, we as a species would not need or would have a state in existence.

I support this, what happens if your kid gets like polio or some shit because you didn't vaccinate and now you have to put that extra strain on the medical system because you didn't vaccinate your kid. Preventative care is the cheapest and easiest.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;49170272]I support this, what happens if your kid gets like polio or some shit because you didn't vaccinate and now you have to put that extra strain on the medical system because you didn't vaccinate your kid. Preventative care is the cheapest and easiest.[/QUOTE] Isn't polio dead? I'm fairly sure no one has had it since the 50's.

[QUOTE=Passing;49170279]Isn't polio dead? I'm fairly sure no one has had it since the 50's.[/QUOTE] It's still around in third world countries and makes the occasionally rare appearance in the first world iirc

This is great except for the fact that those kids are going to suffer because of it. Some parents are so adamant about that bullshit that they'll just go without the money and live in poverty over it. I don't have a better solution though, it's just that these people are real fucking idiots

Good idea, but conspiracy theorists are going to even be more convinced that the government are up to no good because of this.

[QUOTE=Passing;49170279]Isn't polio dead? I'm fairly sure no one has had it since the 50's.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24726592[/url] Its coming back in some areas [QUOTE]This is great except for the fact that those kids are going to suffer because of it. Some parents are so adamant about that bullshit that they'll just go without the money and live in poverty over it. I don't have a better solution though, it's just that these people are real fucking idiots [/QUOTE] That or give their kids bleach shots.

[QUOTE=benbb;49170449]Good idea, but conspiracy theorists are going to even be more convinced that the government are up to no good because of this.[/QUOTE] With all of these refugees and idiots not getting immunized we're probably gonna see some outbreaks in western countries. Even while dying of Polio they'll probably refuse to blame themselves.

My only issue with this would be the possibility of a waiting period/delay on appointments, but I'm sure there's some backup plan for that.

But what if your children are allergic to some of the things in vaccines? Is there a process for that?

[QUOTE=mralexs;49171178]But what if your children are allergic to some of the things in vaccines? Is there a process for that?[/QUOTE] yes there is a variant for allergic children (most of the vaccines anyway).

[QUOTE=mralexs;49171178]But what if your children are allergic to some of the things in vaccines? Is there a process for that?[/QUOTE] Or if they can't get a shot at all for medical reasons, the point is that if everybody else gets the vaccine they're indirectly protected by herd immunity.

[QUOTE=mralexs;49171178]But what if your children are allergic to some of the things in vaccines? Is there a process for that?[/QUOTE] It explicitly has exceptions for medical reasons. If you're allergic to the vaccine you're exempt.

[QUOTE=mralexs;49171178]But what if your children are allergic to some of the things in vaccines? Is there a process for that?[/QUOTE] How can you miss literally the only bolded sentence in the tiny snippet in the OP?

So if you didn't have any kids, the same rules that parents get when they don't vaccinate their children applies to them?

[QUOTE=Xonax;49174995]So if you didn't have any kids, the same rules that parents get when they don't vaccinate their children applies to them?[/QUOTE] Yes because it doesn't make a difference. The bonuses that a couple would lose for not vaccinating their children are bonuses related to having dependants, which childless couples can't claim anyways.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;49175011]Yes because it doesn't make a difference. The bonuses that a couple would lose for not vaccinating their children are bonuses related to having dependants, which childless couples can't claim anyways.[/QUOTE] Ah, so people who don't have kids don't really lose anything. If that is the case then this is really good in my opinion, I did think Jab meant Job which was concerning but thank god I was wrong.