You are here

Sponsor an Australian Child - new ads on the internet

Ads are now appearing on the internet, asking people to sponsor an Australian Child. They are from the Smith Family charity. They talk about how difficult it is for families to pay Australia's [world highest] rents, food and bills, then how difficult it is to finance the necessities for education. "One in seven Australian children and young people are growing up in poverty,[1] where even the bare necessities are hard to come by. In a family where there is no regular income, money goes on food, rent and bills. Finding money for a school uniform, proper shoes, textbooks or the next school excursion is often impossible."

"You can change the life of a disadvantaged Australian child

For $48 per month you can make a lasting difference to the life of one of these children.

Because it takes a big caring family to raise a child, each student is paired with two sponsors. This ensures your sponsored child receives life-changing, comprehensive support as long as they are at school, and enables them to acquire the skills they will need to create a better future.

Together, we can give some of Australia's most vulnerable children the support they urgently need."

Tales of the 'One In Ten', published on you tube in 2014, is a skilful and enthralling animated web series based on the real stories of Australian children from disadvantaged backgrounds who struggle daily with the effects of financial hardship. The menu for the series is here:

It is absolutely horrific that Australia's politicians, corporate think tanks and mainstream media, have allowed it to come to this, with marketers like Bernard Salt anointed as informed commentators, continuously painting rises in housing prices as a great thing and claiming that Australia needs more and more people. And the professional Greens and the various faux-socialists in Australia, funded by Soros, posing as 'revolutionaries', yet disdainful of civil rights, falsely treating their own countrymen as rich and undeserving, totally focused on identity politics and open borders, uninterested in the causes of war or the consequences of population stampede. has been publishing on these problems for years now. Blind Freddy could see them looming, then rushing towards us, running us down. Our leaders are guilty, guilty, guilty.


[1] Australian Bureau of Statistics 2016. Labour Force Status and Other Characteristics of Families, June 2015 Data, Released August 2016.

Image icon smith-family-ad.jpg5.77 KB


Australia currently spends $5.03 billion dollars on foreign aid – that's 0.32% of our gross national income, or 32 cents in every $100. But, recent plans have been set out to drastically lower our aid spending. A news report highlighting the fall in Australia’s foreign aid spending quoted World Vision Australia Chief Advocate Tim Costello as saying aid was at its highest under Prime Minister Robert Menzies, at 0.5% of gross national income – at a time when per capita income was much lower.
Per capita income in the Menzies era may have been much lower, but costs of living and housing have spiraled out of control since then. The highest aid to gross national income ratio under any Australian government was 0.48%. That ratio was seen under Prime Ministers Holt, McEwen and Gorton in 1967-68.
Growth in per capita income has slowed lately, and household disposable income has fallen over the last several years. But Australia’s per capita income remains well above the average of OECD member countries, and of all high-income countries. Despite 25 years of much-applauded and celebrated economic-growth, where are the actual benefits?
Australia’s gross public debt is on track to rise from $474bn as of last month to more than $600bn within the next three years — even including the government’s reform measures — which will amount to around $23,500 a person. Such calculations include swaths of the Australian population who will shoulder little of the debt repayment.
The debt burden per capita and per Australian under 18 has exploded since the financial crisis from $2600 and $11,100, respectively, to $20,300 and $90,300.
If the costs of "economic growth", fueled by population growth and housing, is costing more than the benefits, surely it's time for another more prosperous and beneficial economic model? Sponsoring children should be a Third World charity option, not here in Australia!