# Welfare system



## Julia (9 October 2009)

I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.

Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves.  (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)

Is this at least partly true? Do we make it just too easy for people not to take responsibility for their own outcomes?

Personally, I don't really think so, as payment levels of welfare are poverty level incomes.  I have no idea, for example, how an adult on unemployment benefit of about $220 p.w. manages, given it would be difficult to find rental accommodation for that, before you pay for all other expenses.

On the other hand, I've seen plenty of single parents with multiple children whose weekly income is considerably more than some working people who are paying the taxes that support these welfare recipients.  That, plus the baby bonus, would seem to encourage some young women to keep on procreating.  I can remember speaking with one woman who had six children.
The eldest was about to turn 16, at which stage she would no longer receive a benefit for that child.  She found that unacceptable so happily announced she would get pregnant again to keep the budget in the black.  I'm not suggesting such an attitude is by any means common.

Then there is subsidised child care.   One view of this is that if we expect mothers to work, then we need to provide the environment for them to access cheap child care.
A different view would be that if you are going to have children, then it should be up to you to provide for them.

Then I gather we are about to have several months of maternity leave (or paternity leave if that's what you want), taxpayer funded.  Is this justified?

The age pension:  should we expect this to continue?  Should compulsory contributions percentage be increased to the level where this can be phased out, except for those who have never been able to work?

Some of you will have other situations that I haven't described.


----------



## greggy (9 October 2009)

Julia said:


> I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.
> 
> Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves.  (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)
> 
> ...



IMO the welfare system should be regarded as a safety net only to assist those going through tough times or are at retirement age.
I know of some people on the dole who thinks its their right to stay on it until they find a job that they really want..In this day and age this attitude bugs me. When I went through uni, I used to spend many nights cleaning toilets in order to pay the bills. I also worked for Woolworths in the freezer department. For both jobs I was the only applicant.
Instead of the super rules being changed all the time, the government should be encouraging more people to save even more for their retirement. The Howard Government did very well on this front, but more could still be done.
There should not be any employer contributions tax whatsoever. Those who have been in the workforce for around 30 yrs might never need to get the pension. This will save the government a fortune.


----------



## Happy (9 October 2009)

Welfare as lifestyle choice bugs me and getting extra child to balance the books should ring the welfare's bell.

I believe that person on the dole should not venture out to get pregnant, but since we have such a generous welfare system, this is now norm rather than exception.

We have 4-th and possibly 5-th generation never employed on some kind of benefit recipients and I think it stinks!


----------



## chode84 (9 October 2009)

Im about to head out so Im going to summarize my response.

Long story short, when I lost my job at the start of this year due to company going in to administration, I went to centrelink to claim to get some assistance paying the mortgage we had acquired three months earlier. I was told I would receive the handsome amount of $26 a fortnight for being unemployed because my gf worked (on a minimum wage, shes a student). Ive worked since the age of 12 (albeit illegal and not paying taxes until 14, 25 now) and this was the first time Ive required assistance due to being unlucky really. 

SO my point about welfare is, it seemed like people who actually need it (myself) just to tie them over in a sticky situation get screwed and those that f**k the system reap the rewards.


----------



## suhm (9 October 2009)

I am a student and on centrelink payments which pay for some of my living expenses, the tax and welfare system is quite complicated but its reasonably fair at least in my case and you don't need to be dishonest i.e. "f..." the system to get an adequate outcome, just need to know how it works and be flexible with how you arrange your finances.

I figure i'm going to pay more than my fair share of tax when i start working next year, without the centrelink payments and parental support it would have been a struggle for me to finish and I admire my classmates who weren't so fortunate and have nearly made it through but some have had to quit or defer because of finances, which is silly given how much money the government has spent to train us.

The welfare system should be there to help you if you need it. Its a shame that some people abuse it but there are a lot of other areas where revenue leaks.

I think that taxes should be progressive or at least flat and expenditure/ tax benefits the opposite targeted to the poor. In general the government does this well but tax benefits are utilised disproportionately by the rich.

I.e. salary sacrificing to super, negative gearing, the discuont on profit derived by capital gains, family tax benift part b.

It may be popular to denegrate dole bludgers but that's not where the money is, they don't have that much.


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

Julia said:


> I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.
> 
> Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves.  (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)




I do believe most people on welfare are undeserving, after seeing developing nations with 0 wellfare system, their population is still able to survive.. although at subsistence levels, they still work and find ways to survive.

They make it way to easy in Australia.. I believe welfare should only go to the physically and mentally disabled.

There are so many forms of payment in the system that are a complete waste of tax payers funds. The Abstudy program is probably the most discriminatory system in this country. Why do aboriginals and torres-straight islanders get special treatment just because they're ancestors were mistreated a few generations ago. I know someone who is 1/8 or 1/16 aboriginal with middleclass earning parents yet she is still able to get Abstudy... this is absurd. We say welfare is to provide equality, but why to aboriginals get free money, where as the rest of us don't... this is equality?? 

I am even more annoyed by the pensioners that protest on today tonite for increased payments. What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives?? Havn't they been able to save any money to fund their retirement... obviously that money has been used to maintain higher than appropriate living standards whilst they were still working that now they do not have any funds to be self sufficient... Oh, and for all those pensioners that have lost significant portions of their savings in the recent downturn.. what kind of idiot pensioner has significant portions of their savings and primary income stream in high risk assets when you are retired  further stupidity on their part. Whats even worse is hearing the stories of those who have leveraged against the homes that they had owned and are now losing those aswell...

Now for the unemployed. Quite simply, the system is inefficient in a market economy. It is placing incentives in the wrong places. As written in the previous post.. some people are happy to wait and keep looking for jobs that 'suit them' whilst living of our tax dollars. If there were no unemployment benefits, I am certain a person would even be willing to take a job at mcdonalds or woolworths regardless of their education level just until they are able to get the job that 'suits them'.


----------



## Mr J (10 October 2009)

> I am even more annoyed by the pensioners that protest on today tonite for increased payments. What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives?? Havn't they been able to save any money to fund their retirement...




Superannuation was only brought 15 years ago. I imagine many thought they would have a pension waiting for them.



> Oh, and for all those pensioners that have lost significant portions of their savings in the recent downturn.. what kind of idiot pensioner has significant portions of their savings and primary income stream in high risk assets when you are retired




Because some 'expert' tells them it is what they should do, and the vast majority seem to have believed it.

Oh, some people may be interested to know how many qualifiers I put in my sentences. They're usually there.


----------



## nunthewiser (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives??  .





paying taxes to build this bloody country!

paying taxes to send you to school 

paying taxes to let you drive on there roads 

paying taxes so you can have healthcare when its needed 

paying taxes so you are protected by police , armed forces etc 

need i continue or are they still undeserving of help after paying for this fine country ?

oh hang on .. . i think they may have even paid for the phone line(if laid b4 telstra floated) you used to access the internet to type that selfish dribble 

may misfortune never shine on you or your family


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

Mr J said:


> Superannuation was only brought 15 years ago. I imagine many thought they would have a pension waiting for them.




Big mistake.. never go through life assuming someone else is out there will help you. Why make this assumption.. I'm not assuming the govt will help me out when I retire. And why would you want to live a life dependent on the govt anyway when you can be self sufficient?

Even if there was no superannuation, wouldn't you think to save money for your retirement? You couldn't possibly life comfortably on the amount they give you on the pension without any savings..
And this is another reason why welfare payments is inefficient... especially with a growing population. How do you expect newer generations to pay for the aging population?? In a system with no welfare payments... having each person responsible for saving their own funds for future retirement is the most efficient way of funding retirement. I don't see why the younger generation should bear the burden of previous generations failure to save..



> Because some 'expert' tells them it is what they should do, and the vast majority seem to have believed it.
> 
> Oh, some people may be interested to know how many qualifiers I put in my sentences. They're usually there.




Another mistakes.. who actually believes that what these 'experts' tell them is for their benefit and not for the benefit of the expert? Perhaps I'm just cynical.. but what kind of idiot thinks that there is no risk in leveraging against your own home?  Besides.. they have been alive to see so many stock market and economic collapses in their time, 97 asian crisis, 00 .com bubble bursting.. just a few that were in my time. How about all the others during their working lives. You can't naively assume that the stock market will always rise..

You would think that with age comes wisdom, but apparently not...


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> paying taxes to build this bloody country!
> 
> paying taxes to send you to school
> paying taxes to let you drive on there roads
> ...




Oh really... so what you're saying is that they paid higher tax rates than what my parents paid, or what I'm paying now?? 
- I've been on scholarhsip for most of my schooling life.. its the dumbasses with the rich parents that have been paying for my schooling :
- I'm sure its my parents and my taxes that are paying for the roads that I'm driving on.. most of the roads we drive on are not more than 30-4o years old..
- Health care.. aren't we all paying a 1.5% medicare levi? I'm paying for my own healthcare, the rest is subsidized by the rich ppl :
- Oh.. they paid for the phone lines.. so what, we're paying for a fibre optic system... I think glass tubing is more expensive than copper wiring

You can't say that they paid for all the infrastructure that we now use. We're paying for it too...


----------



## nunthewiser (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> Oh really... so what you're saying is that they paid higher tax rates than what my parents paid, or what I'm paying now??
> - I've been on scholarhsip for most of my schooling life.. its the dumbasses with the rich parents that have been paying for my schooling :
> - I'm sure its my parents and my taxes that are paying for the roads that I'm driving on.. most of the roads we drive on are not more than 30-4o years old..
> - Health care.. aren't we all paying a 1.5% medicare levi? I'm paying for my own healthcare, the rest is subsidized by the rich ppl :
> ...




mmmmmmmmmm you missed my point completely 

glad to see you found another form of welfare tho . sponging off "richer people" ....... 

tax builds the country ........ they paid 50 years of it 

some may even have fought for this country to protect your right to walk this land in freedom

you obviously cant see past your "its ok to milk the rich " but not ok for the "less fortunate pensioners that have paid there way to get some back " ideas ........ so i will leave it at that 

have a nice day


----------



## Glen48 (10 October 2009)

I got a Chinese woman over her about 3 yrs ago, got married because Migration said we had to and open a joint account because it looks like a genuine marriage and they told us in 4 yrs time she would be and Aussie, 6 months ago she got the best legal advice in the country from her Chinese friend's and claimed Violence ( it is on the from page of the application for migration form  to make sure you know it is available ) took off, collect every penny the Feds could throw at her took the money out of our  join account and is now suing me for wages with the help of Legal Aids.

Why would and one want to live in China when the Feds encourage this plus she is now an Aussie Migration won't eve enforce their own policy. So all of those who pay tax's she thanks you.


----------



## cutz (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> They make it way to easy in Australia.. I believe welfare should only go to the physically and mentally disabled.




Hi jono1887,

With ridiculous statements like these it's no wonder you rub people up the wrong way, you talk about subsidies by the rich to the poor but how about the subsidies payed for by the working poor keeping the rich afloat, i.e negative gearing and depreciation routs.

You may have the rest of your life mapped out bro but thing's don't always pan out as they should.

I don't mind my taxes going towards people that need it, that includes the long term unemployed but paying for the routs the the rich employ that pisses me off.


----------



## Fishbulb (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> Oh really... so what you're saying is that they paid higher tax rates than what my parents paid, or what I'm paying now??
> - I've been on scholarhsip for most of my schooling life.. its the dumbasses with the rich parents that have been paying for my schooling :
> - I'm sure its my parents and my taxes that are paying for the roads that I'm driving on.. most of the roads we drive on are not more than 30-4o years old..
> - Health care.. aren't we all paying a 1.5% medicare levi? I'm paying for my own healthcare, the rest is subsidized by the rich ppl :
> ...





Your lack of knowledge of the history of economics and of this country in particular is what's making you come to the conclusions you have come to.

Look into it a bit more and you'll probably change your tune - hopefully. 

Here's a starter for you - superannuation schemes haven't been in place in this country for very long at all. It used to be accepted practice that one works till the age of sixty, then goes on a pension. In those days, apparantly you could support yourself and your family, buy a house and car etc etc - on one wage. That's right, on one wage. 

Things have changes veryrapidly in a hundred years or so. Some of those old guys you're complaing about made the country, figuratively speaking. 

Anyway, I hope you don't cop dumb treatment from some jerk when you're in your dotage. 

Paying for fiber optic indeed......


----------



## Julia (10 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> mmmmmmmmmm you missed my point completely
> 
> glad to see you found another form of welfare tho . sponging off "richer people" .......
> 
> ...



Nun is right, jono.   I wonder if you appreciate how self-righteous you are, and how lacking in empathy for anyone who doesn't have your youth, intelligence (?), opportunities.

Let's make up a little hypothetical situation for you.  Let's say you are involved in a car accident next week (not wishing this on you, of course) and are so severely injured that you are unable to complete your education or ever hold a job.  Who would look after you?  Who would pay for this care?

On the question of superannuation, as has already been pointed out, it has been compulsory only in recent times.   A couple of generations ago, very few women worked outside the home, so had no income of their own from which to save anything.   In those days it was simply accepted that taxes paid would cover the payment of an adequate pension in retirement.
Very, very few people would not have qualified for an age pension.

Whilst I agree with you that people who borrowed against their homes in retirement were very foolish, at least if they added to this further borrowing in the form of a margin loan, they were encouraged to do that out of fear that they would not - as you have pointed out - be able to live on the age pension.  So, being of a generation which largely trusted "professional advisers" they felt safe in following the advice of licensed financial planners.
No, you wouldn't have done this, and neither would I, but we have the benefit of a bit more understanding and financial education.

Jono, I wonder if you do anything to make a contribution to our society?
Any voluntary work?  Contributions to charities?  Or is it all just about you?
You've said your chosen branch of medicine will probably be surgery.
Unfortunately, that still requires you to be able to communicate with patients, many of whom will be anxious and ill.   I'm finding it pretty hard to imagine you with enough understanding, compassion and empathy to even get to first base of reassuring such patients.


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> mmmmmmmmmm you missed my point completely
> 
> glad to see you found another form of welfare tho . sponging off "richer people" .......




I didn't get it for nothing.. I've worked my ass of for the last 6+ years studying my ass off...



> tax builds the country ........ they paid 50 years of it
> 
> some may even have fought for this country to protect your right to walk this land in freedom
> 
> you obviously cant see past your "its ok to milk the rich " but not ok for the "less fortunate pensioners that have paid there way to get some back " ideas




Them fighting for our country is irrelevant in this case. Sure welfare payments to the war widows would probably be appropriate.. but they are now long gone..

Taxes have built this country... yet we're still continually being built and growing. Infrastructure is still being formed, and we're still paying for it. Just because they paid it before us, doesn't mean that they are deserving of our taxes..

I wasn't milking the rich.. it was the only way I could get through a private school education. I worked to get that scholarship, and kept working to keep it. The system of scholarships has been set up so that people despite economic status, are able to get a better education..


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

cutz said:


> Hi jono1887,
> 
> With ridiculous statements like these it's no wonder you rub people up the wrong way, you talk about subsidies by the rich to the poor but how about the subsidies payed for by the working poor keeping the rich afloat, i.e negative gearing and depreciation routs.
> 
> ...




Ok, negative gearing and the likes does not take money away from the poor and gives it to the rich. It allows a way of reducing the amounts of money the rich give to the tax man (so that the poor don't get the money earnt by the rich), because as Paker once put it _“I pay what I’m required to pay, not a penny more, not a penny less. If anybody in this country doesn’t minimise their tax, they want their heads read because, as a government, I can tell you you’re not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.”_

Why would you pay anymore taxes than what you should be paying? If the negative gearing system is in place.. why not make use of it??

I don't get how you are paying for the routs that keep the rich afloat?


----------



## Mr J (10 October 2009)

Jono said:
			
		

> Big mistake.. never go through life assuming someone else is out there will help you. Why make this assumption.. I'm not assuming the govt will help me out when I retire. And why would you want to live a life dependent on the govt anyway when you can be self sufficient?




Whatever their reason, that is what they believed. Most of us make assumptions, and I certainly wouldn't call these people idiots. They just may not have seen the pension become what it has. Perhaps they thought that the country they helped build would in return take care of them later in life. It's not unreasonable.

Of course someone your age is more likely to have your view, as you have grown up in the era of super. We know how minimal the pension will be, and that it may not even exist for us. We've been brought up knowing we will probably have to be self-sufficient. Many pensioners were not.



> Another mistakes.. who actually believes that what these 'experts' tell them is for their benefit and not for the benefit of the expert? Perhaps I'm just cynical..




Yes it was a mistake, but one that many have made. They believe these 'experts', because they believe the job of these experts is to guide them with sound financial advice. They may not understand how this really works. Some of us are probably naturally cynical, but our interest in finance/economics/business etc exposes us to a world most do not think about.

I'd like to think I would know better if I was in their shoes, but would I really know better? Before my venture into gambling/trading, I was far, far more ignorant of anything financially related than I am now. My ignorance may have lessened over time, but I'm sure I would still be far more ignorant than I am now.



> You would think that with age comes wisdom, but apparently not...




What is our age worth if we don't learn from our experiences?


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

Fishbulb said:


> Your lack of knowledge of the history of economics and of this country in particular is what's making you come to the conclusions you have come to.
> 
> Here's a starter for you - superannuation schemes haven't been in place in this country for very long at all. It used to be accepted practice that one works till the age of sixty, then goes on a pension. In those days, apparantly you could support yourself and your family, buy a house and car etc etc - on one wage. That's right, on one wage.




I am well aware that superannuation just came in within the last 2 decades. Yet my granparents living in a developed country starting off with nothing have managed to save enough to live through retirement very comfortably without help from any of their children. This is through living in a country with no welfare payments throughout their whole lives...

Why are they, able to save money and pay for their retirement whereas the Australians living in a higher standard of living are not able to? Its the attitudes and mindsets that are people in Aust have that the govt will always be there to look after them. It is this mindset that has caused the lack of savings even up til now (household savings rate has been negative for several years until the recent crisis)...

If they were able to survive on 1 wage, with a house, car and all that.. why couldn't they save anything? If clearly life was all rosy, and only one source of income was needed, wouldn't you think they'd be floating in money by the time they retire? 



> Things have changes veryrapidly in a hundred years or so. Some of those old guys you're complaing about made the country, figuratively speaking.




True, the world has changed significantly in the last century... but if that mindset that the govt would bail you our or support you if you need it or are too lazy to support your self wasn't there, we would not need welfare payments for pensioners...



> Anyway, I hope you don't cop dumb treatment from some jerk when you're in your dotage.




I hope so too... :


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

Julia said:


> Nun is right, jono.   I wonder if you appreciate how self-righteous you are, and how lacking in empathy for anyone who doesn't have your youth, intelligence (?), opportunities.




I do realise that I may come across as self-righteous in these forums, but I as just wanting to provide a point of view which may be slightly stronger than my personal beliefs...



> Let's make up a little hypothetical situation for you.  Let's say you are involved in a car accident next week (not wishing this on you, of course) and are so severely injured that you are unable to complete your education or ever hold a job.  Who would look after you?  Who would pay for this care?




I did write in a previous post that welfare payments for the disabled are justified..



> Whilst I agree with you that people who borrowed against their homes in retirement were very foolish, at least if they added to this further borrowing in the form of a margin loan, they were encouraged to do that out of fear that they would not - as you have pointed out - be able to live on the age pension.  So, being of a generation which largely trusted "professional advisers" they felt safe in following the advice of licensed financial planners.
> No, you wouldn't have done this, and neither would I, but we have the benefit of a bit more understanding and financial education.
> .




Even my grandparents with no financial or economic education would know that borrowing against your house is the biggest no no.... just because someone is qualified, certified, licensed or more educated than you, doesn't mean you trust them completely without doing your own research..



> Jono, I wonder if you do anything to make a contribution to our society?
> Any voluntary work?  Contributions to charities?  Or is it all just about you?
> You've said your chosen branch of medicine will probably be surgery.
> Unfortunately, that still requires you to be able to communicate with patients, many of whom will be anxious and ill.   I'm finding it pretty hard to imagine you with enough understanding, compassion and empathy to even get to first base of reassuring such patients




contribution.. did 2-3hrs a week community service at salvos, local churches during my last 4 years of highschool... Life is not all about me, I just dislike people attitudes that they can rely on the gov't for things..
Well, if you're the best at what you do, patients will come regardless of your bedside manners... :


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

Mr J said:


> Of course someone your age is more likely to have your view, as you have grown up in the era of super. We know how minimal the pension will be, and that it may not even exist for us. We've been brought up knowing we will probably have to be self-sufficient. Many pensioners were not.




I havn't got my views because of the superannuation system.. its because I've seen my family who have grown up in a country with no welfare support what so ever become self-sufficient.. you are quite simply naive to believe that someone else will pay for your retirement. Can you honestly foresee how the government structure will be in 40 years from now? what if Australia was taken over by another country?? what if the like it has now, the pension system has changed to only provide subsistence rates?

Anyone who can put their faith in someone else paying for their retirement is a naive fool.. (yes i know harsh.. i'll probably get scolded by one of you later on)



> Yes it was a mistake, but one that many have made. They believe these 'experts', because they believe the job of these experts is to guide them with sound financial advice. They may not understand how this really works. Some of us are probably naturally cynical, but our interest in finance/economics/business etc exposes us to a world most do not think about.




yea, well this may be true.. but if they had truly cared about their finances, they would have read into things a little more..



> I'd like to think I would know better if I was in their shoes, but would I really know better? Before my venture into gambling/trading, I was far, far more ignorant of anything financially related than I am now. My ignorance may have lessened over time, but I'm sure I would still be far more ignorant than I am now.




Ignorance is most definitely NOT bliss... as these people have probably now learned...


----------



## explod (10 October 2009)

Intersting thread indeed.   Many of us pay up to 48 cents in the dollar tax directly with many other taxes on top of that and we do so gladly as it supports the great democracy that we have.   Many people are born in circumstances and with less opportunities than others, they lack mentors, decent parents and education that can put them on the right track.  Even criminals are so because of a bad start in life and poor peer/parent/examples and influences.  We are all part of the human family together and I do not begrudge one cent of welfare even to the so called hobos, who in fact are in the minority in this country.  I am not going to name any on this thread but some of you are spoilt pups and very wet behind the ears at that.

have a great Saturday........ eexxplooowwder


----------



## gooner (10 October 2009)

I've got an interesting perspective.

I was retrenched about a year ago. I am married and at the time I was retrenched, I had two young children and my wife was pregnant with our third (although I did not know that at the time). We took 4 months off to travel a bit and have a holiday given I had been working for the previous 15 years or so. I had a high income job so did not receive any family tax benefit which is income tested, but did take advantage of the tax breaks for superannuation, which is just another form of welfare really - just for high income earners.

I already had savings when I was retrenched and also received a large retrenchment payment including annual and long service leave. As a result my savings are too high to qualify for unemployment benefit (Newstart) or parenting payment.  However, I do now get family tax benefit (since the new tax year kicked in on 1 July) of about $350 a week, the maximum amount. I also get the baby bonus which is now paid fortnightly for six months rather than as a lump sum amount. Obviously, not enough to live on, so I also need to use interest and dividends on savings and some capital to live on.

I have been looking for a job for 8 months and have had two interviews in that time. I got very close on one of those jobs, but did not get it. I have applied for at least 100 jobs during that time.  I never defined myself by my job, so I am enjoying my time off particularly given I have three children under the age for 5 that take up a lot of time.  I also have plenty of savings and no mortgage so do not face any concern about being thrown out on the street or being able to feed my family.

I recognise I am lucky. I also recognise some people are not or do not have the ability to put away decent savings in case of adversity.

But what about someone in my position who did not have any savings, but did have a mortgage or was renting who could not find a job for 8 months. How long before the bank/landlord throws them out on the street or he runs  out of money to buy food for the family were there no welfare payments.  Do you really want children having to live on the streets or begging for food. This is what you see in countries that do not have welfare systems.

Just because a few people rort the system, does not mean the system should be scrapped. IMHO, would be better to attack some of the high income welfare such as overgenerous super concessions, negative gearing and welfare given to private schools.


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> Anyone who can put their faith in someone else paying for their retirement is a naive fool.. (yes i know harsh.. i'll probably get scolded by one of you later on)
> 
> yea, well this may be true.. but if they had truly cared about their finances, they would have read into things a little more..
> 
> Ignorance is most definitely NOT bliss... as these people have probably now learned...




Jono, you idiot, let me tell you a little story before you go blabbing your idiotic immature mouth any further my friend.

My grandma, who has just passed, lost her husband when she was a mere 40 years of age. For the last 40 years, she has relied on her pension, to live. In that 40 years she tried to save away as much money as possible, so that when she passed, she had something to pass on for inheritance.

She passed not so long ago, and let me tell you how much she manged to save. $12,000. Yes that is it. from never buying a new tv, never buying a new fridge, never buying top quality food or going out. The only time she got anything new, was she was robbed. Insurance replaced her stuff, but because it was so old, they had to replace it with new equipment because it wasnt made anymore. And you know where that money she saved went? all to funeral expenses, so you tell me, how the F*** pensioners dont deserve there measeley amount of money a week. They worked hard there whole life, the have 10x the right of any young person on the dole, who is fit and physically able to work. 

The mentality of this new generation, will make it harder for us in the future as we are the ones fudning these idiots, who are to lazy, or just dont want to work. IF YOU DONT LIKE IT, **** OFF TO INDIA AND THE MIDDLE EAST where you can do as little as you ****ing want.

And to all those dole bludgers out there, who think it is there "right" to live of our hard earned money, i beg you to leave me in a locked room with you for 30 mins, and i bet i will change your mind.

Help is required for those studying, help is required for those who are disabled, help is required for those who are to old or frail to work. i dont accept that there is to little jobs for the population. There are plenty of jobs, pick a paper up, look on the interent. the problem is, people only want to do the jobs they want to do! tough luck you dont get handouts for not being satisfied.

As you can tell im slightly passionate on this issue.


----------



## nunthewiser (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> I didn't get it for nothing.. I've worked my ass of for the last 6+ years studying my ass off...
> 
> 
> 
> ...





AND OTHER PEOPLES MONEY PAID YOUR WAY ..... A HANDOUT . A PRIVATE WELFARE

i give up 

have a niceday


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

explod said:


> Intersting thread indeed.   Many of us pay up to 48 cents in the dollar tax directly with many other taxes on top of that and we do so gladly as it supports the great democracy that we have.   Many people are born in circumstances and with less opportunities than others, they lack mentors, decent parents and education that can put them on the right track.  Even criminals are so because of a bad start in life and poor peer/parent/examples and influences.  We are all part of the human family together and I do not begrudge one cent of welfare even to the so called hobos, who in fact are in the minority in this country.  I am not going to name any on this thread but some of you are spoilt pups and very wet behind the ears at that.
> 
> have a great Saturday........ eexxplooowwder




We live in a country where education and health care are all provided by the government.. each individual despite their parents and what not have the opportunity to get themselves educated, stay away from drugs, alcohol and crime and grow up to earn an income and contribute to society. You can't simply blame having a bad start for going into a life of crime or welfare dependence...


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

PS jono, ill be damned if im going to take any life lessons, or advice from somebody who thinks abstaining from sex til marriage will get you into the pearly gates.

Get a root jono


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> Jono, you idiot, let me tell you a little story before you go blabbing your idiotic immature mouth any further my friend.
> 
> My grandma, who has just passed, lost her husband when she was a mere 40 years of age. For the last 40 years, she has relied on her pension, to live. In that 40 years she tried to save away as much money as possible, so that when she passed, she had something to pass on for inheritance.
> 
> ...




I don't mean to offend you but a 40y/o is still midway through their life and are quite easily able to find a job rather than live of the pension. And regarding your points about people on the dole.. I am against all forms of wefare, not just the aged pension.


----------



## Ardyne (10 October 2009)

I beleive "ass" shoulde be spelt "a.r.s.e" unless your refering to the animal. - ( the dots are so it doesnt come up as "****")


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

How much do you think you can save, as a 40 year old women back in the sixties? supporting 3 children, maybe get a casual job? Do you know how many women worked back then? or how hard it would have been for a women to get a job back then?

once again your ignorance astounds me.


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> AND OTHER PEOPLES MONEY PAID YOUR WAY ..... A HANDOUT . A PRIVATE WELFARE
> 
> i give up
> 
> have a niceday




*Welfare:* Actions or procedures ”” especially on the part of governments and institutions ”” striving to promote the basic well-being of individuals in need. These efforts usually strive to improve the financial situation of people in need but may also strive to improve their employment chances and many other aspects of their lives including sometimes their mental health

*Scholarship:* An award of access to an institution, or a financial aid award for a student to further education. Scholarships are awarded on various criteria which may include a student's athletic, academic, artistic or other abilities, and often factor in an applicant's community service record and extracurricular activities.

I was not on welfare...


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

jono, can i ask, are you indian?


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> PS jono, ill be damned if im going to take any life lessons, or advice from somebody who thinks abstaining from sex til marriage will get you into the pearly gates.
> 
> Get a root jono




Since when was these forums about personal attacks  They are simply a means of expressing personal values.. I don't care what you think about them. But there is no need to make personal attacks about my religion or personal lifestyle choices...

*edit: and I wasn't asking anyone to take any life lessons from me, nor was I giving out any advice..


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> jono, can i ask, are you indian?




no, I'm not... why does this have any relevance... you gonna start making racist remarks towards me as well??


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

No not at all, but there is a general belief they hold towards tax, that they bring to australia with them. That is all. 

What so you can challenge our beliefs but we cant challenge yours?


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> How much do you think you can save, as a 40 year old women back in the sixties? supporting 3 children, maybe get a casual job? Do you know how many women worked back then? or how hard it would have been for a women to get a job back then?
> 
> once again your ignorance astounds me.




Unfortunately, I'm not a 40y/o women living in the 60's... the 40s was after the various wars and women were able to enter the workforce. Although I do admit that their incomes were considerably lower than their male counterparts, there were still jobs available..


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> No not at all, but there is a general belief they hold towards tax, that they bring to australia with them. That is all.
> 
> What so you can challenge our beliefs but we cant challenge yours?




Feel free to challenge my beliefs.. just don't make personal attacks against me in regards to other issues not relevant to the issue of welfare in this thread..

But my race should be of no implication here on these forums... I have laid out my beliefs clearly in my posts.. go ahead and challenge them..


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

I have got worked up enough on this issue.

But for your readily take as much as you can, give as little as possible attitude. I wish you many illfortunes, as im sure will come your way.

The universe has a very unique and extrodinary way of dealing with people like you.


----------



## Fishbulb (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> I am well aware that superannuation just came in within the last 2 decades. Yet my granparents living in a developed country starting off with nothing have managed to save enough to live through retirement very comfortably without help from any of their children. This is through living in a country with no welfare payments throughout their whole lives...
> 
> Why are they, able to save money and pay for their retirement whereas the Australians living in a higher standard of living are not able to? Its the attitudes and mindsets that are people in Aust have that the govt will always be there to look after them. It is this mindset that has caused the lack of savings even up til now (household savings rate has been negative for several years until the recent crisis)...
> 
> ...





The mistake you make in your thinking, is that you don't seem to able to cast your mind into the past and IMAGINE how it must have been. You take your current values and fears with you to a much more prosperous and less troublesome past. 

There was no need to save for your future when it was a one income family etc. You simply bought the house the car etc and were able to live quite well on a pension. That was how it was. There's no mystery to it. 

Of course these days.....


----------



## cutz (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> Unfortunately, I'm not a 40y/o women living in the 60's... the 40s was after the various wars and women were able to enter the workforce. Although I do admit that their incomes were considerably lower than their male counterparts, there were still jobs available..




So how the hell is a 40 year old woman able to earn a living while raising kids on her own, have you got any idea pal. How you ever ventured outside this country and seen what the alternative is like, have you ever considered what if your circumstances took an unexpected turn ?


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

Cutz, jono has that covered!

he will just mooch off the rich, then when he is back on his feet, he wil spit in the face in society, the society that helped him back to where he is

Jono the only reason you even have an oppurtunity is because of people like us. So shut up, and be greatful you are not living out of a cardboard box.


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

cutz said:


> So how the hell is a 40 year old woman able to earn a living while raising kids on her own, have you got any idea pal. How you ever ventured outside this country and seen what the alternative is like, have you ever considered what if your circumstances took an unexpected turn ?




Yes I have ventured outside of this country and have seen some of the worst forms of poverty.. children living on their own in slumps, families living next to a dump in shacks made out of materials probably pulled out of the dump...

If my circumstances did take an unexpected turn, I would like to believe the financial precautions I have taken would be to support me.. But I am still under 20, so I would probably go back home if things went really bad...


----------



## explod (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> We live in a country where education and health care are all provided by the government.. each individual despite their parents and what not have the opportunity to get themselves educated, stay away from drugs, alcohol and crime and grow up to earn an income and contribute to society. You can't simply blame having a bad start for going into a life of crime or welfare dependence...





Having worked among youth for a lot of my career jono, a bad start is a bad start and you *can* blame it.  Some have the mental capacity to overcome it but very many do not.   Teachers for example in the lower class areas are just so overwhelmed by difficult students (we are talking children here) that they can do little, and it is well known that parental support is essential and usually very lacking in such areas as mere survival is the priority.

Get in amoung the real world.  Probably you have not the inclination nor the ability to see the underlying truth


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> Yes I have ventured outside of this country and have seen some of the worst forms of poverty.. children living on their own in slumps, families living next to a dump in shacks made out of materials probably pulled out of the dump...
> 
> If my circumstances did take an unexpected turn, I would like to believe the financial precautions I have taken would be to support me.. But I am still under 20, so I would probably go back home if things went really bad...




I would LOVE to know what financial precautions, and under 20 year old, who studys could have in the face of a financial meltdown. do you have 100,000 stashed away? or a property you own? 

get your head out of your ****!


----------



## starwars_guy456 (10 October 2009)

Guys, can you please present the arguments constructively rather than resort to personal attacks? It's very off putting.

For what it's worth, I believe:
*- it's good to have welfare:* I'm comparing this to a country I have been in the past, where people were more cynical, hard edged and basically needed to be on their guard at all times just to survive. I'll be interested to see what the crime rate there is, but it "feels" higher.

*-it's too easy to get welfare/the level of welfare for those that do not really need it is too high:* There appears to be some in society that exploit the system, or plainly does not require the welfare they receive to survive. Will this breed complacency among these people? Probably yes, don't like to see how their future generations will turn out.


When you're stuck in a community of deadbeats, it's very uncommon for one to strive higher than their peers. I see that at uni all the time, especially with students thinking about their careers and applying for jobs. I mean, in my faculty, some have really really strived to get experience, and pad out their resume. Others just don't really *get* the need to do all these extra curricular stuff, and are content with high marks. Often it's the group you hang out with, even though you're all bright students. 

So don't underestimate how hard it is to be different, or to strive up, when you're in a lower socio-economic group.

-Ed


----------



## Tink (10 October 2009)

starwars_guy456 said:


> Guys, can you please present the arguments constructively rather than resort to personal attacks?
> 
> It's very off putting.




well said


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> I would LOVE to know what financial precautions, and under 20 year old, who studys could have in the face of a financial meltdown. do you have 100,000 stashed away? or a property you own?
> 
> get your head out of your ****!




10k term dep... considering i live on under $250/week that's almost a years living expenses for me...


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

your term deposit was with lehman brothers. what do you do

3 years ago you could have said, unrealistic, never would happen.

But can you not see you are no different to anyone else?


----------



## starwars_guy456 (10 October 2009)

I do think though that there are situations where we need to rely on others to do your work for you (ie financial advisors, fund managers, dry cleaners etc). We can't all specialise in everything. 

In the same way, perhaps, for some people, financial management/personal success will be unlikely because they don't have the education or knowledge to make plans, and the group they are running around with makes it unlikely that they will learn these skills.


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> your term deposit was with lehman brothers. what do you do
> 
> 3 years ago you could have said, unrealistic, never would happen.
> 
> But can you not see you are no different to anyone else?




Luckily for me.. all Australian bank deposits have an explicit deposit guarantee. And even if this were to be removed in the not do distant future, the Aust govt has an implicit guarantee... And as mentioned, I live of 250 a week, I could easily get a job at mcdonalds or hungry jacks to pay for living expenses...


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

hahahahaha! jono, you are not prepared for unseen events, as much as you would like to think you are.

What if the government can no longer keep that gaurentee as industry needs such stimulus, they cannot possibly fund your measily 10,000. what will you do? write a letter?

And mcdonals will only hire 15 year olds, as they are paid less and you are no longer cost effective or viable as an employee, you jono, are in no financially secure position.


----------



## jono1887 (10 October 2009)

lukeaye said:


> hahahahaha! jono, you are not prepared for unseen events, as much as you would like to think you are.
> 
> What if the government can no longer keep that gaurentee as industry needs such stimulus, they cannot possibly fund your measily 10,000. what will you do? write a letter?
> 
> And mcdonals will only hire 15 year olds, as they are paid less and you are no longer cost effective or viable as an employee, you jono, are in no financially secure position.




you also assume I have no physical cash, gold or other relatively liquid assets... what kind of idiot puts all their money in the bank??

you think there are no other forms of work in our economy? there are department stores, restaurants, cleaning companies... hundreds of possible jobs that would pay me a measly 15/hr to do some repetitive task...


----------



## lukeaye (10 October 2009)

tell that to the millions of unemployed americans.

Go live over there for a while.

I "assume" that because you are only 19 years old. you study. i doubt you have such great "wealth"


----------



## explod (10 October 2009)

> jono1887 Re: Welfare system
> 
> you also assume I have no physical cash, gold or other relatively liquid assets... what kind of idiot puts all their money in the bank??




You are starting to worm and weasel around a bit now Jono, you did not enlighten us with the stash earlier, silver spoon in the mouth old son, you would not really know what day it was in the real world.



> you think there are no other forms of work in our economy? there are department stores, restaurants, cleaning companies... hundreds of possible jobs that would pay me a measly 15/hr to do some repetitive task...




Well I have two Grandchildren at Uni, good kids and smart, and jobs are just not that easy at the moment.   Employment opportunities are decreasing with the effects of the down turn and when you need it most there may not be a job to be had at all.   Do a bit of reading up on what it was like in the Great Depression 1929 till about 1940 and the world fundamentals indicate that we may have a worse one this time, its like that in the UK and US now, we may not be far behind.  So get your powder dry old son.


----------



## cutz (10 October 2009)

explod said:


> jobs are just not that easy at the moment.   Employment opportunities are decreasing with the effects of the down turn and when you need it most there may not be a job to be had at all.




Agree with you there,

On the surface it appears that Krudd and his phonies have saved us all but dig a little deeper and things may not appear as they seem.

Jono it's all to easy to lose touch of reality from the sanctuary of uni life.


----------



## boofhead (10 October 2009)

I think Jono's problem is lack of life experiences with many different social groups. His ideas read like popular Sydney talkback or channel 7 or 9 current affairs television shows.

There are some very unfortunate circumstances that crop up. Some bizarre circumstances too.

The scholarships are in some way a form of welfare. Look hard at many definitions.

People on the "dole" are not buying property or anything of high standard. A single person is getting about $225 a week before rent assistance etc. are added in. Many don't like the idea of paying for people that are not interested in working but they're not going to have an overly great standard of living at that rate.

I think Jono should start a business putting people in to the millions of jobs out there with a small commission. Say $10 per job. If it is anything like he says then he'll have at least one million in cash in less than 12 months.

I'm guessing he lives in a city or major population area. Move outside of them areas things get harder. Propery prices and rentals may be cheaper but everything else gets more expensive. Move to the small country towns and things get harder still with many places closing. Jobs lost.

West coast of Tasmania started to get caught up in the boom then bam! World crash and many mines shut. What do they do? It is an isolated area that sometimes gets cut off in winter.

As you want to be a doctor or something - an expert group. Remember even doctors make mistakes or give bad advice. What about patients that die or get very ill from bad advice or diagnosis from a doctor? That's similar to what has happened to some following expert financial advice. It is easy to say they should get educated but I have not found anyone that knows enough about everything to be infallible.

And Jono, you need to look a lot harder at history to get full context. So much of history is lost on you.

It is a cheap and easy shot to beat on the little people.


----------



## greggy (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> I don't mean to offend you but a 40y/o is still midway through their life and are quite easily able to find a job rather than live of the pension. And regarding your points about people on the dole.. I am against all forms of wefare, not just the aged pension.




Hey Jono 1887,

I've never met anyone in my life who is against all forms of welfare until now. Yes the superannuation system only fairly recently in place (20 odd years) will encourage many people to provide for their own retirement. This is a good thing. However, not everyone will be able to do this for one reason or another. Also, are you saying that war veterans don't deserve a pension after fighting for this great country?  
What do we do with people who are in desperate straights? You'd just turn them away wouldn't you.
Yes some might be abusing the welfare system and this bugs me, but the clear majority are not.  The welfare system was designed to look after the least fortunate in society. 
It sickens me to read your self righteous comments.  I've been fairly lucky in life and have worked hard to get there, but there are many people out there who are going thorugh hard times. Its better to give them a hand up rather than a kick in the guts.
I've spent many weekends handing out food to the homeless.  Would you care to come with me and see how many people live under those circumstances.


----------



## suhm (10 October 2009)

Blaming the proletariat seems to be a popular past time generally and at least in my med school, do you go to melb uni as well?

We're always getting taught about how ppl of low SES and the indigenous population have poorer health outcomes, never any explanation of how to alter the situation.

Nearly all the students attended private schools, myself included, silver spoons abounding. I've been on a scholarship as well pretty much since the start of high school. 

My parents also came here with almost nothing and scrimped to raise 2 children and invest for the future. Life does throw you curveballs though and luckily they had planned well for the future so we are able to live a good quality of life but other people are not that fortunate.

To me Jono it seems to me that your parents are your safety net like mine were and that is why you don't see the need for the welfare system, but not everyone is so fortunate.

Some people may abuse the system but the vast silent majority aren't out the rip off the system.

I'm not trying to pontificate, I put my hand out for money whichever source I can and will be structuring my finances to pay the least amount of tax I need to. I'm going to end up paying millions unless life throws me a curveball as well.

Society is judged by how it treats its weakest members and whilst Australia is far from perfect I'm glad that I live in a country which does at least try to protect those who can't protect themselves.


----------



## drsmith (10 October 2009)

I have not had a chance to read the whole thread but to me the biggest problem is that the middle class welfare inparticular has become a vote buying exercise by the political party in power. 

The problem with doing away with welfare alltogether (as a safety net) is that that can result in a larger underclass which can present social problems of it's own.


----------



## greggy (10 October 2009)

drsmith said:


> I have not had a chance to read the whole thread but to me the biggest problem is that the middle class welfare inparticular has become a vote buying exercise by the political party in power.
> 
> The problem with doing away with welfare alltogether (as a safety net) is that that can result in a larger underclass which can present social problems of it's own.




Yes Dr Smith. Warning..warning...look at the US with its much higher crime rate and other social problems.  May be Jono should head off there, but there again the US has a very limited form of welfare. Oh the pain..Oh the pain.


----------



## wildkactus (10 October 2009)

Agree with you DRsmith in the large part that welfare has become just another tool to get people to vote for em and be relient on the government for their welbeing.

I'm a pay for what you use type of person, but not every one can do this I know, and it works for me as an expat, I have to no choice in it I have to pay or I don't get anything.

I think the first thing in fixing the welfare system, is to fix the education system, the education system IMO is setup to make people relient on the system not just welfare but the whole system (a sort of security blanket) and does not teach people to be more self relient, its this its allways there if you fail or don't want to move ahead attitude that can be fixed by teaching people to see that self relience is a better option in the long run, and that a welfare system is a place of last resort (yes we will still need one as some people will always need help). make people respect a system rather then think it is just there for the takin.

Thanks and Happy Trading


----------



## Riddick (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> Yes I have ventured outside of this country and have seen some of the worst forms of poverty.. children living on their own in slumps, families living next to a dump in shacks made out of materials probably pulled out of the dump...
> 
> If my circumstances did take an unexpected turn, I would like to believe the financial precautions I have taken would be to support me.. But I am still under 20, so I would probably go back home if things went really bad...




are you serious? can't even believe I'm writing a response to a teenager, who contrary to what he believes in his little head, or feels with so mch conviction some where else in his little body, cant, in actual fact, provide a convincing, logical arguement, provide compelling evidence or any shred of reason to back up his misguided assertions about the notion of a social welfare net.

one year at university, (which still puts you 8 years behind me and most of my friends), seems to have equipped you, in your mind at least, with some kind of intellectual super power so potent that for a moment you thought you were qualified to comment on matters of social, governmental and public policy that teams of intelligent and talented individuals construct and fine tune over entiregovernment terms in office. Unfortunately for us, a single moment was all you needed to climb up on what you believed was a well thought out and informed high horse, but that in actual fact turned out to be instead a little step ladder that enabled you only to peek out of mummys apron folds long enough to get skull rubbed by some of the much bigger boys.

so. stay inside and read some. do a bit more learnin', maybe a bit more thinking whilst looking in the mirror. 

don't forget to make your bed...


----------



## Riddick (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> I do believe most people on welfare are undeserving, after seeing developing nations with 0 wellfare system, their population is still able to survive.. although at subsistence levels, they still work and find ways to survive.
> 
> They make it way to easy in Australia.. I believe welfare should only go to the physically and mentally disabled.
> 
> ...




your views on the welfare system are remarkably similar to my views on parts of the legal code. that is, the parts that define the nature and extent of assault. so, to those ends, I propose a deal. _You_ stop paying taxes for the provision of welfare and _I_ get to block the blood flow to to your brain with a rear naked choke?

seems this isn't the only thread where you have displayed your astounding intelligence. some of jono's best work takes place on the joke thread. check it out.


----------



## Julia (10 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> I did write in a previous post that welfare payments for the disabled are justified..



You wrote this in response to my asking how you would expect to cope if you were suddenly and permanently disabled, unable to complete your education and get a job.

OK, so you would get the basic Disability Pension.  Do you think that will cover your medical needs, rent, and most importantly pay someone to care for you?  Of course it won't.  So what will happen to you?  
Presumably you will expect your parents to care for you?
But what happens when they die?  Remember, that nice Christian girl is probably not going to want to marry an invalid now.

This, jono, is the situation of thousands of disabled people, many of them young, who end up in aged care homes because there is nowhere for them to go.  

Likewise people with a mental illness.  How are they supposed to exist, paying rent, all other expenses, on a disability pension?

They become part of our 'underclass', a group whom no one cares about.
Who is to say you won't become schizophrenic yourself, huh, jono?
Think that's impossible?



> contribution.. did 2-3hrs a week community service at salvos, local churches during my last 4 years of highschool... Life is not all about me, I just dislike people attitudes that they can rely on the gov't for things..



Glad to know you're made some contribution.  Sadly it doesn't seem to have taught you much compassion.



> Well, if you're the best at what you do, patients will come regardless of your bedside manners... :



Oh, wow, the self confidence of the ignorant.  No they will not, dear jono.
It may surprise you to know that many patients place more importance on a good relationship with their doctor than a slight edge in technical skill.
I sure as hell hope I never end up as an involuntary patient of yours, should I have the misfortune to need surgical help.




gooner said:


> I've got an interesting perspective.
> 
> I was retrenched about a year ago. I am married and at the time I was retrenched, I had two young children and my wife was pregnant with our third (although I did not know that at the time). We took 4 months off to travel a bit and have a holiday given I had been working for the previous 15 years or so. I had a high income job so did not receive any family tax benefit which is income tested, but did take advantage of the tax breaks for superannuation, which is just another form of welfare really - just for high income earners.
> 
> ...



Great post, Gooner.  Must take a lot of persistence and determination to keep applying for jobs when the take up rate is so low.  Good on you for having planned so well.




jono1887 said:


> We live in a country where education and health care are all provided by the government..



Oh, get real!   There are waiting lists of more than six years for a basic dental examination in the public system.  Ditto a similar length of time just to get on the waiting list for things like hip and knee replacements.  Private health cover is an absolute necessity and very difficult to afford on a low income.

Apart from people on welfare benefits, life is a constant struggle for people on low incomes.  Cost of living continually rises and whilst some do waste money, most don't.



> each individual despite their parents and what not have the opportunity to get themselves educated, stay away from drugs, alcohol and crime and grow up to earn an income and contribute to society. You can't simply blame having a bad start for going into a life of crime or welfare dependence...



Oh God, you just have no idea, do you!   Do you think you can grow up in an environment where your single mother is an addict, prostitutes herself to fund her habit, there is a constant stream of drunken abusive men in the house, some of whom will likely physically and/or sexually abuse you, and you'll be sufficiently unaffected to achieve what others in a more 'normal' environment do?

Not everyone has had the (questionable) benefit of growing up with the belief that they can do whatever they choose and in the process sit in ultimate judgement of the rest of the population.





boofhead said:


> I think Jono should start a business putting people in to the millions of jobs out there with a small commission. Say $10 per job. If it is anything like he says then he'll have at least one million in cash in less than 12 months.



Great idea.  Should be a piece of cake for you jono.


----------



## drsmith (11 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> There are so many forms of payment in the system that are a complete waste of tax payers funds. The Abstudy program is probably the most discriminatory system in this country. Why do aboriginals and torres-straight islanders get special treatment just because they're ancestors were mistreated a few generations ago. I know someone who is 1/8 or 1/16 aboriginal with middleclass earning parents yet she is still able to get Abstudy... this is absurd. We say welfare is to provide equality, but why to aboriginals get free money, where as the rest of us don't... this is equality??



They get it because acheiving broader social equality from the present situation is extremely difficult. It is far beyond our current political culture.



jono1887 said:


> I am even more annoyed by the pensioners that protest on today tonite for increased payments. What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives?? Havn't they been able to save any money to fund their retirement... obviously that money has been used to maintain higher than appropriate living standards whilst they were still working that now they do not have any funds to be self sufficient... Oh, and for all those pensioners that have lost significant portions of their savings in the recent downturn.. what kind of idiot pensioner has significant portions of their savings and primary income stream in high risk assets when you are retired  further stupidity on their part. Whats even worse is hearing the stories of those who have leveraged against the homes that they had owned and are now losing those aswell...



Today Tonight is sensationalist trash that concentrates on one side of a story to generate an emotive response.

Governments past and present are to some extent to blame for tax policy that encourages income tax deduction as a primary motivating factor for investment whether that be unlimited negative gearing or dodgy agricultural schemes.



jono1887 said:


> Now for the unemployed. Quite simply, the system is inefficient in a market economy. It is placing incentives in the wrong places. As written in the previous post.. some people are happy to wait and keep looking for jobs that 'suit them' whilst living of our tax dollars. If there were no unemployment benefits, I am certain a person would even be willing to take a job at mcdonalds or woolworths regardless of their education level just until they are able to get the job that 'suits them'.



The question here is one of striking the right balance between the safety net and the incentive to work. Removing the safety net alltogether does not achieve that balance but that does not mean there is no scope for modification.


----------



## Mr J (11 October 2009)

I can see the argument both ways, but this discussion (?) is a little one-sided, so I'll come in on the 'harsher' side.

Why should we support unproductive members of society? Why should many people be forced to support those they do not wish to support? Do they really have a responsibility? Why should they lower their standard of living to help someone who means little to nothing to them? Let's face it, if we truly cared, we'd do far more than what we do now. All we do is make 'guilt' donations or forced payments through tax.

Imagine the if the dead weight of humanity was removed. There would likely be more land for productive use, less frustration, less crime, less pollution, ultimately less suffering etc. Our standard of living will rise, and perhaps apart from the psychological effects of allowing severe temporary suffering, humanity may very well be better off.

We're effectively interfering in the free market (nature) and subsidising failing businesses (people who can't support themselves). We can't expect to do this and not experience negative effects - not just in terms of existing humans, but also future effects such as the weakening of our gene pool.

I don't mean to add fuel to the fire, but I think the anti-welfare viewpoint raises valid questions.


----------



## Fishbulb (11 October 2009)

Mr J said:


> I can see the argument both ways, but this discussion (?) is a little one-sided, so I'll come in on the 'harsher' side.
> 
> Why should we support unproductive members of society? Why should many people be forced to support those they do not wish to support? Do they really have a responsibility? Why should they lower their standard of living to help someone who means little to nothing to them? Let's face it, if we truly cared, we'd do far more than what we do now. All we do is make 'guilt' donations or forced payments through tax.
> 
> ...




I agree, we'd end up with a sort of "super society". One where the disabled, frail and aged simply didn't exist any longer because they'd be "dealt" with before they became a burden. We'd be wealthy and healthy and we'd have an oh so good time of it wouldn't we? No dinks weighing the super menschen down. 

It'd be great. It'd be the completion of a major work begun in the 1930's.


----------



## Julia (11 October 2009)

Mr J, obviously you're at least partly doing the devil's advocate role, but most of us will agree about some of your points.

Rather than removing support entirely, how would it be if the middle class vote buying measures were removed?   Earlier I raised the question of subsidised child care and the new maternity leave scheme.  I'd personally be happy to see these wiped.  Ditto the baby bonus.

But I'd like to see more support for people with severe disabilities (not just those who have managed to wangle the Disability Pension rather than the dole on the pretext of the ubiquitous 'bad back', but people with genuine and intractable disabilities.

And more for aged care so that elderly people aren't left lying in their own waste because there's not enough funding for staff in nursing homes.

There are already quite a lot of restrictions on people getting the dole, with it being suspended if they fail to turn up to interviews etc.


----------



## Mr J (11 October 2009)

> One where the disabled, frail and aged simply didn't exist any longer because they'd be "dealt" with before they became a burden




If the current, endless cycle of suffering was dealth with, society would be given a clean slate. It would become more prosperous and productive, and probably be better able to offer support economically and technologically. Current suffering will take a long time to defeat, and that's if we truly care.



			
				Julia said:
			
		

> Mr J, obviously you're at least partly doing the devil's advocate role, but most of us will agree about some of your points.




It's obviously a touchy subject and will stir emotion, so I think to some extent this comes down to emotion versus logic. We may be better off by letting nature take its course, but our emotions prevent us from doing nothing. I'm not going to suggest which is better, and perhaps the best approach is the middle ground.



> Rather than removing support entirely, how would it be if the middle class vote buying measures were removed? Earlier I raised the question of subsidised child care and the new maternity leave scheme. I'd personally be happy to see these wiped. Ditto the baby bonus.




Sure. Ultimately, welfare should be for those who need it. Personally I'm not against welfare, but I am against its use as a political tool for bribing and irresponsible social planning.



> There are already quite a lot of restrictions on people getting the dole, with it being suspended if they fail to turn up to interviews etc.




If they can't turn up it better be because they have a job interview!


----------



## Chris45 (11 October 2009)

Back in 2004 (I think), the “conservative” Howard govt. removed Superannuation from the Newstart Assets Test.

So, if a middle-aged single homeowner, with $millions in Superannuation, has liquid assets of less than $178,000 (bank, shares, funds, etc) and is bored with work, Centrelink will generously deposit $456 each fortnight into his bank account. If he’s a non-homeowner, he can have assets of up to $307,000.

All he has to do to qualify for this generosity is to make a feeble effort to find work by writing to, say, five businesses each week, randomly selected from the phone book, and ask for a job even though no jobs are being advertised. If he words his application letters carefully so as to make himself a rather unattractive prospective employee, the employers won’t even bother calling him in for an interview. Apart from the occasional "nuisance" interviews with his employment agency, he can then enjoy a relaxed and quite comfortable life at the taxpayer's expense. A few years ago, Tony Abbott introduced the requirement that job seekers on Newstart had to do fifteen hours per week of voluntary work. I wonder how easy it is for recalcitrant job seekers to get around that obligation?

The generosity of our welfare system is mind-boggling!


----------



## Riddick (11 October 2009)

J offers some valid ideas that are not really very new at all, but well documented in recent and living history, namely the removal of the underclass or "burdensome populace"

Malthus, who wrote at the end of the 19th century, describes almost a free maket approach to society, where diseases winnow the frail from the strong, the uneducated and undernourished are left to their own devices and only the upper class and as it stands more educated, can afford or are encouraged to breed. Kind of Huxleyesque in its vision, he saw practical application in modern (for his day) society. A hugely important factor was left out ohis thinking though and was later described after the fact by writers such as Jared Diamond in his book Collapse. Put simply: desperate people do desperate things.

The example he uses to illustrate his point is Rwanda. to sumarise, the system of preserving ownership of land, splitting it between sons and passing it ever down through generations led to a point at which land sizes were too small to sustain an individual let alone families. fathers refused to pass down land, certain individuals contrary to law and custom attrained more land and basically extorted a generation by making them work on the promise of getting land, then with holding payment. In the wash up of the civil unrest that followed the majority of those killed at the outset of the conflict were the rich or land owners. the lesson is simple. If you set out the get rid of the undesirables they will turn around and bite you. The only way out of this conundrum is to exterminate the 'undesirables'in one fell swoop. the word we use for that is genocide not a description any westernised country wants on its resume.
The lesson for us on this forum: if you were to stop the dole or welfare tomorrow an army of people who depend on government payments would be mighty peeved, and hungry desperate people do desperate things to survive. you can fill in the blanks.
so applying the economic theory of second best to a social situation, is it not better that we create a system whereby the "undesirables" are sustained at a level that a) provides them with the basic needs to survive and thereby stops the peasants revolting b) provides them the tools by which they can remain capable of contribution - ie fit healthy and trainable c) at a level of health that they can stay at home and out of hospitals d) creates a system of aspiration whereby the stipend they recieve is enough to give them a bit of time and money to create experiences for themselves that provide motivation and the desire to achieve.

so is our current system effective: Our government runs as a monopoly and in a monopoly, as there is no competition, things get done with no fear of reprisal, bankruptcy or accountability. so the easy answer is no: our system is not really effective. you can collect empirical evidence by walking down the street in any lower socio economic suburb in any city in the country. should people with no job spend their baby bonus (or bribe, whichever way you want to look at it) on a TV. No way. should we give them foodstamps and education allowances instead. Most likely.

emotion has nothing to do with and actually emotion has no place in debate. when emotion is involved in a debate it's called preaching. and preaching is a form of manipulation and manipulation is a form of "brainwashing". 

so logically we do need a safety net in some form. if only to stop a revolution of sorts.

but, logic also dictates that our current system, hijacked as it has been by the socialists (PAYE tax brackets are a form of socialism, so yes socialists), does not want to remove the all sacred "freedom of choice" from the welfare dependant minority who abuse the system.

a couple of things to think about. If welfare is a bribe to stop the great unwashed from banging on my door with flaming torches and pitchforks (a la french revolution) at midnight, then the pittance I contribute is a wise investment.

If the public health system is overburdened by the undeserving non contributors then great. I have private health and I choose the exercise that option.

If the undeserving breed up, then great, we have cannon fodder for the next regional conflict, people to wash my wind screen at the traffic lights and dudes to do the crap jobs that I don't want to do. I am, afterall, a capitalist and like other capitalist, I need people to do menial tasks that in the future, robots will perform.

And, to be honest, do I really care if some people slip through the cracks, take advantage of the system and create anexistence of sorts from welfare? To make a comparison to the animal kingdom, these folk are essentially the scavengers, arriving when the carcass is already just a pile of bones and maggotty entrails. And, like all scavengers, they choose to pad their nests out with their ill gotten gains. But scavengers never ever know how it feels to be the predator and are themselves only ever one slip away from becomming prey. 

sorry for the long post but good debate like the comments here deserve considered responses.

thanks for reading


----------



## overit (11 October 2009)

Well put Riddick!  I wish I could write like that! 

Until then I will stick to posting pictures and videos! :


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (11 October 2009)

Centrlink is just another source of funds.

One year before I present there , I will be all in cash and gift to my descendents every cent I have.

I will sell garpalmansion as well and give the proceeds away to Vinnies or some other worthy cause.

I fully intend being on a pension with all the benefits when I retire.

Free bus, reduced price of medicines, free doctor, free apartment on the Strand due to rent relief and ownership by my favourite grandson, reduced fees at the opera, concerts, cheap meals and grog at the Cowboys club in town, and I believe even the local brothel is giving pensioner discounts , though I'm not saying I'd avail myself of that relief.

They did call Welfare , Relief in the 30's I believe.

Now I know why.

gg


----------



## son of baglimit (11 October 2009)

julia

i congratulate you on creating yet another thread for the ultra right wing, close minded, 'every welfare recipient is a drain on society' believers who at times flood AUSSIE STOCK FORUMS. if those same folk are happy for these parasites to have to camp in the streets, MAYBE THEIR STREETS, then fine.
otherwise, why stir this pot again ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (11 October 2009)

son of baglimit said:


> julia
> 
> i congratulate you on creating yet another thread for the ultra right wing, close minded, 'every welfare recipient is a drain on society' believers who at times flood AUSSIE STOCK FORUMS. if those same folk are happy for these parasites to have to camp in the streets, MAYBE THEIR STREETS, then fine.
> otherwise, why stir this pot again ?




sob, as Pauline said, please explain!!

gg


----------



## Julia (11 October 2009)

Julia said:


> I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.
> 
> Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves.  (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)
> 
> ...






son of baglimit said:


> julia
> 
> i congratulate you on creating yet another thread for the ultra right wing, close minded, 'every welfare recipient is a drain on society' believers who at times flood AUSSIE STOCK FORUMS. if those same folk are happy for these parasites to have to camp in the streets, MAYBE THEIR STREETS, then fine.
> otherwise, why stir this pot again ?




Son of baglimit, If it pleases you to be sarcastic towards me, then that's fine.
A repeat of my original post is above.  I simply asked the questions.  I was prompted to do this as a result of some of the conflicting views expressed in another thread which had more to do with welfare than the topic of the thread.

The fact that four pages have been filled in this thread seems to me an indication that plenty of people have something to say.

Instead of making snaky remarks to me, why don't you offer your own view if you feel the thread is unbalanced?

It's not up to me to monitor or judge the contributions on this thread.

And, frankly, I resent the suggestion that I'm pro right wing philosophies.
On the contrary, although I resent middle class vote buying 'welfare' I'm very, very conscious of the need for a well funded system to look after people who are genuinely disadvantaged.
Having worked with disadvantaged people for nearly two decades, I'd say I'm in a reasonable position to comment.

Now we will with much interest await your own views about the welfare system in Australia, what you approve of within it, if anything, and how you would like to see it changed.
That would be rather more constructive, surely, than just having a go at me?


----------



## Bobby (11 October 2009)

You all need to understand that without welfare the low lives that abuse it would be costing us much more in jail .

Its like a bribe we pay to stop more crime .

Sad STUFF HEY !


----------



## Riddick (12 October 2009)

overit said:


> Well put Riddick!  I wish I could write like that!
> 
> Until then I will stick to posting pictures and videos! :




thanks, too kind. just appreciate that folk read it and think it makes sense.


----------



## Riddick (12 October 2009)

son of baglimit said:


> julia
> 
> i congratulate you on creating yet another thread for the ultra right wing, close minded, 'every welfare recipient is a drain on society' believers who at times flood AUSSIE STOCK FORUMS. if those same folk are happy for these parasites to have to camp in the streets, MAYBE THEIR STREETS, then fine.
> otherwise, why stir this pot again ?




so you HAVEN'T actually READ what 90% of people have said? do you work for the public service?


----------



## Riddick (12 October 2009)

Julia said:


> Son of baglimit, If it pleases you to be sarcastic towards me, then that's fine.
> 
> The fact that four pages have been filled in this thread seems to me an indication that plenty of people have something to say.
> 
> ...




Thats ok Julia. When he posts something here Riddick will DESTROY his arguement.


----------



## son of baglimit (12 October 2009)

Julia said:


> Son of baglimit, If it pleases you to be sarcastic towards me, then that's fine.
> A repeat of my original post is above.  I simply asked the questions.  I was prompted to do this as a result of some of the conflicting views expressed in another thread which had more to do with welfare than the topic of the thread.
> 
> The fact that four pages have been filled in this thread seems to me an indication that plenty of people have something to say.
> ...




julia - yes i was being sarcastic, onviously, but i did not suggest for a moment that YOU were right wing.

i am however sick of threads that allow those close minded, commonly very right wing folk another place to rant their views. every time we have a thread regarding politics, budget decisions, welfare, immigration (the list goes on) out come those that hijack the thread with views that clearly lack thoughts beyond their own wallet or the cosy neighbourhood they reside in.

arent their thoughts more at home in the 'my comments' section of any news.com.au website ?

and riddick, yes, regretably i am a public servant. regretable because the majority of views expressed there are commonly at the other end of the spectrum, and just as lacking in thought due to the effects on the wallet.
also regretable because it is truly insane how much time is wasted on procedures that are only in place to hinder the public, not service it.

joe blow - how about yet another rule for ASF. you require stock posts to provide analysis/charts/careful explanations regarding comments - why not the same for those threads that are of a general nature. why not comments requiring analysis from both sides of the fence, rather than just provide a forum for the close minded.


----------



## Tink (12 October 2009)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *starwars_guy456  *
> 
> 
> ...





This whole thread has just been attacking people

Unbelievable


----------



## wayneL (12 October 2009)

son of baglimit said:


> joe blow - how about yet another rule for ASF. you require stock posts to provide analysis/charts/careful explanations regarding comments - why not the same for those threads that are of a general nature. why not comments requiring analysis from both sides of the fence, rather than just provide a forum for the close minded.




As far as I know, there is no impingement on any political view on ASF.

Any lefties with a legitimate argument, step right up and state your opinion.

As a matter of fact, as a classical liberal with a few mild but grudging social liberal overtones, I am considered of the near left. 

But believe you me, there is no political preference at ASF. State your case.


----------



## gooner (12 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> As far as I know, there is no impingement on any political view on ASF.
> 
> Any lefties with a legitimate argument, step right up and state your opinion.
> 
> ...




And no one could call be a rabid right wing nutter. Though agree there are plenty of them on ASF. Internet forums, newspaper sites etc just seem to attract a lot of very weird views


----------



## Tink (12 October 2009)

Who cares what political view a person has,  playing the ball not the man is how a discussion should be run and no way has that been the case in this thread..

All I can say is -- Grow up children, we arent in a playground anymore..


----------



## wayneL (12 October 2009)

Tink said:


> Who cares what political view a person has,  playing the ball not the man is how a discussion should be run and no way has that been the case in this thread..
> 
> All I can say is -- Grow up children, we arent in a playground anymore..



Tink, probably best to leave the moderating to the moderators.

But with the example set by Messrs. Rudd, Turnball et al, we shouldn't really be surprised. In fact, I think ASF members are somewhat more restrained than the  political "*elite*" (stated with a strong hint of irony).


----------



## wayneL (12 October 2009)

Tink said:


> This whole thread has just been attacking people
> 
> Unbelievable




That's not actually accurate, I have just reviewed the whole thread and to be frank, there were a couple of posts that went over the line. The rest was just robust debate.

Moderators can't physically read every post, so we rely on members using the "report post" feature at the bottom of every post.

If folks see a post they believe contravenes the code of conduct, can you please report it via this feature. That would help us keep things on the right side of the rules.

That said, politics is an emotive topic and we shouldn't be surprised if there are strong views.

Thanks


----------



## Joe Blow (12 October 2009)

son of baglimit said:


> joe blow - how about yet another rule for ASF. you require stock posts to provide analysis/charts/careful explanations regarding comments - why not the same for those threads that are of a general nature. why not comments requiring analysis from both sides of the fence, rather than just provide a forum for the close minded.




Baglimit: As Wayne suggested there is not much censorship of political views on ASF unless those views are completely over the top. What you see in this thread is simply a typical cross section of the views of ordinary Australians. We have left wing perspectives and right wing perspectives. There are closed minds (as well as open ones) on both sides of the political spectrum.

What I don't want to see is threads like this degenerating into personal attacks and insults. That's what makes me cranky. People are free to take issue with the views and opinions of others. That's what forums are all about. There is nothing wrong with robust debate. However, I do not consider insults and name calling to be a part of that.

Please note I am not accusing anyone of anything, just making a few observations.


----------



## Julia (12 October 2009)

Tink said:


> Who cares what political view a person has,  playing the ball not the man is how a discussion should be run and no way has that been the case in this thread..
> 
> All I can say is -- Grow up children, we arent in a playground anymore..




Tink, I disagree with your above assessment, with respect.

I'd say the same to you as I have said to Son of Baglimit, i.e. instead of criticising those of us who are contributing, and/or - as Wayne has suggested - appointing yourself to a moderating role, why don't you contribute your views about the welfare system?

You frequently comment on whether a previous contribution was "well said", or alternatively, criticise as above.  That's fine and your right, but I'd be much more interested in your actual views about this or other subjects.


----------



## greggy (12 October 2009)

Joe Blow said:


> Baglimit: As Wayne suggested there is not much censorship of political views on ASF unless those views are completely over the top. What you see in this thread is simply a typical cross section of the views of ordinary Australians. We have left wing perspectives and right wing perspectives. There are closed minds (as well as open ones) on both sides of the political spectrum.
> 
> What I don't want to see is threads like this degenerating into personal attacks and insults. That's what makes me cranky. People are free to take issue with the views and opinions of others. That's what forums are all about. There is nothing wrong with robust debate. However, I do not consider insults and name calling to be a part of that.
> 
> Please note I am not accusing anyone of anything, just making a few observations.




Hi Joe,

Well written as per normal.
The beauty about me is that I'm right in the middle, a moderate, so I get attacked from both sides...LOL..thats life and that politics for you. We live in a democracy and are all entitled to our own views.
I firmly believe in a well targeted welfare system as per the one we currently have in place. Yes, its not perfect but its far better than not having one at all as Jonno suggests. Australia is still the lucky country and has always tried its best to look after the needy.
My brother is severely retarded and without the disability pension would live in absolute poverty. This is just a classic example of the need for a welfare system...but the list is endless.
Everyone sees things from different perspectives. During the week, I work long hours to support my family with a bit of share trading (my capitalist side). 
As I have worked for and continue to work as a volunteer for a charity at weekends, I often meet the forgotten people in our society (e.g. the unemployed and homeless, the disabled). I only look down on people in order to give them a hand up. I continue to have the upmost respect for the likes of Julia who have worked hard for diasdvantaged members of our society. Lets all do our little to make Australia a better place to live in.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (12 October 2009)

son of baglimit said:


> julia
> 
> i congratulate you on creating yet another thread for the ultra right wing, close minded, 'every welfare recipient is a drain on society' believers who at times flood AUSSIE STOCK FORUMS. if those same folk are happy for these parasites to have to camp in the streets, MAYBE THEIR STREETS, then fine.
> otherwise, why stir this pot again ?




sob, Julia can be a bit of a stirrer at times, but I know that she has a heart of gold and is a caring and good person. Sometimes she posts just to stir the pot and her sense of humour can get up people's noses sometimes.

If you want to you can twig your asf and put her on ignore.



greggy said:


> Hi Joe,
> 
> Well written as per normal.
> The beauty about me is that I'm right in the middle, a moderate, so I get attacked from both sides...LOL..thats life and that politics for you. We live in a democracy and are all entitled to our own views.
> ...




You are a good bloke and just like me in the the centre politically, everyone else is either right or left.

Centrelink was set up just for blokes like your brother and I would fight any decrease in his benefits.

Don't the left and the right go on, mate.

Why can't everyone be like you and me and wayneL, a classical liberal with a few mild but grudging social liberal overtones.

I do I must admit vary between that and anarchist.

gg


----------



## GumbyLearner (12 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> Tink, probably best to leave the moderating to the moderators.
> 
> But with the example set by Messrs. Rudd, Turnball et al, we shouldn't really be surprised. In fact, I think ASF members are somewhat more restrained than the  political "*elite*" (stated with a strong hint of irony).




Excellent point WayneL.

Sometimes ASFers can be deluded about the above stated fact. In the end the elites are all mates and can't wait for their consultancy roles when the electorate have had a gutful of them. They rub shoulders with one another and generally put on a nice routine for question time et al. There are a few exceptions of course.

Anyway back to the laziness debate!


----------



## boofhead (12 October 2009)

There is some ignorance about the welfare system. Some about how much they get paid but mostly about eligibility and the various conditions once you are in the system - especially Newstart.

Centrelink has some form of access to tax records. They also have back checks. You will be asked about things from a few years ago - not just 1 year ago. As an exercise you can go in to a Centrelink office and get the forms. You may be surprised.

I think the welfare system should be kept but improved. Change it to create a lot of little federal government projects with local focus. Create many part time jobs for 1-2 days a week - simple things like keep an area of a reserve or park clear which often doesn't require much skill. The suitable agency can handle the more specialised roles.

I admit a bias to supporting welfare because I receive it. I supported the idea of it while I worked too (company closures suck, but lucky enough to get full entitlements.)

I will focus on the unemployed that Newstart - the issues should focus on how JSA agencies operate. They don't help the unemployed in a useful manner. They are pushed by paperwork, bureaucracy and whatever it takes to hit KPIs and look good but rarely help in a useful manner in getting people in jobs. After seeing how they operate I can understand why the unemployment rate has been better than anticipated - people give up and drop out of the system. I can see why depression is an issue for many unemployed. It is an innefective system driven by politicians and votes.

I remember Abbott or Hockey in 2007 making a comment about anyone still unemployed didn't want to work and didn't deserve the payments. Surely that is a sign their system is broken or there are not the vacancies they think exist.

Maybe they could offer a lower pay to those that don't want to work. It could be setup with the ATO to trigger legitimate income sources detected for review. It frees up many people that work in the system.

Governments also know they need unemployment - helps to put downward pressure on wage increases and inflation.

Governments looking after the health system better will also put downware pressure on the welfare (social security) costs.


----------



## Happy (13 October 2009)

boofhead said:


> ...
> 
> I admit a bias to supporting welfare because I receive it. I supported the idea of it while I worked too (company closures suck, but lucky enough to get full entitlements.)
> 
> ….




This should be sole purpose of welfare; it should be given to genuine recipients.

Luckily, besides all the people who abuse system, there are real cases that get support when they need.


----------



## Calliope (13 October 2009)

greggy said:


> The beauty about me is that...




Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I see you more as a cute duckling, greggy.


----------



## greggy (13 October 2009)

Calliope said:


> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I see you more as a cute duckling, greggy.




Hi Calliope,

Cheers mate. My 3 year old daughter (at the time) chose the duck for me at that time..  Every time I post and look at the duck it reminds me of how lucky I am to have both a wife and daughter (now 5 years old) that I totally adore.

Garpal Gumnut, thanks for your heart felt comments especially about fighting for the disabled which includes my severely retarded brother. Julia starts many thought provoking threads and like you said has a heart of gold.

I've met so many nice people on this forum and have been happy to return after a long break. If I start mentioning everyones name it will take a week to write such a post. To everyone, a big thank you.


----------



## Calliope (13 October 2009)

greggy said:


> Hi Calliope,
> 
> Cheers mate. My 3 year old daughter (at the time) chose the duck for me at that time..  Every time I post and look at the duck it reminds me of how lucky I am to have both a wife and daughter (now 5 years old) that I totally adore.
> 
> ...




Hi Greggy,

After reading your posts I have gone off the boil. I realise that I really have little to complain about.

However, I am in the middle of e-tax 2009 and things are not looking good. Early in the GFC I transferred most of my liquid assets from shares to term deposits. Now the interest chickens have come home to roost. My tax bill will be about three Pink Bat installations higher than last year. 

I wouldn't mind so much if it was channelled to some worthy welfare recipients. All the best to you and your family.


----------



## CooksHat (13 October 2009)

Hi
Im only new here but i was looking through this thread and thought i might be able to give some people a diffrent view.

Im currently on Newstart (The Dole) im a 37 year old male i have no children or significant other.

To start off with i dont like being on the dole, but given my location i have little choice.. im in a area of no industry to speak of. We mainly have Retail and Hospitality thats about it.

I wasnt always on the Dole i spent 12 years in IT until that got "Outsourced" i worked my way up by working all day and studing all night 7 days a week.

I also have driven trucks,forklifts, worked in kitchens all sorts of jobs mostly casual as i said above its the location.

If the govt was to offer some sort of REAL training in order to get the dole id grab it with both hands. Ive spent sometime working in the north and west of melbourne were i see tradies working in factories and frankly id give just about anything to be able to have the oppertunity.

If the govt would relax the entrance to the military i would gladly join but being an asthmatic that rules me out... why the gove would relax the rules and let me in as a aprentice cook or maybe train me as a nurse i have no idea.. these people dont see combat hence the need to run would be low i would think.

I hav also tried to get into the Emergency services but again asthma and hundreds of fit healthy recruits make it impossable.

I have done work for the dole ..cooking for the homeless .. it was a joke!

Ive applied for over 200 apprenticeships over the last 2 years and got told that im to old or other excuses.

Do i want to be on the dole... hell no!! but to get off the dole you need to be given a hand up .. not just a yeah we'll train you for a job that wont be there whe your finished and you'll have no real qualifications eg traineeship's that pay $5 per hour then they sack you when the traineeship is finished.. yup been there to!

So id be interested in after a year or two of being treated like this and having to deal with the Job Network system how many people would just given up....Im sure that what has happened to a lot of unemployed.

So there you go thats the other side,I thik maybe if a few people worried more abou twhat they could do for people rather than what other people may or may not get the country would be better off... 

Just a though .... thanks for listening.

Jimbo


----------



## overit (13 October 2009)

CooksHat said:


> Hi
> Im only new here but i was looking through this thread and thought i might be able to give some people a diffrent view.




Good post mate.

Some people need to open their blinkers a little. Read this article from the cairns post a few weeks ago as an eye opener. 



> Jobless rate hits 12.5pc
> 
> Friday, September 18, 2009
> 
> ...


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 October 2009)

CooksHat said:


> Hi
> Im only new here but i was looking through this thread and thought i might be able to give some people a diffrent view.
> 
> Im currently on Newstart (The Dole) im a 37 year old male i have no children or significant other.
> ...




It's tough when no-one is willing to give you a fair-go.

The only advice I can offer is to operate outside the Centrelink system. I'm pretty sure they are 100 times more useless than you or I.

I would start knocking on doors. Face to face with employers. It's very easy for anyone to dismiss your enquiry via the phone, email, fax etc..
Get in their face and show potential employers whether they have advertised or not that you want to work and that you want to work for them. The best thing anyone unemployed can do, is sell themselves. **** third parties Job Agencies etc.. especially Centrelink. Face-to-face is the only way someone will give you go. Done it 3 times in the past and it WORKS!


----------



## wayneL (13 October 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> It's tough when no-one is willing to give you a fair-go.
> 
> The only advice I can offer is to operate outside the Centrelink system. I'm pretty sure they are 100 times more useless than you or I.
> 
> ...




From the other side of the fence, agree entirely.

When I was in manufacturing, anyone with the gumption to knock on the door was immediately considered. At least 75% of our guys were door knockers.


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> From the other side of the fence, agree entirely.
> 
> When I was in manufacturing, anyone with the gumption to knock on the door was immediately considered. At least 75% of our guys were door knockers.




Yes, it may seem old fashioned and an inconvenient excess for the job-seeker. But if you go that extra mile, that's the kind of initiative people in business will value. You can only be rejected so often, eventually someone will say YES! Persistence always wins out in the employment seeking game.


----------



## Julia (13 October 2009)

CooksHat said:


> Hi
> So id be interested in after a year or two of being treated like this and having to deal with the Job Network system how many people would just given up....Im sure that what has happened to a lot of unemployed.
> 
> So there you go thats the other side,I thik maybe if a few people worried more abou twhat they could do for people rather than what other people may or may not get the country would be better off...
> ...



Jimbo, I know it's just so difficult and de-motivating.   And the mealy mouthed platitudes from government probably make it worse.

I reckon Gumby's on the right track.  Thousands of people write letters and job applications.  The bloke who demonstrates sufficient initiative to go and see a prospective employer, indicating a willingness to do anything at the beginning, stands out.

Best of luck.


----------



## boofhead (14 October 2009)

Centrelink is not the issue. Centrelink mostly only deals with payments etc. The vacancies are handle by recruitment agencies and Job Services Australia agencies (outsourced but govt funded.) Centrelink personnel are normally pleasant to deal with and understand. It is always interesting to read figures that come out of Centrelink - they are often a better indicator than ABS random stats.

JSA agencies are mostly useless but are good at paperwork to look after themselves and like to set up various coarses to get extra govt money with no real evaluation of how effective they are.

JSA agencies fall back on to cold canvassing as the advice they give. That highlights how little effect they have. Perhaps a lot of money could be saved by moving their work to a government department and give all new signups to Newstart a DVD or VHS recording on various aspects of looking for work with a book. JSA agencies seem to be reasonably clueless on how to really help the job seekers. Most of the good JSA employees quickly find better work and the unemployed are mostly left with the dregs.

I'll say it again, the reason why the unemployment rate looks so good is people get fed up with the system in place they drop out.

I know what the cook dude is feeling. While the unemployment rate looks as good as it does all forms of government and many media commentators speak down how bad things are. It's not until you look at hours worked that you see the big problem.


----------



## greggy (14 October 2009)

Calliope said:


> Hi Greggy,
> 
> After reading your posts I have gone off the boil. I realise that I really have little to complain about.
> 
> ...




Thanks Calliope for your nice words. All the best to you and your family also.
Overall, our welfare system is well targeted although it could do with some tinkering around the edges.
I got back into the market back in March this year after a long break. Late in 2007 I also moved to cash.


----------



## greggy (14 October 2009)

CooksHat said:


> Hi
> Im only new here but i was looking through this thread and thought i might be able to give some people a diffrent view.
> 
> Im currently on Newstart (The Dole) im a 37 year old male i have no children or significant other.
> ...




Hi Cooks Hat,

I wish you well in your search to find another job.  It must be hard for some people to find the motivation to continue searching after so many knockbacks. 
I was unemployed for a short while in 1991 during a bad recession here in Victoria.  The unemployment rate went well into double digits aided by the incompetence of both the Cain and Kirner Labor State Governments. 
I ended up doing voluntary work with the Red Cross. This led to the opening of some doors for me as employers were impressed with my work ethic.  This was in the days where there was no work for the dole scheme. It might be an idea for you to consider the same.  At least it fills a gap on the resume and gets you more out and about.
Living on the dole must be hard indeed. I agree that the government should put extra funding into training places for those out of work.  Once again, best of luck.


----------



## nunthewiser (14 October 2009)

Dear cooks hat 

you posted your single with no kids etc etc 

come to Geraldton WA , grab a tick test COUNTRY taxi drivers license (which i can help you get)and an ABN number 

i will give you work ( a taxi to drive on a % basis ) 

sincere offer .. pm for further details if intrested 

i understand that relocation etc may be not worth it or not viable as its hardly a career oportunity , but it is cold hard cash and good for a fill in the gaps kind of job

an unusual sort of job , maybe not suited for some , but certainly intresting


----------



## CooksHat (14 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> Dear cooks hat
> 
> you posted your single with no kids etc etc
> 
> ...





Sorry i couldnt PM i need 5 posts or more to do that so it seems 

But here was what i was going to say

Hi, Thanks for the offer but i think with relocating and house rental it proberly wouldnt be worth it. But thank you so much for the offer ... its nice to get a replay from anyone these days 


Also id like to thank everyone for their kind words,i'll keep sticking at it something will break from me soon im sure.

Thanks again everyone!

CooksHat


----------



## awg (14 October 2009)

hard to know where to start, as I spent many years working in the system, in a variety of jobs.

Could write many pages, however want to keep it short.

The system is driven by dollars and politics, individual circumstances are a distant last

As such, there will be a tremendous upheaval faced with respect to the numbers situation of the ageing population, people dont realise how drastic this is.

In addition, pensioners are politically astute, they sent John Hewson out on his ar$e.

I dont have the answer for this, other than I personally aim to be too wealthy to ever qualify, going good so far, but who knows what will happen in the future?

Youth UB is a perenially difficult problem.

As is Disability pension, and the many that are not fit for full-time work, due to a wide variety of physical and psychological impediments, but do not technically qualify for DSP.

The ABS figures of UB bear no relation to the real picture, they should publish Centrelink figures.

Full and frank debate of the issues is not encouraged by any political or bureaucratic participant, quite the opposite, I can attest, many in charge are amazingly ignorant and/or unwilling to detail the matters.

4% UB is regarded by many economists as full employment, and for all intents and purposes, I agree.

IMO, most welfare recipients can/should/want to contribute to society in a meaningful, non-persucutory fashion, there is so much that could be achieved if everyone would face up to in a fair dinkum way...dont hold yr breath tho.

The for-profit JSA system is a waste of resources, to a large extent.

I would estimate welfare "fraud" costs about 10% of the budget, that is incorporating the completely undeserving. 

Others may think differently, I am to the left.

To finish, a story

A man came to see me one day, told me he was broke, needed some money.

I said show us your ID etc..all he had was an Immigration document that showed he had come to Oz from Poland aged 2 yrs.

He had no Drivers licence, birth cert, TFN, or bank details.

I said " dont think I can help u mate, whats the story?"

He told me thus " I have never recieved welfare benefits, I work for cash, I own a horse and ride the country as a swagman"

guy looked like Alby Mangels..ie tough and weatherbeaten.

I said " so wheres the horse"

he said "outside"...sure enough, tethered to a telegraph pole outside, on the Pacific Highway, was a horse with swag.

I gave him a cheque for 1 weeks dole, and he rode away

true story, happened many yrs ago, and i got in trouble of my boss


----------



## Chris45 (14 October 2009)

awg said:


> I gave him a cheque for 1 weeks dole, and he rode away



I wonder how he cashed the cheque?


----------



## awg (14 October 2009)

Chris45 said:


> I wonder how he cashed the cheque?





In the good ole days, Commonwealth Govt cheques were like cash, and would be exchanged by the Post Office, pub, or even corner store, usually for a fee.

I didnt care anyway, I believed him, the horse was the clincher, ( and I properly registered the name on his Immigation paper on the national database.)

After multiple thousands, you got a feeling for a true or untrue story.

BTW, I once had the lovely job of issuing cheques to the prison release clients.

It was the first thing they had to do after leaving prison, straight to the dole office for some dosh..that could be interesting at times

many public servants forget the second half of public servant


----------



## FlyingFox (28 April 2013)

I wonder if Julia and Tony went out campaigning, how many "Carina's" they would find....

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/21/w...ate-ample-to-a-fault.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


----------



## Longjaw (28 April 2013)

chode84 said:


> Im about to head out so Im going to summarize my response.
> 
> Long story short, when I lost my job at the start of this year due to company going in to administration, I went to centrelink to claim to get some assistance paying the mortgage we had acquired three months earlier. I was told I would receive the handsome amount of $26 a fortnight for being unemployed because my gf worked (on a minimum wage, shes a student). Ive worked since the age of 12 (albeit illegal and not paying taxes until 14, 25 now) and this was the first time Ive required assistance due to being unlucky really.
> 
> SO my point about welfare is, it seemed like people who actually need it (myself) just to tie them over in a sticky situation get screwed and those that f**k the system reap the rewards.




Kudos for you for being a man when your still only a boy,
I am sorry that you are unable to access the system that others seem to freely achieve,
I see it all the time being a part time counceller and the genuine ones seem to miss out,what bothers me is others that seem to be on a lifelong pension for no known reason?? (You must know one or two?)

I don't know the answer to this but maybe Julia can answer it better,my advise is don't let it get you down,hop on your bike/car and knock on all doors.

Offer to work for free for the day (Legally they have to pay you anyway)and see what happens, put your heart into that job that day and you might be surprised.:

Remember you cant make a worker out of a tradesman but you can make a tradesman out of a worker.

This is a very important statement to remember,this is why people who have no formal training but have initiative  become millionaires while college educated people can remain unemployed.


----------



## Longjaw (28 April 2013)

wayneL said:


> From the other side of the fence, agree entirely.
> 
> When I was in manufacturing, anyone with the gumption to knock on the door was immediately considered. At least 75% of our guys were door knockers.



I also make it a point to find a job for anyone who has the guts to knock on our door,ready for work.


----------



## SirRumpole (29 July 2019)

Robo-debt charges dead people.

Maybe we should have a Royal Commission.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07...ed-against-dead-disability-pensioner/11342994


----------



## sptrawler (12 September 2019)

SirRumpole said:


> Robo-debt charges dead people.
> 
> Maybe we should have a Royal Commission.




Humans charge for non existent people.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...t-family-day-care-scheme-20190911-p52q77.html

If people were honest, maybe our welfare costs would be more manageable.
Australia the good Country, giving people a fair go.


----------



## chiff (12 September 2019)

sptrawler said:


> Humans charge for non existent people.
> 
> https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...t-family-day-care-scheme-20190911-p52q77.html
> 
> ...



Whenever I think of honest people I think of Politicians.If they get caught rorting they just pay it back without penalty.One in particular is Sussan ley...demoted from the ministry under Turnbull for making excessive trips to the Gold Coast...looking for property to buy we were told.Now she is back as a minister-I hope she is wearing a location bracelet.In the real world her employment would have been terminated-not so in politics .They want people to have drug tests???


----------



## sptrawler (2 October 2019)

These sort of people bring the whole system into disrepute, then you end up with something like Robo-Debt collection, which makes life difficult for everyone.

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/w...elink-pretending-single-mother-235917989.html

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/man-busted-lying-to-centrelink-105-different-times-033219219.html


----------



## sptrawler (28 January 2020)

It looks as though Robodebt will be sorted out, it sounds as though everyone who receives newstart or the age pension, will have to enter any external earnings into Mygov, well that will be a pain in the butt.


----------



## sptrawler (29 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Robo-debt charges dead people.
> 
> Maybe we should have a Royal Commission.
> 
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07...ed-against-dead-disability-pensioner/11342994



Sounds like Robo-debt will have its brother in a few years, Robo-cop.









						China develops AI 'prosecutor' that can charge citizens with crimes with '97% accuracy'
					

China has developed an artificial intelligence capable of charging people with more than 97% accuracy, replacing prosecutors “to a certain extent,” according to its researchers.  How it works: The machine, built and tested by the Shanghai Pudong People’s Procuratorate — China’s largest district...




					finance.yahoo.com


----------



## SirRumpole (29 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Sounds like Robo-debt will have its brother in a few years, Robo-cop.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Now that would be a great system to hack into. Charge all the CCP members with treason, and have them all shot.


----------



## basilio (3 December 2022)

There is currently a Royal Commission into the Robo debt scandal which was  launched by Scott Morrison who ultimately presided over the total xxxxing disaster his baby had become.

From the very beginning it was clear that the premise of Robo Debt was wrong. The concept that one could take an amount  earned over  a few months and then average it over a year directly contradicted the way welfare payments are calculated.

This was also clear to Centerlink employees.  At least one of them wrote directly to her boss and detailed her concerns over the very basic mistakes in the proposal.

How far did this go ?  Be interesting to see who is made responsible for this on going travesty.

You are being misled’: the Centrelink worker who tried to stop robodebt as it started​Exclusive: As the disastrous program gathered pace, Colleen Taylor reached out to her boss with strong concerns, only to be dismissed as overly sympathetic to welfare recipients

Follow our Australia news live blog for the latest updates
Get our morning and afternoon news emails, free app or daily news podcast






Former Centrelink employee Colleen Taylor says she is one of many Centrelink officials who she believes raised concerns about the robodebt program. Photograph: Dan Peled/Dan Peled for The Guardian Australia

Supported by




About this content
Luke Henriques-Gomes Social affairs and inequality reporter
Sat 3 Dec 2022 01.00 AEDTLast modified on Sat 3 Dec 2022 09.21 AEDT



It was nearly 2pm on 7 February 2017 when Centrelink frontline worker Colleen Taylor sent off an email that may yet occupy a small place in Australian political history.

Among about 3,000 words of jargon and painstaking detail about Centrelink processes was a statement of moral clarity. “As a compliance unit,” Taylor wrote, “we should not be the ones stealing from our customers.”
The subject of Taylor’s email was what had just been dubbed “robodebt”. Now the subject of a royal commission, the disastrous program was launched by the then social services minister Scott Morrison in 2015 but only unleashed at scale towards the end of 2016. It then hit the headlines.

Taylor’s email, courageously sent to the most senior person in a department of more than 30,000 staff members – Kathryn Campbell – was released among a tranche of hundreds of documents by a royal commission this week.

... As a frontline staff member who had worked in Centrelink compliance for nearly six years, Taylor had become increasingly outraged by the new ways she and her colleagues were being asked to calculate alleged welfare debts. She had already shot off an initial – also lengthy – email outlining her concerns to managers in January 2016.

She knew Campbell’s claims were wrong. Things had changed. Her email to Campbell is a prescient, devastating take-down of the program.

*......Directly contradicting her boss, Taylor wrote: “There has been a very dramatic change within the last 18 months to the way in which compliance assesses income and calculates and recovers debt. I was involved in both the old and new processes and can provide a first-hand explanation to you.”*

Taylor identified several key issues, including the use of “income averaging” – the central plank of the robodebt scheme – which was subsequently found to be unlawful by a court, leading to a $1.8bn settlement. Taylor explained that staff had previously used ATO data (annual pay statements) as a guide to see if someone may have underreported their fortnightly income to Centrelink. Then they would seek information from the person’s employer so they could properly investigate the case.

*....Taylor says she is one of many Centrelink officials who she believed had raised concerns. “I did say, ‘This is the sort of thing that ends up in a royal commission,’” she says. “I also said, ‘People will commit suicide.’ And it absolutely devastates me that that’s what happened. The feeling of hopelessness up against the bureaucracy would be overwhelming.”*

Taylor is yet to be contacted by the royal commission.

“Once you demonise people, you can get away with a lot of things,” Taylor says now.

“We went from this thing that 95% [of welfare recipients] are doing the right thing, to, almost 95% are ripping us off because of this data-matching.

*“We were compliance officers and we were the ones stealing from our customers. How crazy was that? It’s just unbelievable.”









						‘You are being misled’: the Centrelink worker who tried to stop robodebt as it started
					

Exclusive: As the disastrous program gathered pace, Colleen Taylor reached out to her boss with strong concerns, only to be dismissed as overly sympathetic to welfare recipients




					www.theguardian.com
				



*


----------

