Tony Cuts Bludgers Funds

[Boggo]

Next thing some turkey will be saying that the recipients of social welfare should be conscripted into the armed forces.

Turkey #1 here, if it can be established that they have no other ambition in life other than to scab of the people who are working and attempting to contribute to society then yes I am a turkey.

Yank the earrings and other taxpayer funded metalware out, give them a haircut and kick them out of bed at 5 every morning.

The ANZACS who we are forever grateful to didn't sit around shopping malls and scribble graffiti on public and private property just for the hell of it.

In the long run these characters will thank you for changing their lives for the better and the public will thank whoever has the balls to make the decision for the reduction in crime and vandalism.

Look at the problems they are having in the British Isles where they now have second and third generation career bludgers with law and public order problems reaching critical levels.

As a minimum the Swedish National Service model should be considered.
http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/en/About-the-Armed-Forces/The-Swedish-military-service-system/

Any other turkeys out there ?

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Next thing some turkey will be saying that the recipients of social welfare should be conscripted into the armed forces.

Mate, that is the last thing the Australian Defence Force would want.

Believe me.

The very last thing and only a boofhead would suggest it.

gg

 

[Smurf1976]

Remind me just how much of taxpayer's funds were recently used bailing out speculators globally? Now consider the comparatively trivial amount spent on health, welfare, environment, education...

The banking elite are the real bludgers who have managed to take a sizeable chunk of global GDP and many brilliant minds and apply it all to the production of absolutely NOTHING of value to anyone. Then they expect those who actually produce real wealth to bail them out when it all goes wrong.

That's the real bludging, those sitting at home watching TV are a trivial cost in comparisson.

 

[cutz]

That's the real bludging, those sitting at home watching TV are a trivial cost in comparisson.

Unfortunately Smurf some factions prefer to go after the weak and the voiceless, the narrow minded feed on this rhetoric.

Imagine what would happen if the government decided to pull the pin on negative gearing and associated tax breaks causing a freefall in prices ending the rampant speculation, the squealing from the boomers would be unbearable.

 

[Julia]

My experience was that suitable individuals were extremely keen to take up work, and would do so if they were assisted in relocation expenses

Any fool could tell you that there is several thousand $ in expenses to move from western Sydney to Pilbarra...were is that gonna come from?

There is a $5000 government relocation allowance available. I'm not sure what criteria apply to this.

I'm a dole bludger and proud of it. :

Really? Why are you proud of it?
Why wouldn't you be more proud of having a job and actually contributing to the society of which you're a part?

I totally disagree, we live in Australia, a pittance must not be earned, this is the path down the slippery slide, the payoff for not working is living on a pittance, and the pittance is spent anyhow.

That's true, but cutz, extended periods on welfare simply do nothing positive for anyone's self esteem and just promote a victim mentality.
Just consider for yourself, if you stopped working because really it was just a bit too much of an effort, and sat around on the dole, how would you feel?
Happy? Satisfied? I don't think so.

This thread is attacking a section of the community, most are disadvantaged.

Disadvantage has many faces. One is being part of a family that has only known multi-generational welfare, where the idea of actually working to earn a living is completely foreign, and the notion of dependence is completely entrenched. There is nothing healthy about this, for the individual, or for our society.
Even work for the dole programmes, if engaged in genuine, productive work, at least encourage decent work habits and a sense of being useful.

To say that all people who are not actively seeking work are 'disadvantaged' is casting them into the same victim category as has happened for so long with aboriginal people, i.e. because they are so 'disadvantaged', then we can't possibly expect them to take responsibility for changing their lives, and becoming productive. As long as you foster this attitude, it will flourish.

If you read some of Noel Pearson's writing about his (aboriginal) people you will see how strongly he feels about what a disservice welfare has done for them. Exactly the same applies to unemployed people in the broader society.

 

[cutz]

Hi Julia,

All your points are very true and I certainly agree that getting caught up in an unwanted cycle of unemployment would be soul destroying but the point I was trying to make ( before getting sidetracked ) is that there may be an extremely small section of the community who choose to and are comfortable and happy being on the dole, these people should be left in peace.

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia,

All your points are very true and I certainly agree that getting caught up in an unwanted cycle of unemployment would be soul destroying but the point I was trying to make ( before getting sidetracked ) is that there may be an extremely small section of the community who choose to and are comfortable and happy being on the dole, these people should be left in peace.

Hi cutz,
I don't like the idea of that for young people, but agree absolutely for older people who will be rejected by employers on account of their age anyway.

I had a friend who a couple of years ago was retrenched at 58. Despite his best efforts, he couldn't find a job. But he was still subjected to the stupid indignity of trotting in to Centrelink with his list of potential employers to whom he'd made an approach for a job.

 

[Boggo]

section of the community who choose to and are comfortable and happy being on the dole, these people should be left in peace.

You have to be joking, are you seriously happy to have your taxes subsidising these people while elderly people who have worked all their lives and paid their taxes are lying on trolleys in corridors in our hospitals because there isn't enough money to go round.

Give them food vouchers for the local supermarket instead of money, money is what you earn not something you automatically get because you want to be left in peace.

 

[Boggo]

I had a friend who a couple of years ago was retrenched at 58. Despite his best efforts, he couldn't find a job. But he was still subjected to the stupid indignity of trotting in to Centrelink with his list of potential employers to whom he'd made an approach for a job.

This is what the dole is for, this person has probably worked and paid taxes for the last 40 years and is now making a genuine effort to find employment and not be perceived as burden on society.

I would gladly put my hand in my pocket and top up his current centrelink payment, and given the choice I would most definitely divert all the money that I may be contributing to any bludger (living in peace ) to this person.

 

[Space Invader101]

There are heaps of jobs about, and if people didn't have Centrelink bludge money, there would be even more.

gg

Do you have "Experience" because that's what's pad locked on nearly every easy job advertisement a moron could learn in 5 minutes flat to discourage unskilled workers.

Unless you consider being a stripper or telemarketer satisfying jobs.

Before you critisize me I do work, pay taxes and am over 30. I just don't believe in the arrogance of kicking people when they're down.

 

[gooner]

Turkey #1 here, if it can be established that they have no other ambition in life other than to scab of the people who are working and attempting to contribute to society then yes I am a turkey.

Yank the earrings and other taxpayer funded metalware out, give them a haircut and kick them out of bed at 5 every morning.

The ANZACS who we are forever grateful to didn't sit around shopping malls and scribble graffiti on public and private property just for the hell of it.

In the long run these characters will thank you for changing their lives for the better and the public will thank whoever has the balls to make the decision for the reduction in crime and vandalism.

Look at the problems they are having in the British Isles where they now have second and third generation career bludgers with law and public order problems reaching critical levels.

As a minimum the Swedish National Service model should be considered.
http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/en/About-the-Armed-Forces/The-Swedish-military-service-system/

Any other turkeys out there ?

I'm not a turkey.

If you were in the army facing off against the Taliban, the last thing you would want is a bludger watching your back. The army is a professional organisation and should no more be forced to take bludgers than any other organisation.

Hi cutz,
I don't like the idea of that for young people, but agree absolutely for older people who will be rejected by employers on account of their age anyway.

I had a friend who a couple of years ago was retrenched at 58. Despite his best efforts, he couldn't find a job. But he was still subjected to the stupid indignity of trotting in to Centrelink with his list of potential employers to whom he'd made an approach for a job.

It is not guaranteed that people will be rejected due to their age. As the pension age is 65, someone who is 58 has 7 years of work ahead of them. Is that a bit early to stop requiring them to work?

Whilst I am not on the dole, I have been unemployed for 18 months since being retrenched. I arrived in Australia in my late-20's (early 90's in the middle of a big recession, the one we had to have) and picked up a job quickly and easily. I now have lots of good Australian based experience but finding it very hard to get a job. Of course I am nearly 20 years older which is the crux of the matter.

The challenge facing older people looking for work (discrimination based on age) is not that different to the challenge faced by younger people looking for work (discrimination based on lack of experience or race (wrong colour) or background (Westie accents are no good if you want a job at Prada)), so personally, I think Abbot's idea is stupid. What if someone has a few children at 27 - they have to fly off to Kalgoorlie looking for work leaving their partner to handle the kids............

 

[Whiskers]

All this talk about bludgers is a joke, as far as I'm concerned among many things that makes this country great is if you wanna bludge and are happy to live on a pitance you can,

It seems to me that this phrase has been taken out of context a bit by some. It essentilly just reflects a part of the intrinsic freedom of democracy... HOWEVER, as implied...

personally though I think that most unemployed can't get a job because of the fact that there aren't enough jobs around.

the economic and strategic fact is that while unemployment may be say 5%, often there are no jobs that you are qualified to do available in (your) local community. They may be 100's or 1,000's of km away... which leads to...

There is a $5000 government relocation allowance available. I'm not sure what criteria apply to this.

I know family,neighbours and friends who work in the mining industry. There are two main factors why they often don't relocate their family to these areas.

The main one is the work can often be short term projects or often scaled back, even temporairly shut down when commodity prices fluctuate. A family member has moved for work as a tradesman in eastern Qld, WA and western Qld in the last few years. He's single so it's not too much of a problem. The cost and implications of moving a family in these situations is horrendous, even when there are schools etc reasonably available.

Secondly, mainly because of the above risks, many consider the relocation distruption too costly even with the 'relocation allowance' which may cover part of your moving expenses and probably not available to qualify every time you are stood down.

Really? Why are you proud of it?

I suspect he/she is :... but I know some who thrive on rorting love to get gov payments, grants, charity etc they are not entitled to, where they can.

 

[Julia]

This is what the dole is for, this person has probably worked and paid taxes for the last 40 years and is now making a genuine effort to find employment and not be perceived as burden on society.

I would gladly put my hand in my pocket and top up his current centrelink payment, and given the choice I would most definitely divert all the money that I may be contributing to any bludger (living in peace ) to this person.

Thanks, Boggo, it will cheer him up to hear what you've said.
And yes, he has indeed worked hard all his life, and done thousands of hours of volunteer work in the community as well.

It is not guaranteed that people will be rejected due to their age. As the pension age is 65, someone who is 58 has 7 years of work ahead of them. Is that a bit early to stop requiring them to work?

I understand what you're saying, gooner, and no, we do not want to foster the idea that people are on the scrap heap after 40 or some other arbitrary age. But in an area of high unemployment where someone has demonstrated that they have canvassed most of the employers in the town, perhaps they could be required to do, say, three days a week as a volunteer, rather than continue in the demeaning and fruitless search for a job that isn't there.

Whilst I am not on the dole, I have been unemployed for 18 months since being retrenched. I arrived in Australia in my late-20's (early 90's in the middle of a big recession, the one we had to have) and picked up a job quickly and easily. I now have lots of good Australian based experience but finding it very hard to get a job. Of course I am nearly 20 years older which is the crux of the matter.

So you know what I'm talking about then.
All the best for finding a job soon, gooner.

 

[TheBigSponge]

Look leave us bludgers alone OK, or else lol

 

[Chris45]

they could be required to do, say, three days a week as a volunteer, rather than continue in the demeaning and fruitless search for a job that isn't there.

I remember that, a few years ago, Tony Abbott introduced the requirement that everyone on Newstart had to do 15-20 hrs a week of Community or Voluntary work if they didn't have any paid work, which seemed to me to be a reasonable proposal.

Did this policy work or did the 'bludgers' (I'm referring to the young beach-bum types, not the genuine work seekers) find a way of getting around it?

I can imagine that a sullen and recalcitrant young bludger could make the lives of the other genuine volunteer workers quite difficult.

 

[Boggo]

Whilst I am not on the dole, I have been unemployed for 18 months since being retrenched. I arrived in Australia in my late-20's (early 90's in the middle of a big recession, the one we had to have) and picked up a job quickly and easily. I now have lots of good Australian based experience but finding it very hard to get a job. Of course I am nearly 20 years older which is the crux of the matter.

At least you are looking for a job and would prefer to be employed, you are not a bludger imo, there is big difference between you and what Tony Abbot is hinting at.

 

[Calliope]

I remember that, a few years ago, Tony Abbott introduced the requirement that everyone on Newstart had to do 15-20 hrs a week of Community or Voluntary work if they didn't have any paid work, which seemed to me to be a reasonable proposal.

Did you ever watch a gang of these guys on the job? It's impossible to make anyone work if they don't want to work. If Abbott thought before he opened his mouth he realize how impossible it is to get these people to even travel to another suburb to work, let alone the other side of the country.

Besides, the Civil Rights mob would scream their heads off.

 

[gooner]

At least you are looking for a job and would prefer to be employed, you are not a bludger imo, there is big difference between you and what Tony Abbot is hinting at.

Even if I was not looking for a job, I would not be a bludger given I am not on the dole. I could call myself a "young self funded retiree".

Problem with Abbott's policy is that it will apply to all under 30's and so uses a very large sledgehammer to crack a very small nut.

 

[Chris45]

Did you ever watch a gang of these guys on the job? It's impossible to make anyone work if they don't want to work.

Yes, that was what I was thinking. Nice in theory but probably hopeless in practice unless it involved the successful completion of a specified quantity of work rather than just hours.

I've seen reports on the Community Service punishments where they stand around and do virtually nothing, because it's time based. So say a person was assigned a specific task like weeding a specified area of park etc. and he could only go when the job was completed to the required standard. How would that work I wonder?

 

[nulla nulla]

TONY Abbott has proposed banning the dole for people under 30 in a bid to entice the unemployed to head west and fill massive skill shortages in the booming resources sector.
The Opposition Leader made the controversial remarks during a two-hour meeting with about 15 senior resources industry leaders in Perth on Monday night.

Mr Abbott told the roundtable briefing he believed stopping dole payments to able-bodied young people would take pressure off the welfare system and reduce the need to bring in large numbers of skilled migrants to staff mining projects.

His comments were attacked last night by Australian Workers Union national secretary Paul Howes, who described them as "Hansonesque".

"If he genuinely thinks you are going to solve an economically crippling skills shortage by taking punitive measures against welfare recipients, he has clearly never lived in the real world," Mr Howes said.


"You can't just get any old Joe off the street and plonk them into a mine, and think that's going to mean they can work."

Six of the attendees confirmed yesterday that Mr Abbott had raised the idea of banning welfare payments for young people to encourage them to fill the thousands of jobs emerging in states such as Western Australia and Queensland.

"He said he was thinking more and more about it, with a view to formulating something on it," said one of the participants, who asked not to be named.

Another recalled: "He definitely said it was something he was considering as a policy."

A third executive said: "It certainly wasn't a throwaway line. He brought up the issue twice during the meeting."

Mr Abbott also told the business leaders that safety mechanisms would be needed under such a scheme to protect disabled people or those with mental health problems. And he raised the possibility that employers would need to be given funding to train the unemployed, according to those present.

Some of the business leaders were surprised by the remarks, while others were impressed Mr Abbott was considering new measures to address the labour shortages in Western Australia that threaten to crimp the next resources boom.

"I thought to myself: here is a guy who thinks outside the square," said one participant.

I couldn't see the date of the article but I suspect it was April 1. Seems like his April fools day joke has got a lot of people in.