Is an Equal Society a Realistic Aspiration?

[Calliope]

I don't mean to make this thread political and am just using Mr Muir as one example.

A forlorn hope. That horse has well and truly bolted.

 

[sydboy007]

I think inequality is getting worse in this country.

Just have to look how unbalanced the tax system is.

Rewards speculation over hard work. Why does someone who saves some money in a bank account pay full tax, but someone who speculates on property or shares can get up to a 45% discount on their interest costs and then pay half tax on any profits they make?

Then there's the Byzantine layers of tax expenditures that never seem to be targeted for 'welfare" cuts. Why did Abbott side with 16000 very wealthy super funds providing over 100K in tax free super over the 3.6M workers who get little to nothing to paying extra tax on their super? All that seems to do is entrench the current wealth divide.

Why do some people who's employers are willing to provide them a novated lease can get subsidised cars, whereas those poorer in the community get no such benefit?

Then you just have to see how often rich people break the law and seemingly get slaps on the wrist, where poor people will end up in jail. Just have to look at the CEO of Gunns who was caught doing insider trading for selling his shares before the market knew the company was tanking. So he sold out taking home $3M while shareholders were left with practically nothing, and he was fined $50K. How is that fair?

It's fine to want a society where equal ability enjoys equal opportunity, but there also needs to be balance in that the tax system, the legal system also treat everyone equally, which it clearly doesn't.

 

[Julia]

I would agree if there was evidence that there were plenty of jobs around for youth and people were slacking around on the dole when there was opportunity for work, but your anecdote about 500 applicants for one job is just one example that this is not the case, and having no income for 6 months is just punishment not incentive.

With respect to that anecdote, Rumpole, a job with Coles is very convenient, right in the CBD. There are, however, hundreds of jobs within an hour's drive of this town, fruit and vegetable picking all year round as crops change. These growers cannot get young unemployed people to do this work, and it's done approx half and half by baby boomers travelling round following the seasonal work, and backpackers from overseas doing the same. Both these groups tell me they can easily earn $100 per day which is certainly better than the dole.

The growers provide transport and even accommodation where necessary, but still these kids refuse to do the work.
So let's not have our hearts bleeding too profusely for them, and rather encourage them to understand that it's just not reasonable to turn down a job because you don't especially fancy it, and that the taxpayer has no obligation to support you if you do.

Re the Coles job, I also made the point that pretty clearly a lot of those kids turned up poorly presented, showing no ambition to actually gain employment, but rather to be able to tick the box on the Centrelink form which says they have ' applied for a job'.

What I might suggest as an alternative is cutting the minimum wage for people under 25 to provide business with an incentive to create more jobs.

That sounds like a sensible suggestion, as would be cutting penalty rates that see so many businesses close at weekends because they simply can't afford to employ staff.

Julia are you suggesting an Orwellian Animal Farm kind of Utopia ?

I'm not suggesting or ruling out anything, TS. Orwell's tract was satirical for good reason. I cannot think of any model of society that represents any sort of utopia.
It's just something that has been bothering me and I wanted to throw it out to the forum to see if anyone believed it would actually be possible to ever have a truly equal society, as distinct from one which provides equality of opportunity.

What do you think?

+1

Whilst there are plenty of able and willing people unable to find gainful employment I would recommend a nearly opposite approach. Allow those lacking in motivation to simply opt out of the workforce. Doing so would create opportunities for those more willing (and hence more worthy) to productively contribute to our society.

Could you outline how you think this would actually work, cynic? Would those who choose to opt out be funded by the working taxpayers to enjoy such an existence? Or do you mean if they opt out, then they also opt out of any taxpayer funded income?

I think inequality is getting worse in this country.

Just have to look how unbalanced the tax system is.

Rewards speculation over hard work. Why does someone who saves some money in a bank account pay full tax, but someone who speculates on property or shares can get up to a 45% discount on their interest costs and then pay half tax on any profits they make?

Agreed, syd. Anyone taking an objective view would. It's difficult to avoid the conclusion that the lack of attention to the many benefits to the affluent is ideologically based.

However, can this be justified on the basis that it's often the most affluent who create jobs for others?
That if we reward people for entrepreneurial attitude, they will continue to expand businesses ?

Why do some people who's employers are willing to provide them a novated lease can get subsidised cars, whereas those poorer in the community get no such benefit?

Perhaps just one more example of how one's capacity to negotiate a salary package determines individual success. If you're destined (and have no expectation of anything more) to spend your working life as a supermarket checkout operator, then pretty obviously the notion of negotiating for a company car would be a bit unrealistic.
Yes, it might seem unfair, but it's also an incentive to increase one's abilities and move upward.
There have to be additional rewards for additional talent, surely?

 

[overhang]

I'm in favour of giving the government's tough new rules for young unemployed a go? How do others feel on this in particular?

Well for a start I find it ridiculous to on one hand take this hardline approach to the young but on the other hand offer employers incentives to employ over 50s. These over 50s will be competing in the job market with the youth but yet one has perks involved with employment in the way of cash incentives and the other doesn't, yet the one that doesn't has no safety net to fall back on when the employer picks the over 50. Boggles my mind to be frank.

In a whole though there will be some that this kicks into gear and gives them the drive to find a job, but make no mistake there will be some that will suffer substantially due to this policy. I don't think its going too far to suggest that this may push some into a life of crime, I mean what choice would they be left if they're left unemployed but have no money for food or rent? I don't accept the premise that everyone is employable, some just aren't, they lack any sort of initiative and are more of a burden than anything. People just seem to think that these types of employees should just get a job stacking shelves or picking fruit etc but even those employers have a higher standard than these type of workers can meet, there are enough unemployed out there that you can be picky with workers.

As far as equality is concerned well as others have pointed out, under a capitalist system there always will be equality. The trouble is to solve equality requires wealth redistribution which is always a contentious matter. What I do find concerning however is that a particular industry has enough power to overthrow a PM (I know it wasn't the only factor). When the affluent are given so much power its very difficult to wield that back of them.

 

[Julia]

Overhang, no young person is about to be cast out into the street with no financial support. If he/she declines or can't find a job, they simply need to be engaged in some form of training program in order to receive either youth allowance or the dole.

Therefore effectively no change from the present except they will not be funded by the taxpayer for sitting at home or hanging out at the skate park.

Labor has apparently been very successful in planting in the minds of some of the electorate that the government plans to drive young people into living on the streets where the inevitable sequelae will be a generation of teenagers robbing banks and engaging in violent home invasions.

 

[Duckman#72]

Labor has apparently been very successful in planting in the minds of some of the electorate that the government plans to drive young people into living on the streets where the inevitable sequelae will be a generation of teenagers robbing banks and engaging in violent home invasions.

I agree Julia, and the media have fanned the flames of this idea.

Personally I am all for the "basketweaving and pottery" courses being taken off the register as eligible for govt training assistance.

However as a rural person I do see one problem. It is much easier for parents who live in the city, to "help and assist" their kids financially when they are either looking for a job or going to Uni. Unfortunately the realistic position is that all 4 of my kids will have to leave town for study and work. I can't provide free or cheap board, I can't assist with transportation and I can't be there to help guide the kids (in the flesh)- just the way it is.

Duckman

 

[overhang]

Overhang, no young person is about to be cast out into the street with no financial support. If he/she declines or can't find a job, they simply need to be engaged in some form of training program in order to receive either youth allowance or the dole.

Therefore effectively no change from the present except they will not be funded by the taxpayer for sitting at home or hanging out at the skate park.

Labor has apparently been very successful in planting in the minds of some of the electorate that the government plans to drive young people into living on the streets where the inevitable sequelae will be a generation of teenagers robbing banks and engaging in violent home invasions.

If only it were as rosey as you make it sound Julia. So to receive any government assistance one must take up a debt ridden HECS course that they may have no interest in. Fresh school leavers who didn't receive the desired HSC results are then left with very little choice in higher education courses, pushing students into higher education they have no interest in is not the answer. This won't be so bad for those over 21 who can apply for courses as a mature age student but for what is quite a daunting period for any fresh school leavers life, I don't think they should feel pigeon holed into higher education just to receive benefits because they're having difficulty finding work.

Regarding your fruit picking, do you realise that most this work is seasonal? Work can only be offered in short terms which suits backpackers etc but hardly suits anyone looking for long term work.

 

[chiff]

Regarding fruit picking-We stayed in a caravan park in the Riverland SA last week for four days.The onsite vans were taken by Chinese workers and the cabins by a Pacific islander team.On the way home we saw two different groups of vine pruners only,both wearing the Vietnamese style head wear(peaked straw hats).
The fruit picking jobs for locals ,in my area,and in this area that we were in,have diminished.
About ten years ago we stayed in the same caravan park and it was loaded with itinerant Australian workers.
Perhaps we were at the wrong time of the year this time?

 

[SirRumpole]

The growers provide transport and even accommodation where necessary, but still these kids refuse to do the work.
So let's not have our hearts bleeding too profusely for them, and rather encourage them to understand that it's just not reasonable to turn down a job because you don't especially fancy it, and that the taxpayer has no obligation to support you if you do.

If you say there are jobs out there that are not being done, I'll believe you. Whether the availability of these jobs exceeds the demand for jobs in every area is another matter, and as has been pointed out, some jobs are seasonal.

The government has offered a "learn or earn" edict to young job seekers. So lets look at the "learn"component.

State governments have cut resources to TAFES and have basically let the system run down. Places in these courses are limited and upfront fees apply. If students are required to learn, then I can see TAFES being swamped by demand that they can't fill, and this will result in people who can't satisfy either the earn or learn requirements and will essentially be out on the streets unless they have supportive parents.

I agree with the concept of the unemployed learning skills and trades, but it has to be able to be practically implemented, and not just an ideological dictate.

I think a better alternative is more rigorous work for the dole schemes where the kids can actually do some useful work for the community. This could be linked to some financial incentive for local businesses to provide training, and creates some contact between local business and potential employees.

 

[SirRumpole]

If students are required to learn,

Should be

if the unemployed are required to learn

Here is an article detailing the cuts that have been applied to TAFES around the country

http://theconversation.com/tafe-cuts-will-harm-the-economy-boost-crime-rate-experts-9597

 

[Julia]

If only it were as rosey as you make it sound Julia. So to receive any government assistance one must take up a debt ridden HECS course that they may have no interest in.

Probably we need to see the detail of what is planned. I haven't at all had the impression that 'training' means university and therefore debt.

Fresh school leavers who didn't receive the desired HSC results are then left with very little choice in higher education courses

Well, perhaps they can repeat their final years at school. My experience during mentoring in high schools is that many of them are semi-literate, so maybe if they engage in literacy and numeracy tutoring that would be both useful to them and meet the government requirement.

I can't see that it would be so difficult to provide appropriate training in various areas. Dozens of organisations are equipped to do this.
But if we're determined to just look at the negatives and not see any value in rejecting the idea of multi generational welfare where kids simply have the expectation that a life on the dole is OK, then of course you won't find anything anyone suggests acceptable.

pushing students into higher education they have no interest in is not the answer.

I agree and don't think this is what's planned. Our universities have already been dumbed down more than enough.

Regarding your fruit picking, do you realise that most this work is seasonal?

Well, duh! Of course it is. There is, at least in Queensland and probably in WA in winter also, year round work, whether it be picking fruit or vegetables, cleaning up vines, etc.

Work can only be offered in short terms which suits backpackers etc but hardly suits anyone looking for long term work.

So obviously, you're entirely opposed to the government's plan, overhang. What do you think should happen?
Do you think it's OK that kids leave school as soon as they legally can, with little prospect of getting a job because they're simply not well enough equipped or have the right attitude to appeal to an employer, then immediately get youth allowance or the dole to just sit around doing nothing?
Is that going to build a better society or just continue to foster the entitlement mentality?

Shouldn't we be encouraging young people to believe that to get on in life we need to make a genuine effort, that for society to work well everyone capable must make a contribution?

Perhaps that's an outmoded view? I'd be really interested to know how you think it all should work. That was one of the purposes of starting the thread.

Duckman, such a good point about country people needing to also help their children with accommodation.
Is online university an option? I know a few people who are currently doing this and it seems to work quite well.

 

[Julia]

State governments have cut resources to TAFES and have basically let the system run down. Places in these courses are limited and upfront fees apply. If students are required to learn, then I can see TAFES being swamped by demand that they can't fill, and this will result in people who can't satisfy either the earn or learn requirements and will essentially be out on the streets unless they have supportive parents.

Good point about the TAFES having been downgraded. Should we have enough faith in the government (yes, I know it's hard for you, Rumpole) to believe they will reverse the downgrading of TAFES or by some other means ensure there is a variety of training available, outside of any notion of attending university.

I agree with the concept of the unemployed learning skills and trades, but it has to be able to be practically implemented, and not just an ideological dictate.

A little ideology of the idea that the taxpayer is not going to fund you to sit at home doing nothing seems pretty OK to me. We can all learn something all the time. Especially young people who are not already well educated.
I see more of a problem with university graduates who still cannot get a job in their chosen field.

I think a better alternative is more rigorous work for the dole schemes where the kids can actually do some useful work for the community. This could be linked to some financial incentive for local businesses to provide training, and creates some contact between local business and potential employees.

Yes. Agree. I want young people to develop a work ethic, a belief that they have a worthwhile contribution to make and that they are not making it sitting around uncommitted to or believing in anything.

 

[overhang]

Probably we need to see the detail of what is planned. I haven't at all had the impression that 'training' means university and therefore debt.

Can you point me to where one can receive this training you speak of that consists of no up front fees or government debt but qualifies as the learning aspect to allow welfare payments?

I can't see that it would be so difficult to provide appropriate training in various areas. Dozens of organisations are equipped to do this.
But if we're determined to just look at the negatives and not see any value in rejecting the idea of multi generational welfare where kids simply have the expectation that a life on the dole is OK, then of course you won't find anything anyone suggests acceptable.

Multigenerational welfare is the major issue. There are children brought up who have never seen their parents work a day in their life. They then have no sense of the requirements to hold down a job, these kids are the problem. Not every youth should be thrown in this category which some seem to keep suggesting, just because someone is on welfare doesn’t mean they’re a bludger. So for these kids the answer I believe is work for the dole schemes to teach them punctuality, authority, time management skills etc. This work should always be available and not in 6 months cycles with no welfare available for the first 6 months.

Well, duh! Of course it is. There is, at least in Queensland and probably in WA in winter also, year round work, whether it be picking fruit or vegetables, cleaning up vines, etc.

Julia having done a bit of fruit picking in my life there are permanent positions that are unavailable and often taken up by long serving staff. The odd position would be available but hardly opens the floodgates to full time work that you seem to believe. Moving about and relocating for short-term work is just not financially viable, even shearing offers more permanent work.

So obviously, you're entirely opposed to the government's plan, overhang. What do you think should happen?
Do you think it's OK that kids leave school as soon as they legally can, with little prospect of getting a job because they're simply not well enough equipped or have the right attitude to appeal to an employer, then immediately get youth allowance or the dole to just sit around doing nothing?
Is that going to build a better society or just continue to foster the entitlement mentality?

Shouldn't we be encouraging young people to believe that to get on in life we need to make a genuine effort, that for society to work well everyone capable must make a contribution?

Perhaps that's an outmoded view? I'd be really interested to know how you think it all should work. That was one of the purposes of starting the thread.

As a whole I am opposed to the government’s plan and this is not because Labor have entrenched anything in my mind, I haven’t even heard them speak on the matter. So for a start if your going to push the youth into work then be consistent about it and offer cash incentives for employers to employ youth, not over 50s as this government has planned which contradicts its plan to stem youth unemployment. No one should be without welfare for 6 months who is unemployed, work for the dole should be available to fill this void. These are my answers to the problem Julia but right now I see the governments plan of pushing more kids into useless arts degrees as so they can abide by the ‘learn’ component as a short term answer.

 

[SirRumpole]

Should we have enough faith in the government (yes, I know it's hard for you, Rumpole) to believe they will reverse the downgrading of TAFES or by some other means ensure there is a variety of training available, outside of any notion of attending university.

Faith in government ? That's almost oxymoronic.

Seriously I obviously hope that State and Federal govt's reverse the trend in defunding TAFES, but if they don't and kids can't earn because there aren't enough jobs and can't learn because there aren't enough TAFE places, and have no source of income because their benefits have been removed, then what do suggest they do ?

 

[Julia]

Can you point me to where one can receive this training you speak of that consists of no up front fees or government debt but qualifies as the learning aspect to allow welfare payments?

No, overhang. I cannot point you to anything. I have no idea about the detail. What I'd hoped to discuss in this thread was - as the title suggests - whether it's realistic to aspire to having an equal society.
Have a read, if you haven't already, of DocK's comments and others where the broad concept is thought through.

I'm not across any of the detail involved in current learning, work for the dole or other schemes.
What I'm just hoping for is some properly thought out policy which will dispel from the minds of our young people that it's OK not to work, and that it's fine to have your fellow Australians support you indefinitely because you lack the skills, background, training to get a job. The government has an army of bureaucrats who presumably can figure out how this can best be achieved.

Multigenerational welfare is the major issue. There are children brought up who have never seen their parents work a day in their life. They then have no sense of the requirements to hold down a job, these kids are the problem.

Exactly so.

Not every youth should be thrown in this category which some seem to keep suggesting, just because someone is on welfare doesn’t mean they’re a bludger.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting anything like that, overhang. What we are aiming for is to reduce the multigenerational welfare and to prevent even more families falling into that philosophy.

So for these kids the answer I believe is work for the dole schemes to teach them punctuality, authority, time management skills etc. This work should always be available and not in 6 months cycles with no welfare available for the first 6 months.

OK, fine. Also would teach them some social skills, how to work co-operatively with others etc.
I'm actually not clear about the 6 months of no welfare. Are you definitively saying that even the 'learn' option will not be available for that period in order to get some financial support?

Julia having done a bit of fruit picking in my life there are permanent positions that are unavailable and often taken up by long serving staff. The odd position would be available but hardly opens the floodgates to full time work that you seem to believe. Moving about and relocating for short-term work is just not financially viable, even shearing offers more permanent work.

Accepted. I used fruit picking just as one example in my local district where growers simply cannot get local young people to do the work.

I know some teenagers who have got jobs because they approached an organisation and offered to work as a volunteer for a defined period. It showed the potential employer they had initiative. Some of the high schools actually help the kids to organise this and act as liaison with potential employers.

As a whole I am opposed to the government’s plan and this is not because Labor have entrenched anything in my mind, I haven’t even heard them speak on the matter. So for a start if your going to push the youth into work then be consistent about it and offer cash incentives for employers to employ youth, not over 50s as this government has planned which contradicts its plan to stem youth unemployment.

Yep, entirely reasonable. One has to consider the offering of cash incentives for older workers as having the ulterior motive of keeping on side a group of people commonly thought to be Coalition voters.

No one should be without welfare for 6 months who is unemployed, work for the dole should be available to fill this void. These are my answers to the problem Julia but right now I see the governments plan of pushing more kids into useless arts degrees as so they can abide by the ‘learn’ component as a short term answer.

Agree about the six months. Perhaps a stand down period of four weeks. Young people are unlikely to have cash reserves and may not have a family to support them.
I hope you're wrong about the arts degrees. I can't believe any government would be that silly. Most of the kids I'm thinking of wouldn't be accepted into any university, and neither would they have any interest in it.

Faith in government ? That's almost oxymoronic.

Sadly, yes.

Seriously I obviously hope that State and Federal govt's reverse the trend in defunding TAFES, but if they don't and kids can't earn because there aren't enough jobs and can't learn because there aren't enough TAFE places, and have no source of income because their benefits have been removed, then what do suggest they do ?

As above to overhang, I don't think it's up to me to come up with a solution. That's why we have thousands of highly paid bureaucrats.

Could we perhaps try to revert to the broader picture instead of getting hung up on what a detailed policy plan should be?
One example is the general concern about how increased technological capacity has removed so many manual jobs, the sort of work that the kids we've been discussing above could do well enough to give them a sense of self worth and pride in being able to make a contribution.

After many years of participating in mentoring programs in some of the area's most disadvantaged school populations where - given the homes a lot of these kids come from - the kid is absolutely up against it all the way, to observe the difference in a kid who manages to get even a part time job is amazing. This is what I am hoping the government is wanting to foster, rather than just any sort of money saving exercise.

 

[trainspotter]

Julia wrote:-

I'm not suggesting or ruling out anything, TS. Orwell's tract was satirical for good reason. I cannot think of any model of society that represents any sort of utopia.
It's just something that has been bothering me and I wanted to throw it out to the forum to see if anyone believed it would actually be possible to ever have a truly equal society, as distinct from one which provides equality of opportunity.

What do you think?

Orwell's Animal Farm ended with the pigs and men in a kind of rapprochement and unable to distinguish between themselves. It started as a Utopian society but as usual .. "equal" means many different things to many different people.

George Orwell .... "I saw a little boy, perhaps ten years old, driving a huge carthorse along a narrow path, whipping it whenever it tried to turn. It struck me that if only such animals became aware of their strength we should have no power over them, and that men exploit animals in much the same way as the rich exploit the proletariat."

I believe Orwell is right ... So to answer your Q Julia ... NON !

 

[SirRumpole]

If you want a general discussion about equality, I believe (and I'm sorry to be political about this), that up to the last election we had one of the fairest societies on the planet. Scandinavia, Japan or Germany may be better, but they pay higher taxes in the Scandinavian countries and we don't have the population size of Germany or Japan that's needed to develop industries for local demand. We don't have an entrenched class system like the UK, or a corporatised education system like the US (yet).

What makes a society as equal as possible (and it's not possible to be genuinely equal because there will always be inherited advantage and a distribution of IQ levels across the community) is a high standard and equitable availability of education to as many people as possible, including not only the young, but mature age workers who may be getting left behind by rapidly increasing technology.

That was the purpose of the Gonski report, to determine areas of education disadvantage and correct them. God knows where the money was coming from to implement that policy, I don't think that Labor did, but the intent was there.

You are correct Julia when you say technology is taking jobs that young people could do. I've seen fruit 'picking' machines that shake fruit into nets and wrap them up , so that is another area that will probably be closed down for employment prospects in the future.

The big threat that I can see to our future living standards are free trade agreements that force us to compete against economies with much lower living standards, forcing the world economy to a lowest common denominator rather than pulling the low paid countries up to a higher level. Some sectors like agriculture will benefit, but agriculture employs relatively few people due to increasing mechanisation. Other sectors like manufacturing will collapse like we have seen with the car industry.

I believe that our only chance to survive in the future is by having a vibrant R&D sector, and one that has a greater capacity to commercialise inventions and ideas than we currently have. The more people who have ideas, the better. And that comes back to...you guessed it, EDUCATION. With this government and its partners in crime, the States, defunding schools, universities, researchers like CSIRO and TAFES, what chance do you think we have ?

 

[cynic]

...
I believe that our only chance to survive in the future is by having a vibrant R&D sector, and one that has a greater capacity to commercialise inventions and ideas than we currently have. The more people who have ideas, the better. And that comes back to...you guessed it, EDUCATION...

On the contrary, my experience with contemporary education to date is that it conditions students to think in a very narrow and limited fashion.

Too often when discussing alternative viewpoints with others I've been beset with ridicule by teachers and students alike. If the curriculum were remedied, then perhaps education might have something worthwhile to offer.

The dearth of basic literacy, numeracy and critical thinking is ample testimony to Australia's failure to efficiently educate its populace.

The education curriculum would need to undergo significant revision before seriously entertaining it as a productive solution.

 

[SirRumpole]

The education curriculum would need to undergo significant revision before seriously entertaining it as a productive solution.

So, your alternative is ?

 

[Calliope]

It is a myth perpetuated by the do-gooders that equality can be foisted on us by governmenr edict. Another myth is that envisioned by Gonski that pouring more money into educating those with lower IQs and disabilities will somehow elevate them to equality in the market with more gifted students.

Any government with any backbone should be pouring more resources into facilitating the progress of brighter students to achieve their goals in the sciences and mathematics essential for research. A high proportion of these are Asian students whose parents take the work ethic seriously and wiill scrimp and save to educate their children.