Do you believe we have a gambling problem due to the ready availability of pokie machines?
While in opposition Abbott showed a definite lack of bipartisan support with Labor on pokies reform.
Maybe have a look at the graph again and you'll see Australians lose more on pokies than the standard American loses in all forms of gambling. Australians lose more on gaming machines than any other country.
But hey, I'm expecting you to answer no to my question above so I suppose that's why you see it as a senseless attack on Tony when it really shows his lack of understanding on the issue, and probably his desire to support the businesses rather than look after voters.
How many people do you and Syd employ out of interest?
Most bosses dont bother with medical certificates.But those that implement it do so for a reason. It was brought in for a reason.
And sorry but business isnt your damn mother. Youre sick you pay.
Businesses aren't mothers, but they are breeding grounds for germs spread around by their employees. People dont want to get sick by mostly they get sick in the premises of their employers sitting next to sick people who are at work because employers are stingy about giving sick leave.
So as I suggested before, if employers paid a proportion of the cost of getting a certificate (this is called a price signal), then maybe they will get the idea that employee sickness is partly their fault too.
I fail to see the relevance of that to the discussion. Out of interest, are you a doctor?
Can't say I've ever had, or heard of someone having, a job where it wasn't required by default. It's standard practice certainly in a lot of industries.
Me pay, not too unreasonable. But I don't actually need to see a doctor for a common cold, there's no medical need for that whatsoever, hence no need to actually pay a cent. Just staying home for a few days, in order to avoid spreading it to others, is all that's required. No medical certificate, since no doctor involved.
It's business that wants unnecessary visits to GP's, not patients. It thus seems perfectly reasonable that, in line with the much vaunted "user pays principle", business pays the cost of this excess medical servicing not required the by patients. This then produces a price signal, encouraging business to curb this expensive practice except in situations where value is actually being created.
The crux of this and many other issues is that the Australian economy has become increasingly inefficient and it's costing everyone, business included, an outright fortune. Either we change, or at some point the rest of the world will effectively force change one way or another. Most of that comes down to special deals for this, that and every other interest group with the practice of issuing medical certificates for common colds etc being just one of numerous examples. But as with all of them, there is incredible resistance to change from those who seek to gain from maintaining the inefficiencies.
There is hardly any industry, apart from iron ore due to a natural advantage, where Australia is efficient by global standards these days. We need reform, a lot of reform, and a government willing to pursue it. By definition that government cannot possibly consider itself to be "conservative" if it is to be the agent of change. Therein lies the problem, our main political options are either conservative, or are heavily aligned to a particular interest group. End result is that sensible reform is virtually impossible, one party by its' very nature is not keen on change and the other is too close to those who may seek to resist it. Hence, not much changes.
More like $65 less the medicare rebate
I've had incidences of being sick where the effort to get an MC has probably meant I needed an extra day to recover. I think some flexibility around this issue would help save a lot of $$ without opening it up to rorting.
Possibly a statutory right to 2 days off each year without an MC would help those who don't abuse the system, while those who do want to try and use up their 10 days "entitlement" will still be required to provide some form of evidence.
I wouldn't mind if there was a provision made so that an employee who uses above the average could be asked to attend a company doctor on their next sick leave request. I don't see the employer has a right to know what illness you have, but they do have a right to confirm you are ill.
The current system is extremely expensive, especially if you are forced to go to an emergency department, as I have, so as to get an MC to get paid for the sick leave.
ABBOTT...ABBOTT...ABBOTT......Why blame Abbott?
Gillard promised the world to that Tasmanian Senator, I think his name is Wicks, to fix the gambling problem and she back flipped on the deal......she let him down badly which is no surprise.
No one is forced to gamble......they all know the consequences with poker machines......so if they want to pour their money into the pokies so be it....Good luck if they win.....bad luck if they lose.....you will never beat a poker machine.
which is then claimed as a business expense and admin costs then get added boosting the final expense. So bad idea imo. Yep charge employers and they will charge it back on top of admin.
Andrew Wilkie is the member of parliament you're thinking of. He is not a senator. He has an interesting history.
Do you believe we have a gambling problem due to the ready availability of pokie machines?
While in opposition Abbott showed a definite lack of bipartisan support with Labor on pokies reform.
Maybe have a look at the graph again and you'll see Australians lose more on pokies than the standard American loses in all forms of gambling. Australians lose more on gaming machines than any other country.
But hey, I'm expecting you to answer no to my question above so I suppose that's why you see it as a senseless attack on Tony when it really shows his lack of understanding on the issue, and probably his desire to support the businesses rather than look after voters.
I imagine the relevance was that an employer and an employee will view the same situation from their own points of view. In an ideal workplace these views will be complementary, but not when you have employees whose attitude is how much can they get for how little input.I fail to see the relevance of that to the discussion. Out of interest, are you a doctor?
Presumably that's a characteristic of the type of work you have done. I was in the workforce for nearly thirty years, was never asked to provide a MC once.Can't say I've ever had, or heard of someone having, a job where it wasn't required by default. It's standard practice certainly in a lot of industries.
It's not about paying the $7.
I'm absolutely amazed that someone who raves on about every perceived evil of a certain political party couldn't be bothered making himself aware of the facts of who he is actually talking about, and has such a short memory about details.
For heavens sake <you know who you are>, do some research before blurting out propaganda, you have little credibility as it is.
No guts...no glory Rumpy....So I made a mistake and you were delighted to jump on the bandwagon of character assassination again....Anyone who does not a mistake does not make anything.
Whether his name is Wicks. Wilkie or Willie Winkie it made no difference to the long nosed redhead PM who was recently dumped......She duped Andrew Wilkie into believing she would do something about problem gambling just to get his support in the lower house and then put it in the too hard basket.....That woman lied through her teeth.....Wlike took her at her word but of course we all know Gillards word was not worth the paper it was written on.....only the one she signed with Bob Brown for the carbon tax we were not supposed to have. ....Wilkie was not a very happy little Vegemite .
In W.A we don't have pokies, other than in the casino. I hate the things.
However I doubt the pokie, or gambling problem, has only come about in the last 16 months.
I did hear a lot about pokie reform while Labor was in, but was anything of substance ever tabled? I'm sure Labor didn't need bipartisan support to pass anti pokie reforms.
Having said that, wasn't it reported a month or so ago, that one of the political parties, were involved in a pokie operation somewhere over East?
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...act-pokies-clubs/story-fn59niix-1226065964688
It can't always be Tony's fault, or can it Syd? Your dislike, seems to be clouding your otherwise, good posts.
Among the measures that would be stripped away by the legislation are a requirement that by 2018 all new poker machines be capable of supporting a pre-commitment system, and another that ATM machines in gambling venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit. So-called ‘pre-commitment’ technology allows gamblers to set how much money they plan to lose in a given session, locking out the player once the limit is reached.
The bill would also dismantle plans for a national gambling regulator, and remove the two levies on the gambling industry intended to fund it; scrap a requirement that warning messages flashed on poker machine screens be “dynamic”, to catch gamblers’ attention; and abolish the proposed trial of a mandatory pre-commitment scheme, which was to begin in the Australian Capital Territory this year.
ATM withdrawal limits in place in Victoria have seen the amount of money that problem gamblers lose on each sitting at the pokies fall by up to $90.
Mr Abbott told a rally of more than 1,000 people at the Campbelltown RSL in south-western Sydney last night that problem gambling was an individual issue which can be dealt with by counselling.
He described the pre-commitment legislation as bad law that could not be supported by any sensible party.
"When this legislation comes before the Parliament I predict that we will oppose it," he said.
"And if this legislation is passed by the Parliament and if we then subsequently form a government, I predict we will rescind it. That's what I predict."
So what ? It's the employer that requires the medical cert, so why shouldn't they pay instead of the taxpayer via Medicare ?
Your business rules are no concern of mine or any other taxpayer. The other side is that requiring a certificate discourages abuse of the sick leave system. That is to the advantage of business, another reason why business should pick up the tab for MC's and why it should not be a deductible business expense.
That's an interesting view, but I subscribe more to what he actually waxed lyrical about and that was more to do with seat fixing and Gillard driven by polling and perception.
fore example:
"A curious twist in the story is how Gillard effectively offered me Denison for keeps in mid-2011. We were holding one of our frequent meetings in Canberra and out of the blue she said I needed to think about my future and, in particular, whether I wanted to be the ALP Denison candidate at the next federal election or wanted Labor to not even run a candidate there at all. The alternative, clearly, was business as usual ”” and by implication a tough Labor campaign directed at me come election time. Of course Gillard’s approach to me was in the context of her trying to find a way to head off my bringing the government down. I rejected the suggestions.
But why didn’t Labor-leaning Denison turn on me after I tore up my agreement to support Gillard when, in January 2012, she reneged on her agreement with me to deliver deep poker machine reform? Perhaps that reflected the declining popularity of the prime minister, but in the mix has to be a craving in the community for principled political leadership. To that end Gillard failed to honour her word and it reflected very badly on her. For my part I’d promised repeatedly to withdraw my support if Gillard failed to honour her agreement, and that’s exactly what I did. Frequently afterwards constituents, often traditional Labor supporters, have voiced their approval of my response to the prime minister’s behaviour."
You've been arguing that the senate needs to get out of the way of th Government, that we need a mor ebipartisan view to bring about the reform Australia needs.
So let me know if the below sounds bipartisan from the Abbott opposition & Govt to pokies reform:
http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/the-house-wins-gaming-reforms-ditched/764/
Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews on Wednesday morning will put to a vote in the House of Representatives a bill repealing almost all of the harm-minimisation measures passed by the Gillard Labor government in November 2012.
Note the Abbott Govt has turned it's back on a policy THA WAS SHOWN to be effective in Victoria. Surely when you can see something works for the common good you don't stop it rolling out nationally
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-26/abbott-predicts-pokies-repeal/3600604
So where's that bipartisan suport you've been calling for since the Abbott Govt was formed?
This is what Abbott had to say on triple j back in oct 2011 - "But I don't think the Labor caucus like it. I think if she tries to ram it through, if she's still the prime minister, this could be (the issue) which kills her."
So do you think Abbott was opposed to pokies reform because he didn't think it would be successful (though at least limited reform in Vic HAD BEEN SUUCCESSFUL), or that there were better ways to achieve it, or was it because he thought it would harm the Gillard Govt and opposing it would benefit himself and the coalition opposition?
PS Smurf, on the 'trust' issue above, I am not suggesting you are not trusted or that you do not trust your employer. Presumably you work for some large electricity organisation where individual relationships are less likely to occur.
The other thing that I am puzzled at is the govt's moves to put the revenue raising in the hands of one of, if not the most militant union in the country. The AMA membership is a closed shop organisation that regularly flexes it's muscles in disobedience of the govt, any govt and invariably the govt capitulates.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?