The solution to cutting welfare costs to Australian tax payers is as plain as the nose of your faces, but no one wants to impliment a "tough love " stance for the benefit of everyone. 1) Immediately stop the $8billion in foreign aid, and use that money to fund TAFE education and teachers, so unemployed Australian people can gain employment skills necessary for our industries. 2) Every unemployed individual "must" participate in a TAFE course of their choosing while receiving welfare. This will eliminate the need for Australians businesses to bring over 457 visa workers. 3) Stop all 457 visa workers entering Australia "if" an Australian is unemployed, and can do the job. No more free-lunch for companies bringing in foreign workers on 457 visa's to under-cut Australian wages and conditions. 4) Stop paying people to have babies. If people cannot afford to have a baby, then they shouldn't be having one in the first place. The same philiosphy should be applied to payments to have babies as credit cards, if you cannot afford to have one, then don't have it. 5) Stop paying maternity leave. Same principal applies to point (4). If you cannot afford to stay at home and look after your own child for a set period of time with your own money, then don't have the child. Why should you expect someone else to pay you to stay at home to look after "your" child. Afterall, its not like the planet has a shortage of people, and your child is desperately needed for the human species to survive. We already have 5 billion human beings on the planet. 6) Stop paying retired ex-politicians $600K lifetime pensions, and other benefits that cost the tax payers $billions to fund. 7) Stop subsidising private schools. If thay cannot afford to operate a private school without the intervention of Government financial subsidities, then close. Public money should only go to fundings and subsidising public schools. It costs the tax payers $115,000 per year to keep prisoners in Jail. The free-ride is over. Start making prisoners do a certain amount of hours per week in community service, instead of lazing by the pool, gym and multiple recreational facilities all day in jail. Make them do laundry for nursing homes and aged care facilities; prepare meals for Meals of Wheels. Clean the sides of freeways from litter, and clean the years of pensioners who are unable to do it themselves. Give them some self-esteem in knowing they have done something worthwhile for the community they have taken from, instead of a lazy privilaged life behind bars. http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/wes...new-figures-show/story-fnhocxo3-1226730978849 The about are just some basic ways in which Australia could drastically reduce its financially dependency on welfare, and save hundreds of billions in revenue, but my ideas and basic written commentary might be to low-brow for some intellectually elite on here.
Welfare, it's not a bad word This is just the start, from family farms like the one I grew up on, to large pastoral companies. When I was a boy, we had a market farm, we grew vegetables and had a small miking herd. We were typical of the hundreds of small family farms patch worked across the Hunter Valley. We grew acres of onions, potatoes and tomatoes, as a matter of fact, Dad still holds the record crop of onions according to the Department of Agriculture. Harvesting season was great, dozens of workers would come and set up camp, some lived in tents, some slept in their cars, the locals drove home each evening. I remember one old bloke, drove an old truck, with a canvas roof and suicide doors. The radiator at front steamed regularly and he had a couple of bruises from misjudging the timing when wheeling the crank handle. We plowed with a single furrow plow pulled by a draft horse. Over the years we bought a tractor, then slowly over the years, harvesters and rotary hoes etc. The workers slowly went, for a while it supported me, Dad and my grand parents, eventually it became small, and we were swallowed by the corporate industries, they had little care for the small farmer, his going broke was just the way it was, and was going to be, money over people, welcome to the new world. Well my friends, we are on the dawn of a new age, an age of information, of entitlement, of welfare, of control. Why, because that is what we asked for.
OK, AM, CD, Garry et al, you seem to have all the answers. What do the people in these scenarios do if there is no welfare. 1: An entrepreneur starts up a new business, he does his business plan and sees he can capture 50% of the market. He opens up and everything goes well. He employed 5 people and starts to operate. His business goes as planned, he actually captures 60% of the market. Bill Bloggs, who took over the family business from his father, tries to compete with the new business, but a large advertising campaign, the buying power of the new business wins out and Bill's family business has to close down. The entrepreneur however has a problem, he likes the ponies and is often seen with Mr Magoo at the track. He is a bad gambler and loses everything. He shuts down his business and lays off his staff. The five staff head off to Centrelink, on the way they pass Bill Bloggs, he nods to them, then turns and says. "Are you heading to Centrelink? I have just been there and there is a sign on the door. 'Closed until further notice, Australia cannot afford you any more'" 2: A good hard working Aussie, Adultm Ale is doing his bit for Australia. Every day he arises, kisses the little woman and the kids as he heads off to work. His son had left his skates on the path, it is dark and Adultm does not see it, over he goes, donkey over heals, snap goes the leg. Adultm (Strange name I know, I think he is a refugee) crawls in to the house, "where's the insurance papers" he screams. After reading them he realises he is not covered. Why didn't I take out disability insurance he mutters. He sets off to the doctors. "That will be $1,250 dollars " the doctor says, "no welfare here" he adds, "we pay our own way, right?" Adultm goes to centrelink, he isn't able to work for 3 months, he needs a safety net, when he gets there he sees a sign on the window. Closed until further notice, Australia cannot afford you any more' 3: Little Tommy just gets his HSC results, didn't do as good as he hoped, he applies for work at a family business just down the road. He can't start how ever for 6 weeks, he asks his dad to cover his car payments until then. "sorry son I just cant afford it, go to centrelink" .....
Is this the absolute maximum of your thought pattern??? Like I mean, have you really been following the comments on this thread??? or is that supposedly great university education you pretend to have cannot get past the fact that welfare is MORE than simple unemployment benefits??? Probably the most pertinent question you should be asking is What happens when the money runs out to pay such welfare budget??? I know, you can borrow it, As the ALP thought, from everybody because you have a triple A rating, except by that time you wont have a rating at all BUT hey, you pretend to be an open thinker who considers all. Unfortunately this stupid comment, just like the continued effort of TV to comprehend what people talk about betray you, and it is not a good look. So when you catch up, ,maybe you could join the discussion, but while you stuck in your own ignorance keep it to yourself.
That's a stupid post DV. Nowhere on this thread has anyone suggested we get rid of unemployment benefits or medicare.
I have said it dozens of times now Garry17, its not the topics or issues raised on this forum that is the problem, it is the majority of Australians lack of intellect to even grasp the fundamental concepts surrounding the problems and issues that is the problem. It would seriously seem that Australian intellect is going backwards, not forwards, and I believe the drop in intellect could account for the bad primary, sceondary and University education systems they have been provided with over the past few decades. If you seriously look at their education systems and cirriculum, it would suggest they have been dumped into classrooms like sheep and told "what" to think, and not "how" to think. Catergorising welfare into unemployment and pension boxes is completely ridiculous, and a narrow minded way of thinking. It begs the question why self-professed educated individuals would not look beyond the obvious, and I believe the following paragraph explains this. The do-gooders on here like DV and TV will not accept or admit that welfare is beyond the basic concept of unemployment and pensions, because once the do-gooders admit and accept that free tax payer aid given to strangers, and paying individuals to give-birth and care for babies is welfare; it challenges their whole core belief system, and that is something they are terrified of doing. Therefore, to distract others from discussing the real topic, and to hide the truth form themselves, they randomly generate stupid comments that a 5 year old mentally disable child wouldn't understand. Politicians, in collusion with the biased media, like nothing better than to point their grubby fingers at unemployed individuals and pensioners when their is a problem with Australias financial stability and situation. Not once do they ever point their grubby fingers at other areas that are a massive drain of Australias finance; like ex-politicians claiming unnecessary $600k lifetime pesnion from the Australian tax payers, or other points I raised in my previous post.
I also blame the education system of Australia and according to the statistics of the education around the world Australia (who has made it a mark to ensure every child is educated) falls well below other nations who has very limited education systems only for the people of advantage. This current government has made all the noises about education but now it appears they are as happy as the ALP to throw money at the problem. So it would seem Australia is set to have MORE generations of children educated to be led by the nose and NOT thinking for themselves. Wow these politicians have a lot to answer for but the drones continue to support them. It amazes me that when you talk about welfare these particular areas is all they know. They dont realize that public health care, public education and other services are also welfare. As stated these people think it is their god given right to get money for nothing. The real problem is that while welfare continues to rise (the demand) the ability to pay diminishes. While welfare is handed about to the people who believe they are entitled to have something for nothing without the slightest bit of effort. Total disregard for the procurement of such and total lack of understanding what will happen if it is not addressed. They remind me of people who would drive flat out at a 20foot brick wall. Seeing it coming they simply put the foot down harder. When everybody tells them to stop they simply say they have the vision for the future Everybody else applies the brakes and swerve around it, BUT not these clowns, they think if they go fast enough (or spend as much as they can get their grubby hands on) that on the other side it will be better. If this was true, it would be, they would be dead and the world would not have to put up with such bigoted ignorance. BUT alas, some people just cannot stand by and let idiots eradicate themselves for the betterment of the world Shame. Now come on CD, it is not that they are distracting others, it is that they want to bring the conversation back to something they can understand. We have to have patients with the ignorant, some of them actually do learn but others will happily remain in their ignorance as it makes them happy You saw with the carbon tax they were totally incapable to comprehend the complexity of the issues raised. You see with the welfare debate the same, Unfortunately. Obviously they suite the general demographic that likes to remain in ignorant bliss led by the nose and simply ignoring anything they think does not affect them. Oh but listen to the scream when their entitlement look to be under attack. Forget the fact at current rates welfare is going to kill the economy, they believe Government will always have the ability to give them what they want I had High hopes for this latest government well before election with the rhetoric in this area. Discussing the fact that welfare cannot continue, but just today I heard something a little distressing in this area that makes me agree with this sentiment. Talk about stopping the corporate welfare was a good thing although the ONLY way I can see that being fruitful for Australia is that protections on Australian manufacturing and industry needs to be adjusted. Apparently the Coalition intends to reduce current protections. The ALP are no better, they want to NOW raise tariffs on cars to protect what??? A manufacturing industry that does not exist??? I know they are tarred with the same brush but these ALP clowns are just totally inept. IF the ALP were to pull the wool out of their eyes and see the wall approaching fast, maybe they would be able to figure out a solution to this problem, Unfortunately they seem to believe the only solution is put the foot on the gas. I dont think they realize the economy will be just as dead if they hit it at half speed as going flat out. Go figure, what great foresight these people have???
This is a good example of waffling, brown nosing and contradiction in one! You are so set on waffling that you didn't respond to his statement! Welfare is not just somebody who is unemployed FFS!
Now, Now stand aside and let the adults discuss things as it is obviously way above your head. We know, you want to pretend you are interesting, important and so grown up but all that is showing through is that infantile, superficial, bigoted, ignorance of the ill-informed... When your handlers get back from the extended leave of discussing what to do next I am sure they will inform you of what is happening, but unfortunately we are not your parents... You poor thing...
Governing Australia is just like any other business. You MUST have educated and qualified people in the business doing the right job. I don't employ hairdressers to do mechanical work, or mechanics to do office administration. The Australian people have been employing (voting in) unqualified people into Senior Ministerial poitions to run Australia for countless decades, and its now benining to show these unqualified people don't have a clue what they are doing, because the country and the people are in a bloody mess. Any private business that operated under the same situation of hiring unqualified staff is bound to fail, and Australia now finds itself in a situation of failing. As I have stated before, 99% of the politicians elected into govern Australia have not even run a lemonaid stand in their front yards, and yet the Australian people expect them to know everything about managing the whole country. If the people want better results form their politicians, then don't vote in unqualified politicians. What the hell do they really expect when the political they elected into power gives their members senior portfolios in health & education, but the person knows absolutely nothing about health & education? When something goes seriously wrong, the people start jumping up and down like idiots demanding answers. Well, what the hell did you expect when the political party you elected into government gave one of their unqualified mates a senior ministerial position? If I operated my business like this in the real world, it would be losing money hand-over-fist, and it just demonstrates why Australia is losing so much ground to the rest of the world in basic health, education, manufacturing, and infrastructure - the wrong people in the wrong jobs.
Look, while I do agree with the major point of your post, I must point out politicians do not run Australia. As you can see throughout all the threads Government is declared as Tony Abbott. Well regardless of what ANYBODY thinks Abbott does not know everything about Australia he is simply the PM, many decide he is doing everything simply because they do not like him. The truth is, if you recall a British show called 'Yes Minister' you would find this to be the closer to the truth than what people really believe. Government departments actually run the nation which are never voted for and only change at the change of government, NOT for the betterment of the nation, NOT due to the job they public servant was doing, ONLY to reward their mates for support. If you look at all legislation and regulation created in Australia, all you have to do is look to the department that is responsible for such and see the public servants patting themselves on the back saying 'we justified our job for another few months.' The bigger the change the longer there job survives, imagine how long the public servants job will exist in the budget office if they can work out a way to reduce the massive debt Australia has been put in??? Just on a side note, I heard in parliament yesterday that Australia does not have a spending problem, They have a revenue problem, from an ALP git... When somebody is stupid enough to attack the government with such statements you have to wonder if they actually graduated kindergarten let alone have any education at all. Unfortunately, this clearly demonstrates the stupidity, ignorance and qualifications from these politicians as you say... So simply, government does not really run the country, they don't know how to run a business and simply provide jobs for the boys and not decent people for the jobs. Yes, I would have to agree with this... even after pointing out few things about this stupid governance system that appears to promote the stupid.
I have to disagree with your assertion that politicians don't run the country, and will give a clear example as to why I disagree. Gay marriage is an important issue that will effect and have consequences for 20 million Australians, and change Australian society, not just 300 Canberra politicians. These 300 Canberra politicians have taken it upon themselves to hyjack our democracy by advocating their morals and ethics are more valuable & important than what the general publics are, and that politicians have the right to make this very important decision for the benefit of everyone, instead of allowing the poeple a voice by declaring a referendum on the topic. So in effect, politicians do sanctimoniously believe "they" run the country by not allowing the people their democratic voice in having a referendum. If politicians don't think they run and own the country for their own benefit, then who else can sell public owned assets without the approval of the owners, and get away with it? Politicians have given themselves the unique power of Gods, to do as they like, when they like, and as often they like, and the people of Australia by voting these same clowns back into government every three years have facilitated that omnipotient self-belief politicians have in themselves. When the people have allowed politicians to create laws and standards that don't effect them, and politicians don't have to live and work under the same laws and guidelines as every other person, then what the hell do the people really expect would happen? Surely the people have enough intelligence to know the adage: power corrupts, and absoulute power corrupts absoultely. Politicians believe they are so far above the general people in their omnipotientance in being untouchable, that they constantly lie to our faces and decieve us, as if they are doing nothing wrong, and if they are doing something wrong, the public won't do anything about, becuase they keep getting voted into power. LOL Australian politicians are like those uncontrollable kids you see on "supernanny". Its time the people became the Supernanny, and started to take control of the country again, instead of allowing the uncontrolable kids (politicians) to maintain control. Surely in 2014 the people deserve better than a spitefull group of children fighting with one another like they are in a daycare centre? Two groups (ALP & Liberal/National) with different ideas, but do they have to act like unintelligent morons towards each other and the public to discuss the different ideas? Its just about them getting elected and being able to stick their snouts in the tax payers funded troth of goodies, and this has to end for the benefit of the people who are paying the tax to keep these idiots in a job. Worst case scenario: I would give my dog food and water before any current politician.
I see what you trying to say, and YES the politicians do believe they run the country. BUT they don't, you forget one thing in your example, which is that the pressure to vote these things have come from the people. These groups of people are the ones who want to change your moral and ethical beliefs. The size of that group is in dispute and the government believes it is crucial enough to make policy on such. BUT again it is not the government that makes policy on such it is a bunch of public servants in the background who were never elected whose job is only pertinent to the party and the performance of the department and the ability to appear relevant to the government. The point of removing any ideal that a government would refer to the people (referendum) is because that would demonstrate the government has no idea what the people want. They want to continue to make the drones believe they are actually effectual… OF course they think they run it, they simply DON”T. However, while I do consider Howard’s short sighted view of privatization I do agree with selling of public assets of which I will not address here at this time. Later I will, but I think you will note there is a difference where I believe you are generalizing… We can return to this later in perhaps another thread… Yes they have, funny though is the fact that they do not run Australia shows this comment is actually true. and the clowns still believe anything that comes out of their mouths… It belies belief that people really still believe that one party is better than another. The corruption of the government in Australia you so clearly point out will be missed by these people and on the cycle will go… IT is all about getting elected, it is all about getting those jobs for the boys. Government departments create the regulations and laws in view of simply trying to justify a new job for another mate. Australia is so top heavy with public servants trying to justify their jobs while politicians stand in a room trying to make their particular voice stand out, while Australians are left to rot.
If politicians cannot successfully manage businesses like QANTAS, and Commonwealth Bank, then how can they or anyone, seriously convince ME they can manage the economy of an entire country? Doesn't it stand to reason, that if politicians cannot successfully manage small businesses, then they cannot manage a big buninesses? Is there a reason why this methodology is being ignored by the media and the people? Does it really take a high IQ to understand this, because to me, its basic comprehension. I don't blame politicians anymore. How can you blame uncontrollable children when its the fault of the parents, and I apply the same philosophy and standards to the Australian voters actions and behaviour towards Australian politicians. The people are hoodwinked into believing that politicians are their "mates" but don't realise that when a politician gives them 1 cherry, they will take 3 back from them - that is their nature.
How can we possibly attempt to change the concept of welfare, when the people in control of the welfare system (politicians) have the same welfare mentality as the people they are giving it too? We have to start with a new system, before the concept can be changed. Its not logical to attempt to build a construct based on the current Government model. Our current Government is an antiquated system that was adoped from ancient civilisations, and its time we created a new system for 2014, not something that belongs in 2014BC. It might have been a Government system that worked back in Roman times, but its not working now in modern times, and its showing it age by failing the people on numerous levels. Its also showing how corrupt the system is -keeping 300 in power over millions, but its the millions, not the 300 that is keeping the civilisation alive. Now all we need is for the people to wake and start using their brains.
Unfortunately that is the problem. We cannot change something while the people who are in the same ignorant stupid manner are in charge. I do agree, but a I would hope that the drones will at least think about it and maybe, JUST maybe they will change for the better. I just doubt it...
A great post, it shows your total ignorance of reality. In a later post you talk about politics in 2014BC as if it was then that politics began. Politics has always been there, politics is an integral part of human relationships. I think you mean democracy, the political system most western countries use, well we do anyway. Democracy was started by the Greeks, in Athens, in the 6th century BC. It was designed as a representative system, members of the government are representative of the people they govern, not representative of a royal family, that is a monarchy, not representative of the military, that is a military dictatorship, not representative of business, the rich and elite, that is an aristocracy. Democracy literally means, rule by the people. As states grow, governance becomes more complex so we use governments. A government is not a group of military people, it's not a group of aristocrats, not a group of the rich, not a group of businessmen, it's a group of the citizens of the state, a group that represents the citizens within the state. So a true government would reflect the citizens of the state. That is, if 10% of the citizens are tree hugging greenies, then a truly representative government would include 10% greens. If it (the state) was 40% businessmen, then a truly representative government would include roughly 40% business people, 30% workers, then 30% working class, 55% woman ... and so on. If this was artificially salted, that is if we said it had to be 100% business people for example we would not get a representation of the citizens, rather we would have representation of business people only. The other issue a lot have here is preferential voting, preferential voting is absolutely necessary if we are to have a true representative government. I have done this exercise before but I will show it again. We have an election and 10 contenders. Contender 1: gets 20% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 18% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 17% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 15% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 8% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 9% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 6% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 3% of the primary vote. Contender 1: gets 4% of the primary vote. Candidate 1 wins even though 80% of the people didn't want them too. Our preferential system will then look at our second choice. The person we want if we don't get our first choice. It will then trickle down through third choice, 4th, 5th and so on until we have a winner with more that 50% of primary and preferential votes. This means that the elected person is at least one of the choices of more than 50% of the voters, rather than the only choice of 20% of the voters and someone not voted for by 80% of the voters. I would love someone to try and prove to me that this is not the fairest system. I for one like the system, I at least get a few chances of having my preferences counted. I am not going to be governed by a soldier, a businessman, a tree huger or a king, but by a group of people that represent the majority of people, whether I like them or not, I like the system. Of course we will always have the dull and the ignorant, those that are so arrogant that they believe they know better than everyone else and that their representative is the best, and they may just be, for them, but not necessarily for all or the majority at least.
Love your exercise BUT apparently candidate 1 gets 100% of the vote and no preference is shown. Little bit like saying if you say it is so, it must be so… I also love the fact you say that the party elected is representing the people’s wishes YET you complain that the government should not be acting on the peoples wishes. Bit of a conundrum there isn’t it???
Damn cut and paste, I forgot to renumber them, but that's cool, only the dull and ignorant would not understand what happened so I will await a comment from someone else. Thanks though. On the conundrum, it is, and will always will be, unless of course we get the "perfect" politician, but then they wouldn't be human, because we are not perfect. Like I said, I may not like the result, but I love the system. I love the freedom to choose my representative. I love the freedom to whinge if I don't get it. I wouldn't change it for any system currently. I would be very pleased though if ever someone comes up with a better system. - - - Updated - - - For the dumber ones here.. these were supposed to be numbered 1 through to 10. Thanks for those smart enough to figure that out for themselves.
Oh... gee your upset because you thought you would pretend that My words in another thread is all you need but when your obvious pedantic failure is shown it is nothing but insult... One should be consistent before they pretend to be better. The problem of the conundrum is that this is what was taken to the election and clearly there is majority who want these policies. The fact you don't like them and suddenly try blame the government for doing what it said is the problem. You can whine all you like but what gives you the right to STOP what they are doing???? And for the really dumb people who pretend they are of higher regard. PRACTICE WHAT YOUR PREACH...
This bit is as TV would say, gibberish, I may not be as smart as you so I don't understand it. I agree This I agree with Blame them for doing it ... um they are doing it, like you said, they took it to an election and are doing it, why wouldn't or better why shouldn't I blame them, by your own words they ARE doing it. Whatever IT is. Nothing, zilch, zero, f'all. I have no right to STOP it. I do however have every right to talk about it. To discuss, debate, draw pictures of, write it down, record it, write a screen play about it, actually in a free country, which this still is, I have a lot of rights. But you are correct, I have no right to stop it, or STOP it as you shouted. I do have a right to give my opinion, and that is all I am doing. I have the right to analyse what they are doing, the right to see if their are better alternatives, in my opinion, and I have the right to post them here. People here have the right to rebut me, to offer an alternate opinion. It's called freedom Garry, (I will refrain from calling you Gazza). Even you have the right to your opinion. So the final part of your post I will hand back to you as I think the shoe fits you better.
I think that the modern conservative interprets welfare in the wrong way. There are a couple of things you have got to realize about welfare. First and foremost is that welfare is not "charity." I don't mean that in the sense that because government coerces you to pay taxes, it isn't charity. I mean it is not even intended to help people. It is quite literally intended to make sure that things don't get bad enough for large groups of people that they start doing stuff like overthrowing governments and seizing property. It is a pay-off. We have a massively affluent society, and if a person - for whatever reason, good or bad - is left to starve and fend for themselves, they will most certainly start to organize, and the results will be alot worse than paying an absolute minimum income. Secondly, welfare helps the economy, it doesn't harm it. A person on welfare isn't hoarding their money. They don't have savings. Every dollar that they get is immediately put back into the economy. It flows straight out of the hands of the poor and straight into the hands of the rich. If you are a conservative in a Republican sense of the word, I don't know why you wouldn't support it. It just ends up going straight to the top. Lastly, I believe that all human beings have certain fundamental rights, and access to food, shelter, water and healthcare is one of them. In my opinion, if we can't provide that, we might as well start throwing crap at one another and eating the fleas we pick off one anothers body. I get that some people don't want to contribute to this; you believe all the money you earn should be yours to keep. Fine - so let's turn every road into a toll road, let's privatize the police and courts, let's consolidate wealth into the 1% even more, let's really just go hard into this whole bootstraps thing. Because I can guarantee that after a few years of this, your perspective is going to change radically.
Bravo, a great post. Articulate, well written and very very true. I look forward to a good laugh at the rebuttals.
