The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Tony Abbott wants to get tough on welfare bludgers. Hear! Hear! > Comments

Tony Abbott wants to get tough on welfare bludgers. Hear! Hear! : Comments

By Naomi Anderson, published 8/4/2011

There are some welfare bludgers, but they're not on the disability pension.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Naomi Anderson,
judging by this you're just another dreary drudge of the system, devoid of imagination and intent on giving some form to a dog's breakfast.
Why must you think in terms of adapting the system to the individual, or validating the corporation with a consignment of guilt that it will eagerly take up, at least as PR. Critique is the means by which the system grows stronger; it assimilates it, uses it, to a point; to the point that it serves the bottom line and not beyond it. If you had any nous at all you'd see that what you ask for (no better than unionism) is unrealistic in the long term. Your intentions are clearly honourable, but naive, mendicant.
Why don't you try to overthrow this system of patronage, rather than validating it with a begging bowl?
Posted by Squeers, Friday, 8 April 2011 7:56:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree totally with the sentiments of this article and also with the comments of Phil7 and Bully in particular.

I don't believe that drug addicts and alcoholics should be allowed onto the Disability Pension at all full stop. The DSP is designed as an income support payment to those whose condition will not improve within the next two years and cannot understake study, training or paid work of more than 15 hours per week within that same time frame. Drug addicts and alcoholics need to hit rock bottom and get themselves into a detox centre and there their condition will definitely improve within two years.

As for Phil7's comments about needing to take on the big end of town, I agree with them as well. It seems that its popular nowadays for politicians to claim that the numbers of people on DSP are bloated with dole bludgers which I find hard to believe. The big end of town finance the electoral campaigns of both sides of politics, pay close to or near nor tax (by various legal tax mechanisms), are greedy and lazy. They need to pay their fair share of tax without recourse to tax minimization schemes, cease financing electoral campaigns and on the issue of the Disability Support Pension - butt out and shut up altogether.

And for the record I am on the DSP and have been so since January 2008 due to multiple mental health diagnoses and a musculo-skeletal condition called Fibromyalgia. All this has been and is continued to be treated and documented by various specialists and mental health practitioners.
Posted by theoriginalmattyc, Friday, 8 April 2011 10:22:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
theoriginalmattyc< "I don't believe that drug addicts and alcoholics should be allowed onto the Disability Pension at all full stop."

What of those drug addicts or alcoholics who have developed chronic conditions as a result of their addictions...such as liver failure, kidney failure, or any of the blood-born diseases such as HIV or Hepatitis C?

And if we are going to deny the alcoholics and drug addicts disability pensions, then we should surely deny the tobacco addicts the pension for the same reasons?

There are multiple chronic diseases caused by smoking... including lung cancer, emphysema, and COPD (Like Bully), who most certainly can't work because of these debilitating conditions at some stage of their illnesses.

I doubt the government is talking about these sort of disability pensioners as being bludgers.

More than likely it is the conditions that are difficult to prove that are used as an excuse by true welfare bludgers... such as some back pain problems, some mental health disorders and some 'stress related' illnesses (not ALL are bogus of course).

Some people will think up all sorts of scams to avoid working!
Posted by suzeonline, Saturday, 9 April 2011 2:02:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As an electrician who came from a housing commission area, I would like to say that Naomi Anderson’s scenario is the biggest fantasy since the Stolen Generation(s).

Gee Naomi, I came from a block of flats with 84 units, and I can absolutely assure you that many of the people there really did believe that the world owed tham a living. They had no intention of working if they could get away with it. . And if you think differently, then you must have led a sheltered life.

When Whitlam got into power, I held onto my apprenticeship while all of my mates from the flats tossed their apprenticeships in and went surfing every day. They thought I was crazy for going to work. Most of my old friends today would be unemployable. Why should the taxpayer subsidize stupidity when our hospitals in Sydney are permanently at Code Red through lack of funding?

Of course, apprenticeships were very easy to get when I was a teenager, that was before the unions and the government decided to buy the youth vote by tripling apprentice wages until no employer could afford to hire one. As for her fictional hero getting hurt on a site with “no OH&S”, there are sites like that, and they are all controlled by imported ethnic groups who would never hire an Australian anyway, and who undercut the prices of Australian firms who do submit to OH&S. But I’ll bet that Naomi is another one who thinks that multiculturalism is just grand.

Australia has 800,000 people on disability pensions, Naomi,which is incredible for a country of 21 million. The real story is what proportion of them are phony. Stop parroting the Party line that the poor unemployed are all genuine and accept the reality that too many of them are bludging on the system.

Your problem, Naomi, is that there are a lot of people from my own socio economic demographic who can relate similar stories to mine, and who know that your little scenario is complete hogwash. And you wonder why working people vote Liberal.
Posted by LEGO, Saturday, 9 April 2011 6:03:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh what a wonderful story.

Just a few points.

The author says>>He enrols in a pre-apprenticeship to be an electrician - paying over a thousand dollars - and passes with excellent grades.

Is this the same kid, who had no interest while at school?

If so, why did he change?

Now you say the parents earned $60K, and that this was all but taken up in rent. Wow, that's some apartment!

So, just a few questions.

If the parents were obviously, low income earners, why on earth did they have a child, knowing full well they couldn't afford him?

Also, why didn't they take some responsibility for their child's education and ensure that he did better at school.

After all, he obviously had the abbility.

After all, with almost their entire wage gone in rent, it's not as if they were down at the pub because they had no money for that.

You see everyone blames society, but in reality, it's the parents who are ultimately resposible for the future of their kids.

Now if they don't want to take resposibility, then don't have kids.

Cash wages at a construction site. That's about as rare as hens teeth and in any case, any serious injury would have been reported when he went to hospital. Sorry, but I don't buy this one.

Now, the real problem with hiring a disabled person is the way that they are paid.

I have been there and done that. The employer is provided with a subsidy for up to 26 weeks, after which the employee has to then be paid at full rates.

I have complained about this very issue. I suggested that the employer be given a continual subsidy dependant on the degree of disability. But they won't listen.

Why on earth will anyone employ a person with 70% ability and pay them 100% wages. Won't happen.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 9 April 2011 6:49:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why not address the root cause rather than join the witch hunt?

Maybe there are some contributing factors to the growing rates of depression & disability from an increasingly varied range of complaints.

Gee, I don't know, maybe increasing the gap between rich & poor causes some stress - particularly on the poor - you think?

Maybe ongoing pollution in air food & water contributes to the decline of public health in general and the vulnerable in particular.

A civilized society looks after its members who can't (for whatever reason) look after themselves.

Try a bit of compassion - I would rather support ten people who could survive without help, than deny assistance to one who genuinely needed it.
Posted by Phil7, Saturday, 9 April 2011 4:21:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy