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 > Tackling poverty should still be a budget priority > Comments

Tackling poverty should still be a budget priority : Comments

By Molly Johnson, published 3/5/2013

The number of long term Newstart recipients, those who have received unemployment benefits for more than 12 months, is increasing at a higher rate than the number of short term job seekers.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
I do not understand why any discussion of poverty focuses almost exclusively on 'give more money', of course that will temporarily lift people from poverty, it is, to me, an easy unsustainable solution. It is not as if we do not have the intellectual capacity to derive another solution surely?

In the past 30 odd years, millions of people have been lifter, permanently, from poverty. Providing jobs and opportunity appear to me to be one other solution. In china, India and Africa millions have been assisted through the simple expediency of affording cheap reliable power, free trade zones etc have made huge differences.

Consider the consequences of 'developing the north of Australia, eliminate job stifling regulation, tax concessions, workplace flexibility, external financing arrangements and eliminating trade restrictions would revolutionise the place. The failure of the gas hub project at Broom is a typical example of perpetuating poverty in the region. Eliminating restrictive business hours and crippling award rates eliminate many from getting work at weekends, I could go on of course, but you get my drift I am sure.

Regulations, both green and red tape stifle the goal of alleviating poverty.... It is so simple people, human societies have been getting out of poverty for hundreds of years, it is what EVERYONE wants for themselves and their children.
Posted by Prompete, Friday, 3 May 2013 8:55:18 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
That sounds like a plan Molly. A plan that is to encourage more Bludgers.

First of all I really doubt many, even our Bludgers are living on $35 a WEEK, but it would be a good trick if you could train them to. Save the tax payer a fortune, which I'm sure they could use more profitably.

Secondly if you want to get the public on side with even more handouts, you'll have to start getting rid of the Bludgers. Bludgers like those around here who will do a day, or even 2 for a local turf or dairy farmer for $175 in hand a day. Ask them to do more & they just laugh. A couple of these days & their disposable income is greater than many fully employed.

Give the bludgers even more & many of those low paid employed are going to say stuff this, & refuse to work for what they earn.

They are already becoming like my neighbor in the Wide Bay area. Of course he was a pom, so already trained in their union attitude to work. He had been on the dole for a few years, & was always crying poor. A couple of people suggested he should take one of the jobs that the Childers sugar mill were trying to fill.

His answer was "what, come off the benefits for just 6 months work? not bloody likely". As a tradesman, he would have earned about 40% more in that 6 months that the years dole income, but he was a confirmed bludger, just like 10s of thousands of them.

So dear lady, when you have got all this type off our backs, you are welcome to ask about raising the dole for the genuine, usually over 55 cases. You should have no problem funding it from the savings, & the extra tax income from the now employed bludgers
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 3 May 2013 10:20:01 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
to many in the poverty industry with vested interest to eliminate it. Look at those eco terrorist on the sea shepherd. how many are considered 'poor ' while stealing from the taxpayer?
Posted by runner, Friday, 3 May 2013 10:42:15 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
Before China accepted a free market as the basis of it's now burgeoning economy, 800,000 lived in real dire poverty.
Real dire poverty, translating to incomes of $1.25 a day or less, and routinely going to bed hungry, and with a nutrition shortfall, that meant something like a common cold, could wipe out a family, or most of a village.
Today, the real poor in China number just 200,000; and, the wealthier middle class, continues to expand.
Albeit, many now struggle to maintain previous standards, due to rising labour, food and rent costs!
Even so, it has been economic growth and economic growth alone that has transformed China, and places like Taiwan, Singapore, Southern Korea, war ravaged and basically bankrupt Japan, Germany and many parts of completely devastated Europe.
China was fortunate that its banks were all Govt owned and controlled, and therefore was virtually quarantined from the GFC!
We for our part, didn't invest very heavily in worthless derivatives, and were somewhat similarly protected.
China's massive economic growth came even as she basically depopulated; meaning, we can grow our economy, without ramping up our population numbers.
We can put some real growth into our economy, just by building more houses.
We can do that by returning affordability to the market.
We can do that by massively improving the Govt spend on Govt housing.
The new estates/high rises, can't be allowed to become ghettos full of the poor, but incorporate a very broad spectrum of the wider community!
Rapid rail links would promote just that.
Finally, we need to be able to afford and fund the changes we need to put much more growth and entrepreneurial enterprise into our communities, and an economic model that derives all its real growth/burgeoning prosperity, from investing in our own people and their better ideas, rather than entirely unproductive parasites.
To that end, we also need to accept the need for quite massive reforms, simplification in our tax system and industrial laws; continue to roll out the NBN; and develop publicly owned power systems, that are both carbon free and cheaper than coal!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Friday, 3 May 2013 10:50:23 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
The dole is not enough to live on, and could be improved, to say 80% of the average wage, if limited to just six months? If as part of the compact, we also remove unfair dismissals!
If those who wouldn't work in an iron lung are able to be moved on, without delay or involving a veritable army of lawyers, and the courts?
Employers might have enough new confidence to employ/try out, more new employees!
And if we are smart enough to reform our tax system to get the domestic economy humming along, a six moth dole payment period, at the higher rate, would be more than enough for those genuinely seeking work; even if that then compels some to move, relocate or retrain!
There could be a case made for extending and extending again, a much more generous dole, if recipients were indeed retraining and demonstrably gaining relevant new job ready skills! And the new future high tech high reward economy may well mean that the average employee, may need to retrain/update their skill set, several times during their entire working life!
I also think we need to examine who does that training and at what cost to the recipient.
I believe, we ought to replace many of the private players, who may well be generating significant profits, but far too few graduates/apprentices; with many more significantly improved and much more comprehensive and successful TAFE colleges!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Friday, 3 May 2013 11:21:27 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
Dear Molly,

As discussed on a recent similar thread, many of the unemployed are unemployable. The unemployable are a product of a failing education system that has been progressively socialized and dumbed down by people who have lots of answers but donít understand the questions.

I think the real tragedy is that there are still people with influence who are prepared to sacrifice large sections of our community upon the altar of socialism. Those proposing an increase in funding to maintain the status quo of so many are repugnant.

To socialists it is about appearing to be compassionate through spending more public funds. To conservatives it is about finding and applying real solutions in order to assist both the unemployed and the unemployable to become productive members of our society. By so doing they can once again hold their heads high and grow their self esteem.

It does no credit to The Australian Institute to attempt to draw attention away from the damage your political mantra has already inflicted on our society in general and those without employment in particular.

I do wish your institute was an elected body, that way we could dump the lot of you along with the current government in September. Then you would really begin to understand what it means to be unemployed and just how awful it is to be paid to stay that way.
Posted by spindoc, Friday, 3 May 2013 11:22:16 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
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

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