Yvonne,

I would like you to produce the quote where I suggested you should be raped. Of course you won’t be able to because I never said it. However I am not surprised that you would be so confused. You’re inability to see the difference between Australia and Nazi Germany is a basic pointer to your difficulties with comprehension and analogy.

Since I didn’t mention carers in my posts I’m wondering how it is you know my views on this topic. Since I also mentioned my support for proper gov’t funded healthcare and education I am doubly surprised.

Maybe you should read my posts and stick to what I actually said before you start to beat me over the head with what you think I believe in. Of course maybe that’s asking a bit much of a drama queen like your good self.

Just wondering from what standpoint those who disagree with the author are coming from? Australia is not very kind to those in its own community who are suffering, not in contrast to some European nations anyway. With the beginning of the feminist movement and beyond, those who have been marginalised have been fighting for the opportunity to exercise their own autonomy. Is it only those who come from at least a middle class background who should have the right to determine their own future? Who has the right to force their own values and moral standards on others? With the system that is proposed by the author the taxpayers would also benefit, and while I agree human beings offten act with self-interest and sometimes prefer leisure over work, the proposed system would offer a means to enable those who would otherwise have been unable to pursue a better life

To those in the forum who beleive they are being clever by dismissing others in the forum with such comments as 'drama queen'(Paul) and implying others are drug users ( Earl) you are doing no more than denigrating your argument by committing Ad Hominem fallacies. I suggest you may strengthen your arguments by simply not reverting to the use of such fallacies.

Yvonne “Are you seriously so convinced of the objective goodness and benefit of a pure capitalist society”

I acknowledge that individuals are (to use your words)“humans with all their foibles, prejudices and little morals who create the demand or lack there of.”,

Thus, whilst a “pure capitalist society” in an impractical expectation, when I consider all of the tested alternatives, a libertarian-capitalist society remains the best option for the vast majority of the population, in terms of the delivery (or freedom) of the life-quality attributes which we live for, rather than the economic attributes required to exist.

Re “Funny not many men doing this kind of low paid work either, though the 'market' is demanding many more bodies to fill the vacancies.”

The elasticity of demand, relative to the economics of supply will always converge to meet at the right price for any product or service.

The problems are where one of the parties can excerpt an undue influence.

Undue influence, such as monopolistic power, is most commonly observed when government gets in on the act to protect or promote (often its own). commercial interests in the name of “the greater good”.

I have checked out this “ greater good”, he is not listed in the white pages and I have never ever met anyone who has met anyone who has actually met him. I am left to believe the “greater good” is a lie, invented by those who lack the imagination to think up a better excuse for corrupt behaviour.

Re “demanding better wages for carers of children and disabled”

“Demands” invariably degenerate into intimidation and blackmail when they are not met. No one should expect to demand anything,
Respect of the other party to the transaction requires the most forceful approach possible can only be “negotiation”.

“not everybody who you disagree with…”

my libertarian principles respect their right to disagree.
The bit which concerns me is the socialist inclined, (bearing in mind Lenins maxim “the goal of socialism is communism”) tend not to respect my right to disagree with them.

Earll11,

Perhaps, “paternalism is a such dirty word” because it institutes a kind of a guardianship over adult persons mentally capable to undertake own decisions.

“Dirty”, perhaps, is a very polite word covering the de-facto illegal activities of introducing the paternalist programs beneficial because of the state funds' redistributing by and for themselves/their peers, by intentionally denying basic human rights of people because of their belonging to different social/racial groups in post-Howard Australia.

Hopefully, it is in correct, plain, understandable English.

Michael K,

You can only be affected by gov’t paternalism if you are reliant upon them for you living. What gives those who live on the dole the right to argue that they should be able to spend the money we give them on whatever they see fit?

If you had fallen on hard times and asked your family for $500 a fortnight to live on would you tell them it was none of their business if you were spending most of it on alcohol and drugs? The right to spend all your dole money on drugs and alcohol to the neglect of your children is not a basic human right.

In the communities covered by the Howard intervention there have been significant increases in the purchase of fresh food and attendance at school has improved dramatically. If that is the effect of paternalism then there needs to be more of it. I have no problem with this program being extended to white dole bludgers as well. And just for those bleeding hearts, a dole bludger is, apart from a few exceptions, anyone who has been on unemployment benefits for more than two years. These aren’t people who have fallen on hard times, these are people who have taken up unemployment as a lifestyle choice. I’ve been on Austudy and I have spent a lot of time in Centrelink. The vast majority of customers are lifestyle recipients. Those who aren’t should absolutely be treated differently but those who can be identified as bludgers should cop the same rules as the indigenous communities. My understanding is that the minister is working to introduce this as policy very soon.

Acass2

1. Mind your own business
2. Yvonne’s despicable attempt to pretend I had wished she was raped is worthy of far more than “Drama Queen”
3. Anyone who thinks that free money is a good idea is either smoking drugs or doesn’t have the sense god gave a wombat.