Trust the old sneekmeister on this one Shaz - there will be a plethora of policies - the latest one suggested all but directs new houses to be built out of tungsten or some other non flamable material!

Am I not saying what comes from it will be rational, effective or appropriate I am just saying there will be a lot of action - for those in power to seem to be doing something - thats all

This article is mere unweaned squalling for the teat. Before any wealth can be re-distributed, someone must first engage in productive activity.

There can be nothing more selfish than trying to get something for nothing by urging the government to take it from someone else. Yet this infantile sense of entitlement to something for nothing underlies every single socialist policy and is ultimately is all that socialism has to offer.

This economic illiteracy then does not understand that the destruction of wealth has consequences: it makes people poor!

Has it ever occurred to you that there might be some connection between the fact that government takes 40 percent of what the people earn every day, and the fact that hundreds of thousands of Australians reach old age broke? And then the same economic illiterates who caused the problem in the first place have the gall to suggest it should be fixed by taxing the rising generation even more!

Grim
"Interest payments are nothing more or less than a penalty for being poor, paid to the rich."

That is mere economic illiteracy too. So $100 today should be worth the same as the same $100 in 50 years time, should it.

You should be ashamed of your ignorance, not flaunting it like something clever.

Claims of 'economic illiteracy' are a resort of those of seek to avoid moral issues by claim of 'expert opinion'.

Such claims are also designed to deceive workers and vulnerable people of their real interests - to confuse them with jargon - that they consent to impverishment and exploitaiton.

Charmaine Crowe's core proposals, though, would only cost around $3 billion. And even if this was broadened significantly - and cost over $10 billion - it would be less than 1% of GDO...

The point: the measures I suggest are not beyond our means. As I said before - remember the economy is valued at over $1 trillion. Why then the Scrooge attitude?

And as for the moral aspects - the genuinely disabled; carers, those who cannot find work even with the imposition of an activity test - why should these people pay the price? Removal of superannuation concessions favouring the rich - could save billions....

So again - don't be deceived. Look at the moral aspect. And look at the underlying interests...

“This article is mere unweaned squalling for the teat. Before any wealth can be re-distributed, someone must first engage in productive activity.”

The article specifically targets pensioners, who -presumably- have spent their entire working lives in productive activity. It's even possible that a couple of them may have produced you, Wing ah Hume.

“There can be nothing more selfish than trying to get something for nothing by urging the government to take it from someone else.”

I have an 'ignite' credit card, which costs me exactly nothing. No yearly fees, no transaction fees, nothing. PROVIDED, of course, I pay off the full amount every month. How can Westpac bank afford to offer this free service?
By charging interest on the transactions of all those people who cannot afford to buy such luxuries as food, and housing and clothes.
Can there be anything more selfish than the rich being directly subsidised by the poor?

“That is mere economic illiteracy too. So $100 today should be worth the same as the same $100 in 50 years time, should it.”
Yes.
In fact, the Austrian School (Wing has perhaps heard of them?) has often advocated a return to the gold standard, as a means of controlling inflation. The other fork, of course, in controlling inflation and the money supply, is the issue of interest free credit, by the GOVERNMENT, and an end to the (contentious) practice of fractional -and post fractional- banking, whereby banks can create far more money than the Mint, out of thin air.
Can there be anything more selfish than getting something for nothing?
Look up monetary reform, -as proposed by many adherents to the Austrian school.
Tristan,
“So again - don't be deceived. Look at the moral aspect. And look at the underlying interests...”
Hear, hear. All the elitist policies of the arch and anarcho capitalists and free marketeers fail the first test of morality: “how would you feel, if it was you...”

It's hard to imagine the hardship that people living on pensions live under because you rarely mix with people outside your social group and the lone Newstart recipient you know isn't likely to bore you with the details of the intrusive, draconian and incompetent micromanagement that Centrelink foists on their Newstart 'clients'.

A more enlightened management regime would free up Centrelink staff and release their clients from the stress of micromanaged scrutiny so that they can retain their self esteem and confidence and perhaps develop an alternative to living on Newstart Allowance which pays half the poverty line.

Dear readers;

Just letting you know that I'm republishing this article on my personal blog as well as here.

If you're interested, I urge you to take a look there. Some of the work there is republished from OLO - some is original...

Importantly - I want to encourage debate - and to keep my blog 'relevant'...

Also: I'm looking to accept submissions for the blog from like-minded friends and readers who are capable writers.

And genuine - even critical -debate is welcome - (but no trolling pls)

So - hoping to see your there:

Left Focus: http://leftfocus.blogspot.com/