*ie when the country can no longer afford to pay pensioners a minimum "australian" standard then you simply ban breeding,*

DreamOn, seemingly you are busy dreaming. For if you ban breeding,
you won't have any young taxpyers in later years. So who is myopic
here?

The size of the economy is not the issue. It is more about how
many are on a nett basis actually contributing to Govt revenue
and how many are drawing from it.

In Australia, last I checked we had as many drawing from Govt
as taxpayers. The cake is only so large, the more living from
the Govt, the less there is to go round.

You could of course increase taxes on the rich. What would
happen is that the richest would go and live somewhere else, where
taxes are lower. All this has been tried before.

If you really want to help the poor, so shut down the pokies.
For its usually the poor who lose billions of $ a year, down
those machines. The rich sit back and cash in, by owning them.

Yappie

you are such a pathetic little worm

go away

Yabby:“If you really want to help the poor, so shut down the pokies. For its usually the poor who lose billions of $ a year, own those machines. The rich sit back and cash in, by owning them.”

There are towns in NZ that wont let them in, they have seen what happens to the poor locals in other towns. In Oz can individual towns/councils do this?

I can’t imagine that happening here, the cry for “rights” would be heard coast to coast, thread to thread.

I think the message was sound; your delivery often brings out the worst in people. You obviously have a gift.

I am going to go google the word “myopic”. Oh yeah and “sagacious”, damn CJ.

Pelican: “We need to wake up to ourselves that it is people that make up a community and how we treat the most vulnerable is a measure of civilization”

I heard it was how we treat our dead. Mostly we seem to want them to hurry up and get there then we can have a nice service.

Yabby
Your welfare figure includes a vast number of welfare initiatives, including middle class handouts and some of the more peripheral welfare allocations such as for housing, social inclusion and the homeless just to name a few - where did you get the figure?

As far as I am aware the reform package for age pensioners in this Budget comes to about $14.2 billion. Much less than Defence, border protection and other national security spending.

When coming to a figure on age pensions it does not have to mean reducing welfare to other needy sectors. It can come out of corporate welfare spending or a number of other areas. There is no rule that by increasing one pension you have to decrease another type of pension.

Sometimes governments should simply do what is 'fair'.

DD
Sole parents did not get a pension rise in the budget.

http://www.budget.gov.au/

Pelican, each year when the budget appears, the major papers do
a budget breakdown. I generally keep a copy. This year I kept the
one from the AFR and the one done by the West Australian economics
editor.

Yes, the 110 billion for welfare includes various welfare, but the
point is that the total is huge. According to the West Australian,
age is about a quarter of that, invalids another 14 billion. Their
health, housing, etc is on top of that.

Do the maths yourself. According to the budget, there are around
3.3 million aged, invalid, etc pensioners. Pay each of them a rough
guess average of 270$ or whatever, say 14'000 a year, that gives
you 46 billion. Add another half a million carers, more billions.

So if you want to put pension payments up by 10%, your total cost
will be 11 billion$ in total. Who on which pension gets how much,
is another argument again.

Industry payments are minimal in comparison. I have no problem with
them being cut, the main beneficiaries seem to be MV companies,
around 600 million a year or whatever. That won't get you far and
the people who work for those companies, terrified that they will
close down without assistance, might not agree with you. Your
unemployment pensions might then increase dramatically.

Just think about the fundmentals of the big picture here. Something
like 90% of income taxes paid by working Australians goes for
just welfare expenditure. That is roughly 6 times the military budget. Health, education, payments to the States, all then are
still to be financed too.

" ... DreamOn, seemingly you are busy dreaming. For if you ban breeding,you won't have any young taxpyers in later years. So who is myopic here? ... "

Yappie, it doesn't mean that you won't have any young people, but rather that breeding will be sustainable, in part indexed to the base line of the saftey net.

I am wondering, are you a political propaganda parrot?

You seem to deliberately avoid the "big picture issues" in relation to the economy despite protestations to the contrary.

I'll give you an example. The reason that liberal party members generally do not wish to invest in training of australians and investment in manufacturing here is becasue it reduces their profit margins.

They purchase from say red china at minimal price, who historically did not control their population growth resulting in massively wide spread impoverishment, bare subsistence living and economic enslavement, and then sell to australians at an inflated cost.

For some of the pensioners, if you have enough excess in your budget to "break traction" consider a 60 day holiday in Indonesia or otherr parts of asia.
(Book yr accomodation on arrival and give the parasites a miss)

The same red china goods that you buy in australia don't even cost 1/10 of the price that they do in australia, with a much bigger range of choice. Buy up big for the years ahead, clothes and toys for the grand kids (100% cotton)and then ship back. You'll have a wow of a time and save a lot of $AU.