I've just been reading these posts and having a chuckle.
If one were to take all the people who've had a bucket tipped on them in the course of this thread, and move them out of the country, there would be nobody left.
Except maybe a few contributors to The Forum...
Just kidding!
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Fair enough Anthonyv, but look at Raw Mustards post, and too at the intention of Rechtubs, or my perceived thoughts on both.
Do we turn the other cheek, not say it like we think it is?
What results from that action?
I do not support Rechtubs view, but are ANY OF US able to say his customers did not, [SOME NOT MOST] come into the shop beer and cigarettes in cart to present a Vinni's or salvos food card?
We deceive our selves if we do not think it happens.
In my life, I have never known so many Children in Foster care.
So many in careless care too, some times that Foster care is care for cash, not kids.
Do we claim it is untrue?
Or face it,we can do better.
The fact is my claim is true, good reform comes from Labor,harsh from Liberal/Conservative,and their red neck pup Nationals.
We should be proud of our achievements here and look for further progress.
Last it is the nature of debate to be different, it too is human nature to claim our views are the right ones.
I and others fled a thread on drug reform.
It became a difference of drug use, side tracked to discuss alcohol a subject unrelated.
Such acts kill threads.
Reform is never easy but never unneeded
As always Anthony my regards and respect.

Greens Senator Rachel Siewert spent a week trying to survive on $17 a day, $244 a week the equivalent of the Newstart Allowance, This is about one-fifth of what the average single person under 35 spends a day.Senator Siewert found it very tough trying to survive on $17 a day.
Senator Siewert is pushing for a parliamentary inquiry to examine the adequacy of welfare payments. The issue will be referred to the Senate Committee on Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for inquiry, when the Senate resumes in mid June. Senator Siewert wants the inquiry to examine whether the 'jobseeker' system helps or hinders people's abilities to overcome barriers to employment.

Senator Siewert said "The income support system was designed for a different labour market and no longer meets the needs of the unemployed or underemployed, The 'welfare to work' mentality of recent governments has led to reforms based on the flawed assumption that unemployed people simply have a poor attitude towards work. This is old fashioned thinking that does not take into account the massive gaps in skills and education faced by many unemployed people. How can you look for work when you can't afford a train ticket, a haircut or a telephone? At the moment people are being let down by the system and in many cases are being forced into poverty and debt."

The Greens, welfare organisations and business groups have campaigned for the Newstart Allowance to be lifted by $50 per week to $294 to help people falling below the poverty line

Perhaps the Greens Senator should try a few years working hard at a stressfull job with a mortgage, maybe an over inflated child support assessment, no Commcar or other perks, no prospect of a set for life parlimentary pension on an workers pay and see what its like with so much of your pay being grabbed to fund other peoples priorities and life choices.

There is a balance, we do need to take car of the genuinely needy but we should not do so at the expense of harm to those who pay for it all. Wage earners are far to easy a target for governments and well off people with a social conscience and the ability to minimise their own taxes.

R0bert

You can have all the enquiries into welfare that youmlike, but the reality is, the country simply can't afford any more for welfare, so, that simp,y means, find a way to better spend what we do on welfare, and controlling waste is the first step.

Now it is said that $17 per day is the amount of job start.

Well that simply means for every $17 of welfare not spent on grog, gigs and gambling, will provide for one more person on welfare.

I just fail to see what the issue is with quanteening welfare, after all, it's not their money, it's the tax payers, and surely the tax payers have a righ to know that as little as possible is being wasted.

After all, welfare is provided to support families and it's usually the kids that miss out because they don't get to share the cigs, grog or gambling.

*RawMustard*

I think you may be on to something there mate visa vi the $180,000 a year for 3 days work, but as you have not provided relevant details, it is difficult to take it into account.

..

*Paul*

In my opinion, the *Greens* and others do themselves a great political disservice if they do not concurrently advocate for a reduction in costs in other areas in order to pay for a huge increase in overall welfare payments. Of course, if you do it for NewStart, you'd have to across the board.

However, whilst I note that some commentators are in favor of structured deficits and maintaining current cost structures, I for one most certainly am not. I want a reduction in costs and fat and in the black.

To that end, I would do away with middle class welfare in its entirety. For example, no family tax benefit or baby bonuses except for those eligible for welfare payments, though I note additional measures are likely required to take into account the working poor.

Additionally, with limited exceptions, the doctors and lawyers would be remade members of the regulated classes - i.e. fixed price, means tested sustainable funds. To that I would add dentists and vets. Further, no public service member or contractor would receive any more than say 75% of the base rate of his or her Minister.

An implementation of a program like this though would perhaps need to be cap-exed in so as not to shatter the existing indebted, particularly as regards property and mortgages.