I cannot understand why young people today apparently have the choice of working or not working?

I know many young persons who do not have a job, preferring to stay at home and receive the dole, laying around and smoking pot, which appears to be the height of their ambition in life.

The government bodies will tell you that they cannot do this, but lets face it,....they do and probably have been doing it for months, if not years.

It would be interesting to see in print an HONEST account of exactly how many people are unemployed and receiving taxpayer funded "relief" rather than persuing the opportunity to work for a living.

This choice should not be available to anyone who is able-bodied and capable of working for their keep.

Wait for the bleeding hearts and the do-gooders to jump up and say that there are not the jobs available for everyone wanting to work, to which I say poppycock, the most unqualified moron can be employed
picking up rubbish along the sides of the road, and in many other public areas.

This mindset of laying around getting paid for doing nothing has to stop, before the current Labor Government wrecks the whole economy, and we end up like Greece, Cyprus and many other of the the shamefully indebted nations.

I say if you are able-bodied and capable of working then get off your backside and get a job doing something, ( I know you will probably say you are currently unemployed, but you want to be a Brain Surgeon?)
but sorry, everybody has to do their little bit to keep the ship afloat, so if you do not wish to participate, then we give you NOTHING!

Crackcup,
If you want to eliminate hangeronarism you need to eliminate socialism first. You see, the notion of of social support was hijacked about 40 years ago by the neo sozialisten under the pretence of socialism. It has now morphed into a monster feeding on itself 7 getting more obese by the day. Those of us who want to put a stop to this insanity are branded either racist or redneck by those too stupid to see even with hindsight available up front.

Dear Crackcup,

It is not clear from your post whether what you object to is:
1) Young people not working.
or
2) "We" having to pay those young people who do not work.

What if a young person just lives with their parents and lives on their account? or what if they live on their savings? is that a problem?

Also, you say "then we give you NOTHING!" without explaining first who are these "we". Do you object for example if myself and others help such young people through St. Vincent de Paul or Anglicare? What right have you to tell me what to do with my money?

And why should everyone involve themselves with money and economics in the first place - can't they just be good people without expecting a formal pecuniary reward?

Yuyutsu, that is an obtuse argument. You are well aware that Crackcup is complaining about the too easy access to taxpayer funded welfare.

Of course no one gives a damn what you chose to do with your own money, however when you include agencies like St. Vincent de Paul or Anglicare, which are heavily supported by tax payer funds, you are merely disguising the source of the money rather than changing it.

I most definitely do object to you or any other bleeding heart claiming the right to chose the distribution of our taxes, either directly by centertlink, or by agency.

When I went cruising in my yacht I went for considerable periods without being employed, but never assumed I was entitled to any form of welfare, or taxpayer support. I returned to Oz one year to find a safe spot for the cyclone season. I went to the Commonwealth Employment Service in Townsville to check the prospects for employment.

The clerk, assuming I was applying for unemployment benefits, which I was not, wanted to know how I had been supporting myself in the 5 months since I had last worked. He was incredulous when I replied "out of the bank". Evidently it was unknown for anyone to support them selves while doing what they wanted to do.

Europe's problem today is excessive welfare, which has destroyed their economies. Anyone who can't read the warning sines is an idiot.

Oh Hi Julia, how's the DIS going? Found the funding yet love?

What right have you to tell me what to do with my money?
Yuyutsu,
None if you don't claim it in your tax return. I strongly object to just keep paying more & more taxes so more young people can have the CHOICE of not doing any work. You think I enjoy going to work so that I can pay tax ?
You say people living with & off their parents ? get real ! Those parents can't fill out the tax deduction forms quick enough. Guess who is paying for it all in the eventual ? We all are !
Want a life, get a job ! Stop bludging.

"""
I know many young persons who do not have a job, preferring to stay at home and receive the dole, laying around and smoking pot, which appears to be the height of their ambition in life.
"""

Did they start off that way or were they dealt a bad hand?

I know a few myself. They all had apprenticeships, but then the companies they worked for all went broke and they haven't been able to find new ones. They sit around my garage with my son every Friday and Saturday nights playing computer games and cards. They all say the same thing. Flipping burgers or filling selves don't fill their cars with petrol any better than the dole, so why bother?

"""
the most unqualified moron can be employed picking up rubbish along the sides of the road, and in many other public areas.
"""

See filling selves and flipping burgers above!

Dear Hasbeen,

Sorry, I was not aware that St. Vincent de Paul and Anglicare are heavily supported by tax payer funds. Lets then just assume that I found some other charity that was not.

<<You are well aware that Crackcup is complaining about the too easy access to taxpayer funded welfare.>>

Why should I? It's the first time I come across him/her on this forum, so let's hear his/her answer directly first.

Dear Individual,

1. <<None if you don't claim it in your tax return.>>
2. <<You think I enjoy going to work so that I can pay tax ?>>

Now isn't this a contradiction? On the one hand you don't like to work for paying tax, while on the other you want me to do the same!

<<You say people living with & off their parents ? get real ! Those parents can't fill out the tax deduction forms quick enough.>>

That possibility has not even crossed my mind - What if they don't? What if the parents are wealthy who like Hasbeen live off the bank? or what if they grow their own vegetables (and the young ones may be helping too)? or what if they live in a community or an extended family where they don't bother using money in the first place?

I think you both miss my point: all I was trying to find out is whether Crackcup is advocating slavery, whether s/he believes that everyone MUST work and MUST do it for money.

No Yuyutsu, just not hold their hands out for taxpayer money. I am a great believer in people doing their own thing, in their own way, provided they pay their own way.

RawMustard the defense forces are advertising for trainees in lots of trades. Most of their qualifications are now recognised in civvy street, so much better training than it used to be.

If those kids really want a trade, can't find a place in civvy street, & can handle a bit of discipline, tell them to have a look at it.

It is not all that easy to get in, they aren't after cannon fodder, like the old days. They will need good school results & be reasonably physically fit.

Not all defense force trades involve getting blown up in Afghanistan.

Yuyutsu,
we're not missing the point because you don't make a point to miss in the first place. You are a perfect example of why our society is the way it is. If I had my way you would not be let anywhere near a polling booth for a long time yet.
RawMustard mentions companies that go under & leave people without a job. Yes, because it becomes too much for some companies to remain viable after paying so much tax to keep those who don't want to work & support an insane Public Service.
The real issue is that everyone wants good money for nothing in return.

What a joke of a post.

Firstly the premise that there are millions of young people out there "choosing" to bludge their way through life without a care in the world is a straight up lie. You hear that? A LIE. Yes I am calling you and anyone who repeats the falsehood a liar. Since we all know how horrendous it is to lie these days dont we? Anyone can avail themselves of the relevant statistics and if they did so they would find that the vast majority of young people are working or studying.

Oh and Centrelink with their pointless monkey tricks and "work for the dole" rock painting schemes or even worse virtual indentured slavery for some supposedly non profit entity are hardly a picnic for those who need to rely on government support. More like punishment for being poor. Anyone "choosing" that would have to be pitied and suspected of being unwell mentally.

What about the handouts (much more than the dole) given to those with private health insurance, first home buyers, private schooling, private childcare (soon to include nannies), businesses like the car industry and mining?

It is only ever the poorest and the most vulnerable that you attack. What cowardliness. How about you direct your spite and bile towards some of the real culprits behind our moral and fiscal decline. The bankers, the neocons, the media and the politicians that fawn over them? People who really did "choose" what actions thaey were going to take and without the slightest thought for the harm they would do.

Yuyutsu, Mikk,(what "strange" pseudonyms):
I suspect from your names that you could possibly be two of the many "financial opportunists" that have "invaded" this country in recent times?

As I said in my subject post,...wait for the "do gooders and bleeding hearts " to jump up,...they are usually the ones who are the targeted offenders, milking the system to the max, and trying to make everyone else feel guilty by objecting to them.

For you two literally challenged objectors, I will repeat the gist of my opening statement,..any able-bodied young person who is NOT prepared to work and is prepared to bludge his or her way through life, should NOT receive a handout from the Taxpayers!...NO WORK, NO PAY!...got it?

"Anyone can avail themselves of the statistics"...read the original paragraph again,..."It would be interesting to see in print an HONEST account of exactly how many people are unemployed and receiving taxpayer funded "relief", rather than persuing the opportunity to work for a living"....there are statistics and statistics, but for the sake of expediency, most statistics are conveniently "manipulated" to suit the government of the day`s financial agenda.

Maybe we should start posting our threads in picture form, so that the intellectually challenged can understand the actual simplicity of our posts?

>>any able-bodied young person who is NOT prepared to work and is prepared to bludge his or her way through life, should NOT receive a handout from the Taxpayers!...NO WORK, NO PAY!...got it?<<

You'll be pleased to know that this system is already in place: Centrelink make dole bludgers fill out so many forms and jump through so many pointless hoops that getting the dole is harder work than working. If they don't perform their tasks they don't get paid.

Most deadbeats and bludgers have just enough common sense to realise that it's easier to just get a job and will be found in crappy dead-end jobs all over the country. Go to a servo in the small hours of the morning: the dull-eyed, dull-witted pimply youth behind the counter is your pot smoking bludger. He sleeps half the day, has a low income and doesn't really contribute anything of value to society but he is working. Just not very hard. If he was not working he'd actually have to work harder to earn an income and it isn't hard to see why he'd want to avoid doing that. Hence he works.

Cheers,

Tony

"what "strange" pseudonyms", Crackcup...

and one for a container of a free-base crystalline tropane alkaloid isn't?

Dear Hasbeen,

<<I am a great believer in people doing their own thing, in their own way, provided they pay their own way.>>

And so am I, but this discussion is merely about subsistence, not yachting. Living on meagre welfare-money is not a joy!

Dear Individual,

<<If I had my way you would not be let anywhere near a polling booth for a long time yet.>>

Thank you, indeed I am a postal voter, but if you don't want me to vote, then suit yourself and you'll get Julia again.

Dear Crackcup,

Thank you for your clarification: I am very glad that you have no intentions of whipping or jailing those who do not work into consent.

<<I suspect from your names that you could possibly be two of the many "financial opportunists" that have "invaded" this country in recent times?>>

FYI, since I invaded this country, Australia received hefty taxes from me, money which comes from overseas, while I do not require any of its services except for the right to live in this continent. I am glad when my tax-money goes to feed the financially-poor, preventing slavery, not so when it goes to feed the government, its public-service and a myriad of silly and unjustified projects.

All,

In nature and early human development, one always had to work for a living, but one didn't always need to be formally 'employed' and earn money in order to live.

Current civilisation, involuntarily imposed conditions and legislation that no longer allow one to survive without money. Having done so, it ought to compensate individuals with the only remaining means of subsistence - money, so that individuals can have a similar standard of living as they had in pre-civilisation nature.

We ALL deserve such compensation, those who work and those who don't, those who are healthy and those who are ill, those who are young and those who are old: compensation should be unconditional!

In practice, this compensation becomes a negative-income-tax, where each person receives a fixed sum that is offset against a fixed-rate tax applied from the first dollar of income.

Wm Trevor and All:

I use that pseudonym "Crackcup" simply because I was unable to continue my original pseudonym "Cuphandle" when I changed ISP`s from
Dial-up to Satellite connection, but then again most posters will have at some time in the past, thrust and parried with me during some of the more enlightening Threads!

I can assure you that I am totally opposed to hard drugs of all kind. Note: I stated hard drugs, because I do not mind a Rum and Coke or a nice cold Beer on a hot day, and I can hear the opportunists grabbing at my use of "drugs" ie: Alcohol, but I am NOT perfect either, but I have spent most of my life working and paying the appropriate taxes, as required by the system!

I do harbour very strong political beliefs, and I am appalled at the direction that this Federal Labor Government is taking this country. I am further amazed that in light of the National Deficit created by this Government in it`s feeble attempts to buy votes from the gullible recipients, and the outrageous political fiasco displayed by this Prime Minister in the recent Rudd/Gillard circus performance, that our illustrious Governor General failed to recognise the dire financial situation created by Labor and failed to take the most appropriate step by immediately announcing a lack of confidence, calling an immediate Election, and placing the country in the hands of a Caretaker Government!....Could it be that she has a conflict of interest at heart?

You people talk so much garbage.

My wife is a councilor with a job network charity. Not a business, but a charity. For the last 2 years she has handled the long term unemployed.

A bit of a bleeding heart, she used to lecture me that it isn't the unemployeds fault. People who are homeless are just unlucky. She still tries desperately to help her clients, but is now admitting that about 50% of them will do anything to avoid getting a job.

Even worse are those who get a job, but don't turn up after a few days. This spoils her credibility with prospective employers, who will only take on long term unemployed, after too many no hopers, unless recommended. Her recommendation goes a long way but can't afford to be wrong too often.

For a long time she resisted breaching those bludgers who weren't prepared to work, but that is changing. Now when they stuff up intentionally, & thus make it harder for her to help the genuine cases, they are breached. No longer getting away with it, the bludgers don't like having their bluff called.

The bludger count in that office runs at about 12% of those referred from centrelink. Thanks bleeding hearts.

If you want to fix it, Hasbeen. You need to change the whole system and give kids an incentive to go to work. Working 38 hours a week just to meet their bills is not going to work. People need rewards and they are few and far between for a lot in this country now. Between bureaucracy, regulations, laws, the nanny state, and increasing costs, a lot have given up. Not everyone wants to sit around some trendy cafe drinking lattes and playing on ICraps all weekend. But in a lot of places that's all that's available to them. Anything else is either banned or financially out of reach!

The nannies, bureaucrats and socialists have put a huge dampener on everything. What you're seeing is blow back.

A good place to start would be to hang all the lawyers with the entrails of all the insurers and radical greenies.

"The nannies, bureaucrats and socialists have put a huge dampener on everything. What you're seeing is blow back.

A good place to start would be to hang all the lawyers with the entrails of all the insurers and radical greenies.

Rawmustard, capitalism has caused unemployment to rise with poverty and homelessness at a all new record level right around the world, and you know it. A socialism democracy system will take the power away from these greedy types bloated with corruption and dishonesty.

Socialists generally argue that capitalism concentrates power and wealth within a small segment of society that controls the means of production and derives its wealth through a system of exploitation. This creates a stratified society based on unequal social relations that fails to provide equal opportunities for every individual to maximize their potential, and does not utilize available technology and resources to their maximum potential in the interests of the public.
Christofias won a crucial presidential runoff in Cyprus, defeating his conservative rival with a majority of 53%. In Greece, in the general election on 17 June 2012, Coalition of the Radical Left (Syriza) won 26.89% of the votes and became the second largest party in parliament.
In Ireland, in the 2009 European election, Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party took one of three seats in the capital Dublin European constituency. In Denmark, the Socialist People's Party (SF or Socialist Party for short) more than doubled its parliamentary representation to 23 seats from 11, making it the fourth largest party. In 2011, the socialist parties of Social Democrats, Socialist People's Party and the Danish Social Liberal Party formed government, after a slight victory over the liberal parties. They were led by Helle Thorning-Schmidt, and had the Red-Green Alliance as a supporting party.

Rawmustard, the lates brain wave of thought by some, is to add more people just to keep the cash-register,s ringing, however this plan will just fold in on its self with more unployed as the by-product.

Planet3

Rawmustard, the lates brain wave of thought by some, is to add more people just to keep the cash-register,s ringing, however this plan will just fold in on its self with more unemployed as its by-product.

Typo:)....

Planet3

millions of young people out there "choosing" to bludge
mikk,
why the blown out of proportion reply ? No one's talking about millions. The argument is about the many who seem to think it is their god-given right to sit back & don't do anything if they don't want to but still expect support from those who do go to work.
I tell you what you could do to get an idea of what it's like for most of us. Go to work & then give half of what you work for to some total strangers who don't even acknowledge you as you say good morning to them as you walk past them sitting on a beach on your way to work.

Dear Individual,

<<who don't even acknowledge you as you say good morning to them as you walk past them sitting on a beach on your way to work.>>

I don't justify this behaviour, but no wonder after the tortures they endure in Centerlink they no longer feel they owe anyone anything.

Once Centerlink is replaced with a fixed unconditional universal payment (whether one works or one doesn't), those young people will have more incentive to work because while no one will tell them to, if they do they will have more money in their pockets.

Yuyutsu,
Where I live the Government stipulates that we employ a certain quota of certain people. Now, the greater majority show up for work when they feel like but they still get paid full fortnight. We are not allowed to dock them because we would be branded a certain despicable word.
We are literally falling ar$e over backwards to help the many young but they literally do not want to work. I remember when their fathers were young & exactly the same & they now bleat discrimination, under paid work etc.
Their sons & daughters are gradually starting to bleat discrimination and, just like their fathers they'll be called respected elders before long by the academic ignoramuses in the South. Sounds like I'm knocking a certain group of people doesn't it ? Yes & that certain group includes a large number of outsiders who do not belong to this group, they belong to the Public Service.

It appears that there exists in our community a very large group of people who believe that the unemployed are "entitled" to stay in bed and receive the dole for whatever reason, and believe me when I say that "having been dealt a bad hand" is NOT one of them!

I personally know many who prefer not to seek work, sit at home in their taxpayer subsidized house or flat, smoking Dope, cigarettes and drinking booze or spirits.

The Unemployment Benefit as such was designed to offer temporary relief whilst a person was unemployed, actively seeking work. It was never designed to sustain the habit of drugs, booze and the easy life doing nothing. Many of these young able-bodied dole recipients are shacked up with girlfriends, who provide a constant source of sexual
satisfaction, invariably too lazy to use birth control, thus inevitably ending up in the family way, conveniently providing a better source of income ie: Baby Benefit and Family Benefits. These same young "beneficiaries" seem to think that the world owes them due to the fact that most have been mollycoddled, by parent(s) who themselves are beneficiaries of the free hand-out, and can see nothing untoward in continuing the line of growing recipients.

I am afraid to say that somewhere down the line, very shortly, we are going to witness a massive change in the way the benefits are paid, if we are to survive financially. No one will be able to get a hand-out without fairly contributing realistically, and many of these layabouts will get exactly what they deserve,... NOTHING!

Not that many years ago society had an answer to 'layabout' problems. It was called the "Vagrancy Act" and simply meant that if you could work and chose not to you went to prison for 3 months.
Coupled with the "Consorting Act" and the "Street Offenses Act" and the "Truancy Act" we just about had the whole thing covered.
Perhaps we should remember what Dr. Adrian Rogers had to say

“You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation.

You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”

~~ Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931- 2005

Australia would have a much higher homeless and disadvantage rate if we eradicated social security nets. They are in place to ensure people don't starve should they find themselves out of work for a period of time and allows for training or time to find another job. Do we really want to go down the path of a third world economy? Even Americans who generally loathe the idea of safety nets have some form of unemployment benefit in place.

Rorting by Wall Street and the finance sector costs us a lot more as a society but as the latest 4 Corners program about the GFC revealed, not one financier/banker/trader (other than some small fry) has been charged or sent to jail for fraudulent activity.

Even if we accept there are a minority on the dole, who for whatever reason, find this largesse so powerfully attractive they want to loll about smoking dope while the rest of us work, the figures are a minority compared to the bailouts and subsidies offered to the corporate sector. Rorting in the social security system is mainly by people who participate in the cash economy and who receive benefits fraudulently and pay no tax. This is already a criminal offence and is a separate issue to the concept of a safety net.

However I agree that programs which help people learn new skills or gain experience are useful to ensure people are not at risk of long term unemployment. There also has to be an awareness that many people who are on unemployment for some time are also disadvantaged by illness and some form of disability which makes things more difficult. There is a fine line now between what constitutes a disability, who can and should work and who can't. Difficult questions with lots of fluff thrown up by the politicians about equal oppportunities for the disabled but very little real action by governments or business to ensure disabled people have the same opportunities.

Dear chrisgaff1000

“Not that many years ago society had an answer to 'layabout' problems. It was called the "Vagrancy Act" and simply meant that if you could work and chose not to you went to prison for 3 months.”
“and when they get out of prison, then what?

Not that many years ago!....Gezzzzz, why not just have them all shot, oh dear. The amount of dinosaurs posting now days with ideas that worked well in some smaller population, and probably on some other planet as well:) Wind back the population slowly, and watch today’s problems get slowly better and eventually disappear.

Indy, the worlds growth is the governments management, and if they fail, well….just have a look around the world and pick any country you like……and what do you see?
Lets cut the crap and do it like the old days and just invade some pain in the arse country like north Korea and those useless male problems like in the first world wars and so on will be solved.

See! You just have to think like a dinosaur:)…….and they too when extinct by theory of bigger is better:)

PLANET3

>>I personally know many who prefer not to seek work, sit at home in their taxpayer subsidized house or flat, smoking Dope, cigarettes and drinking booze or spirits.<<

Then you need to go and report them to Centrelink immediately - you could get in a lot of trouble if you don't. You're obliged to inform Centrelink if you know that somebody is receiving a Centrelink benefit to which they're not entitled - and obviously sitting around all day doing drugs does not meet eligibility criteria for the Newstart allowance:

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/newstart-allowance/eligibility-for-newstart-allowance

Cheers,

Tony

Dear Individual,

<<We are not allowed to dock them because we would be branded a certain despicable word.>>

That's terrible... Shoosh, Tony may overhear me and tell the authorities! (PS. how many years in Siberia do I get if I became aware that my mother used a page out of Lenin's book as toilet-paper and failed to report her to the authorities)?

I have no problem with people who stay in bed all day, or for that matter out in the sun or in the public library reading books: so long as they are happy to live only off that meagre allowance, that's fine. If my tax-money goes into helping them maintaining this low-profile, low-maintenance, easy-going, non-violent, non-intrusive, peaceful lifestyle, then compared with other government expenditure it's relatively one of the best places my money goes into.

We all know that in the end nobody in Australia will ever go really hungry - if one did, they would soon break into my house, so better this way!
(it's actually cheaper than fortifying all doors and windows with iron bars and sophisticated locks, not to mention changing those tiled roofs into concrete and hiring armed guards to patrol the street - as they do in those countries where people do go really hungry)

However, if they do drugs and alcohol and all that, one wonders where they got the money to buy it!

<<Where I live the Government stipulates that we employ a certain quota of certain people.>>

!ylkciuq ecalp taht evael uoy taht tsegguS I

"""
Rawmustard, capitalism has caused unemployment to rise with poverty and homelessness at a all new record level right around the world, and you know it.
"""

Sorry, PLANET3. What you think is capitalism is far from the truth and you know that also :~)

Now if you want to talk about crony capitalism, corporatism, welfare for the rich and adding government sponsored barriers of entry to the little guy, I'm all ears.

One simple fact that we operate under a federal reserve banking system that picks winners and losers, is not capitalism!

And by the way, all those countries you mentioned. They're all hopelessly failing!

"""
Rawmustard, the latest brain wave of thought by some, is to add more people just to keep the cash-register,s ringing, however this plan will just fold in on its self with more unemployed as the by-product.
"""

Not that I'm in favour of unending growth. But under a true free market, capitalist system that was fare for all, that wouldn't be the case.

The problem with these arguments/discussions, is that they always get broken down to their most basic rendition. I know I'm really guilty of that crime myself :~) But they're so much more complicated than that.

History has shown us that socialism doesn't work. And to look at history to get an idea of how capitalism plays out. The closest we've had to a true capitalist, free market society is the American experiment. But even then it still wasn't a true capitalist, free market system and now is imploding under a mixture of crony capitalism, corporatism and socialism. But for a time there in its early and mid history, it was a very successful, free society with very few not willing to engage.

cont..

From my opinion, it all goes right back to childhood when you were a kid just learning to ride your first bike. You can't just look at a kid that's 18+ years old and doesn't want to work and call him a bludger as most these days seem to do. We didn't have too many of them back in my day and that wasn't too long ago :~) So what's changed, why are a lot of young kids not wanting to engage?

I feel the system is geared against a lot of them now and what we're seeing is the blow back from a myriad of early policies and rules that were implemented and continue to be expanded to this day. Policies that stifle young minds and turn them against the system. Policies that take away the rewards some need to continue playing the game. Policies That prevent kids from engaging.

In our endeavor to protect people from their own stupidity, and to grant corporations special privileges, we're creating a rigged system that benefits a minority. This has consequences and kids failing to engage is one of them. It has nothing to do with capitalism.

Can we help all of them? No. But we could reduce a lot of them and get them to kick in. But the big wigs don't want that. It's more beneficial to them to have a few sponge of the system and let the rest pick up the tab.

RM,

It does make one wonder why a human would resist the "system".

After all, they are drafted in pretty early these days. You'd think years of sitting in neat rows, reacting to bells and whistles and gaining their kudos from stickers, ticks and award certificates, one would imagine they'd be well and truly indoctrinated by the time they're ready to leave school.

We'll just have to try harder.

: )

Yuyutsu,
or should I call you Ostrich, if your idea of preventing a very serious situation get a lot worse is to run away from it than you have either no idea whatsoever or you're still a juvenile.

Mr PLANET3
I really have no idea what planet you may live on but the idea that people can do exactly what they want to here in our so called democracy is the reason why we are where we are at this point in time.
My statement was and is "IF" you can work then you must work to support yourself. Do you really think it fair that I should support someone who refuses to support themselves.
In a true democratic society the strong survive and grow and if they have anything they WANT to give to others then they may do so. The weak fall by the wayside. Even our indigenous cohabitants practiced this form of social economy.Leaving the weak behind to die when they moved on. Their society could not afford to feed them and carry them from place to place.
When those 'others' attempt to take what they want either through social security or force they should be first condemned and second locked up like the predators they are. Keep locking them up until they learn to conform. All social security money should be rationed out for what it is intended, accommodation, sustenance and education not grog, gambling and drugs.

Dear Rawmustard.

While the feed-back is of great value (over the last six years) with the pinnacles of all understandings,the callings for greater achievements in political science and the fundamentals of a complex society, also calls for change even in the most smallest parts. However, those of us that dictate from our ivory towers with the best intensions of course, can miss the true nature that centralizes and questions how we govern all as a fair state of fairness. QLD

Dear chrisgaff1000

You have indeed a very strong view that’s respected, and please forgive me for stirring the pot:)

And last but never the least Poirot….all you get is a smile:) but how to eradicate with a prudent deterrent ……I,ll just sit this one out:)

Planet

Dear Individual,

<<if your idea of preventing a very serious situation get a lot worse is to run away from it than you have either no idea whatsoever or you're still a juvenile.>>

I have no idea since you never informed me of your situation
(but thanks anyway for the compliment, nobody called me "juvenile" in perhaps 40 years, maybe I'll even be able to make somersaults again).

All I know so far about your situation is what you wrote, that is, that the government forces you to employ people which you do not like against your will. I don't know the nature of your business, but on that information alone I would consider it a sufficient reason to move out and let the government deal with the mess they created.

The whole philosophy behind the old Vagrancy Act was that if you don't work for a living then you must steal and therefore need to be locked up to protect society. Today we avoid the responsibility of protecting society from predators (no quite really) by handing out social security

government forces you to employ people which you do not like against your will.
Yuyutsu,
Why the twisting of my words ? For what reason ? I didn't say I don't like those people nor did I say I am employing them.
What I did say was that the Federal Government's policy of employing people no matter how inept or disinterested for work is forced upon us, You & me & all the other taxpayers. I am not at all happy about blokes getting $1400 f/n for only showing up for 2 or 4 hours a day.

Does the Government really have policies which force private comapnies to employ certain people and pay them for hours they haven't worked or does it just provide incentives to employers to employ certain people?

Cheers,

Tony

Dear Individual,

<<Why the twisting of my words ? For what reason ?>>

Because I honestly did not understand, especially the word 'we' in "Where I live the Government stipulates that we employ a certain quota of certain people", which I took to be your family-business or company. Also, by "Where I live" I understood it to be some regional policy, so I suggested that you move elsewhere.

Government should not be involved in employment in any form or shape.
Whether one works or doesn't, when, where, what hours and how much they get paid, etc. is a private matter between the person who wants to work and the person who is willing to pay them for that work. This should have no connection whatsoever with welfare.

Now I sincerely still don't understand your post from Tuesday, 26 March 2013 8:34:37 AM. If you want me to understand it, then you probably need to be more explicit.

In case your reference was to the public service, then yes, it should be decimated, in the literal meaning of that word, divided by 10!

Yuyutsu,
Fair enough. I did fail to say that by "we' employ I meant Local Government which had amalgamation forced upon us by Politicians incompetent Beatty & Bligh. The rott was instigated by Goss many years back & Beatty did a Keating/Gillard on him. Goss fancied himself as a cast of Big Goaf & failed just as miserably. We copped crap from them then & we still pay for those crapheads now.

All:
Okay, I guess it is time to throw more wood on the fire!

I think that every able-bodied unemployed person ( a person that is unemployed for more than six months, and living off the dole),should be drafted to a minimum of two years into a National Service type system ( non combatant at this time! ) where, if it was run the way it was in the 50`s,or along similar lines, an able bodied person could be taught the principles of cleanliness, self-discipline and the basic skills to become employable, after leaving the Service, or if choosing to, could be come a permanent member of the Defence Forces, serving the country. Two years would be sufficient time to improve a basic education level, should that be the case.

I know many do-gooders will squawk that this is "forced militarism"
or some other silly expression, but the alternative sure beats being unemployed and getting cut-off altogether, as could possibly happen in the not too distant future!

Anybody out there with any better solutions to solve the problems, which are only going to get worse, as the population increases and
the breeding of youngsters imbued with a mindset of "expectation" and "the world owes me a living"?

Dear Crackcup,

I take that as a legitimate provocation rather than a serious suggestion.

Yes, I did suggest a solution - a negative income tax to replace all welfare and the abolition of Centerlink.

So subsistence is free for all, but any comfort or luxury beyond that is subject to earning money (typically from work). A fixed tax-rate of say 30% from the first dollar earned, with no humps, bumps, margins, loopholes, exceptions and caveats, ensures an incentive to work because no matter what your situation is, for every extra dollar you earn you pocket an extra 70c.

I am not a Jew but I think we need to look at the Israeli system. Everybody does national service. Everybody gets educated and everybody gets social and strategic discipline. Everybody wins in the long run.
I don't necessarily agree with their expansionist aims or their methodology but I do understand it.

Dear Chris,

<<I am not a Jew but I think we need to look at the Israeli system. Everybody does national service. Everybody gets educated and everybody gets social and strategic discipline. Everybody wins in the long run.>>

A reality check:

Good, educated, clean, disciplined and tender 18 y.o. boys from good homes in the good end of town, straight out of high-school, instead of proceeding to university while their studies are still fresh, with every prospect of highly-professional employment, are forced to live like sheep among wolves in the same tent among ruffian criminals whom other than in the army they would have never met, exposed to all despicable behaviours of night-mare material. Unable to cry and call Mom and Dad for help, following 3 years of terror and bullying with no escape, they are traumatised and scarred for life.

You should thank God, Chris, your good fortune or both, that you are not a Jew living in Israel.

Yuyutsu, what an indictment of their Arab neighbours, that the Israelis have to live that way.

I am quite sure they would not live that way if they did not have the people of a failed vicious civilisation, trying to push them into the ocean, as neighbours.

instead of proceeding to university while their studies are still fresh,
Yuyutsu,
that's just so wrong a mentality. Studies are always fresh, what goes stale is mentality. time spent among others in an unfamiliar environment is what brings experience, builds character thus a healthy mentality & strengthens the learning process. To be confined to the compounds of Universities is exactly what's causing the retarding of education & mentality that is now a huge problem in society. It inhibits social development & fosters conformism. With that kind of mentality you get the society we have now. The only thing that's holding us still together is a handful of sane thinkers but once they become thinner on the ground & the brainless get desperate anarchy will take over.

Dear Individual,

<<Studies are always fresh>>

Sciences, when not touched for 3 years, are to a large degree forgotten, but this was the least of the points I made. Society could be losing doctors, scientists and engineers, but that's not the main point.

What I wrote essentially, is that taking innocent children (and we're not even talking about dole-bludgers, drug-and-alcohol users and other delinquents, not that I believe that even they deserve such horrors), whose sole "crime" was to be born where they were and turn 18 in reasonable health, and forcing them for 3 years into jail-like conditions, beleaguered by the worst scum of society, including sadistic criminals, as the "mates" they must share all with as well as their direct commanders, in a pressure-system deliberately designed to break their spirits (so to turn them into "soldiers" who would obey any order without hesitation), is not something we should ever accept.

A country or a nation that does that, EVEN IF IT WAS JUSTIFIED IN EVERY OTHER ASPECT, HASBEEN, does not deserve to exist on the face of this earth!

If you think that those children are going to 'toughen' and get a 'character', well they probably will, but not the kind of character you welcome. Do you think they will just happily and loyally serve the society that betrayed and tormented them? No, they will surely and rightly-so grow either into criminals, terrorists and saboteurs or mental patients.

<<To be confined to the compounds of Universities is exactly what's causing the retarding of education & mentality>>

We are talking about kids who did not yet even have a chance to go to university to begin with!

With such Spartan attitudes, one could just as well justify the hunting-down of young Africans, 'for their own good' chaining them to boats so that those who survive the Atlantic-trip are of tougher character, so that their descendents after generations in the cotton-fields may one day invent Jazz, Blues and Rap.

Yuyutsu, you really should post this stuff in the toilet, because that is where it belongs.

Have you ever had anything to do with the armed services? I very much doubt it, as you have no idea of what it is like.

The stuff your talking about died out about the same time the dinosaurs did, or not long after, if it actually ever existed. I've read stuff similar to what you are pushing, but it was written by historians, so probably just so much CR4P, like yours.

I was going to try to explain the facts of life to you, but I won't waste my time. Go peddle your venom elsewhere.

Dear Hasbeen,

I admit I know not about the Australian armed services.
I also admit that I haven't been in Vietnam,
but I have been in equivalent situations,
which is why I sought refuge and am now in Australia,
still suffering the occasional nightmare several decades after,
and as for my worst enemies, I wish them a speedy death by heart-attack or snake-bite, but not the life of a conscript.

but not the life of a conscript.
Yuyutsu,
You see using words like conscript is already off the topic. We're talking about young people experiencing a life, a real life, away from pampering parents & softly, softly homosexual bureaucracy.
You obviously never had to do anything for being here but rest assured many of us who pay tax know differently & better.
Are you ready to support a stranger like we've supported you thus ?

Dear Individual,

<<Are you ready to support a stranger like we've supported you thus ?>>

What a huge support and welcome I'm receiving on this page!

If you read a few posts back, you can see that I am more than happy to see my tax-money go towards supporting other Australians, strangers to me, who for whatever reason have no other income (but not when my tax-money is directed elsewhere within government administration).

I thank Australia for allowing me to be here. I arrived as a skilled migrant, I bring my income from overseas, pay my taxes here and the only support I receive or ask from Australia is the support of the land of Australia under my feet, the air of Australia which I breath and the water of Australia which I drink.

Yuyutsu:

"and forcing them for 3 years into jail-like conditions, beleaguered by the worst scum of society, including sadistic criminals,"

How dare you refer to Australian Servicemen as "the worst scum of society"??

I would suggest that had it NOT been for the actions of these people that you refer to as "scum", you would not be here in Australia posting the drivel that have been posting, nor would you have been allowed to express your very strange opinions in this manner!

You have a very strange mindset indeed, and certainly have absolutely no idea of winning the hearts and the minds of the people of this country, people who have given you sanctuary ( although maybe somewhat grudgingly), from whatever demons you perceived were attacking you in your country of origin.

Dear Crackcup,

<<How dare you refer to Australian Servicemen as "the worst scum of society"??>>

Before getting red in the face, take nice 3 breaths and re-read my posts - my account was not referring to Australia, hence had no relation to Australian servicemen.

Australian servicemen are selected rather than conscripted, hence the scum is not admitted to enter the forces and bully the others. Those who do serve in the Australian forces are highly-motivated volunteers who are suited to the task in nature, rather than children forcefully kidnapped from their homes, parents and studies as the case is in other countries.

supporting other Australians, strangers to me, who for whatever reason have no other income
Yuyutsu,
That scenario is the crux of National Service. To offer people the opportunity to become competent thus more useful to themselves & society. How else do you expect them to gain experience & life skills if you don't expose them to it ? Do you really believe education is the problem solver ? No, experience is ! education merely enables a quicker take on things but it does not provide competence & a complimenting mentality. As has so often been stated on OLO people with only idleness at their disposal lose direction & motivation. A national Service exposes even those who already in a healthy state of mentality to other aspects of life which they are not normally exposed to. A National Service is a win-win proposition & those participating in it WILL express their gratitude later in life. I think Government should do a poll on National Service instead of the pointless Liberal?Labor ones.

Does the Government really have policies which force private comapnies to employ certain people and pay them for hours they haven't worked or does it just provide incentives to employers to employ certain people?
Tony Lavis,
I only just spotted your earlier post & the answer to your question is, the Government stipulates that on any project in remote & not so remote communities a certain quota of local workers are to be employed. So, contractors put them on the payroll & encourage them to stay away so as not to interfere with the work. This practice is governed by well documented & spoken about experience of massive absenteeism. Hence these wages are of course calculated into the contract price up front.

Dear Individual,

<<Do you really believe education is the problem solver?>>

"the problem"? What problem?
Surely you've heard of the golden rule: If it ain't broken, don't fix it!

A few people who prefer not to work (or not to be involved in formal employment with financial consideration) and rather live on a very frugal subsistence income, are not a problem. Generosity is not a sin and I refuse to feel jealous at them!

<<How else do you expect them to gain experience & life skills if you don't expose them to it?>>

I don't expect anyone to gain anything, that's THEIR business and I have no right to expose others to things they don't want. If they indeed do want to gain experience & life skills, then there are plenty opportunities, they only need to ask and to mean it.

<<people with only idleness at their disposal lose direction & motivation>>

That's THEIR problem, if they see it as such.

<<A national Service exposes even those who already in a healthy state of mentality to other aspects of life which they are not normally exposed to.>>

So does sending everyone for a year or two in prison, whether they committed a crime or not. So does sending young children for paedophile-experience workshops would expose them to aspects of life which they are not normally exposed to. We could even have an exchange program with North-Korea, exposing Australians to life in their concentration-camps.

<<those participating in it WILL express their gratitude later in life.>>

For shattering their formerly happy, peaceful and productive life, breaking their spirits and turning them into broken vessels and nut cases.
But you may be right: I suppose that when faced with waterboarding, they will indeed be quick to express their gratitude.

George Orwell would be proud of you.

Yuyutsu,
Congratulations, you certainly are a one-off.

To Yuyutsu
Since you are obviously some sort of a sociopath with little or no life experience I fold my hand in this discussion.
Having spent a number of years in such exotic locations as Rwanda,Vietnam,Iraq and Afghanistan as a regular army officer and in Israel and Libya as an military attache in the diplomatic service I can assure you that your warped viewpoint would keep you safely away from any firing line.

Surely you've heard of the golden rule: If it ain't broken, don't fix it!
Yuyutsu,
If you were to look up the word broken you'd find it's meaning to refer to not working.
It is extremely similar to to the present federal Government's policies & a huge number of young Australians who are denied guidance.

Dear Individual,

<<If you were to look up the word broken you'd find it's meaning to refer to not working.>>

OK, so we are into word-play, fair enough:

Something works when it does what it was designed to do.
For millions of years, humans and their predecessors were eating, digesting, breathing, eliminating wastes and procreating - all without earning a single coin of money. So long as that still happens, one cannot say that those people are broken (now even if they were broken, the question still stands whether fixing them is a worthwhile pursuit).

<<It is extremely similar to to the present federal Government's policies & a huge number of young Australians who are denied guidance.>>

It's two separate and unrelated issues:
1) A government is a parasite, it's meant to suck our blood and they do so very well. Unfortunately it isn't broken.
2) I am in favour of providing anyone who so wishes with guidance, but I'll never impose guidance on those who never sought it from me in the first place.

but I'll never impose guidance on those who never sought it from me in the first place.
Yuyutsu,
Guidance is akin with discipline, if it is not sought it has to be offered & if still not accepted it has to be enforced.
Unless someone has that discipline they should not be allowed to impose upon others & demand help.

Dear Individual,

<<Guidance is akin with discipline, if it is not sought it has to be offered & if still not accepted it has to be enforced.>>

By one's Father and Mother, them alone - and those whom they voluntarily assign as teachers!

Government is neither, as it was proclaimed: "Stalin is our Father, Russia is our Mother, may we all be orphans"!

<<Unless someone has that discipline they should not be allowed to impose upon others & demand help.>>

I fully agree. Nobody (including even disciplined people) should be allowed to impose themselves on others.

Yes, they have no right to demand help. Nevertheless, I offer my help to them willingly and happily (besides, it also happens to be in my own interest to do so).
Also, besides help, which cannot be demanded, there remains the issue of compensation that I mentioned above (on Monday, 25 March 2013 10:51:59 AM).

breaking their spirits and turning them into broken vessels and nut cases.
Yuyutsu,
You got this one back to front also. What do you suggest should be done to get everyone to pull their own weight If they are physically & mentally capable ?

Dear Individual,

<<What do you suggest should be done to get everyone to pull their own weight If they are physically & mentally capable?>>

Nothing, for the following reasons:

1) I do not believe that "the end justifies the means". Coercing or threatening others is just not right. Even if that goal of everyone pulling their weight be achieved, it would be at the higher price of acting violently.

2) I believe that there are other ways to serve society than to earn money and participate in the formal economy.

3) As yourself replied to Tony (on Friday, 29 March 2013 10:13:42 AM), those who are forced to work do such a bad job that their employer would even pay them just to keep out.

4) Willing to live frugally, wasting less resources, is a great alternative contribution to society.

5) Compared with "public servants" who receive a salary-package 10 times as much, plus their office-expenses and the resources wasted on commuting, welfare-payments are a drop in the ocean.

6) When there is a desperate pressure to get everyone working, arise such jobs that are harmful or unethical. Better do nothing than do harm. When working is optional, conscientious unemployed are able to shun such jobs.

yuyutsu,
that's all fine but you're still evading the main gist of the questions. How to deal with those who keep bludging ?

Individual:

I think that we are flogging a dead horse trying to get some sort of sensible direction out of Yuyutsu!

I have offered my opinion and direction, but I think that when we have a "Misogynist" Government in place after the 14th September Election, we may just see some well-deserved changes put in place, resulting in many of the layabouts being forced to get a job , or alternatively be cut off benefits.

We do NOT want to end up in the sad state that the UK is in now, with its massive unemployment and out of control invasion of immigrants!

Dear Individual,

<<that's all fine but you're still evading the main gist of the questions. How to deal with those who keep bludging?>>

Well, that's a trick question, the like of "have you stopped beating your wife?", damned if you say 'yes' and damned if you say 'no'. I do not perceive people who receive welfare without the will to be employed as 'bludging' in the first place.

Nevertheless, perhaps you are referring to the ugly issue that such people need to lie in order to survive, to pretend to be looking for work. If so, then I have already offered a solution:

My solution is that EVERYONE (including those who are working or have other income) should receive the same basic welfare benefit, unconditionally and with no questions asked.
No questions means no lying and cheating!

That can be achieved by merging the welfare and tax systems, simplifying both.

The tax system should be based on only two numbers: the welfare amount and the tax-rate. The actual numbers are open for discussion, but as an example I'll just throw in $13K p.a. (based on current 'newstart') and 30% (based on current company-tax).

Those who are in need may receive their welfare-money in weekly/fortnightly payments. The rest of us will receive it in our annual tax-return.

So depending on your income, here is the amount of tax you will pay:

$0 (unemployed): $-13000
$20000: $-7000
$40000: $-1000
$60000: $5000
$80000: $11000
$100000: $17000
...

Along, out-the-window go most tax-evasion schemes (because the tax-rate is flat and the same for everyone, individuals, trusts and companies alike); minimum-wage laws; Centerlink; many government positions that were needed to administer the current complexity; compulsory superannuation; most if not all tax-deductions and rebates; and what's most relevant to this particular discussion - the financial disincentive for those on the "dole" to start working: any extra dollar they earn by finding a casual or part-time job, ends up as 70 cents in their pocket.

Yuyutsu,
I tend to lean towards a kind of agreement there however, I'm totally against bracketing tax as it is discriminatory to those at the lower part of the bracket. If you want absolute fairness re paying tax you need to look at flat tax. Zero discrimination period !
Those who don't want to look for employment get drafted until they want to find employment.
There's too small a gap or indeed if any at all between welfare & minimum wage & that is the primary cause. There needs to be a substantial difference to make people weigh up the pros & cons of welfare vs menial job. Unfortunately, we won't get any move on that as long as our public service is saturated with pseudo academics.

Dear Individual,

My suggestion has no tax breaks - it's a flat tax of say 30%.

If the income is I, the tax-rate is R and the welfare is W, then the tax is:

T = R*I - W

Which can be positive or negative.

The motivation behind my suggestion is to remove coercion and cheating from the system, not to re-introduce them through the other door. When someone is dishonest, they would convince you that they are looking for employment and whatever else you like to hear so they have their way, always full of excuses, then it would be the honest guys who suffer, especially those who will tell the truth: "I won't take this job because it is unethical" rather than lie that "my back hurts because I slipped on my grandma's wet floor".

There is no evil greater than conscription. Before immigrating to Australia I enquired and verified with the Australian consul that not only there is no conscription in Australia, but he assured me that it is even illegal to do so. Otherwise I wouldn't have come here, nor would I remain here for one moment if it were otherwise (so don't count on my taxes if they are to pay for forced drafting).

On a second thought, if supporting those who have no other income (but are not willing to be employed) with your tax money is so unpalatable for you, then you should be able to get an exemption, so long as I can also get an exemption from supporting so many other things that the government does which are unacceptable to me and directing it instead into welfare. It would be best if we could mark on our tax-returns what our tax-money should go into.

It would be best if we could mark on our tax-returns what our tax-money should go into.
Yuyutsu,
quite many posts ago I advocated exactly that. No bites from anyone though.