Welfare, and sponging off the government in the form of centrelink money seems to have become an acceptable part of our society. Every fortnight, crowds line up outside the centrelink office to collect their money, before returning home to their houses. Understandably, many of these people are actively searching for jobs and a source of income, but it seems to be that the majority of people on welfare are simply lazy.
My question; is laziness rewarded by welfare handouts in today's society? Isn't Australia meant to be all hard-working?

Corporate and business plus upper middle class *GOVERNMENT WELFARE* is the *ONLY* type of welfare that is bankrupting Australia.

These very well off spongers on the rest of the community should hand their "WELFARE* back.

Welfare should be *ONLY* for the poor, needy, unemployed and elderly who qualify for "genuine" assistance.

Everyone else should DO IT ON THEIR OWN.

These corporate and upper middle class bludgers on the rest of Australia should feel ashamed of themselves.

<<is laziness rewarded by welfare handouts in today's society?>>

It currently is - and the remedy is to award the same basic welfare to EVERYONE, regardless whether they work or not or whether they stand in stupid queues every fortnight pretending to be looking for work, thus laziness (and fraud) will no longer be rewarded.

<<Isn't Australia meant to be all hard-working?>>

Meant by whom?
Are we anybody's slaves?

I think we are meant to feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, shelter ourselves, take care of ourselves - this requires moderate-working, not hard-working: it's only the luxuries that demand hard-working, too often the perverse luxuries of others.

Also, while it's nice when everyone contributes, formally or informally, paid or unpaid, it's even nicer when nobody does it grudgingly just because they need money to pay for their bare-necessities. It's also nicer when no unnecessary jobs are created that do not enhance any real happiness (not to mention such jobs that are even harmful).

we are the livinG MORETAL HEIRS OF THE IMMORTAL GOOD WHO CREATED EVERYTHING..we are all EQUALLY ENTITLED TO SHARE HIS WEALTH/freely.

but some get greedy/making others needy
some catch all the fish/swapping it for extra'S//LIKE FOOD SEX
THING IS SOME WANT BETTER OR WANT IT ALL/AND THATS FINE IF THEIR WORKING TO GET extra

but we are all entitled to a fair share
thus a public dividend..MUST BE THE BASIS OF ANY 'CIVIL' SOCIETY
[AS I DID WHEN I CREATED Gods money[wikiseed/wikigeld/via sun treaty]
your own bank/that gives us the same leverage for cash/bankERS GET/but if we all get it..its double..not 7 fold..[they dont care johan]

the oot pillage and plunder society CANT SUSTAIN UNLIMITED LARGESS TO THE ELITE/THEY RAN FROM europe with their riches/into the city of london/and on into wal street/theN VIA CIA PentrAM/PETUPGONE/THEY GO GLOBA WAR TO PLUBDER THE WEALTH OF THE WORLD

and JOE HOCKEY Just gave them a great gift
the royal treasury..THAT HE IS SELLING FOR OVERINFLATED YANKI PAPER
THAT STEALS THE LAST OF HRH GOLD/PLUS ALL THE PROOF OF THE CRIME..AT A cost tO US YOU Will rue..that day..the money changers took it all away/with petro paper/SO THE JAPS got into it tOO..

why bother TRYING TO EXplain
let the FOOLS GET THEIR BAILIN AND THE MOB WREAK ITS VENGENCE/

Australia doesn't have a high deficit and isn't a high tax nation.

Nhoj

Agreed, corporate sponging, particularly by the use of tax avoidance schemes, is one example, government funding of private schools is another, corporate welfare for farmers should also be subject to audit. Farmers who need drought assistance from the government shouldn't be in the business.

mandialatoppino,

How do you know that "the majority of people on welfare are simply lazy"? If the Coalition government's budget cuts contribute to a recession and members of the middle class find their jobs and real estate 'wealth' evaporating they will be very much in favour of welfare, let's wait and see.

mandialatoppino, you have forgotten one small detail! That being that many, on their way home tripmover the pub/club, pokies, TAB and tabbacco shops to piss away a fair portion of their tax payer funded gift. Not all, but some.

The best way to combat this is to stop providing an ATM card, and provide a restricted debit card instead, because after all, welfare waste is a major concern and, those who don't waste their welfare now will not be disadvantaged by this type of system.

I rather like to plan of, earning or learning.

If you don't have a job, you go to training sessions.

The days of a free lunch are over, and thank god for that.

The unemployment Benefit was created as a safety net for the Australian worker of all classes should anyone fall on hard times ! It has been subsidized and paid for by all Australians and therefore should be there if you ever should need it ! Joe Hockey has used the term Entitlement as If we do not pay for Government services we just expect them ! NO! We expect and indeed are entitled to services provided to us from Government for our tax dollars, otherwise why does the Government think it is entitled to my /our tax dollars ? It is an illogical assertion !

I've said this before - why do some people
believe that the poor are in poverty because
they are lazy and prefer to live on "handouts?"
This view appears to be fervently held even by
people who do not know poor people,
who have never tried to raise a family on welfare
payments, and haven't the vaguest idea what
poverty is really like.

Opinion polls repeatedly show large portions of the
population favouring cuts to welfare spending, or
favouring plans to "make welfare reciepents go to work."

There are few complaints, however, about how the
government pays far more in "handouts," to the nonpoor than
to the poor - in forms ranging from subsidized loans and
grants, tax deductions, et cetera. This fact generally
escapes attention because these benefits take the
indirect form of hidden subsidies or tax deductions rather
than the direct form of cash payments.

We're being told that welfare is a terrible burden on the
paxpayer. The reality is that welfare represents a very
small percentage of the federal budget.

We seem to forget that the elimination of welfare payments
would in effect punish millions of poor children who are
in no way responsible for their parents' situations.

Cutting into health, education, and social services - far
from re-shaping Australia's welfare state - Joe Hockey
has simply re-distributed it. Corporations have emerged
almost unscathed - while attacking our already threadbare
safety net. Business is being rewarded, and the poorest
and the sick are being punished. It's almost as though the
government is penalizing the poor and the sick to reward
big construction companies with big contracts for new
highways. High-income earners are only being asked to pay
higher ptaxes temporarily. And of course Australia's wealthier
get capital gains tax exemptions and Supperannuation tax breaks.

It is unfortunate that some politicians have no idea the
effect that budgets have on the most vulnerable in our society.

The Detroit model: Permanent rule by the banks
http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/detroit-model-permanent-rule-banks/

The Michigan legislature is debating a series of bills to impose a financial authority on Detroit that would remain in place long after the city emerges from bankruptcy. An unelected financial “oversight” committee, known as the Michigan Settlement Administration Authority (MSAA), would run the city for two decades, effectively usurping the local government

VOTE NONE OF the above*
http://whatreallyhappened.com/
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/COINTELPRO/cointelpro.php
http://cecaust.com.au/
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/enron-2-0-wall-street-wants-manipulate-state-energy-markets-just-like-manipulates-every-market.html

It is interesting to note that the top 75 money earners in Australia do not pay even one red cent in income tax, and that is well known not only by the tax department but also by the Australian Government ! There are many people who believe we should not have all these welfare benefits like,sickness,disability,veteran,,carer,old age,unemployment and the like, But they are there for a reason, they are safety nets for the Australian people, If you take them away where do you fall if something happens to you,we are all in the same boat we are all at risk of loosing our jobs,having an accident that debilitates us and of becoming too old to work whether in mind or in body ! Think twice before you pull down these nets they are there for you too, and try to be compassionate to those that have fallen ! they are not given to Australians as some sort of freebie from the government they are an entitlement you have the right to have as a taxpaying Australian citizen and do not make them feel like is is anything less than that !

It's a complex issue that will only worsen. We're living in the era of globalization. Without sounding like I'm anti-anything, let's just look at what that means...

Economies of scale (which basically means that if you're a big business that you buy raw materials or whatever, at cheaper prices due to buying in bulk, and that costs of production per unit are cheaper when you produce more items rather than less, etc.), dictates that multi nationals have been moving manufacturing off-shore due to cheaper labour costs, property and infrastructure that are accessible in developing nations. These are so advantageous as to nullify transport costs.

"Free Trade Agreements" are about facilitating this transition.

The Lima Declaration of 1971 stated that developed countries should move assist underdeveloped countries by placing manufacturing there, with a target of 20% to be achieved by the year 2000. Currently, 80% of our manufacturing is off-shore.

This creates a job shortage in low level to unskilled jobs for that form of labour. Unemployment. It follows then, that while there is unemployment, that it drives the cost of labour down, in contrast to say the 1970's, when there were more jobs than the labour to fill them, forcing the price of labour up, to attract personnel.

Is any of this going to change towards the advantage of labour? It can't. The wheels are not only motion, but are at top speed. It's the way of the world.

Skilled and highly skilled labour are the path we're told to follow, but that doesn't help those that don't have the aptitude, or who for whatever reason, are unable to access training/qualifications.

That's the backdrop to the issues in a nutshell. I have no answers, outside of Australia looking towards being a service-oriented country, like tourism, that facilitates low level/non-skilled labour. Maybe we need to be creative for those at that end of the job spectrum.

Foxy, 'why do some people believe that the poor are in poverty because
they are lazy and prefer to live on "handouts?"'

Does observation over years count? For starters, there are thousands of Bogans who should get jobs. What about those layabouts on sit-dwon money in country towns, where all they are capable of is drinking booze and abusing travellers passing through?

As was said in another thread, none of my Asian friends can see any justification for taxing them to support other people who have the same opportunities and probably more since many people seem to be in receipt of free government services, including advice, counselling and even advocacy and lobbying on their behalf by taxpayer-funded NGOs.

If we are to be diversified and become a part of Asia as has been the direction of Australian governments for many years now, everyone has to get used to working for a quid and not expecting others to always be providing for them.

Shouldn't diversity be challenging the slackers who find it difficult to even show up at Centrelink and would never take up a job because every offer is below them? Meanwhile employers are forced to import workers to take care of locals who are too tired to even wash themselves for a job interview.

Dear OnTheBeach,

<<Shouldn't diversity be challenging the slackers who find it difficult to even show up at Centrelink and would never take up a job because every offer is below them? Meanwhile employers are forced to import workers to take care of locals who are too tired to even wash themselves for a job interview.>>

What pleasure are you deriving out of having them show up at Centrelink?
What pleasure are you deriving out of making them attend job-interviews for jobs they never intend to do, using 1001 tricks to leave an unfavourable impression on the potential employer?

Think of the lost resources: How much it costs to have those Centrelink buildings, how much it costs people to arrive there, how much a Centrelink employee costs - like about 10 dole recipients. Then comes the electricity bill, the billions it takes to upgrade Centrelink's computers (http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/joe-hockey-says-centrelinks-computers-need-overhaul-that-will-cost-billions/story-fn84fgcm-1226894688255), then think of the poor employers who must waste their time in futile interviews instead of being productive! Why shouldn't they import good workers from overseas straight away, who would get the work done cheaper in half the time? Think also of those who do start to work only to sabotage their employer and get back on the dole.

Or do you prefer them breaking into your home? Can you afford the secure locks and extra bars on your windows? Do you want to hire armed patrols on the streets? Or do you prefer them rattling tin boxes next to your car-window whenever you stop at the lights? That's what happens in other countries that don't have the dole!

If you hope they're going to starve to death, just forget about it - they will always find a way to get a meal, and that way will be even more expensive for you and me.

Just give them that minimum income which neither of us finds adequate or respectable, no questions asked, so they stay at home and do us no harm. That's the cheapest option!

'Understandably, many of these people are actively searching for jobs and a source of income, but it seems to be that the majority of people on welfare are simply lazy.'

Yep! Absolutely right, mandialatopino. They're bone lazy - all of them. Not like you, a paragon of righteousness and work-ethickyness

So the only way to deal with these bone lazy (and probably smelly) people is to let them starve and go homeless.

Of course, we'd also have let that tiny, weeney, itsy-bitsy little minority of welfare recipients who are genuinely searching for jobs starve and go homeless too. But who cares about them anyway? They probably lost their jobs because they're stupid and inferior and made bad choices anyway.

I'd just love to see all those bone-lazy welfare cheats lying in the streets slowly starving to death and eating grass. I'd just love to see them sleeping on park benches shivering and cold and dying slowly of prolonged exposure.

I'd just love to see slums and tent cities growing up around out urban centres, full of raw sewerage and desperate people who have to turn to crime to stay alive. I'd just love to see poor hygiene-related disease running rampant and killing them off.

I'd just love to see them breaking into the homes of the deserving rich and stealing whatever they can to stay alive ... oops! Wait a minute - we can't have the rich suffering any form of inconvenience now, can we?

On second thoughts ... maybe we innocent taxpayers should keep supporting those bone lazy people after all.

Foxy et al,

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=1258

Welfare is not a small percentage, it is about 36% of the total budget, with medicare taking up another 22%, so nearly 2/3rds of all revenue is taken up here. To make it worse, these costs are the fastest growing with projected growth of 6% p.a.

The only rational thing to do is to tackle this area, or in a decade we will have similar debts to Europe.

Maybe just have a government making job's not selling us out to oversea's
I do think our job network agencies need to be looked at, Gina and some small group of farmers that say they can't get workers ( these are the only groups i have heard of crying) Don't even have a listing at the job network agencies. So am i missing something here ? We have a place unemployed go to get told they have nothing to offer to them, Then we have companies not listing Job's, Doesn't Seem the system is working.
As for Being Lazy yes some are all people are different and that's a good thing, but when an area has 15% youth unemployment and there is 3 job's in the area Do the math's yourself,We need to stop sending our Job's overseas, Free trade agreements with only countries that have minimum work policy i.e. wages and conditions Otherwise bring in the Tariffs, Soon we would a more level playing field

Dear Shadow Minister,

According to the OECD Pensions at a Glance 2013 -
Australia's public spending on the age pension was
3.5 per cent of the GDP. Italy's was 15 per cent,
France - 14 per cent. Belgium - 10 per cent,
Sweden - 8 per cent and the UK - 6 per cent.

It's good to have money in the bank - but at what cost?
Do we really want to go down the path of -
gross unemployment, crime, family's
suffering, suicides, people going hungry, our most vunerable
having no safety net, and a total break-down of society?
And all that in order to fix an imaginary problem in the
form of a budget "emergency" that doesn't exist?
And making it quite clear that those currently in need will
have to do with less, much, much less. It's almost as though
the government is penalizing the poor and the sick to
reward big construction companies with big contracts for
new highways.

It's simply not logical or fair. Business is being rewarded
while the poorest and the sick are being punished.
That's not the kind of society any one of us should be
wanting - or the kind of government any of us should be
supporting.

Foxy,

Aus's tax intake is about 22.5% of GDP and expenditure is about 25.5% of GDP, in other words the labor's expenditure is 10% higher than income, and Australia's debt is the fastest growing in the OECD. The debt is one of the lowest, but unless something is done, this will change.

Comparing Aus with other countries can be expanded,
- Italy is on the edge of bankruptcy, and France is not far behind. Italy's expenditure on pensions would be 2/3rds of Aus's tax take, and comparatively would wipe out all Aus's welfare and health budget.
- Most OECD countries have far higher proportion of older citizens, roughly where Aus will be in 2 decades. If Aus wants massive debt, high unemployment, crime, and unrest then Italy and France are the ones to copy.

Welfare is a problem, there are bludgers everywhere and one of the biggest bludgers around is Indonesia, currently building a helicopter aircraft carrier which will undoubtedly be of use in the continuing Australian subsidized terrorism against the peoples of Occupied New Guinea.
Australian Tax Dollars at work.

We should be proud to tighten our belts so that the noose can be tightened on those ignorant natives who need the civilizing influence of Indonesian rule.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Liberal Federal MP, Kevin Andrews, voiced the same
beliefs as you and the Coalition, some time ago.
And these predictions
were seen to be by many experts, (and Factcheck),
unfounded.

Andrew Podger, Professor of Public Policy from the
Australian National University wrote in the
Australian Financial Review, "The claim that Australia's
welfare system is "unsustainable" would surprise observers
in most OECD nations which spend a much higher percentage
of their GDP on social security payments. Our emphasis on
flat-rate, means-tested payments rather than earnings-related
social insurance has limited the burden on Australia's
taxpayers."

"... Because we income test payments more than any other
country we have the most progressive distribution of
benefits in the OECD, and we also spend less than the
OECD average. It could be noted that the only element of the
social security system that will resemble the European
approach when it is introduced is the Government's
Paid Parental Scheme."

"We have challenges to face, but we are not heading the
same way as Europe!"

"There is nothing to indicate that as the population ages
Australia is heading toward the high welfare spending of
some European countries. Treasury projections to 2050 show
welfare spending as a proportion of GDP will remain steady
over the next 3 decades."

You are correct Foxy. This "pension crisis" is a fabricated, political construct (just like the budget "emergency" is a fabricated, political construct).

And many Australian voters are so incredibly dumb and pliable (as the politicians know) that they willingly and submissively fall for the lies.

By far ... by VERY VERY far indeed, the biggest welfare bludgers in Australia are corporations, businesses, the well off middle class and of course the upper class. And even with these bludgers ripping off government welfare, Australia's financial position is close to the *BEST IN THE WORLD*. Imagine how better off we'd be still, if these well off bludgers stopped rorting the system.

Dear Nhoj,

Hopefully the current Budget as it stands
will not pass in the Senate and the government
will be forced to make amendments that will be
fairer and more equitable because as it presently
stands high-income earners are only being asked
to pay higher taxes temporarily. Business is
being rewarded and the poorest and the sick are
being punished. Australia's wealthier get capital
gains tax exemptions and Supperannuation tax breaks.
This has got to change - if we're all in this
together, otherwise all we're seeing from the
government is their usual "long on rhetoric, short
on the really tough decisions!"

Foxy,

The quotes were not from Kevin Andrews but from the IMF.

"Unless the Senate passes the Coalition’s budget it will continue to rise. Real public spending is set to grow 16 per cent from 2012 to 2018, says the IMF, faster than 17 other rich countries, including France, the US, Sweden, and New Zealand. Without action Australia faces never-ending public deficits, even with healthy increases in tax revenue of 6 per cent a year.

Australia’s fiscal deterioration is all the more embarrassing in the midst of an unprecedented resources export boom and a historic surge in terms of trade that left households and governments awash with revenue.

Were GFC Mark II to unfurl itself — an ever-present danger given the state of the world’s banks and the as-yet-unknown impact of money printing in the US and Europe — Australia would be far less prepared than it was in 2008.

Sure, the level of federal government debt remains relatively low, but its growth has been world-beating and the outlook is grave thanks to Labor’s populist but unsustainable increases in school and disability spending, which the Coalition has inherited. The IMF, which has no political axe to grind, also noted Australia would have the third-largest increase in net debt as a share of GDP among the group of rich countries."

Dear Shadow Minister,

The following link may help clarify things for you:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-03/kevin-andrews-makes-unfounded-welfare-claims/5215798

Then there are the Arts bludgers.

If ticket sales cannot cover the costs of a production then why should the taxpayer?

Then there are the Corporate bludgers

If profits or commercial loans cannot cover their costs then why should the taxpayer?

and the Club bludgers who enjoy subsidized meals and drinks at the expense of the unfortunates who are addicted to, or stupid enough to, play the poker machines.

Foxy,

Perhaps if you bothered to read the link you posted, you would recognise that the ABC either deliberately or through error did not address the issue raised either by Andrews or myself.

The first error was to use only the treasury's narrow definition of "welfare" as a separate line item to health care.

The dictionary definition of state welfare is:
statutory procedure or social effort designed to promote the basic physical and material well-being of people in need. - which clearly includes medicare, hospitals, and the PBS.

As your article indicated the vast majority of additional expenditure did not come from pension pay outs, but from the vast increase in health costs for the elderly.

The second major error was to use the projections from 2010 which assumes that current legislation is not changing, and does not include:
- The vast new benefits doled out by Juliar to compensate for the carbon tax lie,
- The vast increase in disability expenditure through the NDIS.

So the IMF and Andrews were correct, and the ABC was wrong again.

Yep, the HUGE success of the pokies is 100% proof of the utter stupidity of the Australian public. Any mathematician can tell you it's 100% *IMPOSSIBLE* to make an overall profit from playing the pokies. The *ONLY* people to come out ahead are the club and casino operators and the pokie manufacturers.