All the dole bludgers out there, and they know who they are, have blood on their hands as they have finally managed to ruin what was a system that offered support to genuinely needy people who, by the very definition of unemployed, were actively seeking employment.

Now these genuine unemployed, many battlers, are being treated like second rate citizens all because the serial bludgers of society have to be stopped.

It's just a pity that in order to catch the Grubbs, decent people also have to suffer.

First, they suggest very strongly that the number of people who deliberately cheat the welfare system is not merely a small proportion of Centrelink clients it’s a positively a miniscule percentage of the total number of Centrelink clients. They also suggests that there aren’t too many more of them out there who could be caught and prosecuted if Centrelink did more investigations; at most you can expect Centrelink’s fraud investigations to produce between ~2700 and ~3500 prosecutions each year. This will save somewhere between $100m and $150m off welfare spending – consistently less than 1% of the total welfare budget.

That’s a lot of – uncosted – bureaucratic effort for very little result. As noted above the ANAO found that it’s impossible to say whether the ‘Support the System that Supports You’ campaign delivered value for money by saving more off the welfare budget than it cost to run the advertising and provide the administrative support.

Maybe the real rorters of the welfare system back then were the government and officials who spent public money on a divisive ‘educational campaign’ which produced no demonstrable savings.

Butch, what you say may well be true, this government in an attempt to catch, as you put it "dole bludgers", does unfairly target the genuine unemployed. However I believe there is also a philosophical element in this governments approach to the unemployed. In some way their unemployment is caused by a fault within themselves, they must be lazy, they are inadequate in some way, they are not genuine, they need to be driven to be made to work.
In our society we have a bad habit of stereotyping and stigmatizing various groups based on ill founded perceptions. As for penalizing all for the actions of a few, where is the justice in that?

Garbage 579. Oh & the post is about bludgers, not the conmen/women, who scam the system. Which did your post refer to?

My lady is a consultant with a work placement charity, used by centrelink. They are not a government agency, & are interested in helping people, rather than government. The only money they get from government is for actually placing someone in employment.

As things are tough they need to place people to be able to keep the doors open, & have cut staff who were not getting enough clients into work to cover at least some of their pay.

She has a full casebook of long term unemployed, [over 2 years[, as do her opposite number in the other agencies in the town. In a population of about 10,000 that makes up about 900, or 9%, with only about 25% of them actually trying to find work, & the rest desperately trying to avoid it. There are more than this in the shorter term unemployed, who don't want to find a job, but will take one when it is found for them.

I know your ideology makes it hard for you to accept these facts, but they are facts. Try talking to people like the local turf farmers. They can not get anyone to work for them as a proper job, & are reduced to paying dole bludgers cash in hand for a day or so a week, to keep their business going.

In this area of 1400 people, we have over 200 on the dole, quite a lot young people, who simply refuse to work for a turf farmer, they consider that is beneath them, but continue to get benefits.

It really is time for a serious crackdown.

butch/ya left off the 'l'
blow not bow..bro clearly ya dont know a redirection
[TO STop us talking about real issues/were talking here about 50 idiots
plus a lot of wannabes..but the system..isnt there to judge us or fix our morals..[even the bible says let the wheat[good]..grow with the taresill[....untill harvest[ie death]..letr the dead tend the dead/get govt name calling to end

by what right does govt insult its own charge?
by what right does an democratic goivt discriminate..enough on a few voters top declare drug wars on them[lest we forget the drug war allows secret govt drug dealing agencies to fight secret foreign dug war[yet the war of drugs falls most unfairly on dopers[who smoke a plant/not a drug]..even today/the other redirection/was to drug test doe blodgers

see you boozers stop drinking an d in the morning/your 'dsrug free'..even the other pills all gone/but you vegans and doper no hopers still show proof of canibinol presence[not cannabis presence]
and we smokers getting screwed again

but i know your meaning screw the doper cnohioper interloper
who his own govt declared war upon/who is hated despised more that any kiddy fiddler or carthief..or accountant fraudster.or mass murder..

get off our backs
one rULE FOR ALL[EARN OR LEARN]..NEXT LETS FORCE DIABETICS TO EAT PROPPER FOOD AND EXERSIZE..AND BAN FATTIES FROM EATING MEAT AND DRINKING..AND WHO WANTS THE FAT SLOBS DRIVIUNG OR USINGPUBLIC TRANSPORT LETS MAKE THE UNSEEMLY NEVBER LEAVE HOME

LETS drown the lot of em like puppies

The usual BS vilification of the poor and defenseless by you well off bigots.
The usual "I heard" facts and fantasies.
The usual distortions and exaggeration.
"Blood on their hands" indeed. What an idiotic comment.
Blood on their hands like morrison and his gulags or rabbott when people die because they cant afford the new doctor tax?
The usual lies and propaganda that drip from you rightards like poison.

No one is listening to your lies anymore. No one believes you. No one trusts you.
Everyone hates you and your vindictive nastiness. Your spiteful overreach. Your cruel policies. Your heartless targeting of the old. Your treasonous sellout to the billionares and the septics.

It is not the unemployed who are to blame it is this stain of a government and their ideology of hate and greed and exploitation.

STOP THE LIES!
DD NOW!

It is hard to know what the truth is, full employment is said to be Five % unemployed for one reason or another. If you subtract the genuinely unemployed, and the ones with not enough disability to be out of the system, This is what you must know before you can brand anyone a dole bludger. As for the coalition cracking down on dole bludgers without those figures is an exercise more than being fair dinkum.
Besides it is impossible to believe anything this govt; says or does.

As I have said in the past. Why not get rid of the Dole and all other pensions?

If all working Australians had a “universal basic income” linked to Australia’s GDP we would have no requirement for any pensions or the bureaucratic system and red tape that feeds on it. It is critical that to receive this income everyone must do something meaningful work relevant to their ability for a specific time to receive it. No sit down money! Personal annual income from all sources would have to be restricted and scaled to a proportion of GDP also. This has nothing to do with how much wealth an individual has, only personal annual income.

The aged pension under such a system would be an age that an individual would no longer have a compulsion do something meaningful for a specific time to receive it. This is not to say that the aged should not continue to work if they choose as many do now for no reward to prop up the existing system.
Linking “unconditional basic income” to GDP would mean that the level would rise and fall with productivity and therefore would remain affordable. It would also ensure that we do not descend into a country of entitled bludger’s.

Clearly this is a simplistic presentation and there are a lot of nuances that would have to be considered. Linking executive pay to company’s lowest paid staff member, overall social responsibility and giving greater reward to the producers of GDP are just a few.

No dole bludgers and more importantly no corporate bludgers.

Full employment and no debt.

Where did communism ever work. If you take away the incentive to work, productivity will take a hit. Full employment = no such thing.
There will always be people not willing to work for anything, without rounding them up, and extermination.
Why does the govt; believe 5 % is full employment.
You must say the govt; has a hand in creating unemployment. It stabilises wages growth.
Victoria is facing massive unemployment, but you will hear little about it, as vic can absorb, far greater than other states.

579 - No communism does not work, nor does capitalism.

Communism assumes there is equality. Capitalism inflates entitlement.

The best incentive for work is to take away the incentive if there is no work.

We need a system that rewards productive pursuits over parasite ones.

We need to reward the farmer more than the politician.

We need to contain expenditure within productivity.

We need a system that is fair, more proportional.

Nobody on this forum has ever been able to convince me otherwise.

Everyone on the dole is not a bludger.

Every bludger is not on the dole.

A bludger not on the dole cost us significantly more.

Mikk,
People like yourself rant about people dying because they can't afford the "tax" on a doctor's visit, but think nothing of having smart phones, eating at restaurants and drinking regularly, playing lotto each week, and taking overseas holidays each year. And you have the gall to expect that you shouldn't pay a small amount on your health when you visit a doctor?. In fact, by your standards we are poor.I drive a 16 year old car, have a $30.00 basic cell phone in case I need to call RAC should my old faithful crap out while I'm driving, and last took a holiday 15 years ago so we could keep top health cover.
I feel you must be one of the younger instant gratification generation
who expect government to take care of you while you indulge your lifestyle, expecting government to support you cradle to grave.
Count your blessings Mikk!! You could learn much from the older generation. Most of us worked 6 days a week from age 14 or 15, and started married lives in a small flat while we saved for our first [small] house. And we saved for our retirement years because there was no superannuation scheme.
To date I have offered dole bludgers $20 per hour for work we need done, and have had NO takers! All of them had smart phones though, and when I asked them how they spend their time I was told they watch t.v. play games on their gadgets or hang out with their mates. Not one of them was interested in taking any courses to learn something, and most of them didn't even know what they'd be interested in anyway.
So before venting on this forum, a little research on your part into the conditions now compared with that of the older generation may make you realise just how lucky you are!! We older ones created not only a better life for you, but unfortunately we also appear to have overindulged you, and created a selfish, whining crop of younger people. So now we have to say Mea culpa!

We need to clearly understand the motives of rehctub and the "accurate" meaning of his opening post.

Rehctub feigns sympathy for genuine Newstart recipients. The accurate truth is he doesn't give a rat's rear in Hell about them. His entrenched political correctness/ideology is that Newstart recipients are simply bludgers, sponging on his ability to comfortably live off his generous superannuation. To rehctub, it's all about "him, him, him", and he sees Newstart recipients as a threat. Yep, crazy, far right wing political correctness gone mad.

mikk,

I really do feel sorry for you.

To be so filled with hate must make it impossible to really enjoy life.

To be unable to accept truth when it is offered to you leaves you no way of actually contributing anything to anyone, including yourself.

We have some pretty radical, who push a lot of rubbish, but it is only you that exude this total hate. I hope you learn before it is too late for you to recover.

Mikk, you wrote a VERY good and accurate post, and showed up the silly righties here for what they really are. These radical righties are so full of hate, how can they actually enjoy life?

They can't comprehend the truth that the system loses a miniscule amount percentage wise as a result of Newstart fraud/cheating. The crazy righties here can't contribute anything to anyone because of their blind ideology and political correctness.

People who exude total hate, like Hasbeen, need to gain some semblance of humanity and decency before it's too late.

Butch has never been any different, NJOH
Hasbeen has a blanket approach just like Butch. Persons on the dole for what ever reasons are dole bludgers.

As the major parties compete to play Kick a Dole Bludger, I can’t help thinking we are all being conned. And not just by some of the welfare recipients.

Right now up to 56 per cent of Victorian teens are unemployed.
Some would fit the dole-bludger tag, I grant you that.
But they’re not all work-shy, good-for-nothings.
The biggest problem they face is the mismatch between the skills they have and the expectations of employers.

To put it bluntly, they want to work. But the bosses don’t want them.
As Paul Bird from Mission Australia sees it, nine out of ten teens want to get off the dole. But many need significant help if they are ever going to do so – they aren’t punctual, they don’t present well, and they have low literacy and language skills.

And so what they need aren’t more punitive measures, like those suggested last week by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott. Already, the requirements that come with the Newstart allowance are pretty strenuous. What they need are programs and resources that will break the cycle of multi-generational unemployment, such as structured work experience which teaches them how to work

Evidence,

http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/article/8492894/dole-bludger-challenge

http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/article/8851822/taxpayers-foot-the-bill-in-dole-bludgers-paradise

"A Current Affair" .... ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

That's like the Pope going to the Vatican to get "evidence" that miracles are real.

Onthebeach, that's the funniest post you've ever made. Congratulations. You're even funnier than Andrew Bolt. WOW!!

Unless they have parents able to support them, what will happen to these abandoned young people? How do they find the money to eat, to afford shelter, and keep themselves off the streets? This is certainly not a good time to be young and unemployed from a background of family breakdown. Get ready for surges in homelessness and crime, Australia. Why are we giving up on our youth? As a rich country, we can afford to ensure that no one is denied a safety net, a chance to find one’s feet and focus on getting a job rather than just the next meal.

Everyone wants to see Australia lay the foundations for a bright future. But this budget ''crisis'' has been self-proclaimed by the current government, and calling it a crisis does not stand up to analysis. Not only is the government discarding macroeconomic prudence by cutting too hard during an economic slowdown, it is aiming most of its spending cuts at those least able to afford them, instead of investing in their and Australia’s future. This budget fundamentally alters the social contract in Australia by discarding the inalienability of its social safety nets. This is an inequitable budget – and a harmful budget

Good post 579. Yes, it's a budget based 100% on ideology.

It's ideology first, and the country's people and finances second. A silly "concocted" emergency (that close to nobody in Australia or the rest of the world believes) .... concocted so that the "ideology" reigns supreme. An ideology that stipulates that the rich, upper middle class and BIG business *MUST* receive as much government welfare support/tax breaks as is humanly possible.

Regardless of it being A Current Affair the people are real enough wouldn't you say?

Of course there are thousands avoiding work. I see plenty of it myself where local builders cannot recruit people locally to turn up for the apprenticeship training and the good pay they are offering. How do you explain why a roof tiler is obliged to recruit from overseas?

Apart from that there are the victim industries including multiculturalism where hundreds of millions of taxpayers' dollars are wasted annually, with much of it being diverted into the pockets (and careers) of government bureaucrats and professionals.

That is the inheritance of the well-intended but over-optimistic Gough Whitlam. They really saw Gough coming and have made hay since.

However like others here you already know all of that, or have at least been told, but you are likely out to protect your own interests, which are?

My interest has been declared many times before. It is very simple: I don't particularly care what policies the government enacts (within reason, not limitations on free speech for instance) as long as there is transparency of decision-making and value for money is being obtained.

You couldn't argue for example that value for money is being obtained for taxpayers where hundreds of millions are wasted annually on aboriginal housing that either doesn't get built or where it does, it is trashed or destroyed within months. I don't believe that either side of government has addressed wastage of scant taxpayers' dollars, but the present LNP government seems to be trying and at least doesn't appear to be adding to existing wastage.

Onthebeach, your post was 100% "ideology", and right wing political correctness. And of course with the *OBLIGATORY* references to multiculturalism, Whitlam, aboriginees robbing your tax dollars etc. Gee, it's like it's straight out of the Andrew Bolt Biography.

Oh yes, onthebeach you mention that your local builders can't recruit people who will turn up for their "apprenticeships and good pay". I ask you to name these companies on this forum now, I will then phone them tomorrow and ask them about this, and report the results back here tomorrow.

So onthebeach, name these companies.

@Nhoj, Sunday, 1 June 2014 3:39:42 PM

You don't need any information from me when there are employers and labour recruiters in the papers saying the same and often. Here you go, get on the phone and start ringing, but you wouldn't be out to get a job for yourself I venture,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/willing-workers-from-abroad-take-up-the-slack/story-e6frg6z6-1226937786182#

You could start with your local Centrelink office though and the jobs advertisements in the media.

Go to the Gold Coast where you will see foreign workers working in the variety of tourism jobs and waiting on the buff, vain young tattooed men and women who are spending their free Centrelink $$ on booze and entertainment. Get a job? Not likely!

So 579 tells us there are lots of unemployed youth in Vic. He quotes,"As Paul Bird from Mission Australia sees it, nine out of ten teens want to get off the dole. But many need significant help if they are ever going to do so – they aren’t punctual, they don’t present well, and they have low literacy and language skills.

Well lady, who's fault is their lousy education? Could it be the union controlled lousy education system? & who was running the schools when these kids went to school. Shock horror, it was Labor.

They don't present well. They can't be bothered to shower, & wear clean clothes you mean. Do you think they are too dumb to know the difference, or know they won't be hired when they present like that. Helps to keep you on the dole, don't you know.

They aren't punctual. That just has to be an accident doesn't it. Nothing to do with being work shy.

You lot must believe the moon is made of green cheese, if you believe that crap.

Onthebeach wrote earlier, "I see plenty of it myself where local builders cannot recruit people locally to turn up for the apprenticeship training and good pay".

I then replied by asking onthebeach to name these "local" builders, so I could ring them and ask them about it, and report the results tomorrow on this forum.

In his reply to that, onthebeach has point blank *REFUSED* to name these local builders. Local builders that onthebeach "claims" he knows of who can't get apprentices employed and to turn up for their "good pay".

Conclusion = onthebeach lied regarding having personal knowledge of these specific "local" builders.

What has happened over the last few decades in Australia, brings you back to Adolf Hitler and his dehumanizing of the Jewish race ! First you blame them for the economy, Then you give them names,show how burdensome they are, then they are viewed as sewer rats, no longer are they thought of as Human Beings by the Majority, but as a lice on society that must be exterminated ! That has happened to the Unemployed,single mothers, Disabled and they are now working on the old age ! Who is really to blame ! A Society that values a person by their financial worth,Big business, Government and Greed !The Unemployed are the result of a Capitalist system, Where you have wealth you also must have poverty, where you have employment you must have the unemployed ! Without the yin yang, our system would totally collapse !For every winner there must be a loser !

Today I found that someone entered my car and took the small change that was there.

This is not the first time it happens - some kid in my street must be using it as their pocket-money.

Does it oblige me to lock my car? It doesn't. The trouble I would incur by having to lock my car would be greater than the occasional loss of change. I should thank that little thief for not creating a bigger mess, taking only the coins and leaving behind those practical items that I keep in my car.

---

How this relates to this thread should be obvious.

The big thieves and bludgers are out there in the public "service", each taking 10 times as much as the poor guy/girl who only wants to have something to eat and a bit of roof over their head at our expense. Those "servants" get to holiday overseas and purchase expensive houses, cars, boats, gadgets etc. at our expense, while the dole-recipients take so little.

Just leave those little fish alone - go for the sharks!

Beach, Nhoj called you on that one, you made reference to "local builders" you brought it up, its time to put up or shut up, name these local building firms so my forum buddy Nhoj can give them a call, no harm in that, no privacy problem I can see. No good trying to counter with crap from one of Murdoch's fish wrappers, looks like Nhoj got you there. You have tried to call me on The Greens in the past, I even contacted David Shoebridge over something or other you once called me on, and posted the reply on this forum. Here is your BIG CHANCE to put up, or shut up!
Nhoj, OTB usual tactic when you call him on something like that is he goes deaf, dumb and mute. You wont get a direct answer... NO CHANCE!

You're the only one worth reading, Yuyutsu. All the problems in society have been created by the parasites in .gov. They do it on purpose to give them purpose. We would all be much better off without them!

Yuyutsu you are training those kids to believe that stealing is a good way to get what you want.

You will have no one to blame but yourself when they clean out your home in a few years time. Very foolish of you.

Those kids are just doing what Clive Palmer, Gina Rinehart and Tony Abbott do on a *MUCH* larger scale.

Nhoj,

such jealousy and envy.

More "I heard from a bloke down the pub" crap from the rightards.
They cant give any names because it is all LIES. The only thing the neoconartists are competent at.

Worldwatcher
Your weasely attempt to smear the unemployed because they own a smartphone is bollocks. The job network will force a phone on you if you dont have one.
No unemployed person I know eats at restaurants, drinks at pubs or plays lotto or other gambling. Take overseas holidays? Ha They dont get holidays and couldnt afford even a caravan down the coast for a weekend. Most of them cant even eat properly once they have paid for their rent and other essentials. They are very likely to not just "not want to pay" but they are regularly unlikely to even have $7 to their name.
You bring to mind monty python with your "in my day remarks". Shoebox to live in and gravel for tea was it watchy. ffs

Hasbeen
Im not the one slamming the poorest and most defenseless people in our society. You are the one preaching hate and envy. Envy of those with nothing. Cant you see you are being taken for a fool by the real crooks. They think you are so stupid that you will ignore their theft of billions while focusing on the pittance that some loser on the dole might get. And you are proving them right.

Wake up to yourselves you are being conned and goaded into becoming nasty, spiteful bullies that target the weak and the feeble. It is shameful and unAustralian and you should all take a good look at yourselves.

The Budget predicts a rise in unemployment to 6%, why ? because the Budget is creating it ! How ? by tossing out 16,000 public Service jobs,putting people who currently are on disability Pensions on the dole queue, forcing single mothers with young children out to work,raising the eligibility age for the pension and added to that the school councilors who now face loosing their jobs to Priests ! So, are these people considered to be dole bludgers ? Or the victims of Government policies ? where are all these vacant jobs coming from ? Will someone please define exactly what a Dole Bludger is ? And how they are benefiting from living well below the poverty level ? And exactly how much off there individual tax actually pays for social Welfare and what part of that goes to support the unemployed ? do any of you realize that the unemployment Benefits are not for the poor ? That it is a safety net for the middle class, that once they fall then they are the new poor ! Do you realize by destroying all these safety nets, you are digging holes for your own children ? And do you realize how much financial support that you have to give your children to cushion them from falling into one of those holes ? there is a thing called Social Justice, you should read up on it, It may make you rethink what we actually should be doing,rather than label people as dole bludgers and leaving them to fend for themselves !

Dear Hasbeen,

<<Yuyutsu you are training those kids to believe that stealing is a good way to get what you want.>>

I suspect it's probably just one poor kid, not a plural of them.

By leaving my car unlocked, I teach that poor unknown kid that money is not everything. They already know from past experience that if they leave a mess, then they will find my car locked for the next month or so - which is a lose-lose situation for both of us.

<<You will have no one to blame but yourself when they clean out your home in a few years time. Very foolish of you.>>

I never intended to blame anyone else but myself. If that eventuates, which I doubt (yet also have an alarm-system just in case), then I will deduce that I deserved this as a result of something I've done in my past, either in this lifetime or in previous ones. I know that I'm not innocent, I know that I also played pranks in my childhood, so if I deserve it, then so-be-it and let me come clean of my debt.

Back on topic:

Hungry people steal - and I couldn't blame them.
At the end of the day, they will find some way to eat, this way or the other, but if they're able to do so by receiving that minimal/frugal income without stealing, then we save ourselves the fear and mess of living among thieves. If you do your sums, fortifying your home would cost you more.

That's why I keep a sign in my car's glove-box, for whoever may be searching there:

IS IT MONEY THAT YOU ARE AFTER?
THAN WHY NOT KNOCK AND SIMPLY ASK FOR IT?

Why blame those who steal a little to barely survive on and happily have no job, instead of those who steal much and grudgingly hold and do such a bad job that we would all be better without? On the contrary - we should admire those who volunteer to live with so little, leaving only the minimal environmental footprint behind them.

Oh dear, the under achievers certainly have gone into defense mode on this one.

Firstly, not all dole recipients are bludgers but, it's the genuine 'bludgers' who have brought about this life changing change, through thier prercistant attitude of, it's our given right not to work.

And so it is, but that's not the issue, as the issue is that while nobody insists they work, it's the support they want that's the problem.

Now if one claims to be actively seeking work (the grounds for receiving the dole) and, they get out of bed early at least five days per week, and present themselves ready for work, there's a very strong chance they will find a job.

On the other hand, if they are either drugged up, have a wicked hair style, have tattoos everywhere, have crap hanging out of their faces, then their prospects will be limited.

Now on the other hand, if they present well for work, but don't have the skills to get a job, well what's the problem with mandatory training to gain skills.

People have to accept that welfare is a gift, not a given right and, if used inappropriately, there will be consequesnes.

The problem is though, that the genuine unemployed have finally been dragged down by the serial bludgers.

BTW, for the ten thousandth time, to those using the pension age as an axe grinder, it's the year 2034. Or there a bouts. Hardly happening tomorrow as they thy to make out.

So our Govt has brought in austerity to pay off a $667 billion debt that was created from nothing by OS Central banks ?

We are paying to have our currency depreciated for no good reason.

Unless we move back to Govt banks and a Central Bank we own that can create new money debt free, we are stuffed. This country will be continued to be looted with the help of our political parties. They are all complicit.

..this stain of a government and their ideology of hate and greed and exploitation.
mikk,
where you been lately ? They got voted out at the last election while you were dreaming.

Arjay Tell us what this 600 billion $ in debt consists of.

The ravings by Mikk, 579 etc excusing the rorters is pathetic.
We have already entered the decline to zero growth so when the crunch
comes again, the government will have no choice but to cut the dole
very significantly. The age pension will also be cut as will very large
numbers of public service employees and their salaries.

Further on somewhere after 2020 the situation will worsen considerably.
There is even a risk, how great I haven't a clue, that the Federal
government will become largely non operative due to a lack of money.

A while back I said I was going to read a book, The Collapse of Complex Societies.
Well I am half way through it and it is a hard work read, but we have
all been there before and there are dozens of theories as to why this
or that society collapsed.
One of the major reasons is resources drying up, soil exhaustion, etc
together with the people being unable to accept that change is needed.

It seems the more complex the more unstable the society is.
We are exhibiting all the early signs of collapse.

The dole cheaters will be the first to contribute to the population decline.

Yuyutsu I hope you are right, but I doubt it. Your kid thief will soon get onto grog or drugs, & want more than a few pennies. I believe you're kidding yourself if you think their minor pinching won't turn into major theft.

I hate thieves. I once had a station wagon window smashed because I had a used 5 liter liquid soap bottle full of water on the floor. Some rotten thief caused considerable damage for nothing.

When living on an island, we left our vehicles in a car park at the ferry terminal when we went to town. One day I got only 25 feet before the thing ran out of petrol. Rotten thieves had not just syphoned out a bit of fuel, but had taken the bung out of the bottom of the tank to drain the lot.

Worse, not only did they not replace the bung, or drop it on the ground, they had thrown it into the bush. It took 3 days of no vehicle, & a 2 mile walk home, to get a replacement.

The pinching of petrol escalated, along with an increase in malicious damage to the vehicles, for some time. It stopped suddenly just after a report of 3 youths being found severely beaten. They must have hit the wrong car, or owner.

Training kids to steal by letting them get away with a little pilfering is a very bad idea

It's interesting to note that so many on this blog vilify people like Gina Rinehart and her ilk for being wealthy and providing this country with so much employment, When she could sit back and do nothing.

I never see anyone complaining over the likes of Mark Webber who earns 12 million a year and Tim Cahill earns 4.5 million for kicking a soccer ball and that's probably without all the endorsements. Ricky Ponting 3.5 million. Hugh Jackman has been offered 100 million to do 4 more series of Wolverine. Is he worth that sort of money ? I don't know, but why is it that "celebrities" can't be criticised, but if you provide wealth in the form of employment in this country you are considered rubbish by socialists.

As Gina Rinhart said "The political left is torn and confused. One moment they hate our very existence and even want us closed down — but in another, they don’t want to stop spending the revenue that they count on from us in taxes and royalties"

As Margaret Thatcher said "The trouble with socialism is you eventually run out of other people money"

No one is excusing dole bludgers, it is unfair to lump everybody in the same tub.
BAZZ says we have entered a period of negative growth. The AU economy is powering along at 3.2 % annual growth. With the downturn of mining manufacturing is coming back, which means interest rates are set to rise.
Wherever Bazz gets his info from. it is certainly not from AU business.
Either that or he believes Abbott the liar.
No one wants to have a go at what the supposed 600 billion debt consists of. More lies.
Every govt for the last 20 years or so has to leave office with supposed projections. It is a fictitious number and can not be substantiated.

@snake, Monday, 2 June 2014 11:00:56 AM

Good post.

The elephant in the room is the hugely expensive victim industry created by the Gough Whitlam Labor government years ago. The victim industry sucks long and greedily from the federal budget in all manner of ways, direct and indirect.

There are thousands of government and NGO bureaucrats, and private professionals who get their daily bread from the new victim industries spawned by the Whitlam government. It has been a growth industry since and sucks from the money available for the more traditional government welfare programs such as for elderly, mental health and so on.

If our governments and big business drive local
industries and production out of the country
and negotiate cheap imports into the country
how can we expect the population to be productive
and employed? If the governments protected the
economy of the nation and industry was encouraged
to stay within the country - there would be more
jobs for everyone. We need to maintain tariffs
on certain products to protect our local industries.
Unfortunately in recent years under governments of
both persuasions this has not been done.

As for dole bludgers?
Of course there are people who abuse the system.
There always will be. However,
as I understand it - welfare is such a small percentage of
the federal budget yet no one complains about the "handouts"
given to the rich in the form of tax cuts and other benefits.

Socialism/capitalism? Both systems have their flaws.
Where is the success of capitalism in Africa, Asia, Latin
America?

Winston Churchill summed things up rather well :

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing
of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the
equal sharing of miseries."

I'm sure some on here are so convinced by their own delusions about massive handouts being freely given to the undeserving that no amount of factual argument will convince them otherwise. To justify their thinking, these conservatives had convinced themselves totally that abuse of the system is so widespread and the system so intrinsically corrupt that the only reasonable avenue of recourse is to shut the whole thing down. What would they have the real victims do? Unfortunately, fend for themselves as best they can.

Queensland's deficit will rise to $2.27 billion in the next financial year, almost four times the mid-year forecast, however Premier Campbell Newman maintains the state will recover quickly.

The blowout, outlined in the LNP government's third budget tomorrow, is already hurting consumer confidence, industry and business groups say.

Mr Newman says the State Government will turn the deficit around in 12 months.

"2015-2016 show mostly definitely we will be in surplus that year, and indeed subsequent years after that as well," he said.

More bad news for Bazz

Snake, I have said that for years. People are very quick to judge CEO's and the like, but forget the Andrwpew Bogarts of the world, as they secure their $37 million deals simply for playing basket ball.

If that's not an arse about, tall poppy attitude, what is! Besides, these Aussie sporting/movie stars often blood their careers here in Oz, then take their taxes off shore.

But no, let's pick on the likes of Gina or Allan Joyce as picking on the likes of Hugh Jackman just doesn't have the same appeal.

It's a pity the under achievers don't respect what these people actually do to make their lives livable, because without the subsidies of the high income earners, most would be on the streets.

....No one is excusing dole bludgers, it is unfair to lump everybody in the same tub.

But it the likes of you 579 who is trying to link the two. I'm certainly not.

Then this.....BAZZ says we have entered a period of negative growth. The AU economy is powering along at 3.2 % annual growth. With the downturn of mining manufacturing is coming back, which means interest rates are set to rise.
Wherever Bazz gets his info from. it is certainly not from AU business.

Dream on my friend, as manufacturing is dead and buried, unless of cause we see the min wage drop by about 60%. NOTE! I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT, just before you try to pin that on me, as usual.

As; for the $600 billion, it's my understanding that's what the debt would be should we continue along labors plans. Thankfully we should not get there, because that mob were booted out, along with their unfunded dreams like Gonski and the NDIS.

Foxy....If our governments and big business drive local
industries and production out of the country
and negotiate cheap imports into the country
how can we expect the population to be productive
and employed?

The blame lies with us, the consumer, as we vote with our wallets, not our hearts or minds.

579, QLD will boom, due to CSG royalties.

579 & others, I said we are entering an era of zero growth.
True, Australia & some others are still in positive growth, but only
for particular trade reasons. Those reasons are decling.
Growth is tied to energy and energy is increasing in cost.
The major producers of energy are having difficulty in either preventing
a decline in production or indeed keeping it up.
Note that Mobil, BP & Shell are all suffering falling sales. They just
cannot keep their production up despite having more than doubled their
expenditure on search and development. They are now each spending
in the $Trillions in search and development but are not getting the
results needed. Shell & Mobil are selling assets to enable them to pay dividends.

If that does not tell you what is going on then you are not the sort
of people needed for the future.

Re the $600billion debt, it is just government spending that exceeded
income. Projects like pink batts, NBN, School buildings etc etc etc.
As Barnaby Joyce famously said;
"When you borrow money someone will want it paid back !"

I have never seen a breakdown from where it has been borrowed but I
know that a lot of it is from China, and surprise surprise !
China wants the Trade agreement to allow them to bring Chinese workers
into Australia to work on their projects.

Well what's next ?
How about annexing half of Queensland ?
Well either that or repay all your loans !

Just an extension on annexing Tibet and all the South China Sea.
Who was it that said it was just as important who you borrowed from
as what you borrowed !

Bazz there is no 600 billion debt. it is a pie in the sky. our debt is 350 billion up 70 billion since abbot was fraudulently voted to power.
Labors forward estimates were 120 billion, Abbott made it 600 billion it sounds better. Can't help himself from telling lies.

I can't understand what Butch wrote.
QLD needs to do something they are heading for 100 billion in debt.

The only state that is showing a balanced budget is vic.
Premier Napthine told toxic Abbott not to come to vic, there is an election in November.

Manufacturing is picking up, in great strides now that the so called mining boom is over, we now have labour returning to the state.
If we go over the 3.2 % growth it will put inflationary pressures on and that will mean interest rises.

We need more jobs, and we need more people fit to take up those jobs.
Let's concentrate on assisting as many as possible of the currently unemployed to be fit for a job which will suit their abilities, potentials and interests.

My reading of part of the thrust of the budget is to provide that training - not at university, but at more sober levels, TAFE, job/recruitment services, maybe high school and maybe by apprenticeships.
Of course, those who show relevant promise might also be assisted to advance to a university education - bursary, scholarship, and possibly also with a HEX component.

Is the budget in deficit? Yes, though the degree may be partially in question.
My reading of the budget is, in part, to provide funding for additional infrastructure, mainly on roads and expressways, which would provide some additional jobs, and hopefully some capacity to employ and to train at present unskilled, unemployed workers.
This is a start to addressing job shortage, but in my view is not enough to meet the demand.
So, where to from here? I would hope to see some government action to support local existing and 'new' industry for the long haul.
How? Perhaps some judicious implementation of tariffs or import quotas could be in order, but, due to 'free trade' arrangements, I can't be sure how such could be feasible.
More likely we need 'new' high-tech industry, possibly initially part-subsidized by government, or more foreign investment in our tourism potential - with hotels, for example.
Our governments could possibly also provide appropriate grants to foster local entrepreneurial developments in eco-tourism and local small boutique manufacturing.

In all of this, both the currently unemployed and existing and potential employers and businesses have a role to play.
None can be exempt, including the currently unemployed.

No unwarranted 'labeling' or demonizing please, but ignoring the actual realities will help no-one.

I do not think you are right there, the infrastructure projects are to make Abbott look like something he isn't.
Tafe colleges have taken a massive hit, apprenticeships need a return of the apprentice commission, since it's decline so have apprentices.

The biggest single factor there was apprentices can be dismissed in a downturn. Previously with an apprentice commission employers and the commission had to work together to look for replacement employment for the apprentice. So continuity of employment continued.

Apprentices now are used as a form of cheap employment. Once it was you had to have a certain amount of tradespersons before you could take on an apprentice.

Paul1405 wrote on page 5, "onthebeach's usual tactic when you call him out on something like that is he goes deaf, dumb and mute. You won't get a direct answer, no chance".

Gee, I guess you're right Paul. Onthebeach has gone missing in action regarding his lie.

Onthebeach has 100% AVOIDED addressing me catching him out with his lie, as pointed out in my post at the bottom of page 4. Well at least onthebeach now has something in common with Tax'Em Tony, or should we say ToneLIAR.

Yep, onthebeach has gone "missing in action". That's what happens when ya get "caught out".

Foxy quote Winston Churchill about equal shares etc.
Well I was in Moscow in 1967 and was having diner at the Russia Hotel.
It was at that time the premier hotel in Moscow.
The dining room was actually right at the main entrance.
Only remember seeing a small number of obviously poor people.
However there was some sort of a "do" on at the hotel and the big Zis
were all pulling up at the door and the men in dicky suits and the
women in long dresses and covered in jewelry around their necks and
in their hair were parading in in twos and fours and kept coming for
a long time. (Meals were notoriously slow in Moscow).

So they were not all sharing the miseries !

579, you are right to the extent that the debt has not yet reached
the $600B level, but it is programmed to get there and it will be nigh
impossible to stop it.

The problem coming down the track is the rising cost of energy and its
effect on credit and GDP. As more GDP gets eaten by energy costs there
will be less to pay off our debt and the interest.
We have been borrowing money to pay the interest bill, hmmm.

I suggest that you read this;

http://tinyurl.com/nwcgoov

I think it may open your eyes to the relationship between debt, interest rates and energy.

Mikk
It's very obvious from your post to me that we must move in very different circles, and that your social life is limited to only where all the people to whom you refer are really suffering. I, on the other hand have seen and heard for myself from the many young people I meet, that the picture I painted for you is as true as the fact that some do experience hardship, which I don't deny. Maybe it's just in my locality that I can't help noticing so many of them also sport expensive tattoos.

Our local paper reported last week that drug taking in this area[expensive habit] has rocketed by 50% among young people, along with an alarming increase in STD's since the previous report 2 years ago. Many of today's youth are our lost generation - self gratification is their only goal. Thank goodness we have some who have been taught if they want something, the best way to achieve this is to work.

May I take this opportunity to suggest that you present your opinions without so many juvenile insulting comments to people who post on this forum. Your vituperative comments are just plain rude name calling. Please take note - empty vessels make the most noise, and produce nothing of worth except that. Points can be made just as well if they are presented in a civil manner, rather than thuggish confrontation, which is such an unbecoming method to use on a forum, even if it helps you release your very obvious frustrations.
If you want dialogue and interaction with forum members, I think you will find courtesy a much better way to achieve this.

Dear Saltpetre,

<<We need more jobs, and we need more people fit to take up those jobs.>>

Is it a case of 'need' or a case of 'want'?

Whence this strange assumption as if human life is not worthwhile unless one engages in a formal and regular practice of exchanging labour for money?

While we probably cannot afford to do completely away with this painful practice in this particularly dark day and age, would it be wrong for at least some of us to be liberated from the misery of this degrading cycle? Should we out of jealousy deny this from those who are fortunate enough to escape it?

worldwatcher
The fact that all unemployed people receive the same payment from the government irrespective of where they live would lead one to think that perhaps it is the children of the better off who are the real bludgers. You obviously live in a relatively prosperous area and the fact that young people there can afford drugs, tatts etc only means they are getting money from somewhere else as well as the dole.
Maybe they live and eat at home rentfree. Freeloading off their parents. Maybe there are plenty of corrupt employers in your area who like to pay cash wages. Maybe they deal drugs to the well off workers round your way.
How this means that all the people that live in already suffering areas need to suffer even more than they already do I do not understand.

As for presenting my opinions more civilly. Did you say that to all those here who spewed hate and vilification at Julia Gillard? I am just reflecting the tone of this place for the last few years.
I am also righteously pissed off at this government and its LIES, hatred, vicious attacks and its utter utter hypocrisy.

Never forget
Never forgive

Mikk

Butcher...the term dole bludger emerged as they stripped manufacturing and value adding from us under the Lima Agreement.

The press were quick to scapegoat the masses...but let us speak facts not catch cry’s and see how much we do bludge Butch.

Here are the current stats on global “social cash expenditure” compared to GDP.

Germany....15%
U.S.A....10%
Japan....12%
France...18%
Estonia....14%
UK....12%
Poland....14%
Italy....18%
AUSTRALIA....8%

In countries with electricity only Chile, Korea, and Mexico give less to their poorest plebs than our Labor and Liberal elites do.

Go on chase your dole bludgers....as they say, if you want to beat the dog, you can always find a stick..................

rehctub,

Actually, while not proposing it, your remark about a 60% drop in wages would make us competitive again on the world market. Compared to 3 giant economies - China, India, and even the U.S. Our high wages are destroying being able to compete in manufacturing or export of many things outside of the mining sector.
We destroy ourselves by continually demanding higher wages. The U.S. minimum wage is $7.50 an hour - much higher than even China and India, which goes a long way to explaining why we import so much from these countries, and why so many long established Aussie companies have closed.
The greed has not been limited to government. We all have to share the blame and consequences of our greed.
Those on the dole also have to face the reality that if they want to have a certain lifestyle they may have to consider work they may now consider to be beneath them, that when things are bad enough one must lower expectations.
Are trolley boys in your area all Indians? They are where I live. Not exactly a job offering much advancement, but it's putting food on their tables and a roof over their heads, and they are happy to have the work that young Aussies used to do not so many years ago.
Same goes for our bus and taxi drivers and hospital porters here in the West. Can anyone explain how they are able to so easily find work when Aussies obviously can't?
BTW, the Indian trolley boys at our local mall never stop corralling the car park trolleys, and I've noticed they are very helpful and polite to the older patrons if they see they can lend them a hand to put groceries in the cars for them.

worldwatcher, I was reading an article the other day about the failure of the Sarbucks coffee chain here in Oz. No doubt Being a US based company, they didnt factor in our wage structure for the low skilled.

As for where we are today, is old news in the business world, as when in business what has happened means nothing, because it's all about what's going to happen that matters. That's why many people get confused if a large company, after having a good year, sheds staff. It's all about the future.

Our problem is that our manufacturing future, with the losses of Holden, Ford and Toyota, not to mention all their support industries, means this sector is headed for a train wreck, of proportions most of us here today have only ever read about in history books.

We are in for a hiding to nothing.

We should be acting now, and an immediate suspension of all 457's and zero immigration would be wise places to start as we are going to need every job for our own, and some I fear.

worldwatcher, I suggest you lead by example, show us the way, so to speak. While the rest of us take this gigantic cut in living standards to level of the average Indian, you personally could be a real hero and drop your own income level to that of the average Ethiopian, about $10 a week. In that way you'll make the rest of us look positively well off on our $30 a week.

Mikk

Sorry, you guessed wrong. We live 35-40 minutes from our major city here with good rail service, and have the 2nd highest rate of unemployment, a high crime rate necessitating an increased police presence around our shopping centres, and nurses at our local hospital see so many drug fuelled patients in emergency that they need to have a security guard at the bedside. So no, this is far from a prosperous area, and has a high proportion of government subsidised housing. Median house prices for this area of mainly older homes are around $280,000 for a 3x1 to $340,000 for a 4x2.

We have quite a large industrial area, and the firms there put notices outside their businesses when they have jobs available. I don't know their success rate, but often the notices are left out for a week or two, so suspect they don't have many takers.

I finally had a reply for the $20.00 per hour for unskilled labour which I'd offered. It was from a 66 year old man, and he starts tomorrow. Initially I'd approached young guys on the dole thinking it would be easy to get someone who would like to earn a little extra for a while, so it's left me pretty disillusioned that none of them was interested in manual labour, although they weren't qualified for anything other than that anyway.
Regarding the R G R debacle's comments, my strongest thoughts were how ridiculous our country looked in the eyes of the rest of the world, and the loss of face it incurred. That was one forum fire which didn't need any more fuel. However, it is also pointless to demonize either side of politics when we ourselves are guilty of self interest. After all that's what drives us to work - to achieve our own ambitions, albeit most of us set our sights considerably lower than politicians. They are a necessary evil who should [sometimes do, and sometimes don't] implement the will of the majority, and should also spend OUR money wisely and within our budget.

Paul 1405

Don't be so quick to take offence man. If you took the time to read what I wrote, and digest it thoroughly, you would realise I wasn't proposing we take a 60% cut. Just pointing out why we can't compete on a level playing field. I don't know how much an Ethiopian earns a week, but in any country an increase in wages automatically produces a rise in the cost of our commodities, including food. It would be the same wherever you go in the world including Ethiopia.
Our wage structure is high, and you can't argue against that, but our overall cost of living has naturally risen too. Higher wages, higher prices is a simple equation.
As I said previously, this affects our competitiveness with other countries, which in NO way implied that we should take a 60% cut in income.
When the demand goes out for wage increases, we all end up footing the bill, so we are partly responsible for the increase in prices, along with overly generous governments who spend our money so irresponsibly.
No sane person can expect employers to pay our high wages when they can get the same product produced much cheaper elsewhere. If they can't make profits, they can't pay staff = increased unemployment for us. So what would be your solution?

rehctub,

You paint a gloomy future, but I fear you could be right. Maybe it's because we now have instant access to all the world news, unlike pre internet days, but it would seem that we aren't the only ones heading for trouble. The whole world appears to be in a state of flux, unlike any recorded in our recent history.

I still think we are one of the luckier countries though - for the time being, thanks mainly to the mining sector.

All the mining sector done was shut down manufacturing, through their hiring of skills workers. Since the downturn in the mining sector manufacturing has come back in a big way.
Now our economy is running at capacity with 3.2 % growth.

States that rely on mining there is an underlying factor of collapse.
Coal is bringing in 14$/ton. may as well be left in the ground.

Butch is relying on CSG to pull QLD out of the 100 billion state debt.
Not all states are equal. With vic car industry set for man made collapse vic will not be moved, we have a far greater population / square klm than any of the others.
There lies the difference with the states.
QLD and WA could easily be divided into 4 states.

....Now our economy is running at capacity with 3.2 % growth.

You have proved my point 579, when you said the word 'is', because what is happening now is not the issue, it's what's going to happen in the next three to five years that should be the focus of our planners.

If we don't remove all hurdles that hinder employment for our own people,457's and skilled immigration to name some, there will be serious consequences.

The first step is to get unemployed into training, by force if required, the next step is to get our employers to offer training for locals. You can do that by making the importation of labor non viable, or, by limiting Liceses to the likes of the mining sector if they refuse to train locals.

Now if the unemployed refuse to be trained, then cut them off, as even people with certain disabilities can perform duties, of cause, on a subsidized basis to the employer.

Either way, we must act, and act fast to prevent a downturn few here have witnessed.

Now just on your comment earlier.....To put it bluntly, they want to work. But the bosses don’t want them.

I watched a program recently on youth unemployment in either Mel or Sydney. All these supposed job seekers had either Tattoos everywhere, crap hanging from their faces, ridiculous hair doe's or a combination of the above.

Wanting to work also means being well presented for work.

Unfortunately our society of do-gooders have allowed political correctness to go too far.

If you can't get a job the way you are, then you must look for reasons why.

I didn't make the comment of the bosses don't want them.
457 visas are running at 108 thousand bodies. You had better see Abbott he made 457 easier to get.

Skilled workers took a backward turn when the apprenticeship commission was abolished, and employers were allowed to put apprentices off at any time, instead of finding them another employment place. Howard did that.

Howard made the rule that 5% unemployment was capacity, That was to keep a lid on wages growth.

Economy growth rate, and over employment means upward pressure on wages and inflation. You can't have it all ways as one will effect the other.

Doesn,t that mean we still need immigration to maintain that level of unemployment. The only problem with immigration is the type of immigrant you take in.

4 or 5% growth will be inflationary, 1% unemployment will mean no reserve employees, wages will grow.

I used to have a similar experience with hiring staff in the less touristy area of the Gold Coast worldwatcher.

An add for an administration assistant would draw 150 or more applicants, but one for a stores or assembly worker would be lucky to get 3 in a week, & most of those were over 40.

worldwatcher

To say; << in any country an increase in wages automatically produces a rise in the cost of our commodities>> is far to simplistic, you have not allowed for increased efficiency of production brought about by improvements in technology etc, economies of scale etc etc. If it was all down to wages then we would still have a living standard as per yesteryear. Take any production, coal for example, are we still producing coal in 2014 at the same efficiency as it was produced in 1814? In third world countries there is a general concentration on inefficient production which is offset with high labour input at a low cost.
Using Ethiopia again, if what you say was true then the Ethiopian economy should be booming, production coming out of their ears, but its not, and that is due to many other factors besides the cost of labour.

I also believe that the 457 visas should go.
However the problem of low wages in other countries will no longer a
problem, sometime in the 2020s. The cost of international freight will
continue to rise and all bulky freight will disappear and as happened
with furniture and steel production it will return to local production.
Steel production does not seem to have returned to Australia yet but it has in the US.
So there is some hope for local manufacture.

Eventually there will be very little imported goods. The only types of
imported goods will be very small light products with high value such
as computer chips and they will travel as air cargo on the few flights
each day from overseas.

At present this scenario is absolutely beyond the pale for all politicians
so despite the government reports, reports from bodies such as the
NRMA etc etc they just cannot face up to it.
This means we will need to have an interruption to our fuel supplies
before they face up to the problem.

It will need something like this to happen;
Iran to attack Israel or Saudi Arabia.
A terrorist attack on a significant refinery in Saudi Arabia or Singapore.
A maritime confrontation between Indonesia and Australia.
A blockage of the Strait of Hormuz.
A Chinese seizure of oil supply anywhere.
Any other fuel shortage around the world for political or commercial reasons.
The OECD's International Energy Authority plans to ration out
supplies in the event of shortage but it has never been exercised

Anything like this will mean immediate petrol and diesel rationing
in Australia. We have only about 30% of consumption of our own oil
but we can no longer refine that much. We can only refine 9% of our
consumption for now. In a couple of years it is likely to be 0%.

Do any of you realise what that will mean ?
Do any of you realise that all fuel would be gone in three weeks ?
Do any of you realise that all super markets would be empty in three weeks ?

That's right mikk. They believe anything their religious leader ToneLIAR instructs them to believe. If someone doesn't conform to "their" political correctness, dogma and ideology he is hated and loathed. Compassion, humanity, fairness and dignity mean nothing to these old radical rightie superannuation bludgers here, living in their comfortable homes made possible by their superannuation tax breaks (welfare). They type furiously day after day in outrage against anything that doesn't conform to "their" dogma.

My above post is in reply to mikk's first post on this topic..

I know what I have posted above is literally "Beyond the Pale".
It is however quite real. The Australian Government Dept of Minerals
and Energie's Australian Bureau of Infrastructure Transport and Environment
gave its report 117 to the government stating how risky our present
situation is and the NRMA has also in two reports repeated the same warnings.
Other bodies and academics have also warned of this situation and all
first the Labour government and the current government not only ignore
what they are told but actually attempted to suppress the ABITRE report.
They had it removed from the government web site and requested it be
removed from other web sites. It has been lodged on other web sites.

It really is that bad and if a situation lasted long enough it could
result in starvation in Australia.
That is why the government just cannot accept it.
They cannot admit that they could not manage it.

To ALL -

reading most of the posts here on the so-called "dole bludgers" makes me feel sickened and severely disappointed at how little our supposedly 'modern' culture/society for law and morality etc. seems to actually have comprehended of the philosophical writings on the issues of class, oppression, masters/slaves etc. by the 19th century economic theorists like Marx & Engels etc.

In fact I see little has changed from the ancient times where Roman elites would use 'lowly people' as cattle, commodities and for their private amusement regardless if it involved torture or death.

Classism to extremes is still alive, just as much as in the convict days of early Australia.

What really gets to me is the bizarre most severe and extraordinary blindness or dumbness or perhaps mere selfishness (a trait our leftists at least claim as given to have completely shed themselves of, being the self-professed equal rights fighters they at least say out loud [likely to convince themselves even that such MUST therefore be REAL - very religious in style] at how everyone FORGETS that the lower classes in Anglo Australia traditionally worked low-skilled jobs, jobs which the more powerful decision-making classes decided to 9without consultation or planning) steal away 100% of those jobs and give them to the cheaper slave markets of Asia (real good people to take advantage of oppression) which effectively left the lower classes with NO jobs traditionally worked by their ancestors for centuries and left to try to change their entire world and culture and get some educations that traditionally and culturally may be above their mindsets.

Providing those people with a way b.elow poverty level income is not even close to being proper compensation, they are now slaves to a system which has even began to turn on that pittance (dole).

. . . continued . . .

Ask yourselves this:
why did the same class of now "dole bludgers" ALL have jobs just a few generations ago?

I mean if these people are really just bludgers why did they ever work?

Perhaps it is largely because NO low-skilled jobs traditionally theirs exist anymore and that is something the leaders should address as their crime, NOT the crime of the victims - they are victims.

What sane person would really want to live on a measly 4-5 hundred dollars per fortnight for ever, having to pay rent and food etc.
Don't forget these classes do not have the luxury of inheriting mummy and daddy's 3rd and 4th properties like most middle class do.

Know this -

one day in the future (maybe decades maybe centuries) the average people will evolve enough to look back to this period and know that I am right, know that your classes are extreme bigots of all manners from racists to classists.

That's right - racists.

That is why your classes made SURE to put ALL the non-ANglo immigrants far away from your own suburbs, isn't that right/

Jottiikii – A great rave containing a lot of truth, then you blew it! You said:

“That is why your classes made SURE to put ALL the non-ANglo immigrants far away from your own suburbs, isn't that right/”

In doing so you lowered yourself to the level of those you rave about.

"Ask yourselves this:
why did the same class of now "dole bludgers" ALL have jobs just a few generations ago?" says the arrogant apologist for the bludgers Jottiikii.

The reason we did not have the huge bludging numbers we have today is because the handouts were much less. In many instances it was only soup kitchens, no money for anything.

My father, at 22 during the depression, was working on the land ring barking trees & burning off, for keep, use of a tent, tobacco, & 10 shillings a month. It was that or squat somewhere in a city, getting 2 soup kitchen meals a day, & nothing else. He could get an extras couple of bob a month by selling the tobacco.

We did not have unemployed expecting to live long term on welfare, in a public housing home, with a car & "rights".

Even 40 years ago unemployed could not rent somewhere to live comfortable from their handout, so they took a job, any job.

I guess some twits are too young to know, & too arrogant to learn.

Jottiikii, you'll only get personal abuse from the mere "handful" of far righties on this forum, as evidenced from the 2 abusive replies you've already had.

It's pointless coming here for debate .... all you'll get in return is personal abuse (just look at Hasbeen's sad reply to your 2 posts). You would be better of finding another forum that hosts reasoned debate.

Hasbeen is one of the major personal abusers on this forum.

.....To put it bluntly, they want to work. But the bosses don’t want them. That's just the point Jottiikii, they didn't as this rout has being going on for decades. You have to remember, this thread is about 'dole bludgers' ruining the lives of many genuine job seekers you know, the ones who are grateful for the tax payer funded assistance they receive.

However, if one chooses to waste their dole in the pub, or on gigs or pokies, then not be fit for work, then they are by the very definition, 'dole bludger's.

Now if we followed your rule, of not retraining ones self, well, perhaps we wouldn't have invented the wheel.

If a person can be trained for one skill, they can be trained for many, but first they must want to. That's why we may see the earning or learning change. A change for the better I say.

Nhoj oh dear!

Rehctub wrote, "if one chooses to waste their dole in the pub, or on gigs or pokies, then not be fit for work,then they are by the very definition, dole bludgers".

Rehctub, you need to prove you wrote that statement not out of biased, blind "ideological political correctness" but based it on empirical fact. So, answer the following ....

(1)Name the people who "waste their dole specifically on polkies/gigs/pub for the specific purpose of not being fit for work". Name them, one by one .... give first names and surnames. Let's see how long your list is.

Yep, let's see if you can back up your "specific" claim with "specific" empirical fact via "specific" lists of names.

< He could get an extras couple of bob a month by selling the tobacco. >

How many rules and regulations were around back then, Hasbeen, that prevented people from actually working in some kind of fashion to make an extra buck?

That's right, none!

How many rules are there now, Hasbeen, preventing people from making an extra buck without obtaining a thousand signed certificates allowing them to work? Or paying some extortionist twenty grand a year for insurance in case they break something.

Hell, a lot of folks now won't even let a kid mow lawns if he hasn't got a 2 million public liability insurance! That lawnmower might eat their poodle!

It's all good and well to say people actually got off their arses and did stuff to look after them selves in years gone by. But they're not allowed to any more. Consumers always demanding .gov protect their miserable arses and insurance companies and trade groups lobbying .gov to protect theirs!

A lot of dole bludgers are only doing what the system demands them to do, bludge, they can't afford anything else!

I think you missed the point there RawMustard. Part of his pay was a couple of ounces of tobacco a week. He sold that to some of the others on the same deal, for whom 2 ounces was not enough.

As they would also have been getting the same 10 bob a month, I doubt this earned much, & could hardly have been called a business.

However I understand what you mean. I had a wholesale nursery, growing advanced plants for the landscape trade. Some of my customers would occasionally call to look at something, or to pick up a batch of plants they needed for a current job.

Some "B" grade twit in the council accused me with running a retail nursery without the necessary approvals, & threatened all sorts of penalties.

They really do want to make it hard for anyone where ever they can.

Nhoj, of cause I domt have first names and surnames, even if I did, this world of political correctness would see me sued for privacy breaches.

One such family I used to see regally, not my colour, used to frequent the pub daily, at least for about three days per week. Welfare comes in many forms when you have a lot of kids, so it was weekly.

In fact, I was down the shops the other day and guess what, there they were some three years later.

If you don't think it happens you need to get out more.

But I guess with those lot it's simply accepted, isn't it!

It's been a joke for decades and still still is today, but their days are numbered. Well, perhaps not theirs!

Rehctub, so for all your ideological grandstanding with your demonisation of Newstart recipients, you can identify *ONE* family who "in your opinion" are bludgers ..... just ONE family you know of out of 22 MILLION people in Australia.

AAAAAAAAAAND .... I see you didn't miss the opportunity to point out they are not "white" like you. You are an anti immigration racist through and through.

And I notice in another post you also state you are doing it "tough" on a *ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLAR* income (no doubt a superannuation pension, as you are retired, with all the required middles class welfare ... oops I mean TAX BREAKS). Oh you poor little, hard done by petal. Life must be so tough for you, while those wicked dole bludgers live it up on $252 a week. Ha ha ha.

Paul 1405
You're right of course - coal production since 1814 has vastly increased due to technology. However, so has demand for it through increased world population needs. Also, despite new technologies, so have wages in this country for those in that industry. Am I missing a point you're trying to make?
You must also know that to use Ethiopia as an example again does not compute. They were an agrarian society which due to many factors was virtually destroyed, there is still conflict with Eritrea, they have few natural resources, and they cannot be compared with this country in any way except maybe that they also have to cope with drought. Oh, and we are fortunate that we have in place a formula to cushion those not working too, including those in genuine need as well as dole bludgers.
This does not alter my point that we are uncompetitive on the world stage because of our high wage structure. To further upset you, it is my understanding that for every month worked in the U.S., should you become unemployed you're entitled to the equivalent pay for the same number of months when unemployed. {I understand that has recently been capped since the number of unemployed has risen dramatically over there.} After that the payment becomes standard 'dole' money, and food stamps are issued. This means that in theory it ensures a person doesn't go hungry if they use their stamps wisely.
This gives youth who have never worked since leaving school an incentive to work and build up what I guess you would call 'equity' should they become unemployed in the future, and an incentive to present themselves well at interviews. Sounds to me like a better system than ours to encourage youth to seek work.

Producer,

first, you totally misunderstood my point in making that accusation, many of my other posts provide full context.

I do think that the wealthier white classes in Australia are very racist, classist etc. whether right or left. Actually in many ways the extreme left are the biggest bigots and racists, as they constantly patronise coloured people as if they think all non-whites are somehow braindamaged etc.

What other viable reasons are there for –
(a) wealthier white classes have the power and ability to have decided to implement the massive immigration changes over the last 60 years;
(b) wealthier white classes must have deliberately set-up the whole procedure so that 99% of non-western immigrants will end up settling in and living long term in areas where they themse;lves traditional do not reside – namely the suburbs where the working class live.

How is such a move not racist, classist and many other things?

I see the same exclusionist attitudes in politics, media, business, entertainment where the 99% majority is filled by white middle class or wealthy Anglos and sometimes other Europeans. This is despite the fact that these days more than 50% of the nation is not white or Anglo. Where is their presence?

I presume most of you all here did not read between the lines of what
I wrote a few days ago about our energy risk and problem.
The dole bludgers, and yes there are a lot of them about, as you can
see for yourself, if your prejudices do not blind you, will just have
to survive without any entitlements.

One way or another the old age pensioners also will have to do what they
can do in what will become local community efforts.
The trend has already started by the building of the Transition Town Movement.
There are several already in Australia and hundreds around the world.
There is another movement that I have only just heard about and this
movement sets up to repair all sorts of appliances, furniture, things
that would otherwise be thrown away. They are already in many countries.

The community garden movement is another there are two near where I live.
They mainly concentrate on vegetables etc.

So you can see that when the crunch comes, the dole bludger will get short shrift if they do not contribute.

It sounds very sustenance living but while we keep some features of
our industrial economy we will be relient on community much more.

Hasbeen,

I am not an apologist for “dole bludgers”, I merely dislike unequal treatment and oppression - or masters and slaves societies.

. . . . and talk about getting one’s facts correct . . . .

. . . . ask anyone who lived in 1950-70 and/or other experts etc. this:

1) in 1950-60 just around the beginning of the massive economic-political reshaping by increasing the population by 20 fold and by making [as today it is] the nation with a majority of workers from cultures that may have people more willing to accept worse conditions [perhaps some businesses hoped], was the average price of land and houses 100 times lower than today?
answer will be definte YES.

Now, the reasons are because we had way less people competing to buy land etc.

2) in 1950-60 many like Has been somehow have the gravely ill-informed belief that people got jobs more often [even the poor] because less welfare existed. But again ask any person from that time and like my grandparents told me often – jobs were everywhere such that people could quit one on 1 day and then get another the next day. Also as some did note here, almost NO short training/certificate courses were required so access was easier.
Most of all though is that simply the jobs were there back then, the low-skilled, factory jobs that now all exclusively exist in Asia.
My grandparents on both sides managed to have mostly one worker [male] in a low-skilled job and still they had kids and managed to buy a house/land by age 35.

I am quite certain that 99% people who mock some as ‘dole bludgers’ themselves have not come from the lower classes that copt full brint of the national changes. The wealthier traditionally professional classes did not lose anything they were used to in the 5 decades of change – only the poorer people did, they lost their entire traditional working base and also on top of that they lost the possibility to be able to have a family and buy a house.

Nhoj, difference is, my money is 'earned' not gifted, so I can do with it what I choose.

Furthermore, as one of those who actually pays more in tax than I draw, I don't see it as being unreasonable when wanting my tax dollars to be spent on more important needs, especially when kids are often the big losers with welfare waste.

Jotiiki, some of the tings you said are correct but others are way off.
First the major expansion that occurred in those years was pumped
along by cheap energy and the low cost of land & houses ended because
government forced lending institutions to lend on both incomes.
This enabled developers to push up prices to match the new level of
money in the market.
It is not true that formal qualification were not needed. The system
was more rigid on qualification then than it is now.
It is true however that you could quit one job today and have another
tomorrow. I did that twice actually, but you really had to have qualifications
and experience to achieve that.

You said;
99% people who mock some as ‘dole bludgers’ themselves have not come from the lower classes

The people who have the greatest anger to the dole bludgers are the
lower paid workers who object to their taxes going to the bludgers.
I suspect that you have never worked among them.

Jotiki,

Jobs have been disappearing ever since the copper, then bronze, then steel axe replaced the stone axe, certainly since the mechanical plough replaced horse and bullock teams. So what did people usually do in that situation ? They used to look for other jobs, perhaps unconsciously up-skilling, but seeking work wherever it sprung up.

Victims ? Hardly. When sensible people see a bull coming, they get out of the way. You might be used only to horses for transport but when you see a train coming, you get on it. Nobody, NOBODY, has to be a victim, locked into some time-honoured means of labour.

When I went fruit-picking forty-odd years ago, the local employment bloke was enforcing the policy that nobody got unemployment benefits if there were jobs available in the district. Sounded fine to me then, and it sounds fine to me now.

Yes, bludgers will always be with us. If they are able-bodied, that's their problem, nobody else's.

Joe

Loudmouth,

you are correct to note that over time as society and technology evolves so do the types of jobs and education required.

And like everyone else the poor peoples of Anglo Australia (convicts who built the nation) throughout time (even back in Britain) also adapted to changes like that as did everyone.

This is not even remotely comparable to the massive unprecedented changes in Australia since 1950 that has led to this mass unemployment.

In historical term it was basically overnight that the entire labour force classes went from having jobs abundant to get to having 80% of those jobs deleted from their life (given to Asia) and left with no awareness of why any of this was happening.

Now the only way is to retrain or to get certificates for knowledge they already had and (in the past) used to able to work anyway without certificates.

Why didn't the world of work and types of jobs in the wealthier classes change at all during this upheaval - why only the lower class world?

Jottiikii – By default as soon as you mention race whether it be positive, negative or neutral the statement becomes racial. I the case of this forum the thread will veer off into the normal predictable ho hum territory. You played that game.

There are only two classes and they are producers and parasites. This planet will only mend when the makers are rewarded more than the takers.

Humans farming humans is destroying not only this country but the planet!

Producer,
If you have not read 'Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand I suggest you do. It is all about the 'makers' being rewarded more than the 'takers'

Hasbeen- You talked about a time when jobs were a dime a dozen, a time of wanderers going from job to job, jacks of all trades, hard work admittedly but there was plenty of it ! Times have changed,most of those jobs have gone, long time since I have seen a sign saying "Laborers needed apply within" Its now the 21st century and jobs are no longer a dime a dozen. So why do you even try to compare today with yesteryear ! No one really had an excuse to be unemployed during the times you are talking about(Which was a very limited short period of time, by the way) today however is a total different story ! It appears you have forgotten much !

Sorry Bazz and Loudmouth, I think Jottiikii is right!

So many unskilled and semi-skilled jobs have gone since the 50's. Factory jobs - to overseas or automation. Railway jobs - to 'rationalisation', to automation, and to track building and maintenance machinery. Roads jobs, demolition and construction, concreting, bricklaying, and waterfront/stevedore jobs - due to automation, pre-fabrication and use of heavy equipment. Farming and horticultural - replaced by machinery, bigger tractors and implements in broadacre farming, sugarcane and grape harvesting, and in all manner of fruit and vegetable growing and handling.
And what about mail sorting, handling and delivery?
Practically nowhere has been immune from the 'knife' and the profit-motive.

Remember when you could ring directory information, for free, and speak to a nice Aussie lass?
Or ring just about any large organisation and talk to someone in your State capital?

On housing: My parents bought a house in Sydney in 1966 for $35,000, which sold in 1990 for $1million, and was on the market in 2011 for $4million.

I did buy my first house, in Sydney, when I was just over 35, in 1981, for $85,000 (on a 70% mortgage), and I venture that same house would probably be worth $850,000 now.

Times definitely have changed, and not all of it for the better.

Since finishing high school and uni I have worked all my life, save for 6 months after I finished Nasho's in '67, and make no apologies for what I have achieved for myself.

So, the likes of Nhoj (No-Hoper On Jungle-juice) gets right up my nose with his raving about ideology, racism, Whitey's, Anglo's and middle-class welfare. The likes of Nhoj wouldn't know what it's like to work, and certainly would have no appreciation of the sacrifices, the blood, sweat and 'knocks' it has taken to make this country what it is.
If Nhoj had his way, Oz would be opening the front door to every no-hoper from every third-world looney-tunes-religious hell-hole, just to take the 'Aussie' down 'a peg or two'.
An outright troublemaker of the first order.

No Saltpetre, I agree lots of jobs have gone either overseas or to
automation and earth moving machinery.

Manufacturing went overseas also, but the good news is that it is
starting to trickle back. This is the crux of what I have been trying
to jam into everyones' head; globalisation is ending and everything
will become local.
Globalisation is ending, for two reasons, higher wages in Asia with
higher energy costs everywhere. The poor state of the world economy is
a direct result of a five times increase in energy costs in 10 years.

If you have noticed the economists are arguing about whether to pump
money into the economy or to cut expenditure dramatically.
They are having that argument because only a handful of economists
understand that growth and production of everything depends on energy not money !

Saltpetre, just reread your post.

I and some workmates were working with a Dutch engineer on a project
and in a conversation we remarked that Australians did not like work
and would prefer the beach.
Oh no he said, Australians are very hard workers, how else could you
have built a country like this in under 200 years !

I have always remembered that when I hear that sort of criticism.

More than half a million young people may require some form of emergency assistance in the next four years because of the budget's planned changes to unemployment benefits.

The Department of Social Services has told a parliamentary committee the budget includes almost $230 million to help people with food, utility bills and other essential services.

The Greens say it proves the Government knows it will force more young people into destitution by making them wait up to six months before getting the dole if they are not in accredited training.

The move, one of the most controversial in the budget, is being badged by the Government as an "earn or learn" initiative. It is assuming there will be a 30 per cent increase in applications for student support.

But social service groups are worried it will force more vulnerable people into poverty.

Serena Wilson from the Department of Social Services has told a Senate Estimates hearing the Government is budgeting for an increase in emergency relief.

"[There is] $229.6 million over four years and the purpose of that funding is to provide assistance to people who need assistance with food, utility bills, those sorts of things.

"So it's about essential, essential needs and we've estimated that around 550,000 job seekers would access that assistance."

Chrisgaff1000 – on the contrary, “Atlas Shrugged” is a story where the parasite controls production. It is a classic example of human taker farming human makers. The main characters like Rinehart, Pratt, Packer, Glasenburg, Forrest and Lowy personally produce nothing. They are parasites that receive a disproportionate share of this country’s (and global) wealth.

This is not to say they don’t spend a lot of their time taking this wealth or employing other parasites to take it on their behalf. This is to say there are a lot of makers that spend their time, making the wealth that these parasites take, that deserve a greater proportional share.

The problems that afflict this country are not made by the so called dole bludger; it is a consequence of to many parasites taking a disproportionate share of the productive wealth.

Rewarding parasites disproportionately results in inflation, higher cost and lower productivity.

579 I should damn well hope that those receiving the dole are living in poverty.

Unemployment benefits as you seem to fail to understand, are not meant to be an alternate way of living. They are meant to tide someone over while they look for a job to support their lifestyle.

This is the problem today. Too many see bludging on the taxpayer as an acceptable way of life, & far too many bleeding hearts want the level of support increased so it is a lifestyle.

I personally would like to see the dole at 50% higher initially, reducing weekly to 50% less after 6 or 12 months. This would help short term unemployed to avoid losing everything by failing to meet mortgage & hire purchase loans, but would make finding a job more pressing, just as it should be.

Producer you have that all ass up.

If it weren't for the Rineharts of this world, who could live graciously on their wealth, but go out & risk it all developing new projects, there would be no $200,000 a year jobs for truck drivers, or the tax money to pay the genuine unemployed, or the bludger.

It is such a pity that so many don't know how to say thanks, or add 2+2, & come up with an answer other than not enough.

Hasbeen – Sorry it is you who has it the wrong way. Let focus on Gina:

What did Gina PERSONALLY produce, make, and construct to have control the productive wealth she controls?

As a proportion of wealth she has taken and controls she pays only a very small percentage of that wealth in tax, unlike the heavily taxed workers who make the wealth she takes. She is the one that bludges on the producers and tax payers of this country as well as others on the planet.

Last time I looked she didn’t even have a productive working mine.

As for $200,000 a year truck drivers, I believe she intends to use remote control trucks = No drivers. That’s very gracious of her isn’t it Hasbeen?

Hasbeen you should stop breathing methane, remove your head from that dark place and consider the possibility you, like me get it wrong somtimes!

Centrelink’s reported figures on compliance reviews don’t support any inferences on the rate of dole-bludging. All they show is that Centrelink’s ‘non-compliant’ clients are in the minority. The figures on fraud investigations and prosecutions are much more revealing.

First, they suggest very strongly that the number of people who deliberately cheat the welfare system is not merely a small proportion of Centrelink clients it’s a positively a miniscule percentage of the total number of Centrelink clients. They also suggests that there aren’t too many more of them out there who could be caught and prosecuted if Centrelink did more investigations; at most you can expect Centrelink’s fraud investigations to produce between ~2700 and ~3500 prosecutions each year. This will save somewhere between $100m and $150m off welfare spending – consistently less than 1% of the total welfare budget.

That’s a lot of – uncosted – bureaucratic effort for very little result. As noted above the ANAO found that it’s impossible to say whether the ‘Support the System that Supports You’ campaign delivered value for money by saving more off the welfare budget than it cost to run the advertising and provide the administrative support.

Producer,
Sorry you see it that way. I always thought it was case of management going on strike and the workers (eventually) begging them to come back and crank up industry again.
So you obviously believe that a persons intellectuality and physical capacity to invent, produce and supply is the property of everybody else and he should 'share' it.
Crappola. Might has always been right.

Dear Hasbeen,

<<Unemployment benefits as you seem to fail to understand, are not meant to be an alternate way of living. They are meant to tide someone over while they look for a job to support their lifestyle.>>

True, but this can be changed. The name of that money should probably be changed as well to reflect this change of attitude.

<<Too many see bludging on the taxpayer as an acceptable way of life>>

I don't find it acceptable myself, so I don't live that way.
However, it's a fact that others do find it acceptable, who might as well find worse lifestyles acceptable, such as crime or begging in the streets.

<<& far too many bleeding hearts want the level of support increased so it is a lifestyle.>>

I don't take credit for the heart-stuff, but otherwise I am with them for the following reasons:

1) Dole-lifestyle is better than crime-lifestyle. When people are hungry, they will end up eating this way or the other. Fortifying our homes would cost more. In fact, the poorest workers that live in poor areas and cannot afford to fortify their homes and hire armed guards to patrol their streets, will be the first victims, so they too would prefer to stay home rather than return at the end of the work-day to find it empty. Jailing people is even more expensive for the tax-payer.

2) Dole-lifestyle is better than cheating. Those who don't want to work - don't work, but in between they play cat-and-mouse with the authorities, wasting the time and resources of government (at our expense), employers and doctors.

3) Dole-lifestyle is better than begging. If you've been in countries where dole is not available, you would know the feeling when they rattle tin cans at you when you stop at the lights, or knock on your door at home. It certainly doesn't feel safe, nor comfortable.

4) Dole-lifestyle is better than the busy-lifestyle of those who get paid and are kept busy producing nothing of real value and often even vain products and services of a negative value.

(continued...)

(...continued)

5) Dole-lifestyle is better than slavery-lifestyle, where people need to work against their will and often against their conscience, just to keep their children's stomachs half-full.

6) Those willing to live frugally, thus have only a minimal impact on the environment, should be encouraged. Why force even more people to commute daily to the city and back, causing traffic-jams and wasting our money (including tax-payer money) on dedicating roads, office-buildings, air-conditioned rooms and heaps of electronic gadgets for their use?

7) With less people offering work, those who genuinely want employment get more bargaining power. Apart from pay-conditions, this more-importantly includes the ability to refuse unethical chores.

8) Many good things, if not most, come in informal ways. While it is probably impossible in this dark age and the foreseeable future to completely severe the stressful link between contribution and money, easing it a bit will increase informal productivity and all acts of free kindness.

9) I rather live in a relaxed society than in a rat-race.

10) Many who don't work, actually are unable or have a limited capacity to work. They may not be recognised as such, often not even by themselves, because they could work for a while but then get sick. Unemployment is often a way to avoid admitting one's limitations to oneself and/or to their loved-ones (nevertheless, those limitations do exist).

11) Peace of mind is a valuable asset!

Now of course I prefer that this not be at the tax-payer's expense and in an ideal situation indeed it wouldn't, but so long as our tax-money is given to others, each receiving 10-15 times more than dole-recipients, paying those others should be cut first.

Chrisgaff1000 – Might is always right?

I wonder if you would subscribe to that philosophy after being relieved of your wallet by a mighty thug.

I believe that the current system distributes our productive wealth in a disproportionate manner and is the root cause of the global dilemma.

If an inventor, invents, produces and supplies property that individual is entitled to 100% of the proceeds. The inventor is limited by his own ability and time, as a consequence so is his income.

If an inventor invents, 50 individuals produces, another 20 individual supplies material and another manages production of property they are all entitled to a portion of the proceeds. None should receive a disproportionate share; this is not to say the share should be equal either. The manager is not entitled to 40%.

The top 10% within our economy receive 40%, this is disproportionate and unfair. They are parasites and the real bludgers!

Yuyutsu & Producer, It really is frightening that there are people with your attitude in the country. It will not take too many with your ideas to destroy the society you depend on for your existence, but would destroy if you could.

These last few months of reading the opinions on here are softening my attitude to the Muslim religion & attitude. A Christian country will never treat the ne'er-do-well as firmly as it should, but they will.

Like the mobs of Rome, who destroyed their civilisation with demands for bread & circus, your attitudes destroy the foundations of ours.

Western civilisation is being eroded by the bleeding hearts, & the bludgers who use them to advance their demands.

To paraphrase another bloke, well may we say god save the queen, because nothing is likely to save the western culture.

Hasbeen wrote, "and nothing is likely to save the western culture".

Therein lies the basis of Hasbeen's ideological dogma/attitude to life ...... 100% RACISM.

Hasbeen is a racist/culturalist who feels threatened by difference. His version of "western culture" is a *white* dominated culture. Hasbeen considers black people to be a threat and to be inferior. He is part of a very tiny minority of radicalised Australians.

Hasbeen is a product of the Dark Ages. He still lives in the Dark ages.

Hasbeen will go to the grave that way, and nothing anybody says will ever change his mind

Producer

Are you suggesting that Inventors who invest their time, money and brains with the uncertainty they could lose it all [and sometimes unfortunately do] as easily as make money from their invention should not benefit most if it proves to be a success?

The small businessman who usually works much longer hours than his employees is also surely entitled to the major share of profits. He has taken the risks, and is responsible for making a success of his business to ensure his employees are paid regularly - often in a downturn taking out a loan to keep going.

I fail to see how you can call people like this parasites. If employees feel that isn't fair, they can always go out on their own and try to make a go of it themselves. I can play devil's advocate as I've been both employer and employee, and believe me, I had far less worries as the latter.

There are two sides to every coin my friend. You'd do well to look at and think about both sides before you attribute labels.

Worldwatcher, whilst I agree that the person who takes the initial financial risk deserves a greater share of the profits, that does NOT mean that the risk taker is not a "parasite". But capitalism takes that fair concept to extremes.

Why? Because the risk taker 100% relies on the people in the organisation to put his ideas into operation. Without them his ideas are nothing. He basically sucks their blood and gives them as miniscule a share of the profits that he can legally get away with. The only exception is a "one man band" business.

Capitalism encourages those at the top to be parasites, feeding off everyday workers. Capitalism at the "moment" is the best workable system that mankind has, but it's seriously flawed and will have only a limited lifespan. It will eventually be replaced by another "ism", and the replacement will itself be eventually replaced by yet another "ism" etc etc etc etc. Mankind will forever be searching for the perfect system. Guess what? It doesn't exist.

Hasbeen
Oh how I wish time travel to the past was a possibility! Maybe it would open their eyes for those younger members who haven't experienced real hardship.
Then maybe we wouldn't hear so many complaints from them.
My friend's mother came out as an orphan on a sailing ship,as did her future husband.
They brought up 2 children in a cardboard and scrounged tin dirt floor shack. He was a coal miner in the depression, and walked anything up to 40 MILES to look for work. She didn't have money to buy milk for her baby while he was gone, so an old lady from a local farm gave her a cow. Any excess milk was sold to pay the old lady back.
I've never forgotten her story, and at times when I've been tight for money I realise it has been nothing compared to that lady - who's husband died young from lung disease contracted when he was a miner.
With his income now gone she made sandwiches and cakes, stood outside the local cinema selling them, and finally opened a little tearoom and put both her children through private school.
I don't think there would have been anything like the dole way back then. Knowing her, she would have been too proud to take it anyway.

Dear Hasbeen,

Yes, your Western civilisation, or at least many aspects thereof which I find ugly and violent, are not my cup of tea and if I can I will use all available democratic tools to replace it.

You seem to believe that your culture owns this continent - but your ancestors only took it by force, they didn't create it and have no moral right to retain it.

I wouldn't however replace this culture with the even-worse Islamic Macho culture, but it seems that you would - which means that your hate of `ne'er-do-well`s is even greater than your love of your own people.

Sorry if you feel frightened - I may be breaking down your culture, but I am not going to hurt you or your family in any way or take away your freedom (as your Muslim friends probably would): I am simply claiming my own.

BTW, you seem to imply that me and Producer have attitudes in common: I think they are quite few. To begin with, he mentioned that he wants full employment: I disagree. I rather have a peaceful life where formal employment is only a necessary evil rather than the main theme of life. Let goodness and charity be the main theme of life and let employment be only for those who want to have comforts and luxuries beyond the basics.

Dear Nhoj,

Let's not divert this into a racial thing: it's all about culture.

<<Mankind will forever be searching for the perfect system. Guess what? It doesn't exist.>>

Great observation!

Materialism is based on a lie, hence it has no solution.

Yes worldwatcher, they haven't got a clue.

When I was 10, a few years after dad came back from the war, he & I lived in a tin shack. About 10 families all had them in our road, made out of flattened kerosene tins, while they built houses.

When we had enough house to live in, we could not get water tanks, it was another couple of years before they became radially available. When mum joined us I had to make sure I removed the frogs from the water I drew from the well. She could not have handled drinking it, had she known.

These clowns expect enough tax payers money to live better than we did. None of them would know what a days work was.

Nhoj, I don't like you or your type. Whatever you are I don't like it, if that makes me a racist so be it.

I don't like weasels either, although that is about the same thing as not liking you, so I must be a racist. Nah, that's unfair to the weasels.

Worldwatcher wrote, "I don't think there would have been anything like the dole back then".

Your friends mother, in the depression era (pre and post), would have been entitled to the following available welfare benefits back then:

(1) Commonwealth Maternity allowance (introduced in 1912)

(2) Widows pension (introduced in 1926

(3) Child Endowment (introduced in 1927 in NSW and Federally in 1941))

(4) If she was in Qld. she would receive support from the Unemployment Insurance Scheme (introduced in 1923)

(5) Funeral Benefits (introduced late 1930s)

(6) Commonwealth Unemployment Benefit (introduced in 1945)

(7) Commonwealth Sickness benefit (introduced in 1945)

(8) Invalid Pension (introduced in 1910)

(9) Old Age Pension for women at 60 years of age ( introduced in 1909)

(10) Pensioner medical Service... free medical and hospital treatment for all age pensioners (introduced in 1951)

As you can see, the population back then did *NOT* have to do it all for themselves. That's a folklore "myth", often perpetuated by far right wingers. Back then, the needy and more vulnerable people in our population were VERY well taken care of.

Dear Yuyutsu,

Such an idyllic lifestyle as you describe may only exist in heaven, for here on Earth everything which one may need, or like, has to be produced by someone.
In your idyllic scenario there would be no need for money, no 'dole', no taxation and no industry - as everyone would be living in a simple, subsistence, agrarian manner.

How many could be content with a simple one or two room abode, a vegetable garden and maybe a couple of goats, or sheep, or a cow, and a few chickens, ducks or geese. And, all would barter for anything else - like clothes and footwear.

You think I exaggerate? Just consider. You propose that a portion of the populace not work at all (unless they 'choose' to do so - ha, ha). So they need money, for they apparently have nothing to barter. Money which would be produced by someone else's labour and 'product'. But, what entitles them to that money, to their existence, if they are only willing to contribute when, and if, they choose?
Monks? Shamans? Spiritual Guides? For no-one else would be tolerated for very long by any society - Western, Eastern, black, white or brindled, industrial, agrarian or hunter-gatherer.

It is industry and the near-insatiable demand for more gadgets, refineries and play-toys (like the internet) which enables those garbage-dump families in India and elsewhere to be able to live.
And it is the demand for gadgets and 'things' which provides the wealth for the oil-producing states, and thereby enabling their populace to buy the food which they cannot produce for themselves.

Those who are capable of work, of producing something, have a responsibility to do so. Those who can, but choose not to, are the 'parasites' (unless they have an officially or generally accepted exception - perhaps because they are considered the new messiah?).
Parasites are usually something to be avoided, or exterminated - for the good of the individual and the society's health.
We cannot 'exterminate' the shirkers, the malingerers, but we do not have to 'love' them as our equal.

Dear Saltpetre,

Heaven and earth are two extremes - it doesn't need to be all black or white.

I am well aware that this dark age of ours is unsuitable for having heaven on earth, but some improvement can be made in the quality of life at the expense of the material standard of living. I am aware that there will still be demand for gadgets, but hopefully it will be curbed down a bit, less invasive than now.

People who do not charge money for what they do are not parasites - they simply do not fit in the Western paradigm and if they happen to be born therein, they suffer greatly as well as being unable to realise their full potential and to help others informally to the full extent.

The majority of people will still want more than the basics, at least most of the time, so they will likely engage in formal paid-employment and there will still be money, trade and taxation, but then they should also be able to alternate and take the time off without the anxiety about essential sustenance.

More importantly, as I mentioned, when one finds themselves in employment where unethical demands are made, or where the products/services they are asked to produce are of no true value, one should not be afraid to quit as their basics will be assured regardless. One who finds themselves in a situation like this, though they can work, has a responsibility to not do so. Everyone should be living up to their own ethical standards, high as they may be, rather than having to convince some tribunal of a lesser morality about their unethical situation.

(continued...)

(...continued)

Sorry, but I grew up with a mother who was exactly in that situation, where as a scientist, employed by a government body, she was ordered by her boss to fake the results of her experiments as well as to simultaneously report to several financing bodies at once as if she did the research exclusively just for them. It was devastating. She was broken. Every day after work she was sobbing for hours, but as a family we couldn't do without her salary. This should never have to happen again.

I am also currently aware of at least one person, working for government, who is being ordered by the whole corrupt echelon to change over from an excellent (and cheap) computer system to such an inferior (and expensive) system that will likely put lives at risk. They cannot do anything about it because they need the money to survive.

I am also aware of another mature-aged lady who was ordered by Centrelink to distribute junk mail for a supermarket, despite finding it as I do, highly unethical and harmful to others.

The most common reason for people not choosing to work, is that they cannot find a paying-job which they 1) can do; 2) can do well; 3) would not adversely affect their health; and 4) produces something which they sincerely believe is good.

Yes, Monks, Shamans and Spiritual Guides are a good place to start: Western society is especially cruel for those, making incompatible demands, hence they don't come here - perhaps they concentrate in the Himalayas instead, and our society is spiritually poorer as a result.

DOES THIS REMIND YOU OF ANYONE?

Michael Palin: Ahh.. Very passable, this, very passable.

Graham Chapman: Nothing like a good glass of Chateau de Chassilier wine, ay Gessiah?

Terry Gilliam: You're right there Obediah.

Eric Idle: Who'd a thought thirty years ago we'd all be sittin' here drinking Chateau de Chassilier wine?

MP: Aye. In them days, we'd a' been glad to have the price of a cup o' tea.

GC: A cup ' COLD tea.

EI: Without milk or sugar.

TG: OR tea!

MP: In a filthy, cracked cup.

EI: We never used to have a cup. We used to have to drink out of a rolled up newspaper.

GC: The best WE could manage was to suck on a piece of damp cloth.

TG: But you know, we were happy in those days, though we were poor.

MP: Aye. BECAUSE we were poor. My old Dad used to say to me, "Money doesn't buy you happiness."

EI: 'E was right. I was happier then and I had NOTHIN'. We used to live in this tiiiny old house, with greaaaaat big holes in the roof.

GC: House? You were lucky to have a HOUSE! We used to live in one room, all hundred and twenty-six of us, no furniture. Half the floor was missing; we were all huddled together in one corner for fear of FALLING!

TG: You were lucky to have a ROOM! *We* used to have to live in a corridor!

MP: Ohhhh we used to DREAM of livin' in a corridor! Woulda' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woken up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House!? Hmph.

EI: Well when I say "house" it was only a hole in the ground covered by a piece of tarpolin, but it was a house to US.

GC: We were evicted from *our* hole in the ground; we had to go and live in a lake!

Cont.

Cont.

TG: You were lucky to have a LAKE! There were a hundred and sixty of us living in a small shoebox in the middle of the road.

MP: Cardboard box?

TG: Aye.

MP: You were lucky. We lived for three months in a brown paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six o'clock in the morning, clean the bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down mill for fourteen hours a day week in-week out. When we got home, out Dad would thrash us to sleep with his belt!

GC: Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at three o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of hot gravel, go to work at the mill every day for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would beat us around the head and neck with a broken bottle, if we were LUCKY!

TG: Well we had it tough. We used to have to get up out of the shoebox at twelve o'clock at night, and LICK the road clean with our tongues. We had half a handful of freezing cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at the mill for fourpence every six years, and when we got home, our Dad would slice us in two with a bread knife.

EI: Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, (pause for laughter), eat a lump of cold poison, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing "Hallelujah."

MP: But you try and tell the young people today that... and they won't believe ya'.

ALL: Nope, nope..

Careful there Nhoj, your ignorance is showing again.

All those handouts you mention were a pittance, designed to help those who had family to depend on for accommodation. There was never any real consideration that the recipients could actually live independently on them.

Yes we had child endowment, in the early 50s if you saved it for a year it still wouldn't buy a pair of shoes. That is probably why we all went to school barefoot.

Yuyutsu no amount of rationalizing can ever justify anyone making a conscious decision to live off the labor of others.

Nhoj

A couple of points for you. First, you didn't go back far enough with your figures. None of this existed in the late 1800's.
Secondly, the generation to which I referred were too proud to ask for handouts even had they been available. Rather, the communities helped each other when they perceived the need.
You constantly castigate people who put forward arguments which don't fit your own perceptions. By your definition they must always be from 'the right'.
I seem to have missed any of your posts which see something good in our present system, but you are very liberal with your criticisms. I find such negativity appalling and completely unproductive.

My suggestion to anyone who is so vehemently opposed to life here under either Labour or Liberals rule is to leave for perceived finer pastures.

I have lived and worked in various other countries [including 1 communist one], so trust me when I say that by comparison Australia is way out on top - not perfect, but neither is anywhere else on earth.
cont'd

Dear Hasbeen,

<<Yuyutsu no amount of rationalizing can ever justify anyone making a conscious decision to live off the labor of others.>>

First tell this to the millions of "public-servants" (and external contractors, including universities and doctors) and politicians (and their families) that live extravagantly off our labour.

Second tell this to the millions of moms and dads who are paid in many ways to bring more babies, off our labour.

Dole-recipients should be the last to be told, because the amount they receive to "live off" is negligible relative to the top two groups and hardly allows them to live.

By the time the first two groups are told, there will hopefully develop a culture of voluntarism and charity to replace the mandatory oppression of government. Once that happens, dole-recipients can also move to this voluntary, non-coercive system.

I do hope that you have nothing against voluntary charitable exchange, or do you?

The older members on this forum have been there, done that, and experienced good times and bad in their lives. I think they deserve respect for their experiences and the views they share.

I am dismayed that you cast aspersions on them. My generation valued their stories and their insights - acknowledging that we were too young to have accumulated that ourselves, and how lucky we are by comparison.

Instead of expending fruitless energy putting people down, how about you find some positives to explore and share. Maybe then you'll be taken seriously.

I don't wish to offend you, but if you re-read your posts I think you'll recognise that you present as an angry young person with nothing but acrimony in your heart, which is why I usually prefer to ignore your posts. However, I'm hoping you can show us a better side too. Digest older forum member's experiences without immediately seeing how you can tear them down - in my case by producing [albeit interesting if correct] figures not relevant to the correct time period, so for you it was time wasted collating them in your effort to prove my friend's mother didn't have to do it so hard. Believe me - she did!

Hasbeen is an obvious example of someone who has had his fair share of tough times, yet survived them. Yes, he's rather cynical as a result, but I'd say with good reason when some young turks attack him, even though he makes some very valid points.

Worldwatcher – As a grandfather bordering on great, I say age entitles you to nothing.

Respect is given and only the arrogant expect it.

Life experience does not necessarily buy the aged any credibility, nor can it be used as an excuse.

The current generation is a direct consequence of the older generation’s inability to address reality and embrace change.

The son is not responsible for the mistakes of the father (or grandfather).

The blind political idolism, greed, racism, misogyny that is displayed by some contributors astounds me.

Dear Producer,

It would be interesting to know from where you have gained your amazing insight and wisdom - whereby you can feel so free to label so many with such venom, as in your following:

>The blind political idolism, greed, racism, misogyny that is displayed by some contributors astounds me.<

I take it you have no blind-spot, no niggling ideology, no wish for something better (want, need, and not necessarily 'greed'), and no prejudice of any kind?

Someone so perfect as yourself should surely have some argument to put forward for your 'beliefs'?
For, thus far, belief is all you have conveyed.
(As well as a profound disenchantment with our present form of existence.)

Signed: From an aged and obviously age-deranged, misled, unwise, bigoted, and obviously therefore totally super-superfluous individual.

Producer,

You forgot the heat and snakes. I remember apricot-picking in 46 degrees, all of us huddling under the trees and picking only the low fruit, which was boiling inside anyway.

And sitting in the pickers' quarters at our half-hour lunch-break while a young brown snake slid up to the door, the only door, four feet away. We sat there quietly, he looked around and went on his way, so we got back to our vegemite sandwiches.

Great days ! What kids miss out on now, ay ?

Saltpetre – I would be interested to know what you base your last post on. I challenge you to quote anything I have posted in context, which supports your assertions? Just go to “users” and click on “producer”. It’s all there!

You don’t even have to go that far back. Stuff I posted earlier in this thread will give you an insight to my values. You could have a go at critiquing them if you have the ticker.

I participate in this forum when I can to spar intellectually about concepts and ideas. I am open to modifying my position, but first you would have to present a convincing argument.

Loudmouth – I assume you are referring to the text Python skit I posted earlier. I do agree the kids of today do miss out on so much, but they are not aware of it.

A lot of contributors to this forum suffer from the same affliction, complete ignorance to anything outside their world. They don’t know what their missing out on or want to know.

Baaz,

seriously?

Take a look at the current figures for India in economy, wealth and poverty.

Whilst the Indian economy has increased lots on last decade pr so almost NONE has gone trickling down to the 400-500 milion poorest who do most of the physical work.

Bigger economy and more productivity does NOT amount to [necessarily] better "living standards" for the poor in a given nation.

India and China should be enough for anyone to show this.

Producer

Beg to differ. To assume one must be arrogant if they expect respect is ridiculous.
Many cultures have great respect for their aged, even if it is fast fading here. There are some aspects of the past it would be nice to hang on to, and which have been re-introduced in for example our supermarkets. A small thing like a checkout operator asking how are you today? Observe the people's faces. How can they be rude when they are addressed civilly and with respect? Costs nothing, but promotes a pleasant exchange.

Respect comes in many forms. For instance I respect you have a different point of view than mine. I respect the deeds done by so many selfless people in this world. And of course I respect the fact that some people don't want to work, and others do, and especially respect the young man on you tube who died from cancer and shared his views with the world until he could no longer write.

This one word can be used in so many contexts. As a respectful person I don't feel it is arrogant to expect it to be reciprocated, and maybe we would have more harmony in this world if we did respect each other's differences, and didn't try to change them to one's own way of thinking.

Worldwatcher,

"Hasbeen is an obvious example of someone who has had his fair share of tough times, yet survived them. Yes, he's rather cynical as a result, but I'd say with good reason when some young turks attack him, even though he makes some very valid points."

Hasbeen is amongst one of the rudest, insulting and most dismissive posters on this forum - "if he happens to disagree with you".

Yes, he can be jolly and jovial if he's on your side, but woe betide he holds an opposing view or if he's addressing someone from the left. In that case they get it with both barrels, usually in the rudest form available.

I'm constantly reminded that those of a conservative ideology can usually dish it out, and the minute they are challenged, jump on the "show some respect" bandwagon.

Christopher Pyne is a good example. He's constantly snarling and bagging the Opposition, even resorting to calling Shorten a certain something (widely heard and reported) over the dispatch box in Parliament....and then, when it suits his agenda, donning his rhetorical tuxedo and telling fellow Members they should be "Gentlemen".

Thank you Poirot, high praise indeed, from one of the most abrasive of OLOs posters.

Jottiikii, it must be nice to be so young. If you are not young, why would you be unaware that Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong among others have all lifted their population from poverty to wealth, many to now be well above Oz, by growing their economy.

That china & India are slower is to be expected. They started later, with even lower wealth distribution, & will obviously take longer to achieve much in such huge populations, It is happening in areas more favored for industrial development, but may slow as the US redevelops their industry, & perhaps even the Mediterranean countries can get back on track.

Go back a little further, & you must see it was only the bigger economy generated by the industrial revolution that lifted the Poms out of poverty.

Thank you worldwatcher, but I don't consider I had particularly tough times, they were what we all had. When most of the people you see daily also live in a tin shed, it is normal, not tough.

Most of those people would today probably buy a home, with a huge loan. The loans were not available then, & neither were the building materials to finish our houses.

It was only just before we moved that we finally had running water. This was not poverty, but that pressure pumps did not exist, & neither love nor money could acquire a water tank, or the materials to build a stand to give gravity feed water.

Actually I had a fantastic childhood, building your own house can be fun, & gives you the feeling that you can do anything, if you want to enough.

Worldwatcher – With all due respect, respect can only be given, it cannot be bought, expected or demanded.

I still say it is arrogant and even narcissistic for an individual to expect or to demand it. Age, office, past deeds or creed does not automatically bestow respect on an individual. Being respectful is giving respect and as a consequence one might expect it back in return, but again it is up to the giver to give it.

I think you are getting courtesy confused with respect. It is possible to be courteous to someone you do not respect. I don’t know if you remember the “courtesy is contagious” campaign?

It is possible to respect the deed or the opinion of an individual yet not respect the individual. This however has nothing to do with an individual’s automatic right, demand or expectation of personal respect.

I can respect differences providing those differences do not in any way impact in a negative way on an individual or their rights. I do not respect religion for example; however I do respect the right of an individual to practice a religion providing it does not impact in a negative way on any individual or their rights. I will rile against pedophiles and child marriages and will not respect the practice because it is removed from me and different.

I would like to see the abolition of all pensions and have them replaced by a “universal basic income” in return for meaningful work as detailed in my first post on this thread.

Every working Australian deserves the dignity and respect that work gives.

Hasbeen

You are representative of many of the older generation with whom I've spoken. Strange but true - so many of them, who lived in what today's society would see as abject poverty, recall their childhoods as very happy. As you have said, for them it was nothing unusual, as their neighbours and friends were also financially poor. Why then do you suppose our youth aren't as happy when they have such better? lives.

So many times I hear the same refrain "my life is so boring".

Could it be that with so many parents both working, those parents do not have enough time or energy left to give their kids direction and stimulus?

For me it's a catch 22. On the one hand I firmly believe in women's attempt for equality, yet on the other hand feel children need the comfort of seeing their mother when they get home from school. The first thing myself and my siblings did when we got home from school was call out to Mum that we were home, and hungry. My mother always had fresh baked goodies for us, and her presence was our reassurance that all was well in our world.
She returned to the workforce after the 4 kids left the nest and gained new skills and friends. I never thought to ask her when she was alive if she would have preferred it any other way, and now it's too late

I also believe in progress, and delight in hearing news of new discoveries, but this is tempered by the awareness that in the process of gaining so much, we have also lost much too. Such is life - win a little, lose a little.

Producer

Courtesy, respect -similar, but I don't confuse them. I confess, I must be arrogant, because I do expect reciprocal respect, and usually get it. Sure the other party has a right not to do it, which also doesn't faze me. I live by my rules and don't expect other people to have the same values.

Serial dole bludgers are parasites my tax dollar supports, but I must respect their right to choose that path, although it doesn't make me at all happy, and I certainly do not respect them as people, and begrudge them every one of my hard earned dollar they get, together with the subsidised housing as well.

23,000 in Sydney alone have fessed up that they have rorted a system set up to help the less fortunate members of our society.

Worldwatcher

I remember as a kid I didn’t at the time think my life was that flash. It is only with the passage of time, that we can look back and appreciate it.

I did think to ask my mother and she would have swapped with the old man in an instant.

Have we progressed? The rich get richer, the poor get poorer and there are more of them. The planet is heating yet we continue to burn fossil fuels.

No worries mate, we will be long gone.

We have won a lot, they will lose the lot!

Worldwatcher

The majority of individuals on the dole wants to work but can’t get work and the dignity that come with it. Are they bludgers?

What about the parasites that are employed, that don’t earn although receive significantly more of your hard earned dollar.

I challenge you to read my first post in this thread and tell where I am going wrong?

Nhoj

you may be right that some 'parasites' give back as little as they can. However, that is a sweeping statement which is not true in all cases.

I can cite a 1 man band [roughly 200 current employees now from a base of 1 - himself] I personally know who has a very generous profit sharing scheme for his very happy employees. Naturally his pay is more generous as he has rent, utilities, super, company tax etc. to pay, which comes out of his greater percentage of profits.
In 14 years he has never lost an employee to any of his competitors, and he has the smallest office in the building because he spends most of his time with the employees brainstorming new ideas. If someone is late for work one day, they voluntarily make it up by working later another day. This man sees his employees as his most valuable asset, and has the most loyal staff you'd ever encounter.

He's never forgotten that he was also once an unhappy employee, which was the reason he started out on his own in competition with his old company - which eventually folded.

By the same token there are larger companies who realise their workers are happier if they are paid well and seen as a necessary component to the success of the business, and they also go from strength to strength.

I agree that some are too greedy, but this negatively affects the attitude of their employees, and probably their commitment to their employer. It is then up to the employees to apply pressure for more financial equality, and the employer to see where he could benefit from increasing productivity to be able to increase wages. It is a 2 way street, and both sides must collaborate.
Change.org has proved people power can work.

Life has changed, and there's no going back. Life is much more complex now, much more competitive, and the disparities between rich and poor grow ever greater. The rewards for success can be enormous (or even positively 'obscene', by general standards), and many may consider, quite erroneously, that achieving a modest existence is tantamount to abject failure. Not everyone can invent a 'Facebook' program, or be a maths or physics genius, write a bestseller, be a sports star, or become a business tycoon, a mining or media mogul, a professor, politician or high-flying bureaucrat.

All are individuals, with individual potentials, drives, attributes, and even opportunity. There will always be disparity. The most one could expect is that each contributes to the overall good according to their capacity.

Does Producer have a viable suggestion?

>If all working Australians had a “universal basic income” linked to Australia’s GDP we would have no requirement for any pensions or the bureaucratic system and red tape that feeds on it.<

Shall the world embrace such an homogeneity? (Even if it were possible by some means?) All reduced to the lowest common denominator?
And, with no 'red tape'? And who would administer such a scheme, if not bureaucrats and politicians?
Money from industry flowing into government, in the form of 'excess' profits, after payment to workers of the 'basic income', and this excess then transferred to those not in industrial employment - but who would be engaged doing some non-profit activity (like a 'green army' perhaps?) or volunteering?
The 'mechanics' do not compute.

Life has changed because of overpopulation, worldwide and 'at home', because of global competition for ever-diminishing resources and, ultimately, for survival and ever-greater affluence, and possibly, ultimately, for supremacy.

Unless Oz competes successfully our lifestyle, our future, will be in jeopardy.

$18.70 pw basic wage increase is the thin edge of the wedge to increasing uncompetitiveness on the world stage. Overseas shipbuilding contracts are indicative of far worse things to come - particularly as energy becomes increasingly scarce and expensive.
One size fits all? Good luck with that.

We are offered a truism: 'Age does not necessarily beget wisdom'.

Shall we try another: Youth does not necessarily beget vigour.
Or: Intent does not necessarily beget success.
Or: Looking back won't necessarily get you moving forward.

Most youth may 'wish to gain meaningful and rewarding employment', but some have just about 'thrown in the towel' before they begin.
We do need more meaningful and rewarding jobs for our ever-burgeoning youth, and we need the education and skills training to enable those youth to succeed. We also need the means to instill a 'drive to succeed' in those who lack the confidence or the enthusiasm for employment.

There is no 'one size fits all', but without investment (and possibly subsidies) in new and innovative enterprise we are beaten before we start in any attempt to place all of our capable youth in any form of employment at all. Some will inevitably find their way, by sheer ability and perseverance, but we cannot afford to fail the others.

Welfare as a 'means to an end' for those who have the capacity to contribute (even if they don't know it) not only fails those individuals but fails society as a whole.

Producer

As you say - simplistic. Also idealistic. Simple fact is some people are more productive than others, work longer hours, and have given quite a few of their best years to learn their profession. Doctors come to mind here. Yet you propose to set their level of remuneration to the lowest level to put them on an even wage structure with those who have not sacrificed anything to improve their skill set?

However I think we have too many chiefs on the gravy train in public office whose number could very easily be reduced.

We have too many professional politicians.

I don't propose no politicians, as someone has to represent us, but would certainly get rid of the current breed on all sides who have never worked in the real world, together with those who have risen to their present heights purely through the unions, in favour of a seasoned successful business person who has succeeded in their own particular field.
For example, Dick Smith for small and large business. Len Buckeridge would have been great for the building industry, but he's no longer with us unfortunately. O.K., so two unpopular people also spring to mind for the mining sector. I would favour Palmer as I believe he's self made. Despite Gina's unpopularity and the fact she inherited her wealth, she was well trained by her father, and has managed to increase the business despite having to deal mainly in what is traditionally considered a men's world.

Government is in many ways a corporation. Where it differs is that promotion isn't obtained through merit, and so many from the top echelon down to the lowest would not survive outside of the public service. Portfolios are awarded through "deals", not on prior relevant specific experience.

Our present ambassador to the United states is Kim Beazley - a man who has never been anything other than a very poor politician who wasted millions of our money when he was defence minister, and the consequences of his ineptitude? Terminated? No, given the prime post he wanted in the U.S.

Salpetre

The world has changed, but people have learned little from history

One particular point you made resonated with me. The world is overpopulated and the growth is exponential, yet China was the only one to try and contain it for many years - with little success.

More people to earn money obviously adds to the coffers of the already wealthy. Maybe that's why we don't hear any complaints from them. The only way to curtail an increase in their incomes is to curtail population growth yes? Well no, because money makes money even if it's just sitting earning interest. It's darned hard to send a billionaire broke if he sits on his fortune and doesn't fund any risky ventures. And who determines what they may be?

I can't find it in my heart to envy them though. Unlike poor people whose friends stand nothing to gain from them except their friendship, the rich often are unable to distinguish true friends from false friends, and those who would like to relieve them of some of their money. Like us, they can only wear 1 outfit at a time, and they can only eat so much food in a day. And then along comes the biggie - they leave this world with the same as you and I - nothing.

What's to envy?

Going back to rehctub's initial post:

"Now these genuine unemployed, many battlers, are being treated like second rate citizens all because the serial bludgers of society have to be stopped.

It's just a pity that in order to catch the Grubbs, decent people also have to suffer."

I couldn't agree more:

http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/security-it/julie-bishops-websites-cost-113000-20140605-zrxlh.html

"Three websites for Foreign Minister Julie Bishop's foreign affairs portfolio have cost taxpayers $113,130, according to answers to questions on notice at Senate budget estimates.

The costs include more than $68,000 for "website testing", $19,000 for training, $15,000 for "website release management" and $10,000 for "website deployment".

"I assume [website deployment] means pushing the button to put it up," said Labor Senator Joseph Ludwig, who was asking top bureaucrats about the costs in the hearing on Wednesday morning.

Senator Ludwig later told Fairfax Media: "This is just more evidence of the twisted priorities of the government while it breaks its promises to pensioners, students and low- and middle-income families."

.....

worldwatcher,

Here's a great little animated video narrated by the American actor Ed Asner covering exactly your point in your last post.

http://www.moveon.org/share/72e232/hollywood-legend-ed-asner-has-outraged-republicans?rc=share-5393dd

I highly recommend you view - I think you'll gain a lot from it.

Producer you really should stop thinking in worn out clichés.

The rich do appear to be getting richer, but the poor are also getting richer, at least at the same rate or much quicker.

We only have these bludgers today because their life is not too bad, & is in fact bloody good, with a day or two cash in hand from desperate employers. We are rich enough to pay them that well.

While you think in clichés, you fall for the con job they are meant to effect. You don't have to live in a spectacular house or drive a spectacular car to be rich.

We celebrated my cars 34 birthday a few days ago. It is a magnificent car, lovely to look at & to drive. People compliment me on it regularly, but I doubt I could get more than $7500 for it. Regardless of that, there is no way I would swap it for my neighbors hundred thousand plus new Range Rover.

Should I envy him his expensive car? No way, he leaves for work at around 5 most days, & is regularly arriving home after 7. I worked that hard for quite a few years, I could have been rich, for what.

You only sleep in one room, you only need 3 meals a day, what does being rich do for you? It would appear all it does is attract envy hate, both of which I can do without.

Worldwatcher said <<China was the only one to try and contain it (population) for many years - with little success.>> With little success? How can you make such a claim when stats do not support you. Take China, India and the World population.

In 1960

China 667m
India 450m
World 3040m

In 2012

China 1350m growth 200%
India 1237m growth 275%
World 7000m growth 230%

If China's population had increased at the same rate as India's, it population in 2012 would have been 1830m but was in fact 480m fewer. Even based on the World population growth rate China's population if it had grown at the same pace would have stood at 1535m in 2012 but was actually 185m fewer. Whether the reductions in China's population are solely down to government intervention, I doubt it, but they must be at least partly responsible, would you not agree. Even at 185m less I would call it a success, for what ever reason

Saltpetre

I never suggested “homogeneity”

I said – “Clearly this is a simplistic presentation and there are a lot of nuances that would have to be considered. Linking executive pay to company’s lowest paid staff member, overall social responsibility and giving greater reward to the producers of GDP are just a few”.

I never said “no red tape”.

I said – “we would have no requirement for any pensions or the bureaucratic system and red tape that feeds on it’. My comment was specific to the existing pension schemes!

The rest you have concocted. I would not pretend to foresee where the economy would settle as current market forces would still be in play. The difference is there is full employment; no sit down money, no dole bludgers and the big end of town has limits.

Worldwatcher – Simplistic and idealistic yes. As I said above market forces are still in play. There are no free lunches as there is now and everyone has the opportunity of work. You get rid of the dirt poor and the filthy rich.

The rest is just waffle, conjecture and history.

Has been – If I was to stop thinking about worn out clichés, I wouldn’t be able to think about you!

I’m happy to spar with you on the big stage, not the side show.

Come on boys you have to do better than that.

Poirot
Ed obviously has no axe to grind, being the highest paid actor of 2014.
A little humour - even with an edge- does no harm.

Paul405
Yes I agree, China was successful in curbing population growth. I reread my post, which should have read a little success. Leaving out the a unintentionally changed the whole context of that sentence.

Producer,

There are two main reasons why your proposition is unworkable:

Firstly, it smacks substantially of communism - where the workers get a set 'living', and the big-wigs get to set the work programs and their own remuneration (even though this may be substantially less remuneration than the obscene salary/benefits 'packages' enjoyed by many current top Western executives/CEOs). The West has evolved a more open and competitive system, called democracy, and will not willingly move to anything less attractive.
(Also, I doubt the Union movement would be the least interested.)

Secondly, your proposition goes against the human mindset, and the world mindset, which is for most people to strive for the best they can achieve for themselves and their families. Few truly free and thinking people would readily accept the sort of limitations on their potential to achieve which your proposition ultimately entails.

When, or if, humanity as a whole was to move to adopt pure altruism as the primary driving force and universal charter for human existence, then, and only then, would there be any real chance to achieve the sort of 'equilibrium' your proposition suggests.

>The difference is there is full employment; no sit down money, no dole bludgers and the big end of town has limits.<

How do you propose to achieve 'full employment' and maintain productivity by lowering the salaries of top executives, managers and supervisors and passing on the resultant 'savings' to 'the workers'? Why should skilled and professional staff get the same rate as the floor sweeper? Where's the motivation to excel, to put in the hard yards? Or do you intend there be guards with guns and whips? (And chains on the doors?)

Your proposition is demonstrably unsound - at least for this 'evolution' of human existence.

Saltpetre,

"The West has evolved a more open and competitive system, called democracy, and will not willingly move to anything less attractive.
(Also, I doubt the Union movement would be the least interested.)"

I'd encourage you to to watch that little animated video too, which shows how the post war ethos of social democracy has been distorted in recent times in favour of the obscenely rich...and through which our communities suffer. I might add, the post-WWII years shaped the people who are seniors today. We're actually losing the fairness that pervaded those years.

http://www.moveon.org/share/72e232/hollywood-legend-ed-asner-has-outraged-republicans?rc=share-5393dd

We'll continue the shift backwards in our notion of civilsed society if the trend goes on.

Saltpetre

Communism assumes equality. My proposition is capitalism that recognizes there are limits and social responsibility. Your right the unions would not like it because it’s not communism!

Yes it is against the mindset of the have’s, I’m alright mate, everyone for themselves and stuff everybody else. It’s called change, so what?

I said in my third post of the thread:

Communism assumes there is equality. Capitalism inflates entitlement.
The best incentive for work is to take away the incentive if there is no work.
We need a system that rewards productive pursuits over parasite ones.
We need to reward the farmer more than the politician.
We need to contain expenditure within productivity.
We need a system that is fair, more proportional.
Everyone on the dole is not a bludger.
Everyone bludger is not on the dole.
A bludger not on the dole cost us significantly more.

If the human’s species continues to evolve as it is today it will destroy itself and the planet as we know it.

You don’t get any more unsound than that.

Saltpetre, much of the problem stems from the parents, as they fail to realize there is more to having children than just watching them grow up.

I'm sure if a law were passed that children who fail to attend school, or just plain ignore the education on offer, were the finacial responsibility of the parents, things would change.

But, then we have the do-gooders who have all but removed any real form of discipline, both at home and school.

In short, unmotivated kids of today are a product of their upbringing, or society, or perhaps a combination of both but, ultimately they are the responsibility of the parents, not the tax payer.

Hopefully these new laws, if introduced, will see more parents sit up and take note when it comes to getting the most out of the education system on offer, it may also inspire students to want to achieve, and not simply except a life on welfare, as many do today.

Welfare must become knows as a 'hand up' not a 'hand out'. So perhaps the real dole bludgers have actually done society a favor and push too hard for too long, which has resulted in a government taking real action. Of cause that's yet to be proven.

Producer says "Has been – If I was to stop thinking about worn out clichés, I wouldn’t be able to think about you!

I’m happy to spar with you on the big stage, not the side show."

A total admission that they no answer, & so waffle

Rehctub

A good post.
It blows my mind that women have children and immediately when they are only a few months old, put them in to day care. From the start of their lives these kids are cared for by strangers for what?
Mother to go back to work to help pay for the family's [often 4x2 with 2 cars] lifestyle. It's like having a dog, and leaving it alone at home all day, then coming back from work to spend an hour playing with it.

Children and pets - maybe we should class both as just more toys for adults?

rechtub, I think you are missing out on the significant role government plays in undermining parents ability to set and maintain boundaries for children, especially teenagers.

My impression is to much coverage of rights in the school system and inadequate coverage of responsibity.

An inability for the police to support a parent if a child finds other alternatives to rules at home they don't like. An older teenager can choose to go elsewhere if someone else is willing to be a party to that and the parent is left with no options that I've been able to identify to fix that.

A disfunctional child suppor system that in some situations makes child residency a make or break thing financially for parents on top of an already difficult situation.

Sometimes parents have to ride out the storm as best they can and try to maintain some kind of relationship with the child in the hope that they can be there if the child grows up enough to start making better choices.

I get very tired of pollies blaming parents while the government is a significant contributer to the issues facing parents.

R0bert

worldwatcher,

"It blows my mind that women have children and immediately when they are only a few months old, put them in to day care. From the start of their lives these kids are cared for by strangers for what?
Mother to go back to work to help pay for the family's [often 4x2 with 2 cars] lifestyle. It's like having a dog, and leaving it alone at home all day, then coming back from work to spend an hour playing with it."

I happen to agree with that.

However, our whole society structure in contemporary capitalist Australia is based on consuming.

Parents are encouraged as a matter of course to do exactly that in modern Australia...and indeed most Western Industrial nations.

These days a woman almost has to excuse herself if she's a "stay-at-home" mum.

It's certainly not a "left" or "right" thing...it's a symptom of our consumer society...where if Mrs A pays Mrs B to look after her child then GDP increases. If Mrs A looks after her own child, GDP stays the same.

The institutionalisation of the country is the result where if you're not in the "workplace", you're in some kind of instututionalised care...ergo infants, children and the elderly.

Yes Poirot our kids are in a bit of a catch 22.

They want the best. My eldest daughters home is a bit of a McMansion, with all the best fittings, but it is a nice place to live. Makes her childhood home look a bit of a dump, but then a house is only somewhere to eat & sleep.

She has chosen to work from home, so she can walk the kids to & from school, & pays for that privilege with an extra hour or two after the kids are in bed. It means they have to be well disciplined so she can still work after they are home, a good side effect.

This choice does limit her earning capacity, the positions she can get, & her income, but as after school care would cost $300 or more, it does even out somewhat.

Obviously this choice is not available to all professions, more's the pity. Then again I do know women who relish their time without the kids & loath school holidays. It takes all types.

Hasbeen,

Sounds like your daughter has worked out a great compromise for a parent in 21st century Australia.

"....It means they have to be well disciplined so she can still work after they are home, a good side effect."

Important...and from my experience, children thrive on well-defined boundaries and are greatly enhanced by interacting with the older generations.

Our 12 year-old is a bit of history buff, and has researched and discovered his Nanna's grandad (who died when her father was 4) actually died and was buried in the town where we live in WA in 1896. None of her family to her knowledge had ever lived outside NSW.

Anyway, the upshot here is that he's enjoyed sharing this with his Nan and discussing her family memories. She gave me a great compliment the other week at how her grandson is so well-mannered and caring towards her.

Things like that mean a lot...should be more of it!

Robert, too many people are quick to blame governments for their own shortcomings with regards to their children, because after all, government only legislates in response to things that happen, not to things they have caused themselves.

Parents are 100% responsible for their kids and, even if they are separated, they are still responsible because One, the kids never ask to be born, and Two, the governments don't cause the problems, they just try to manage them.

Governments provide affordable schooling, but can't make kids learn. Same goes for teachers, as they too have skills to offer, but can't make a kid want to learn such skills. Although the thought of being on the street once schools days are over may make some of them think twice. It should also make some lack luster parents take more interest in their kids progress throughout life.

Even discipline , or the lack of it is not governments doing, as they have only reacted to actions by past parents.

So I do think I get the point, that being that as any parant they are your kids, and YOU are responsible for them and if they are nit disciplined, or not focussed on life after school, chances are they will left well behind, this is why I think the finacial responsibility should be a greater burden onnthe parents.

Poirot,

In some ways the 'good old days' were better - when one wage could support a family in a reasonable manner. Now, only a really high salary, or two wages, can achieve the same. But where is the fault? Consumerism, or Capitalism - where the wealthy, or the 'lucky' or the exceptionally intelligent push prices beyond the reach of the 'average'? But, is it the top echelon, the 1%, driving this price-escalation, or the burgeoning middle-class? I think it is the latter.
Middle-class salaries are arguably disproportionate - and consequently having a far greater impact, by virtue of sheer volume.
Pull down the tall poppies? Or, rein in the middle-class? Both?

Social fragmentation, increased competition, a more complex world and class disparity all combine to make life more difficult and more stressful, especially for youth. Enhanced nurturing has an uphill battle to overcome such pressures, but is greatly worth pursuing.

I have to agree with you here, Producer:

>If the human’s species continues to evolve as it is today it will destroy itself and the planet as we know it.<

So, perhaps some form of universal peaceful co-habitation is the only answer - if humanity is to have a guaranteed long-term future. But this would probably have to be under the governance of what would amount to a central 'Senate' of benevolent global dictators. An entirely new World Order. Hard to conceive, and even harder to implement or maintain. But perhaps inevitable - short of global nuclear or chemical holocaust in a power-play for world dominance.

However, I believe such a peace-based system would still have to consist of a strata conforming to individual capability and contribution to the whole. The difference could be that no-one of low capacity could hold any position of dominance or power, and wealth would be more equitably distributed. The 'filthy-rich' would be a thing of the past - of the Decadent Age.

Saltpetre,

Lol!...I read somewhere (don't know if it's accurate) that in Greek democracy, the populace got to vote once a year for their least favourite politician - who was subsequently banished.

Some merit in that - for keeping the bastards honest.

: )

Has been,

You claim that I must be “unaware that Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong among others have all lifted their population from poverty to wealth, many to now be well above Oz, by growing their economy” as if to make stated reply to my mere mention of the Indian and China examples [where much wealth is yet to trickle down] to indicate [to you in some alternate reality somewhere] that I think that NO non-western economies of wealth have given over to the poor.

I fail to follow your logic here, as I never pretended to be unaware of Japan, South Korea etc. I merely wished to note that the seemingly accepted universal rule that - richer economy equates to poorer becoming richer – is in fact NOT universal at all.

Besides, the level of sharing in ANY culture/nation depends upon the culture of the particular people, such that whilst Japan may give over to the poor a bit more than China does there are still many other short-falls compared with most western nations when it come to other moral and legal egalitarian matters [e.g. Koreans born in Japan from parents who were in Japanese war camps in WWII may live in Japan today but are denied citizenship or ability to buy land etc.].

And I do see that “[primarily but not solely] the bigger economy generated by the industrial revolution that lifted the Poms out of poverty.” However whilst the advances made in those regards did get us to the point in Australia (at least) where the average low-skilled poorer family could quite easily purchase land and a house to raise the family before the parents were 40 and with usually only 1 earner, since WWII and the massive global shift of all labour jobs to cheap labour Asian markets coupled with extreme population increases has led to those advances all but being deleted to where the average poorer family today CANNOT expect to be able to purchase a house even if [usually] 2 earners help.

The Greek institution of ostracism allowed the citizens to vote to get rid of (banish) a fellow citizen including politicians whom they feared was getting too powerful. Bring it on, but too bad it's limited to only one a year.