Some political circles that are hell-bent on reform, I cant see how their going to implement the screening? Drugs that come in all sorts, what one's are specifically targeted? Some Prescription medications have opiates/persuado-ephedrine-hydrochloride/ etc...The logic that applies to motor vehicles/ machinery/ must apply, however if one has no prospects of employment..eg..disability payments etc..I feel some maybe singled out.

Your thoughts.

Kat

Quoting from http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/stories-from-chelm

(the town of Chelm was renowned for its residents' [negative-amount-of] wisdom)

"In Chelm, the shammes (Jewish sexton) used to go around waking everyone up for minyan (prayer-quorum) in the morning. Every time it snowed, the people would complain that, although the snow was beautiful, they could not see it in its pristine state because by the time they got up in the morning, the shammes had already trekked through the snow. The townspeople decided that they had to find a way to be woken up for minyan without having the shammes making tracks in the snow.

The people of Chelm hit on a solution: they got four volunteers to carry the shammes around on a table when there was fresh snow in the morning. That way, the shammes could make his wake up calls, but he would not leave tracks in the snow."

So now, for every 10 dole-recipients of ~$15,000 p.a. they're going to hire a drugs-expert-contractor receiving ~150,000 p.a., thus doubling the financial burden of the dole on us, tax-payers.

Yet... a step towards full employment, isn't it?

My attitude depends on how its done. I like a lot of other workers ar subject to random drug and alcohol testing at work despite their not being any particular physical danger aspects to my work. Not something I agree with from a privacy perspective but its a fact of life for many workers.

Once or twice a year I may be tested as part of a random draw and can be tested on suspicion if I give the indication of being substance effected.

R0bert

So test the pollies before they enter Parliament.

For young unemployed & unemployable people we need a national service. Problem solved.

National service costs money. I don't see why i would be against drug testing.

Me thinks the Druggies will protest too much.

I guess we'll find out who the wacked out druggies dole bludgers are soon, won't we?

I support the plan. I also support drug testing for Politicians. They have to be on something, given the decisions they make sometimes.

I believe the taxpayers should protest and not be financing illegal drug purchases of those receiving taxpayers money from our Government while not working.

Interesting responses.

Listening to the various news broadcasts over the weekend, it sounded like there was a wild anti reaction against the idea. It looks like that might have been a continuation of the media hysterics about the budget, not a genuine public reaction.

I agree totally with drug testing for the politicians when they enter the house, including alcohol.

But lets go one further, how about automatic jail for welfare recipients with more than a little pot in their blood. This on the grounds that they must have come by the money to buy the stuff illegally, [probably break & enter], as no welfare payment could fund the stuff. The same for pollies, as they have probably done something illegal to get there

Very simple OOM, if one is on a prescribed drug, they have a doctors letter.

Many workplaces today require you to be drug free and fit for work, OR YOU DO NOT GET A START.

being unemployed is not a problem, UNTIL YOU RECEIVE BENEFITS, THEN, you must be fit and ready to start work.

Quarantining welfare will go a long way towards addressing the issue of waste and drugs.

So as I see it, unemployed have two choices, be unemployed and do what you like, or be unemployed and receive benefits, which in turn have conditions, such as, being fit and ready for work at least Monday to Friday. Problem solved! Because if the person who provides that GIFT has to be fit and ready for work, the very least the receiver of that GIFT can do in return, is appreciate it and be actively seeking employment.

One the most famous statements made by a government has just been made, that being, "the age of entitlement is over".

As random drug testing is both expensive and invasive, I would fine it difficult to support without well defined outcomes.

In the case of industry, drug testing where poor judgement could be fatal is acceptable, but in this case, I cannot see a positive test being used to remove welfare nor any safety benefit.

I would give it a strong thumbs down unless there is real justification.

There are currently 108 thousand 457 visas in AU. A massive increase since Abbott loosened the requirements.

Govt; is good at creating unemployment, what do you say about 5 % unemployment is full employment.
If you force the % down further it will put pressure on wages growth.

All these anomalies in your dole checks will all cost. So you have to know how much are you going to save. Abbott is in the business of deleting public service not increasing it.

I think there should be drug testing for people who come onto this forum .... just look at the ideological delusions we get from Rehctub, Shadow Minister, Hasbeen, Individual and a handful of other radical, old righties here.

John,

Try to read what people have posted before making a complete idiot of yourself. Perhaps you should submit to the drugs testing you advocate for everyone else.

Good afternoon to everybody...

I've read that one of our more pitiable contributors herein, has a belief that certain folk on our Forum should first be tested for the presence of prohibited substances, ostensibly before being permitted to post an opinion ? How quaint.

The only retort I have available to me at this time...? Perhaps there should be an obligatory psychoanalytical evaluation and appraisal of our very own sociopathic young friend, NHOJ ? Particularly now when he tries so hard to mask his classical symptomatology, of acute episodes of narcissism.

Just give us the OK there NHOJ, we'll have you admitted as quickly as humanly possible. In the meantime, just continue taking, deep regular breaths.

Poor old Wuwu and Shadow ..... so "serious" and hurt. Ha ha ha ha.

Someone ought to teach them the meaning of ... hang on I better spell it out for them, here we go guys S--A--R--C--A--S--M.

Now do ya get it guys? Ha ha, probably not. Poor old fellas. Methinks they need a cup of tea and a good lie down to soothe their little hurt feelings.

Drug testing before Centrelink payments, is this
going too far?

Not sure. How is this going to work?
Are they talking about recreational drugs only?
If drugs are found do the people lose their
payments immediately? How are they meant to live
in the meantime? Will alternative programs be
provided, such as getting them off the drugs?
And how will they judge what sort of drugs are ok?
Do people with prescribed medications count?

So many questions. I need to do more research on this
subject.

cont'd ...

Another thought.

If they're going to do drug testing before Centrelink
payments then how about gambling testing?

After all people often take their Centrelink
payments and go gamble away the money.

There's no end of the possibilities of where testing
could take us once we start - right?

Alcohol, also springs to mind.

As do other vices. ;-)

Foxy: Are they talking about recreational drugs only?

Illegal Drugs or drugs not prescribed on prescription.

Foxy: If drugs are found do the people lose their payments immediately?

Sounds like a good idea.

Foxy: How are they meant to live in the meantime?

Same way they did when the spent their Dole money on drugs.

Will alternative programs be provided, such as getting them off the drugs?

An offer should be made. If the offer is rejected then, No Dole.

Foxy: And how will they judge what sort of drugs are ok?

If they have a prescription from a Doctor then the drug is legal. Isn't it?

Foxy: Do people with prescribed medications count?

Of course not. Duh!

Well, that was easy eh! Any more questions Foxy? CDF.

Foxy, it's already been 100% rejected by the Minister.

It's a stupid thought bubble by some crazy rightie that was never going to go anywhere.

Individual wrote (probably under the influence of drugs), "For young and unemployed people we need a national service. Problem solved". Ha ha ha ha ha.... individual's solution is to create massive extra red tape, create more taxes to pay for national service. But as the government solemnly claim they are for "less" tax I guess we'll have to then borrow more money to finance the *HUGE* cost of this and thus send our country into further debt.

Gee individual would make a great *LABOR* PM. His policies seem to be *IDENTICAL*. Wow. Problem solved.

Dear Nhoj,

Thanks for that.

Much appreciated.

Dear Jayb,

Nice to see you posting again.
Love your dry sense of humour and wit.

This silly suggestion of drug testing before getting centrelink payments is definitely going too far.
What if the welfare payments were going to people with kids?
Are we going to cut the payments for them as well? How will the kids eat?

To be fair, should we drug test ALL people on welfare payments , including disability and old age pensions?

We should surely test them for alcohol and tobacco use as well, as these are unnecessary, unhealthy expenses for those on welfare too?

If we did take away drug users welfare payments, then they would surely look at crime to make ends meet...

Nhoj,
If you're aspiring to be a perfect moron you have achieved your goal & you can relax now. Which Uni gave you a Degree for your thesis ?

Ahhh, all individual has in response is personal abuse. Cool.

Suseonline, well if we're going to drug test welfare recipients, that means we'll have to drug test Gina Rinehart and Clive Palmer who both get *MASSIVE* corporate welfare, and let's not forget Tony Abbott's lovely little daughter with her "special" welfare payment ..... oops I mean scholarship. Yep, let's drug test ALL welfare recipients, that means the HUGE percentage of Aussies on middle class welfare, retirees like Rehctub who get all those welfare tax breaks on superannuation (I really hope Rehctub isn't on speed), and let's not forget the politicians who receive all "their" welfare, oops I mean superannuation, en masse when they retire. The list of course goes on and on and on and on. If you include children, probably at least 95% of Aussies are on *WELFARE*. How come that doesn't piss off the crazy righties here? Hmmmmm.

Foxy: Nice to see you posting again. Love your dry sense of humour and wit.

Theeing quuie Foxy. (my favourite "young girl" sound.) It's nice to see your concern.
Alas, so many questions, so few answers. I've come to the conclusion, on here, that it's Politically Incorrect to actually answer a question directly.

Is that right?

Yuyutsu,
I was pulled over on Saturday night in line of about thirty cars.
Everyone was breath tested and about half drug tested as well.
It took three minutes to assess a yes or no response so I don't know where the huge expense come in.
One positive was bundled into a police van for further evaluation.
I thing drug tests for public handouts are a real step in the right direction.
I must admit Foxy has a point though.
Centerlink money is the backbone of the registered club and pub income stream and payments should be quarantined.

Nhoj , I am happy with the notion of testing ALL welfare recipients, and I wouldn't mind betting that the middle-high income 'welfare' recipients will be the ones with the worst drug test results.

In any case, I doubt the Mad Monk will be in charge much longer to get this drug testing off the ground.
According to Abbott's good mate Andrew Bolt, we may have Mal Turnbull calling the shots sooner rather than later.
Maybe Mal will fix the budget mess?

Ahhh, all individual has in response is personal abuse. Cool.
nhoj,
Shouldn't you be reading your own posts first before you get all peed off when your mentality invites backfire ?
If you don't like being called a moron then don't comment like one.

...Methinks they need a cup of tea and a good lie down to soothe their little hurt feelings.
But at least we wont have to wait until we are70!

Foxy....If drugs are found do the people lose their
payments immediately? How are they meant to live
in the meantime? Will alternative programs be
provided, such as getting them off the drugs?

May I suggest the same drugs that prevent people from working would be a good place to start.

As for them getting cut off, Tough titties would be my answer and no, your on your own to soak up your own self pity.

Besides, welfare should not be there to support dead heads.

Earning or learning, what a great initiative..

....If they're going to do drug testing before Centrelink
payments then how about gambling testing?

Quarantining will go a long way towards fixing that.

....Alcohol, also springs to mind.

Most workplaces the number is ZERO, why not for the dole? After all, they are ready to work, are they not!

Suze, easy solution, stop paying them cash. Problem all but gone!

The days of the unconditional free lunch are over. Gee it's great to have a leader with some balls for a change.

Don't be silly Suse. The Libs know full well they would never get elected with Turnbull as leader. If he & Labor had any guts they would get together, they suit each other, & they specialize in having dills for leaders.

Besides Abbott is doing pretty well so far, it is only confirmed Labor voters & the media that don't think so.

Here's a fearless prediction, the fat man will be gone before Abbott.

John,

Insulting someone then trying to claim it is sarcasm is extremely juvenile. You are like a schoolyard retard trying to cover up that he is not even smart enough to understand what sarcasm is. It is just sad.

If you act like an obnoxious troll, then don't get so huffy when you are put in your place, and frequently banned.

Hi there FOXY...

I'm not all that sure whether beneficiaries of welfare payments who take illicit substances, and are detected under this new scheme, should lose those benefits if they're found to be 'using' ?

In my experience many of those who take drugs, if given the opportunity they'd quit their habit immediately ? Of course there are many others, who have no intention of ever giving up their use.

Think about it for a moment. A regular user, who suddenly loses their benefits, may well lose their accommodation, their ability to eat, clothe themselves, and at least maintain some semblance of dignity. Therefore, the only other course they can pursue is return to crime ? A girl, in such circumstances turns to the 'street' as a street worker. Often falling into the hands of some maggot belonging to a criminal gang, and so it goes on...on and on and on ?

There's got to be another, better way of regulating and managing those who're in receipt of welfare benefits. After all, they're not criminals, they're unemployed, for one reason or another. This is a social problem, so the answer must come from a social solutions not from a criminal source.

No, I'm most definitely, NOT a 'leftie' socialist. Rather I'm very much a pragmatic individual. Our gaols are overflowing with those on detention, many of which are incarcerated, merely on drug matters. Many should never be in there. Particular those individuals or are purely users.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

By the way son, my name actually "is" Nhoj.

My above post was directed to SM.

By the way, I guess the crazy righties here don't comprehend that tobacco and alcohol are *DRUGS*. I guess they don't care, as their 'excuse' is, "oh my goodness me, but they're legal ..... thus harmless and ok".

if we drug tested before voting I suspect the greens/labour would be the biggest losers

if we drug tested before voting i suspect the libs/nats would be the biggest losers

Dear o sung wu,

Good post.

I came on here to make much the same point you have just done.

If the Federal Coalition brought this in it would be just another example of Abbott cost shifting to the states.

Remove all means of support to someone down on their luck and using illicit drugs and these will be the folk crawling through your back window just to survive.

It might save Hockey a few bucks in the budget but it will cost the states heaping in extra policing and incarceration costs. Bad economics if anything else.

Rehctub - "Suze, easy solution, stop paying them cash. Problem all but gone!"

Rehctub , Bad idea! Stop paying them cash and they will take their cash and/or goods any criminal way they can get it!
Can you not see that?

Do you not think all the Governments before now have considered this idea?
See Steele Redux's post above.

Do you think we can afford to have our jails bursting at the seams with all the new criminals this would produce?
It would be cheaper to pay them unemployment benefits and have them work for the dole in some capacity at least.

As for your precious Abbott having the 'balls" to suggest such an idea, just remember these were the same balls from which sprung the wasteful ideas for the expensive paid parental leave scheme, the marriage counseling debacle, and the ludicrous amount of money for 'chaplains' to continue 'counseling ' our kids in public schools!

Nhoj

I was once told sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, and you use it to perfection.

Hopefully you will move forward - drop the sarcasm and rudeness, and then maybe people will listen to you what you want to say. As it stands, you really don't appear to have anything constructive to offer, as all your efforts are being expended in trying to get under people's skin with sarcasm and lots of ha ha ha's.

I once knew a heavy pot user who used the ha ha's every time he smoked a few joints.

Small wonder I invariably skip your posts.

Dearest worldwatcher,

As you "invariably skip" my posts, how do you know I use sarcasm? GOTCHA. Nice try. Ha ha ha. I know you "really" read every single word I write. Enjoy.

Love and hugs,

Nhoj. xoxoxox

Nhoj is probably the biggest welfare bludger on the site.

His only weapon is feeble insults, and his childish prose and poor reasoning indicates that he is unlikely to pass any tests either intellectual or drug and feels threatened at having to face any.

Nhoj, here is a challenge: Try for once to act like a grown up and post at least one post that shows a reasoned position.

So far all you have done is put the whinger in left whinger.

Shadow minister,
i think even the morons are rejecting Nhoj.

ITS FUNNY AS I..WAS PERUSING THIS..REDIRECTION..[thought bubble]
I COULD TASTE THE COFFEE..AND SMELL THE BOOZE..it must be hard to be as perfect as you few.

but i dare you..really i dare any of you
to actually go and do it in person..[not have some work for the dole or loose ya dole..work experience kids]w..but you few..W-ho knowwhat others must do.

you few alone who know good from bad
look i dont get the dole cause i smoke/dope..allready..[so any freaking retard that says im committing crime to survive//say to my face im stealing ya cars/raping ya daugfhter for my 'drug'..

[funny thing]..about dope is its a plant..[not a drug]..it grows in dirt..and dirt is a thing the forum is full off...and nothing like beating up the old delusions..or/bLeating ya meat..in drug testing..anyone.

that so want others..to achieve a higher
morality/than any of you ever did.]..

i know its only a red herring..you know its a red HERRING..
but stop talking out of ya butt/and actually try to do it...ya useless dreamers/REAMERS..and on pot screamers/stool reamers..one day they came for you..AND THEN IT WAS OUR TURN/YO SCREW YOU/TOO..

[let ye without sin/beware of the sins they let in]..
that ye did to others..you will see done to you for eternity...

in TIME YOU WILL SEE YOU SHOULDA GIVEN MORE THOUGHT TO DRUG TESTING YA BANKERS LAWYERS AND POLITICIANS/WHO LOVE KEEPING OTHERS BUSY/WHILE THEY STRIP..YOUR ASSET BASE..SAVINFGS securities and comforts..BARE/..[all drug use..is medicinal/not a law issue]m

police policing orals in lue of watching your security/VALUABLES
there are /far..more important things that criminalization of kiddies/
obsessing about what kiddies are doing..

these laws are great..for the kiddy rapers in ya jails/on ya streets and hunting at Your schools. IGNORANT FOOLS YOU FRIGHTEN KIDS THEN BLAME THEM/WHEN THEY GET SCREWED..BY YOUR fear/hate/bias..

its pathetic how you/SICKIES..sIC SICK GOVT,,mandate..UPON OTHERS YOU FEAR...yet in the end only got enough rope to expose your lack..of other..interest/in any\but..biopic-self/interest.

bah*..into the fires../the lot of you.

thus..

[HEAD-COUNT/CONTINUES..]

the narrow obsession..of hell..[is your due.]
but let.you dwell in this delusional hell..you made infinatly worse.
the self control you lack..here ...yet seek to impose upon those nopt as advantaged as you..

so perfect/you reformed druggies
you had Your dopy time/did ya speed/sped throUgh life at nose bleed speed..YET STILL NOT LIVING YA OWN LIFE/..PLUS TRYING TO RUN MINE AS WELL..well-come..to my hell.

[its a fact govt procures kiddies for the kiddie perverts.,.in ya govt inventing chid abduction scemes and in ya child sir-vices.]

stop talking and do it
or go to hell..ya dreaming..ya UP ..distractions..while govt builds its own HELL..on earth..

oh the mirth..when your savings are gone
because you fell for the detraction/that leads to thyne own destruction..time to move on...to real issues not just more obsessive mindless juvenile wank...[govt isnt here to oppress thyne enamiers/BUT TO LOOT YOU BLIND/..WHILE YOU OBSESS IN OTHERS SINs..one day we came for you.]..

one day the young take revenge on the old
force old peoples homes to/be totally drug free.
like should we be giving rapists blue pills..[should govt mandate 25 years jail for a book on how to make a plant grow?].,.

*should commentaters be forced to prove standing [personal damage]/before allowed comment/busy bodies with OBSESSIVE TENDENCIES TO SCREW OTHER's any way they can/because they are gutless;busy bodies obsessing others bodies/pretending to be employ/but really on some govt cash cow paid to troll.[complain/muddy the waters..play politricks]

fine..you earn the karma..by the things you chose
that greaT BALANCE..THAT ALLOWS YOU..TO CHOSE YOUR OWN FUTURE LIfe EXPERIENCE/..BY HOW YOU FORCED OTHERS TO LIVE THEIR LIFE/YOUR WAY..

you made the rule..now
tomorrow..the rule rues its payday...over you too.[how will you like being told what you CAN/CANNOT DO?]..WELL/SCREW THE LOT OF YOU.

I think everyone should be drug tested, every day. ;P

Bad idea! Stop paying them cash and they will take their cash and/or goods any criminal way they can get it!
Can you not see that? Says Suse.

Suse can't you see that most of the druggies are doing that now, just we are subsidizing them with the dole, while they do it? They can't afford much drugs from the welfare cheque, so all that does is help them eat, the better to climb through your window.

Hi there STEELEREDUX...

I believe there are many police now, who realise user's are merely stupid and foolhardy and as a consequence, are now ill. And as such should NOT be gaoled. It's the pushers, courier; traffickers; importers; cooks; and urger's etc., it is they who should occupy a salubriously appointed cell, in Long Bay ! Not some hapless teenager who was stupid enough to get caught up in using drugs, all because it appeared to be 'cool'. The last time I looked, 'stupidity' in isolation wasn't a crime (otherwise that rather pathetic creature NHOJ, would spend years incarcerated !), though I do accept there are many people who view 'users' just as much 'a criminal', as those cited herein ?

I realise I'm proceeding off topic, but one day in the near future, our government will need to decide whether or not to legalise drugs per se ? Not some, not just the so called soft drugs like Cannabis Sativa (Indian Hemp, marihuana, hashish and the like). But all drugs ! Otherwise we'd be confronted with the same difficulties as we experience now, if we became selective as to what's scheduled as illicit and what's permitted.

I must admit STEELEREDUX, it's a decision that I'm jolly glad, not to have to make, such are the complexities of such a resolve ?

Without "Users" there'd be no "Pushers" & visa versa. Same, same but different.

The Users go to jail for a long time until they give up their Pusher & the Pusher goes to jail for life until they give up their Supplier.

Then, we send the Supplier back to wherever they came from to face "their" Countries Penalties, or "Never to be Released & Hard Labour" if they are Australian.

Lot's of adds on TV, Papers & Internet to let the Druggies know so their is no excuse. If a druggie wants to get clean then let them front up & ask for help. Dob in as many Pushers & Suppliers as they can & the treatment is free.

We'll deal with the Alcohol Problem at a later date. One problem at a time. It's time to get real & stop pussyfooting around with these people.

jabbering/quote..<<>.We'll deal with the Alcohol Problem at a later date.>>

geezz ya joking mate[try telling drunks like ya tell dopers and no hopers
ya gutless till ya tackle the biggest killer by far
[not one cannabus death/evER..you dikkheads are just too clever

<<>.One problem at a time.>>

ok lets fix aholes with no injury injuring us
you clowns dont grasp basic law..[if you got no proof im hurting you you got no right to urge uFURTHER AGRIVATED INBJURY UPON ME[NO VICTIM NO FREAKING CRIME YA SLIME..YOU GOT PROBLEMS WITH YA DAUGHTERS OR YA WIFES BOYFRIENDS GET A LIFE YA DRUNKEN LUNK OF JUNK

<<..It's time to get real & stop pussyfooting around with these people.>>

TO RIGHT ITS TIME AHOLES LIKE YOU GOT A life
get a job /ya drunken slob...[now you going to say i hurt you?..grow up ya drank beer gutted toad..get your ego out of my reality/go crap on ya drunken mates.

I find it difficult to believe that centerlink receipients are financing existing drug habits from their welfare payments. The crime problem mentioned earlier is already there, my suspicions is perhaps an increase but not a new thing or a big hit on many who are not already subsidising welfare payments with crime.

As with many of the issues discussed here there are no easy answers, many are frustrated at having so much of their incomes taken under the threat if force and given to those clearly unwilling to try to support themselves. I keep wondering where those who don't see that happening
live, clearly not in the burbs with plenty of public housing nearby.

Many of the proposals to crack down on welfare ar statements of frustration with a system that classifies need and vulnerability pretty much just on the basis of taxable income and flogs those trying to meet their own needs to help those who won't without regard to the needs of the one earning the income. Thats where the real changes need to occur.

The really rich can afford to avoid many of the hit's, many of those working hard to meet pressing committments can't afford to avoid the hit.

R0bert

Oh, Gawd, I set him off again. Sorry. ;-)

Maybe, there could be a system where the Dole isn't just handed out. A person on the Dole register's their accommodation & it's paid from Centrelink. A food budget is paid to Coles/Woolworths & the Dole recipitant goes & collects the food parcel. Electricity is paid through Centrelink too. They can have what's left over.

Then, if the Dole recipitant refuses the Drug test The Dole is cut off completely. Or if they Drug test positive then;

The Users go to jail for a long time until they give up their Pusher & the Pusher goes to jail for life until they give up their Supplier.

Then, we send the Supplier back to wherever they came from to face "their" Countries Penalties, or "Never to be Released & Hard Labour" if they are Australian.

Lot's of adds on TV, Papers & Internet to let the Druggies know so their is no excuse. If a druggie wants to get clean then let them front up & ask for help. Dob in as many Pushers & Suppliers as they can & the treatment is free.

It's time to get real & stop pussyfooting around with these people.

We'll deal with the Alcohol Problem at a later date. One problem at a time.

Time fa ya meds matie, then, have a Bex, a cuppa & a good lie down. ;-)

Its seems the Australian people like thinks just the way they are?

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

Posted by RawMustard, Tuesday, 3 June 2014 5:34:22 PM

RamMustard.....You have my vote for the Australian of the year.

Kat

Dear jayb,

The art of reasoned intelligent argument is a
skill not easily acquired. And sound reasoning
will conquer unreasonable generalisations
every time. Also it helps if you appear to be
arguing on a mature intelligent level not an
emotional one.

As for political correctness? I wouldn't worry
about that too much if I were you. As long as you
don't appear too dogmatic (or abusive) - you'll be fine.

BTW (Loved your "little-Girl voice").
Suits you!

Thanks all for your responses.

Kat

Foxy...Just call me spock:)

Kat

Foxy: The art of reasoned intelligent argument is a skill not easily acquired.

I've noticed that on here a lot. It seems that Political Correctness & apologizing for the antics of the stupid is the current flavour.

Foxy: And sound reasoning will conquer unreasonable generalisations every time.

They weren't generalizations. Are you saying that unless I, "feel sorry & have compassion for these people who have put themselves in their predicament." then I'm making Generalizations. I think not.

Foxy: Also it helps if you appear to be arguing on a mature intelligent level not an emotional one.

I don't have an emotional level. I am emotion free, or so my Analyst says. The softies, Politically Correct, teary eyed sooks are the very people that have allowed these people to get to where they are.

If you are one of these people, then, a word of advice. As Chopper would say, "Harden the Fu(# up. Australia can't afford ya." ;-)

Hi there ONE UNDER GOD...

You seem quite angry even incensed about the general tenor of this topic Johan ? I understand that you consider Alcohol a far more injurious and habit forming drug than say Cannabis ? I'd probably agree with your position on that. Though there's been many sudden deaths associated with Cannabis then one might think. While ingesting the drug itself may not prove too harmful, because it's an illicit substance, one must go through a supplier who can generally introduce you to, other more harmful habit forming substances.

Also those who push these drugs often introduce a new, potential customer (generally a teenage high school student as an example) with a bit of marihuana often for free, and within a month or two they slowly advance them to a stronger drug like Cannabis Resin even onto the much more concentrated and potent, Hash Oil.

What I'm trying to say (and I'm saying it really badly) although Cannabis itself is probably not all that harmful ? However, in order to ensure continuity of your supplies and your supplier, by necessity you need to associate with some really bad arses on fairly regular occasions ? And you can believe me, when I say they don't give a stuff what happens to you ? I can assure you Johan from bitter experience, marihuana peddlers can be just as violent and ruthless as any 'boob rat' that I've ever known ?

Sure I totally agree with you, that alcohol is as habit forming and injurious as other drugs, but the difference is, it's legal ! Whereas many of the other drugs are clearly not !

Yes OUG....you watch out for those 18 year old child molesters....there every where:).....you enjoy.

Kat

Alcohol makes you do stupid things when you're drunk & Cannabis/drugs make you stupid.
I have heard it many times that cannabis is "harmless". Wanna bet ? Everyone I know who smokes cannabis is somewhat off the planet most of the time, not just when they're smoking.
I fully support drug testing before payments because some of my dollars are not only going towards those morons enjoying a rest whilst I have to work, my taxes are also used to sort the morons out when they have to go to hospital etc.

AH/THE GATEWAY/THEORY\..dear wu..please see that smokers preceed the smoking of cannabis
a kid[non smoker]..isnt about to get offerd some dope/because to any kid it will just look like a herb..[but kids get take this pill to get younger/look older calm down/this pill to get healthy that pill as a vitamin[in short dear flat floOt..kids get their thRILL WITH A PILL.

THE GATE-WAY TO THIS PILL POPPING CULTURE OF TRUST BEGAN WHEN MUM FED THE KID Lsd/to slow down their hypper activity/then they got sick/and munny crushed up a pill in his mothers milk[in shirt the gateway..is a lie[we mostly begin with a sip at poppies knee..[OF BOOZE..or a sip of whine with a meal..mate in so many ways the gateway is a lie.]

maybe if your a smoker i offer you a taste of my smoke
[and as many reformed smokers know..qa smoke[even a 50 times stronger smoker/is still magnifying the affects of smoke..[look i will let yopu into the joke/nicoteen smoke narrows the areries/dope smoke opens the, up/but red eyes is the proof..of the maximum it can do

there are no cannabos poisening deaths/a few hos[italisations/plus no doudtsome interesting spin/but mate present the proof/cause someones lying\there are no cannabis mechanism/to 'cause death/unlike booze[go on skull down a bottle of spirits/see how sick ya get/i smoked 25 joints new years eve..to no affect[since the tax increase i have given up toobacco all together[longer ago than i have kNOWN YOU]..THING IS THEY TELL COPPERS LIES[SO YOU HAVE THAT ATTITUDE THAT 'SAVES KIDS FROM THEM SELVES/BY CRIMINALISING THEM

MY LONG CRiMINAL RECORD is 95/percent..dope related
police persuing medical issues/for revenue raising/BY LIES..[its pathetic
b ut as it applies to the dope..ALL THEDOPERS I KNOW WORK..

OK INDIVIDUAL 'CLAIMS' TO KNOW MORE THAN THAT
BUT HE LIES/THEY CANT BE 'HIS' PEERS/BECAUSE CLEARELY HE DISPISES THEM[SO JUDGES THEM WITH BIASED EYES[THAT SEE HIS OWN SIN[WITHIN/HIM]

its pathetic that govt needs propagate and [ROMOTE AS IF TRUE THESE ON GOING LIES..but its so good for cops to hate kids to screw them over[as if their parents and govts havnt screwed them enough..[DRUNKS GET EXCUSED/PUNKS DOPERS NO HOPERS GET REVENUE RAISING AND CRIMINALISED FOR SELF HELP/SELF MEDICATION SENDS DOCTERS BROKE/so they lie for the money and the free trips..

if you only knew/how much i hate explaining things
again and again/then copping the same lies yet again
there are buzzwords/passive smoking]gateway theory..one is fixed by avoiding smokers/the gateway..well..less smokers=less dopers..but heck eat this bisket[filled with/horse tranquilser]..it knocks ya socks off..yet its still a cookie..looks just like a cannabis cookie

bah leave me alone folks im going to explode
YOU HATE DOPERS..[we are the root[gateway]..of all evil]..
I GET THAT

NOW GET THE HELL OUT OF MY LIFE.
fantasize about your own drug fukked realities

/my only drug seems adenolin/that i keep down/by smoking..thc

or adenolin junkies die faster than dopers/
BETTER I GO RACE CARS..in the mall-ways

give a dog a bad name//he will crack
go screw someone elses reality/or get..serious and let get into court

get a life
get out OF MINE
then walk...away..or else i let the phyco..in me go[he will be obsessive..as obsessive as you/but you want him in your life or you wouldnt keep[ playing the same old lies]..please present proof..or pee off.

i know its online opinion/but its not called on line bias
OR LIES ON LINE..or war on dopers smpokers and no hopers
you expressed opinion//i demand it be tested/proved..name names/dates times places

yes you criminalised many doppy kids
but you never saved one life..[from death by marijuana]..its [ure insanity to think so//you ruined many kids lives/with the criminal record/you put on them...and the debts burdens govt 'servants' have hard pressed upon us.

more of me will emerge as THE LIES UNRAVEL
PRESENT PROOF/NAME NAMES OR DROP YA ATTITUDE.

uog: MY LONG CRiMINAL RECORD is 95/percent..dope related.

Here a bit of insight for you.

If you didn't do drugs then you wouldn't have a criminal record & your mind wouldn't be scrambled as shown by the way you present your Posts. Your best bet is to get help with any addiction you may have.

Ask yourself some questions.

Who do you blame for your criminal record? The Police, or yourself for doing something that is against the Law? How do you pay for your Stuff? Do you have enough to live on after that? How is your health affected by your chosen lifestyle?

Dear jayb,

My response was to your post on page 5.
Go back and re-read it - then you may (or not)
get the point being made. Although I won't
hold my breath.

Drug testing is widespread in most commercial environments and has been since the 1980’s. The corporate sector, the construction and mining sector and public service sectors.

These tests are of course directed at those who earn a living and pay taxes. I see no problem in testing those who generate national income or those who’s parasitic relationship with wage earners is to spend the hard earned income of others.

There are those who oppose this who notably, are those who would fail a drugs test or would be certified because of it.

I’m thinking in particular of those who would not be out on the streets were it not for drugs.

Nhoj is one of those on parole simply because he takes his prescription drugs so we can’t argue with that can we. The blue ones at breakfast, the pink and purple ones after you’ve been to the pub, the red ones only when you have rocked up at Centrelink, the green ones after you have eaten your lettuce and the brown ones after you have posted on OLO.

Then you can take the rainbow colored ones when you have watched Q&A and are ready for a drug induced la la session biting your pillow.

Sleep tight and think of Giggle and Hoot

To all the crazies here, comfortably living off "their" tax break welfare .. oops I mean superannuation, who insist that all people on the dole ($252 per week) should be drug tested before they receive their huge fortnightly payment .... do you support drug testing for all old age pensioners before they receive "their" fortnightly payments?

Remember, the baby boomers were the biggest and most prolific drug taking generation of all.

So do you support that? If not, why not? Why only test recreational drug users on the dole, but NOT recreational drug users on the old age pension?

Dear Nhoj,

Your explanation for being a drug induced failure in life and dependent upon the earnings of others is less than admirable.

Those who worked hard, planned for their futures, saved for a rainy day and avoided dependence upon the pittance of $252 per week dole are truly shocked that we can only afford to pay you such a small amount from our efforts as tax contributors.

We see a significant difference between those who have paid their way in society and those who expect us to also pay for your failures as members of society. We don’t need drug testing because we have already secured our futures and our choices by paying our own way. You on the other hand wish to avoid earning and contributing but still wish to avoid drug testing for the money you have NOT earned but still want to spend on drugs that are paid for by others.

I would agree that many in our generation were into free love and recreational drugs but at the same time, still managed to secure our futures without being a financial burden on others. Woodstock was great and I’m truly sorry you missed it.

Recreational drug use for us is a matter of choice because we have already “earned” the right for that choice. You demand it because you are state dependent. By that I mean you are dependent on the hard earned financial security of others to pay you not to work AND use drugs at our expense.

I’m sure you will explain your position without reference to those who pay for your demands.

This is one “crazy” that is all ears?

Dearest Spindoc,

Thanks for showing your nature to everyone here, by displaying that you can't reply without starting with juvenile and 100% unsubstantiated claims in your first sentence. You are good evidence that maturity is not necessarily gained with age.

Spindoc, your superannuation is *WELFARE* ..... amazingly huge TAX BREAKS (welfare) and employer contributions (welfare).

If you are living off superannuation you can only claim to be "independent" if you have NEVER, EVER received superannuation tax braks, and have NEVER, EVER received an employer contribution at any stage in your life.

So Spindoc, enjoy your *WELFARE* payments.

You also wrote, "recreational drug use for us is a matter of choice". So because you're *OLD* it's excused by you and is ok, it's a "choice". Well son, it's exactly people like *YOU* who should be subjected to regular drug tests in order to receive "your" superannuation welfare payments.

Lay off the kids you old fogie.

Let me ask ALL this -

- does everyone on this forum who want the so-called "dole bludgers" to be crushed also apply that philosophy to all indigenous peoples many who are also living entrenched in unemployment, welfare, mental illness etc.

Don't leave out also the large unemployment or "bludging" issue in many ethnic communities.

. . . . . Oh NO . . . likely the prime target here is the traditional scapegoat and punching bag for the white elite - that is the "convict" clases.

Just turn on the tv and see shows like Bogan HUnters and Housoes to see the extreme unashamed classist piggery and cruelty from the elite to those at the underneath of the boot.

*THE* reason why the so called elite exits at all is because they are supported by the less well off, who buy consumer goods produced by the so called elite. Without that, the elite ("financial" elite that is) would not exist.

Basically, the rest of the population provides welfare payments to the financial elite, by buying the products. And in return, the financial elite work for their dole by producing consumer goods. This works right through the chain, from the top to the bottom. EVERYONE is on "welfare".

I'm quite well off, but "some" people in my position, usually crazy far righties, don't comprehend that when it's brought down to the absolute basic level ..... we *UTTERLY 100% DEPEND* on the less well off to support us by buying our goods. THEY are our masters, not the other way round as the crazy righties here believe.

Hi Nhoj,

It’s gratifying to learn that the baby boomers only achieved their financial security by paying 48c in the dollar tax, then paid the super levy on contributions but at a discounted rate

(<< amazingly huge TAX BREAKS (welfare) and employer contributions (welfare)>>).

I guess there is no need to mention that we were well educated, resourceful, hard working and not anticipating being dependent upon others?

So when you consider that tax breaks and super contributions are now even more “amazing” than we had on offer, you would say what?

In summary, you have better tax breaks, improved super contributions and greater social security benefits and you still can’t make a living?

This is all assuming that you are both “employable” and “employed”. Otherwise you are back where you started, with better tax breaks and greater super options but still state dependent.

When you say “Lay off the kids you old fogie”. What you really mean is yes we are kids and stop harassing us because we are even better off that you were but we bitch on about things even better.

Go Nhoj, get a job and stop depending on those who have one.

Spindoc and others,

Ask yourself these BASIC kindie level question:

1) In china which people are really doing ALL the work, making China a big economy, making the world's businesses richer by using slave workers - (a) the wealthier decision making Chinese classes, OR (b) the poorerst of China who's hard, physical work is the real drive for the wealth everyone is amazed by?

2) In Australia which class of people did all the actual real work of constructing an entire nation (roads, dams etc.), the - (a) the wealthier decision making Anglo classes, OR (b) the poorerst of Anglos who were stolen from their homelands of Britain by the elite using excuses of criminality (mostly just small crimes for food etc.) and used as slaves to build the colony?

Clearly in both (1) AND (2) THE POOREST PEOPLES do most work and the rich use the excuse usually that poor are not intelligent enough to make leadership decisions and so can only do physical work (among many others).

So the poor build everything, the rich use it all and claim ownership of it all, then because the rich make decisions to make them richer but which will affect the lives of all the poor (the massive job-economic changes where manufacturing went to Asia 100%) and then still complain that the poor are leeches who bludge from the rich.

What? The rich in all of time have always BLUDGED in all ways from the poorer.

The very fact that the west has shifted ALL menial physical jobs to Asia indicates this is still alive. The most oppressed people in India and China are being jumped on by the world as the slave workers.

Foxy: BTW (Loved your "little-Girl voice"). Suits you! Theeing quuie Foxy. (my favourite "young girl" sound.)

A show of intelligence from the Pseudo famous young women who are famous for being famous. So sickening. Or would that be considered a Clive Palmer.

Foxy: Centerlink money is the backbone of the registered club and pub income stream and payments should be quarantined.

So you agree that Rent Food & Electricity should be taken out of the Dole & what's left passed on to them? Just asking.

. . . continued . . .

People speak about doing it on their own and working hard like Spindoc BUT . . . he mentions "resources" and not "anticipating being dependant on others" like the poor no doubt ; yet he forgets that the wealthier classes have always had much, much more resources, education and other assistance (like slaves or house workers) whereas the poor usually could ONLY rely upon their own wages from working at the local factory.

It was this class of resourceful people who had the power and authority to make the severe world changing changes that led to all the low-skilled jobs being stolen away from the poor here and given to even poorer people in Asia living under oppression by elite masters.

If the "resourceful" peoples could do that to the poor how the hell does anyone think the poor has any power or ability to do anything like the richer do considering the poor clearly have very little resources and influence in any sense?

How about this Spindoc -

use all those resources and ingenuity you profess to bring back the jobs and industries the poor people traditionally relied upon and which your class stole from them.

You actually owe massive compensation to the "convict" classes buddy.

Thanks Spindoc, for proving me correct with your last reply (and you didn't even realise it, ha ha). Much appreciated son.

Dear jayb,

I've stated in the past that -

That there is a belief that the poor are in poverty
because they are idle and prefer to live on "handouts."
And that they prefer to take drugs, drink, gamble, et cetera,
with their Centrelink payments. This view is fervently held
even by people who do not know poor people, have never
tried to raise a family on welfare payments, and haven't
the vaguest idea what poverty or addiction is really like.

Opinion polls repeatedly show large sections of the
population favouring cuts in welfare spending, or having
programs like "drug testing" or favouring plans to "make
welfare recipients go to work."

These attitudes bear little relationship to reality.
If we were to look at statistics - many welfare
recipients are aged people, or disabled, most of the rest
are mothers with young children, and a very small
percentage (I believe less than 3 percent) are able-bodied
men, most of them are unskilled workers in areas of
high unemployment.

Other myths abound - especially that welfare is a terrible
burden on the taxpayer. Welfare represents a very small
percentage of the federal budget.

Why do these curious myths about the poor persist?

It's the belief that if those who get ahead can claim credit
for their success, then those who fall behind must, logically,
be blamed for their failures. The poor are therefore
supposed to need incentives to work, rather than help at the
expense of the taxpayer.

There are few complaints, however, about how our country
pays out far more in "handouts" to the nonpoor than to the
poor - in forms ranging from tax deductions, subsidies, and
other benefits.

This fact generally escapes attention because these benefits
take the indirect form of hidden subsidies or tax deductions
rather than the direct form of cash payments.

I believe that we should provide whatever help is necessary
to those who need it. We may need to change or modify certain
aspects of our system - but lets make it fair to everyone.

Welfare coupons can not be put in a poker machine, lets drop the cash and handout welfare coupons if they embarass you and your pride is affected good, educate upskill, apply for the ADF voluntee just get motivated.

Where on earth do you live Jottiikii, It can't be in Oz.

Send your poor who want to work up this way, that is if you can really find any who do actually want to work. It is the unskilled jobs people can't fill.

Just around here we have 2 turf farmers employing dole bludgers, cash in hand, for a day here & there, as they can't get workers.

We have a nursery, a plasterer, a concreter & a builder, all in the same position.

I can send them to these 6 prospective employers, just in my 2 kilometer long country road. Every one of them has given up advertising as they never get an answer to their adds.

I mentioned I would get over 100 applicants from people in work for any add for administrative position I placed, but none to just 3 or 4 for a stores or production job. This was on the Gold Coast, with thousands of so called unemployed, surfing every day.

Yes it is hard to get a job on $1000 a week, although that plasterer was paying my son that much when he worked for him for two months, waiting for his navy course to start. However even a farm laborer will get more than twice the dole, if they can actually get out of bed & go to work

Foxy: I believe that we should provide whatever help is necessary
to those who need it. We may need to change or modify certain
aspects of our system - but lets make it fair to everyone.

I'm with you on this. Let's take one thing at a time.

Most of the "Old" Baby Boomers, didn't have superannuation. It wasn't a thing that was generally available when I started work. We had Life Assurance. A few bob in each week was going to make you a fortune when you retired. Well I collected mine when I retired. It worked out to be "one week work, present day. Mind you when I took it out at 17 that amount was a veritable fortune. I worked for 42 years & never went on the dole, except for the first few weeks after I left school. I still have the Receipt, 10/6 or $1.05 in to-days money. mind you that was at a time when adult were $10/10/6. I got Super when it was introduced as compulsory. $22000. I retired, then the tax got at both of them, so I ended up with stuff all out of it.

The seriously Physically disabled. We have a responsibility to look after these people. Once they were left to die naturally as nature intended. The mildly disabled were in special homes where they were looked after & worked if they were able. Now the facilities have been closed down by the Politically Correct & these people are out in the World. On paper they have support, but the reality does not meet any reasonable standard.

The Chronically Mentally disabled (the insane) have also been pushed out into the street. They have facilities for them, in for a week, out for a week. No after care. They are on their own. The Moderately Mentally disabled are on the streets all the time. Admitted when they have an "episode" for a few days, then, "Get out & behave yourself." No follow up. There is on paper. The reality, zip! The Mildly disabled are mostly fine & functioning people.

Foxy : That there is a belief that the poor are in poverty because they are idle and prefer to live on "handouts."

No, some people are poor because they have no useable skills, or have a very low SG rating, SG-3 & below. Can't be trained for anything. Sub-Saharan Culture. Most people are SG3 or above. SG (Specific Grouping). I am SG2+. Able to be trained & retain to do anything. SG1-, SG1, SG1+ are you Genius Groupings.

Some people are SG3, & just plain "Bogans" & "Durs" That's why they are poor & live on handouts. It's these people that are lazy &, "Should be given a swift kick up the ar$e." These are the people that should be targeted where the Dole is concerned.

Foxy: most of the rest are mothers with young children,

A good percentage are young girls who have just left school. They have come from a family living on Welfare. They have the intention of getting pregnant as fast as possible to collect the welfare & as much in the way of handouts as they can get, living at home to help support the family. Just off hand I can count of 10 families that I know of in my little town that live like this & intended to live like that before they left school. They think that this is normal.

Jayb,
I have a responsibility to me and mine and a right to protect it when I have to.
I am not my brothers keeper, I can't afford him.
If someone wants what I have then let him either fight me for it or work for it.

chrisgaff1000: I have a responsibility to me and mine and a right to protect it when I have to.
I am not my brothers keeper, I can't afford him.
If someone wants what I have then let him either fight me for it or work for it.

I don't know where your coming from here. but I'll try to make some sense of it.

I'll do a Clive. Apologies before I start.

Chris, any time you want to assemble a group of spastic on the Parade Ground & get them ready for work, be my guest. Until then, these people seriously need the best help the Government & anybody who can lend a hand can do to help them. If it's beneath you or you are to tied up in your own little World, best you stay away. From everybody.

The crazy OLO rightie dogma = "Gee, those evil, wicked, leftie dole bludgers must be living the high life on their $252 a week: Polkies, pubs, brothels, drugs galore, porn, sleep ins all day etc etc etc".

What parallel universe are you crazy righties living in?

G'day CHRISGAFF1000...

I reckon your assumptions are a little too unrealistic, when you say; '...if someone wants what I have; then let him either fight me for it, or work for it...' ?

The noun 'work' (which equates to 'effort') would possibly not necessarily form part of some people's vocabulary. Neither would the verb 'fight' for the same reason ! To 'fight' one needs to have a bit of heart ! Conversely, you need 'heart' in order to get up every morning and go to work !

A curious conundrum for some I'm afraid, in fact any resolution to this trifling enigma, is well beyond their potential to solve, I would've thought ?

Chris, Are you a 'Doomsday Prepper' all you need is a AK47, a can of beans and a hole in the ground, and your set for any eventuality from that "brother" of yours. LOL

The 'Usual Suspects', I need some advice, as a $252 a week "dole bludger" I'm presently spending $250 of it on pokies, pubs, brothels, drugs and porn. Do you thing you chaps on OLO will get terribly upset if I simply blow the other $2 on a luxurious life style?
Also, with the change from daylight saving, does that mean I should now get up at 11am instead of 10? You lads will be please to hear that I once looked for a job, but unfortunately I was so traumatized by the experience my 'case manager' down at 'Centrelink' has forbid me from ever doing so again, that was in 1957, besides, I'm holding out for a managerial position. LOL

'afternoon to you JAYB...

I don't believe for a moment either CHRISGAFF1000 or anyone else for that matter, would quarrel with any assistance given to those profoundly handicapped people, like those afflicted with spasticity. Nor any number of similar diseases, including those who are mentally unwell too ?

What he, and you can include me amongst this group, do strongly object to, is these able bodied youngsters who leave school prematurely, before gaining a worthwhile 'basic' education in order to either, undertake a trade course, or matriculate to a university.

Whereas they'd prefer to lounge around at home or on the beach being supported by welfare instead of pursuing work. I don't believe for a moment, our welfare system was ever designed to accommodate characters such as these, who are simply bone lazy, and would prefer to allow the already stretched taxpayer to fund their indolent lifestyle !

Furthermore JAYB, I don't believe you do either ? I fully accept what you're saying concerning folk who're unable to work. Either because of some physical, or mental infirmity or those few, that for whatever reason, have some intellectual deficiency that precludes them from joining the workforce at large. But, definitely NOT those who possess no legitimate reason for at least not seeking work.

dear Bigots,

does anyone actually believe that anyone really wants to live their entire life in utter poverty on 200 dollars a week with no self-esteem, self-respect, ability to go to dentist or have any luxuries etc., never ever own a house or even a car?

Surely most of those people must be either mentally ill and/or emotionally disabled from some extreme abuse of some sort.

Imagine if you grew up in a family where both parents were entrenched in welfare and had severe mental issues, no proper education or help outside from family friends etc., maybe also if both parents had drug/alcohol problems etc., coupled with ALL the people living in area being the same -

. . . does any of the "resourceful" middle class people here who think they have because 'they did' really think they would have still turned out like they now currently are?

Or maybe, would that person have extreme issues and hiondrances to being able to live a norm al life?

Jottiikii, the crazy righties are not so utterly ignorant and unintelligent that they actually "believe" what they write about Newstart recipients. They write those things as an abuse towards those people here who have some sympathy for those on Newstart. In other words, the stupid righties are merely trying to get under you skin and abuse your sensibilities.

Don't fall for their tactic of abuse. They do it just to bait you. They are immature old men who love to hate.

This absurd belief that those on the Newstart Allowance are well off om $255.25/week is a nonsense. I live in Sydney and with rents being what they are many unemployed are being forced onto the streets. We have over 44,000 homeless kids on the streets, and Abbott wants to cut them off completely for up to 8 months a year. I once believed Australia was a compassionate society, but look what this Government is turning Australia into, an uncaring dog eat dog society.

http://www.homelessnessnsw.org.au/

Hey Paul, that can't be correct. Australia *DOES* use abundant welfare to lovingly protect those in need. I can prove it. Tax'Em Tony's daughter is so grateful to receive her welfare payments, as she comes from such a poor, struggling family. Her $60,000 "special" scholarship (oops I mean welfare payment) will greatly help her poor family cope with her education costs.

See Paul, that proves it. Welfare is alive and well in Australia.

Why do you lot keep saying Tony is going to cut them off.

He said, he will cut them off if they are NOT LEARNING. Now, where's the problem there!

As for drugs, first, the drugs reffwred to are illegal and second, if you want to collect the new start allowance, YOU MUST BE FIT AND READY TO WORK. End of story!

No ifs, no buts, fit and ready for work. The alternative is no work, no dole.

Rehctub writes, "no work no dole".

Hmmmm, so says the bludger who is not working whilst comfortably living off welfare himself ... his $120,000 a year superannuation income (he admitted that in a past post) full of OVERTLY GENEROUS TAX BREAKS (welfare), CONCESSIONS (welfare) and PAST EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS as he wasn't always self employed (welfare).

Yep Rehctub, on welfare himself, sits back in his comfortable lounge chair, with a stubby resting on his big, fat belly, furiously typing about these horrid people on Newstart living it up on $255.25 per week.

Nhoj, you can't even quote a person correctly. Seriously, why would anyone here take you seriously, you only really come here to hurl abuse at fellow posters. Nobody cares.

I did not say I was retired, just semi I am employed and work 5.5 months of the year. To me that's semi retired, because I was used to working six 10 to 12 hour days.

I'm not drawing on my super, not yet anyway,

Rehctub, I see you're taking lessons from "ToneLIAR".

You recently stated you have an income of 120 thousand dollars. Now you're saying you only work 5 months or so per year, and have no super income.

So, what are you doing for 20 weeks per year that provides you with your "claimed" 120 thousand dollars?

This should be good .......

"I'd be happy to support that. I would have no problem with that at all. It might make a few Greens MPs nervous but it wouldn't make me worry at all."

Greens MP Adam Bandt says he does not support testing dole recipients or parliamentarians for use of illegal drugs and asked whether MPs would agree to their alcohol consumption be monitored.

"I wonder whether the same people who are proposing these harsh measures for young people would be prepared to have every MP breathalysed before they go into the chamber," he said.

Tasmanian Palmer United Party Senator-elect Jacqui Lambie says drug testing politicians might help explain some of the policy decisions made in Canberra.

"Well we're going to see why we are getting all these sort of awful decisions coming out one way or the other, aren't we?" she said.

"Fair go ... you've got to practice what you preach - lead by example."

In 2007, Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan challenged other federal politicians to set an example to the sporting and wider community and also submit to random drug testing.

Palmer United senator-elect Jacqui Lambi says the results of politicians' drug tests might help explain some of the policy decisions made in Canberra.

Well, on the day of the last State of Origin Match I had several cartons of beer, bottles of Rum & some bottles of Whiskey as fellow passengers on the plane. When I asked one of the recipients as to how can they afford to pay $240.- for a bottle of Whiskey or $120.- for a carton beer, the answer was "from the Government Child Support payment", it always comes in just before the date of the game.

o sung wu: What he, and you can include me amongst this group, do strongly object to, is these able bodied youngsters who leave school prematurely, before gaining a worthwhile 'basic' education in order to either, undertake a trade course, or matriculate to a university.

Oh I agree entirely. I belong to a "Men's Shed" & we had some of the wayward students three afternoons a week. 3 out of 4 weren't worth the trouble. We had to ban mobiles in the Work Shop. They complained & apparently "We" were out of line. Go figure. They all had intentions of being trades people. They couldn't read or write or even add up. They weren't even interested. They all said, "you just leave school, get an apprenticeship & make big money." No amount of explanation would convince them. What hope for these kids. Then they want to be supported on the Dole.

Whoever: Hmmmm, so says the bludger who is not working whilst comfortably living off welfare himself ... his $120,000 a year superannuation income (he admitted that in a past post) full of OVERTLY GENEROUS TAX BREAKS (welfare), CONCESSIONS (welfare) and PAST EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS as he wasn't always self employed (welfare).

One has to remember here that to get that amount of Super the person must have been employed for a long time & paid his fair share of Taxes.

As far as "Super" goes. yopu are Taxed when it goes in, while it's in there it gets Fee'd to blazes, then gets Taxed when you finally get it.

I really wouldn't call that "Bludging on Welfare." The Government used you money while they had it, kept most of it anyway then doled it out to the Pensioner in a miserly fashion. so, my friend nhoj, Get, well you know.

579: Tasmanian Palmer United Party Senator-elect Jacqui Lambie says drug testing politicians might help explain some of the policy decisions made in Canberra.

I second that, or would I have to get on the end of the line.

579, I don't think it would be fair to test politicians for drugs, some legitimately need them. As I understand it, at this very moment our Tone is on medically prescribed 'human hormones'. Doctors fully expect with an intensive program of these drugs our Tone will be at least half human within 5 years! A medical miracle no less! Unfortunately the first political patent for human hormone treatment, Mathias Cormann, was an abject failure, despite 10 years of intensive treatment poor Mathias is still a 'Neanderthal', no change what so ever. Medical science does have its failures.
p/s This is the real reason our Tone wants all that dosh from a Medicare copayment. Medical research! Yes our Tone want Medical Science to find a way to turn Liberal politicians into human beings! Now such a discovery as that, would be right up there with something like finding a cure for baldness or hives or the 7 day itch! Those really important medical things.

<<Well, on the day of the last State of Origin Match I had several cartons of beer, bottles of Rum & some bottles of Whiskey as fellow passengers on the plane....>>
Indi...That joke fell flat. were we supposed to laugh?

Good evening to you JAYB...

I've heard nothing but good about these 'Men's Sheds', though I've never gone along to them personally, my GP has been a couple of times himself. After which he has even referred a few of his older (Widowed) patients there too. All apparently reporting back to him, in a most positive way ! They do really marvellous work, even with the young unemployed.

JAYB, I really have no idea what can be done with some of these young, mentally and physically healthy, unemployed people. I can certainly corroborate as to what can happen to them should they gravitate into drugs and ultimately a life of crime ?

It seems if you were to suggest they try to improve their basic standard of education, you could be roundly pilloried by those on the left...Why ? Surely there is nothing in that statement that could be described as political ? Nor could it be criticised as being anti-social, or even unfair or too hard, on a young person ?

I know of no trade, where even a basic level of mathematics is not required ? Even reading is essential, not to a standard where Billy Shakespeare's works are the preferred theme for discussion, rather than, 'the last race at tonight's Harold Park's dogs' ? Then why on earth do those of the left, criticise statements of a kind similar to this ? I really don't get it, to me it's basic common sense ?

Thank you for your 'heads up' on the 'Men's Sheds', most appreciated indeed.

Hi Jayb, & o sung, it is the feminists in control of education these days you can blame for much of the lack of math. They have dumbed it down so much to suit the girls, even the high achievers in senior math are arriving at university incapable of doing the work kids did 25 years ago.

A friend of ours got out of high school teaching, when he couldn't stand watching how the syllabus was going.

He started teaching remedial math at a couple of TAFE colleges to those kids wanting to do a trade, but with insufficient math. He loved it. For the first time in years he had a whole class that wanted to learn. It was pretty hard going with some, who could not make change for a hamburger, if the cash register didn't do it for them.

So many of these boys had done very little but muck around at school, & learnt stuff all. Some admitted it was not "cool" for boys to do well at school today. Very few of even the best could handle an electrical apprenticeship math without coaching.

He still does some TAFE, but is now doing mostly the same thing with university BSc students. It really surprised him how little math some kids, with high OP scores, able to get into difficult courses, really understood.

He is finding this a little less satisfying as many of the young ladies doing Environmental science are not even capable of junior high school math, & resent having to try to learn, rather than wanting to.

They expected to learn better ways to hug trees, not math. They expect a BSc because they feel green, not because they know anything.

Has been: the young ladies doing Environmental science .... They expect a BSc because they feel green.

Yes. It was the same with many of these yong fellows. They expect to be Motor Mechanics because they like "fast cars."

Sad, so sad.

Indi...That joke fell flat. were we supposed to laugh?
Paul1405,
If you think that was a joke then you'd better think again. That scenario is cold stark fact on a regular basis. If you think this is a joke then I'm afraid you're even more silly than all morons on OLO combined. I actually think you do know but you're not game enough i.e. lacking the integrity to concede it happens. And, yes it is one of the sad legacies of Labor.
May I suggest you start enquiring about those remote communities before you you start laughing at dreadfully serious Labor stuff-ups which the Conservatives now have to reverse & trying to avoid backlash at the same time. I just hope you feel good about having been instrumental in getting the Labor morons into power & ruin the fabric of our society.

Indi, what was the name of the airline which allowed cartons of beer etc to be taken on board as carry on luggage? You cannot take containers of liquid (any liquid including beer, water, coca cola) in excess of 100ml through airport security. A bar in an airport does not have an 'off license' so therefor all package beer/alcohol purchased has to be opened at the point of sale.

Paul you would evidentially be amazed at what goes on aircraft in the less commercial world of general aviation.

I once had a logging contractor desperate for some "log dogs", steel spikes with a ring on top. These are driven into logs, & a wire rope passed through the ring to make up log rafts to tow out to timber ships anchored off shore.

He wanted two, one hundred weight bags of the things. The Rabaul local air service to Kimbe could not guarantee carrying the weight if it had a full load of passengers in their Aztec that did the run.

In a moment of inspiration I booked 2 passengers into the flight, Mr. & Mrs. Log dog. The customer got his log dogs by speed boat from Kimbe the next morning.

I don't know if they traveled in passenger seats, or in the cargo hold, but they traveled, & even better, the passenger fare was cheaper than the freight bill would have been. Talk about win win

Paul1405,
Of course the grog was not on a seat as such. it was right behind but still in front of the rear bulkhead within the cabin space where hand luggage is stowed. Passengers put it there & collect when exiting the AC. It was the same Airline that was allowed a monopoly by both Labor & LNP Governments after they shafted another one which actually provided a better service. Why, I can't say that here because I'd be accused of being a homophobe.
Besides, that's not the point is it / The point is that people use social benfit as a means of procuring super inflated priced grog. Now I imagine if these people would have to pay $7 for the doctor after a night on the rum then that would really finacially hurt them. But they won't have to pay Cent anyway.

Producer says:

“Communism assumes equality. My proposition is capitalism that recognizes there are limits and social responsibility”

. . . and also he says "ultimately they [kids] are the responsibility of the parents, not the tax payer” which is in sync with his "capitalism" ideas.

However I must point out to ALL the extreme importance of this issue, the fact that it is grossly misunderstood and how that leads to most of the political/social problems in our society.

I agree with both the primary premises of communism and capitalism.
Further I claim that both sides totally misunderstand the fundamentals and this causes them to perceive themselves opposed when in fact they are not different at all fundamentally.

First both communism and capitalism is premised on a conception of the ontology of the self as being each as individuals equal to all other selfs in an existential sense only [meaning they are important equally re their very being]. Communism thinks all people are equal and this leads to their 'fairness' lean and capitalists think each individual is as a principle equally allowed to move within the social-political-economic fabric to gain property for their person, this also at heart relies on the same premise that existentially all individuals are equal somehow.

It is just that both sides get the details wrong when they interpret the principles to be able to real-world instituted.

I believe that both the communists and capitalists misunderstand their premises by thinking to use their base to be an equality of real world terms when this is not ever usually the case. In turn the capitalist relies on that erroneous assumption to claim their right to get more wealth IF they can and do the work whilst the communist erroneaouly believes that ALL things should be shared out evenly regardless of indivudal hard work and ingenuity.

Both are terribly wrong.

Both sides misunderstand that the ultimate premise both communism and capitalism are based on is that the self-as-such [i.e. every individual] is equal in their individual existential nature and worth

. . . continued . . . .

Instead both communist and capitalist philosophies miss the mark some and think that ultimate premise is one about how to understand human relations of self to every other self on the world. That conception leads to both sides erroneously believing they have to either accept or reject outright the belief that every individual is ACTUALLY EQUAL in real life [rather than in principle as it really needs to be seen] and this is why the capitalist tends to REJECT this and embrace a level of Rayndian selfishness whilst the communists claim to ACCEPT this and claim to embrace a total selfless egalitarianism.

These issues have been debated for centuries and in modern times most notably between Rawls and Habermas and others. The debate always comes down to the issue of whether a political philosopher thinks about social inequalities that are often born into [no choice] and how that should affect wealth and the level that the privileged should "assist" those with very little.

Whilst the typical selfish capitalist [everyone for themselves] tends to believe that they owe nobody anything let alone charity, the communist thinks that [at least supposed to] every person should be given same pay regardless of job type and same opportunities etc.

The capitalist ignores the fact that all wealth, opportunities etc. are usually strongly determined by where one is born and their opportunities are highly restricted within those particular good or rotten parameters. The communist ignores the fact that individuals despite their chances [assume same for sake of argument] may work harder than another and/or wish to embrace openness and free thinking more than others and therefore some should still get better rewards than others [the degree of the difference of rewards is the issue].

Anyway the capitalist DO ALREADY recognize and employ this 'fairness' policy but not for individual workers - only for business and big financial setups [e.g. tariff protections etc.]

Maybe you need to be tested.

I got tested going through Grafton last weekend. Passed.

He said do you take drugs. I said more than you want to know. then I showed him my little bag. ;-) He said, "pi$$off." with a grin.