Nobody is suggesting these people can no longer live in these remote communities, it's just that if they choose to, then don't expect we the tax payer to continue supporting them

Welfare is a hand up, not a hand out.

Tony Abbott's key Indigenous advisers have slammed his description of living in remote communities as a "lifestyle choice", saying the statement is "hopeless", "disrespectful" and simplistic.

Abbott is a master at supplying fodder for the bottom feeders in our community!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-11/abbott-defends-indigenous-communities-lifestyle-choice/6300218

All adult Australians are free to live wherever they wish, if they choose to live in a remote community then it is a lifestyle choice.

If the communities are Indigenous Australians then they should need no support if they are living a traditional lifestyle, 40,000 years of self sufficiency backs this up.
If, however, they wish to live a European lifestyle then they should be treated just the same as their fellow Australians and receive equal treatment.

Dear Rehctub,

I agree with the points that Malcolm Turnbull
made:

"Can't we have a sensible debate on the subject
of living in remote communities without the
sustained focus on attacking Mr Abbott."

"I'm not suggesting this is anything other than
extremely complex but I think it important we
talk about the issue thoughtfully and rationally."

Those that choose to live in remote country seem to be able to survive in their culture than those that choose to live in town unless they are receiving royalties. They obviously need less dollars than those that live in towns whose culture is a version of corrupt western.

Despite two centuries of inequality, there is always someone who on seeing something they perceive as an advantage given to indigenous people will squeal like the proverbial cut pig about it. Always adding the over rider "I'm not raciest, I only want equality." however the same people are for ever mute on issues of the inequality that Indigenous Australians suffer.