I walked through the poker machine room at a pub here in Cairns on
my way to lunch with some friends.
I counted forty poker machines ( I think they call them Gaming Machines today).
The room was fully air conditioned and the lighting very subdued so as to enhance the
glittering light shows emitting from the machines.
There was a free coffee bar complete with biscuits and cake and even small savories
Every machine, with the exception of three obviously of an older less attractive type,was
being played to the tune of up to a couple of dollars a pull (button push).
Every one of the machines being played except, for two being played by obvious old age
pensioners, was being played by mostly full blood aborigines whom had just right amount
of clothes on their emancipated bodies (mostly women) to
get them past the door security people.
All had worn thongs on their feet and most of them smelt as though they had not
been near a shower in a month.
One of the staff told me, as she served us lunch, that it was ‘pension day’ and they
would regularly leave most of their pension money in the pockets of the
hotel owners and head for the charities for food and sustenance
Surely this is evidence enough for the introduction of a universal controlled spending
card for all social security clients.

Maybe we could just get rid of pokies? Western Australia doesn't have them in pubs or clubs... doesn't seem to have done them any harm.

Please explain Toni Lavis, why thousands of people who want to play poker machines, & can do so responsibly, should have this removed from them, just because a few incompetents can't handle themselves.

It is probably even better for these "ladies" that they throw the money we have wasted on them into the pokies, rather than pour it down their throats in grog.

I have never been able to see the attraction of gambling, particularly the mindless forms such as pokies, however those who earn their own living should be able to spend their money in any way they see fit.

Those who hold their hand out for welfare payments however, should not have a right to waste what others have worked hard to earn. There is every reason to restrict their spending, or withdraw their availability to do so.

Pubs would go under if it were not for pokies. They are just one of the many, many things that some greedy bugger wanted that have proved to be a curse.

//Please explain Toni Lavis, why thousands of people who want to play poker machines, & can do so responsibly, should have this removed from them//

Because if they want to waste money on the most boring form of 'entertainment' ever devised, they're clearly not of sound mind. These poor souls deserve our compassion, and we shouldn't encourage them in their mindless zombie button-pushing. Especially since pubs and clubs seem to have taken to heart the lie peddled by gaming machine manufacturers that the damn things are actually entertaining. So now instead of live music, pool tables, dart boards... you know, stuff that is really is entertaining... they rip it all out so they cram in more bloody pokies.

If people want to sit and play a game that involves pressing one button repeatedly in order to make random arrays of pretty pictures appear, I'm pretty sure they can do that at home on their computer for a fraction of the cost of playing a pokie, and leave the pubs for the people who want to enjoy pubs with pool tables and conversations that aren't drowned out by their stupid damn machines going bingely-bongely-beep and ringing alarm klaxons every thirty seconds.

//Pubs would go under if it were not for pokies. They are just one of the many, many things that some greedy bugger wanted that have proved to be a curse.//

Pubs have been around a lot longer than pokies, and they seem to do fine in WA.

Hi Chris,

What you write is a very persuasive argument in favour of a Welfare Card for ALL beneficiaries, for up to 80 or 90 % of the value of their benefits: a simple swipe card that, as a matter of course, approves the payment for everything except gambling, grog and cigarettes.

Fools can use the remaining 10-20 % cash for those, and then humbug their relations when it runs out. Sounds fair enough.

Or, of course, if they are able-bodied, they can try work. Wash my mouth out !

Joe

Pensioners have a right to spend their own money as they see fit. The fact that it used to be taxpayers' money before it was theirs is irrelevant - 'tis theirs now to do with as they please.

If you want to ban pokies, fair enough.
If you want to address the social issues that result in people regarding pokies as worth the time and money, better still.
But limiting people's freedom to spend their own money wouldn't be a good idea even if it were free to administer - let alone the costly bureaucracy it would actually entail.

Hi Aidan,

Sorry, yes, you're right - I meant basically all those beneficiaries on unemployment benefits. Of course, they can try studying too.

Joe

In W.A. Those ladies would be haunting the TAB or under a tree somewhere playing cards. End result would be the same.
The Cashless Debit Card has been requested by another Kimberley town and I foresee that in a couple of years the whole Kimberley welfare section will be managed by this card.
Personally I'm in great favour of this card and if I'm put on it won't affect my lifestyle at all, except my EBay shopping will have to be done from the 20% cash component. For the rest, the card does BPay, cash transfers for rent etc and can be used anywhere eftpos is available.
Frankly I think we would see nation wide benefits if everyone on welfare was on this card but I imagine blood would flow if it was suggested for mainstream

We are taxed on currency that we earn, however we are not taxed for currency that we win (or launder) on games of chance.

Perhaps a substantial tax on winnings would dissuade gamblers and those using the gambling activity for other purpose.

I’m sure the majority of elderly described in the post would prefer the company of community, family and friends rather than the electronic ones described. Alas the vast majority of community, family and friends waste all their irreplaceable and valuable time serving their disproportionately wealthy neo-liberal masters and have little time left for the elderly.

Hi Producer,

I have to confess that I don't spend much time serving my disproportionately wealthy neo-liberal masters: are you suggesting that we should ? As one of the decrepit and elderly, I'm involved with a couple of singing groups - Sing Australia, to which any other elderly are warmly invited. But probably we practise on some of the same nights as some of the elderly are practising their button-pressing skills, which is their right. We each make choices. To each his own ......

Joe

G’day Joe

I am approaching elderliness, but have yet to achieve a decrepit state, although I have slowed down a bit. I do a bit of volunteer work for a local museum rather than subject the village glee club to my lack of talent in that area. There is a sense of community amongst the men and women of all ages which I enjoy.

Anyway to the subject at hand; no I am not suggesting we or anyone should serve disproportionately wealthy neo-liberal masters or any other master for that matter. I believe the dole should be eliminated and be replaced by a universal job guarantee for a predetermined time in return for a living income, which is funded federally and administered locally.

We have in this country around 1.4 million unemployed and underemployed which represents a significant pool of underutilised human capital that has the potential to generate significant productivity and growth.

We should give all, the opportunity of choice, and that choice should be autonomous, where one is subject to the consequence of our collective actions, rather than be subservient to the many inept and self-serving actions of the current neo-liberal system.

Hi Producer,

I agree that able-bodied people should be given the choice of working or starving: fruit-picking is not a bad way to avoid the second option. There's usually some of it available somewhere in Australia, for anybody looking for a working holiday away from home. Young, single people should find this option especially exciting - in fact, if they look around, they may find such work available very close to home. It pays fairly well, it allows people to get out in the sunshine and meet other hard workers, it's a healthy life. What's not to like ?

Cheers,

Joe

Joe

The concept of a Job Guarantee should not be restricted to the able-bodied, indeed should embrace all within our society. A locally controlled system would enable job creation that suits an individual irrespective of ability and intellect.

With regard to the lack of fruit pickers to service the industry, I believe it is more and issue of reward for service, isolation and working conditions that are the issue. There are two major factors that play into the current impasse. Firstly the availability of cheap foreign labour that are exploited by the industry in lieu of employing local labour that would cost more. Secondly the industry has to compete with foreign imports that are produced with slave labour and under less restrictive conditions, effectively forcing many within the industry to exploit cheap foreign labour to survive.

I put it to you that we need an equity tariff at the border that removes the imbalance that is exploited by major neo-liberal corporations like the supermarket duopoly. Such a tariff would I believe also stop manufacturing corporations exiting the country to capatalise on the slave labour and third world conditions in other parts of the globe.

A word of caution, any such tariff should not be used to offset efficiencies of a foreign market, only inequities. If a local industry is inefficient it would have to lift its game or fail

Hi Producer,

No, able-bodied people need to understand that unemployment benefits are a privilege, not a right, and conditional on their being no work within a reasonable distance that they can do. End of.

In Whitlam's day, the Commonwealth Employment Service (CES) cut off unemployment benefits in fruit-picking areas once the season started, and resumed it once the season finished. Simple as that. Nobody should expect to be able to live off the back of other workers who pay the taxes so that they can live at leisure.

As for lower wages for foreign workers, I would have thought that was illegal. Your Trump-like notions of an 'equity tax at the border', i.e. tariffs, is totally out-of-date. As for slave labour in other countries, that says nothing about conditions here, and such bizarre 'solutions' as tariffs will do nothing to improve conditions for them either, surely the reverse.

This is Australia in 2017, not the US, not 1917. Get real.

And yes, I have picked fruit, in fact I was doing that at forty. In my last job, at 61, I worked in a dairy. If I could do it, why can't young fellas ?

Joe

They do not want to work, ever and will go to great lengths to prove just that. There is an apt, uniquely Aussie word for it.

You come up against the same problems that warn the military away from ever taking on these men and women, even for a year of national service. Although the Swiss can make it work. Perhaps Australia might learn something from that culture.

There are some obvious differences between the overseas backpackers and grey nomads who pick fruit and the unemployed who find all work beneath the status and view their 'gubbermint' entitlements as their right (even where they may have arrived yesterday).

There never will be a perfect solution and that shouldn't be allowed to stymie any action. A range of alternatives should be applied.

As a base, the cashless card for benefits should be the starting point, see here,
Big Nana, Thursday, 20 April 2017 6:06:47 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7742&page=2

Producer, the stories about poor wages for fruit pickers are just that, stories.
One of my granddaughters went mango picking just out of Darwin last season and was earning $200/day, the same as the backpackers who were working alonside her.
Accomodation was provided and meals, and although the accommodation was very basic there are no guarantees in life that we get to live in fancy housing. All we need are the basics.
The only reason locals don't like these types of jobs is because they are hard work!

Unemployed people DO have to work for their pittance you know.
Its called Work for the dole. It has been around for 20+ years.
Do you want pensioners to work for the pension? Didnt they already work all their lives?
Who is going to employ them? No one wants to employ 50 year olds let alone geriatrics.

Fruit picking jobs are suitable for backpackers because they are young and fit, already travelling, need to work to extend their visas and gives them money to continue their travels. Locals can get a bit of work in season but once it is over they will get nothing unless they pick up and move every couple of months.Not really feasible for a family is it?
Young singles maybe but even then FORCING them onto the road like swagmen of old seems somewhat harsh and backward.

Sad to see well off, comfortable people punching down at those who cant fight back.
It has become acceptable practice and the way it is done here at the rightwing nutjob 2017 version of OLO.
It used to be a place of debate and interesting, diverse points of view.
Now its just a cesspit of hatred and bigotry and whining about lefties and poor people. :(

There is a lot of stuff that I could pull apart in the postings since my last post. But that would serve no purpose; the discussion would become more elongated and would have no focus.

I for one would like to see the dole dispensed with altogether and based on the comments I don’t think I would get much resistance from either the left or the right, although the reasons would be totally different.

The gateway to the solution in my mind is the Job Guarantee, which I describe as follows:

“…The federal government should introduce a floating productivity linked universal entitlement to a reasonable living minimum national wage in return for participation for a predetermined time in a meaningful productive community enterprise that is designed and operated within defined parameters by the community… "

There would be no sit down money, most existing pensions and payments could be eliminated. Everyone will have access to a job that is adapted to individual ability by their community, achieving full employment. Imagine unemployment eliminated, with 1.4 million jobs created.

Because there is a requirement that the community controlled jobs, are meaningful and productive there would be “growth”. There would be an expectation that this would increase organically with time, education, and learned abilities.

Enterprises such as community agriculture, public housing, micro energy grids, elder care, child care, education, health care, and infrastructure would give communities purpose and drive. With the introduction of the initiative described above, private enterprise within communities would be expected to thrive and expand. Life would return to dying communities be it in the remote outback, the rural town, or the city.

As Big Nanna correctly points out “there never will be a perfect solution and that shouldn't be allowed to stymie any action”, so please for the sake of the debate, focus on the big picture not the obvious exceptions.

Mikk,

From the discussion above, even an idiot would have realised that nobody expects old age pensioners to work for their pension - but if you want to explore this side-track, go for it.

Indigenous people in remote locations don't have to work for the dole. Even on CDEP, supposedly a 'work for the dole' scheme, in my observation, nobody had to actually work: mowing their own lawns, or 'home duties', i.e. keeping their house clean, was about all they had to do, and some people were on CDEP, formally a job-training program, for more than twenty years.

When Howard ordered CDEP to be wound down, at least on southern communities, the programs' organisers there paid everybody out in holiday pay, sick pay, superannuation, etc., etc., and set the debts, $ 1-2 million, against their farming enterprises. DEEWR, as the underwriter of such debt, took all the plant, tractors, Pivot irrigation systems, and the new dairy in one case and the pump in another, leaving the communities with no means to run enterprises - and NOBODY there cared, since work was the last thing they wanted to do: the very reason for living in isolated 'communities' was to be somewhere where there was little prospect of work. My brother-in-law ran the dairy until an accident forced him to quit, and always had a lot of trouble getting any young blokes to do any milking.

A few years earlier, his sister, my dear wife, took leave from her university job to try to persuade people at her home community to enrol in university courses, she hoped to move back down there and set up a combined Study Centre/Homework Centre/Historical Centre etc., but everybody asked if they could keep getting CDEP as well as Study Grant; when she said no, not one person was interested. She was devastated.

So twelve thousand acres of good land is now running a couple of hundred beef cattle. The people there did that, with eyes wide open. Tell me about 'opportunity', Mikk.

Joe

Oh come on Producer, we've been there & done that, it's called communism.

When the Chinese tried community agriculture, called communes, was it 5 or 15 million starved to death, despite millions of tons of our wheat imported?

They tried micro steel production, with enormous waste. We've tried public housing, & know we can't afford to house all the no hopers wanting everything for free. It attracts the type of people who won't even change their own light bulb.

Just a quick look at the cost of phone calls, & the number of useless union hacks employed, but not gainfully, when our phone system was government run shows the fallacy of all those arguments.

Government employment attracts bludgers like a dead cow attracts flies, & make work employment is even worse.

For me, i will suggest self control. People should be able to control the ways they invest or spent their money on things like this.

Hi Toni Lavis.

I see you have a very good suggestion, but for me i think if a person can actually have the ability to spend in a wise way that could do more help.

Hi Producer.

You real giving a beautiful suggestion about putting heavy tax on gambling so that people can stop it, but i think there are other unhealthful things over there like drinking alcohol and smoking. don't you think a person can spend all his money on this too? I think self control is the key to stop all of it.

Hi Rollyczar,

Yes,you're onto something, but one problem is that, once a drinker/smoker/gambler/drug-user goes through his own money (often within a day or two), he bludges off, or stands over, other people, usually more defenceless people such his grandmother or auntie or some other relation, to strip them of their money as well. 'Community' or 'family' life has a predatory aspect to it. I think the anthropological term for it is 'demand sharing'. Yeah, they got that right.

I wouldn't be surprised if many such vulnerable people are not only happy with the Welfare Card system, but are also happy for some local store-keeper to hold onto their Card (perhaps without giving over their PIN as well) to ensure that nobody can bully them into giving over their 20 % cash component. Alternatively, that they spend it pretty quickly on essentials for their grandkids, like food.

Cheers,

Joe

//Hi Rollyczar//

How is life in Nigeria? Did you guys ever end up sorting out that business with the prince trapped in exile?

Hi Everybody,
Just a little aside to this card issue.
I think it is a great idea but always remember that there plenty of
'wise guys' out there who will find a hole inn the fence.
At the moment, whilst the rates of abuse are down in the areas being
serviced by the card there is another growing problem which the authorities,
the police and the government have no control over.
Profiteering!
Example:
I have a card that allows me to spend at the grocery store in my community.
I am approached by a smart talking brother who suggests I buy from a list he
gives me and when I come out he will give me half the face value of the purchases in cash.
What do I do?
Well I would normally have blown most of the cash before on grog and
gambling anyway so I accept the offer and my mentor supplies me with grog from his
stash at inflated prices after he has returned the goods to the store for
eighty percent of their purchase value.
Nice little racket and nothing illegal about it.
A nice little cash earner for the store and the mentor and the client gets their grog supply.

G’day all

I do a sojourn to Tassie every Anzac Day and spend the day with family to remember those of the family that served and as a consequence have not responded.

“Hasbeen” I see you are still on the methane, some things never change. Please define communism and how it relates to a federally funded, community controlled Job Guarantee?

The majority of the other comments, although many are legitimate, relate to exceptions rather than the norm. I put it to you that irrespective of the system there will always be those that will take advantage of the system. The only cure for this condition is abstinence or abortion which will over time solve the issue, by eliminating the human race.

Seriously, without assigning labels or highlighting the exceptions why would an autonomous “Job Guarantee” (JG) as defined in my previous post not work?

No one is forced to do anything; all they have to do is spend the time. Key is that any “Basic Income” (BI) should rise and fall with national productivity and entitlement is only achieved by spending time in a JG enterprise. In the event that participants are productive and as a consequence GDP and therefore national wealth increases they are rewarded. If they do nothing and GDP reduces they are penalised, choices and actions should have consequences.

The discussion then comes down to what is a reasonable time and what is a reasonable reward for that time?

If an individual participating in a JG secures additional work and payment over and above the income received in a JG there would be no penalty. The joint income would be subject to the contemporary tax system like anyone else in the workforce. At some point an individual may make the decision that they would get greater income for the time spent in the JG and leave, foregoing the BI in the process.

The other reality is that the contemporary neoliberal market system does not supply sufficient jobs to employ the unemployed. Currently there is only one job for every unemployed.