Yuyutsu,
You confirmed what I have long suspected ! The urgency to rectify the situation is now greater than ever.
As for "national service" is to provide paying public jobs for interested young people;
No, National Service is for young unemployed people who are interested in escaping the welfare mentality. How many do you think are on welfare for no valid reason ? If you're happy with providing for unemployed because they choose to be unemployed then go right ahead & register yourself as a benefactor. I will not object just as you should not object if I choose not to support a voluntary unemployed ! I prefer to support someone if they are prepared to make an effort to earn rather than simply accept support.
I have paid Taxes on my efforts over 52 years & now I'm living off my investment paid to Govt.

Dear Individual,

«No, National Service is for young unemployed people who are interested in escaping the welfare mentality»

Other than the fancy name ("national service") which may warm your heart but is different from the usual meaning of this expression, this is just a rewording of what I suggested: a paying public job for interested young people.

So long as there is no coercion, so long as children are not torn away from their families on fear of prison or of having their ears cut off, so long as nobody is commanded to act against their conscience, including by shooting at others, so long as no good young person is forced into working and living intimately with others of unwholesome character and habits, so long as this does not involve those who already and happily have a good job or study, then there is nothing principally wrong about this and nothing we disagree on, other than your claim that unemployed young people should not receive free welfare payments.

Now this has a simple solution - a tick-box on our tax-return:

"
Should my tax-money go toward:
1) providing a meager income for those who rather not work [for money]
2) paying large salaries (about 10 times as much) to public-servants so they can enforce draconian regulations on the public
3) compensating large corporations for changing their business-model in accordance with United-Nations demands.
4) subsidising other people's hobbies and leisure activities (such as sport clubs)
...
"

I would tick box #1 while you may tick some other box - nothing will really change as it will roughly all balance.

Yuyutsu,
More unrealistic suggestions merely result in more unworkable outcome ! Prolonging Status Quo is what I'm so dead against !
A National Service is for young unemployed people to get a better start for adult life. Handing out welfare nilly-willy has proven beyond reasonable doubt to be of increasing welfare dependence. If you think that is Nation building than go right ahead & put your TFN down for being a benefactor.

Yuyutsu,
the reason why we have # 2, 3 & 4 is bacause people don't want to change the situation for better. Are you aware that I proposed a disaster levy of extremely low percentage for various levels of salaries ? To-date, not one post followed with ayone agreeing to contribute. Now, who do you blame for that ? The Govt or the people who vote for Govt which then does nothing until it affects the popularity polls ?
I blame all ! No-one is prepared to help others unless of course there's a chance of getting a medal & be seen as a hero ! Hundreds of thousands of Dollars are spent on such frivolities instead of going to those in desperate need ! I'll gladly give 0.5 % of my pension towards a disaster relief fund under the condition it doesn't go through a public service level 8 bureaucrat to "manage" it !

Dear Individual,

I have nothing against public bodies employing young and willing unemployed people and paying them, say, twice as much as the dole - it is much better than paying bureaucrats 10 times as much. I just wouldn't call this "national service" as the name is misleading and usually, in other countries, refers to forced conscription under threat of imprisonment or losing one's ear. Also, such employment is neither national nor a service - it is paid work.

As for others who choose, temporarily or permanently, to not commit themselves to work [for money], but rather live on a meager budget, I see this as a positive thing.

We already have over-employment, with too many jobs that do not contribute anything real to people's happiness, some of them even harmful. Such jobs only complicate our lives, waste energy and congest the roads with unnecessary commute-traffic. This pressure to work at all costs brings people to compromise their conscience and moral values (also their health) in compliance with their boss's demands. It is practically impossible today to have a job without a measure of lying and cheating. Unconditional welfare ought to reduce this pressure!

Work can still be performed by the "unemployed", but informally, without pay thus without pressure or a need to compromise one's values.

«If you think that is Nation building than go right ahead...»

No, it isn't. It is a measure toward giving ourselves and others a happier, stress-free life.

I shriek at the thought of "Nation building". Wasn't it Juliar from Labor who pushed this concept on us? I want no nation built, only to increase the happiness of myself and all others.

«I blame all ! No-one is prepared to help others»

This is not true: many helped others during the fires and on other occasions. Many still do and even more will once they are not as worried about their own financial safety.

Leave the date for Australia Day where it is because it coincides with the Chinese New Year, which makes it now part of our Chinese future.