Tony Abbott just doesn't ******* get it

[DivideandMultiply]

Sure they were. I have facts on my side you just have ideology, you are blinded to reality.

Oh meds, that sounds more like a confession.

Overall crime stats mean buggerall, likewise citing cato FFS.

It's not an issue I face, but I am genuinely scared for youth unemployed, likewise the social cost re crime.

Youth unemployment is a major issue, due to wider economic conditions, Abbotts answer seems to be, cut them all loose. This is really dangerous, and a lot of young people are going to suffer horribly. The spike in crime rates and mortality for that demographic is will be an absolute crime, for such a wealthy nation. This is a heartless move and the government will have blood on it's hands.

There is bugger all evidence to suggest such a correlation. There is however plenty of evidence to suggest cutting welfare leads to more people in jobs (Clinton one examle, Germany under SDP another, UK recently yet another). High mandatory wage levels / employment rights are a far bigger detriment to youth employment, why don't you rail at those? Do you realise what the youth unemployment rate is across Europe in the system which you think works?

It may be a stupid policy but lets not wheel out assertions which were long ago shown to be false.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...welfare-reform-link-to-foodbanks-homelessness

Suppressed report: welfare reform link to homelessness and food bank use
A Tory council has withdrawn its own official report linking welfare cuts to a range of social problems from food poverty to violent crime.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...welfare-reform-link-to-foodbanks-homelessness


http://www.theguardian.com/society/...enefit-cuts-storm-triggers-youth-homelessness

Housing benefit cuts: young people face a homelessness 'perfect storm'
Recession and spending cuts have already caused a spike in youth homelessness. Imminent welfare reforms could trigger a 1980's-style explosion in rough sleeping, a report warns.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/...enefit-cuts-storm-triggers-youth-homelessness

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756061612000067

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/73cda788-8457-11e3-9710-00144feab7de.html#axzz31bB3t3vh

Recession-linked crime rises in UK as spending cuts biteHigh quality global

Shoplifting and muggings are increasing in Britain, according to data which show a rise in recession-related crimes as government spending cuts bite and real wages fall.
Police records released on Thursday show a 4 per cent rise in shoplifting and a 7 per cent rise in “theft from the person”, such as thieves snatching expensive mobile phones from passers-by.
Nick Gargan, chief constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary, told the Financial Times that police leaders were starting to talk about an “austerity bulge” in crime figures.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/73cda788-8457-11e3-9710-00144feab7de.html#axzz31bB3t3vh

Ha, hopeless cherry picking. Overall crime continued to decrease even whilst the UK was in recession. Theft from person increased for a simple reason - the cost of smart phones. The facts don't fit your argument. Don't turn in to lemming like Admiral A who just makes dribble up constantly with no reference whatsoever to the facts.

www.ons.gov.uk/.../impact-of-the-recession.pdf

Impact of the recession
By Cecilia Campos, Alistair Dent, Robert Fry and Alice Reid, Office for National Statistics


Crime
• Overall the level of crime continued to decrease during the recession.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...f-entrepreneurs-Bank-of-England-suggests.html

Benefit cuts are pushing more people into self-employment and helping to create a new generation of entrepreneurs, the Bank of England has suggested.
The Bank announced that one of the most “striking” features of the economic recovery has been the record 4.5 million Britons who are now self-employed.
According to official figures, the number of self-employed workers has risen by more than 600,000 since 2010, accounting for more than a third of the 1.5 million new jobs created since then.
The Bank said the trend was partly down to government welfare reforms, such as the £26,000 benefits cap, pushing people back into work. Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, claimed that the figures were evidence that the Coalition was reviving Britain’s “entrepreneurial spirit”.

So I give you 4 sources, one with expert opinion from law enforcement, two that cite/link to government commissioned reports and one that is an extensive study, into the effects of welfare cuts and corresponding rises in crime, poverty and mental health impacts and you link to an opinion piece from the telegraph.

You are damaged meds, such are the extremes of your confirmation bias.

NO be clear. Crime DECREASED in the UK during the recession. It is well known there is little correlation between the factors you mention.

The stats were from the Office of National Statistics and Bank of England. One was an ONS paper. You linked to 3 sources all from a left leaning paper (and ALL behind a paywall)

Google the effects in Germany, US under Clinton etc. All the usual dire predictions, didn't happen.

That is called reality.

I can cite and link to additional studies if you so desire.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756061612000067

These findings suggest there is a significant relationship between the state of the economy – in particular the unemployment rate – and the rate of property crime. The results are consistent with theoretical expectations and with previous studies (e.g. Freeman 1983; Cantor and Land, 1985, Chiricos, 1987, Land et al., 1990, Hale and Sabbagh, 1991 and Pyle and Deadman, 1994).

These results also hold, in model 3, when we control for the effect of variables thought to be associated with reductions in the rate of crime, welfare spending and the incarceration rate (H3). Here the effect of change in crime interacted with time (H4) remains positive and significant (0.23*), while the effect of welfare expenditure (−0.28*) and the incarceration rate (−1.71*) are both negative and significant. Overall, these findings are consistent with theoretical expectations and past studies of the link between the economy and crime, in general and as advanced by Farrall and Hay (2010)specifically with regards to the impacts of certain socio-economic policies.

For the effect of change in the unemployment rate in model 1 (2.05*), the coefficient indicates that a one-percentage point increase in the rate of unemployment is associated with an increase of 2.05 in the number of property crimes per thousand heads of population. For the population of England and Wales, the short-run interaction is therefore equal to an increase of 2.05 reported crimes. So, for a population of 50 million people, the effect would be equal to an increase of 102,500 reported crimes. The size of that effect can be compared with approximately 3 million reported property crimes in 2006. Further, the effect of an increase of £10 in welfare spending per capita is associated with a decrease of 0.28 in the number of property crimes per thousand heads of population, while a one-percentage point increase in the number of people incarcerated per conviction in England and Wales is equal to a decrease of 1.71 in the number of property crimes per thousand heads of population. For a population of 50 million, an increase of £10 in welfare spending per capita produces a drop of 14,000 in the total number of reported property crimes. In all the models, the effect of the lagged value of the rate of property crime is not significant at the 95% confidence level, indicating that shocks to the long-run equilibrium crime rate are not corrected.

The growing magnitude of the effect of the national rate of unemployment on criminal offending during the 1970s and 1980s notably coincided with the monetarist revolution and sharp increases in the unemployment rate in Britain (as well as in other countries such as the US). While monetarist policies brought inflation under control, subsequent upturns in unemployment were associated with increases in the national rate of property crime and the strengthening link between economic outcomes and offending. The rising level of crime in turn gave rise to a rightward shift of criminal and policing policies (Newburn, 2007).

These increases in crime throughout the 1980s, which reached alarming rates between 1991 and 1995, forced the Conservative governments of the time to address the issue of crime ‘head-on’ during the early-1990s (Newburn, 2007: 439). While we therefore agree with Newburn (2007: 452) that the crime policies pursued were a lagged response to rising crime, we also contend that the selection of these criminal justice policies were a consequence of the strengthening link between unemployment and crime in the aftermath of the social and economic policies of the 1970s and 1980s. In particular, the political view of unemployment as an acceptable price for getting inflation under control, and policies targeting the ‘feckless’ and ‘idle’ unemployed and the need to ‘get tough’ with them both via social and welfare policies and punitive crime policies (Bagguley and Mann, 1992). During this later period, the Labour opposition provided little resistance to the punitive criminal justice policies under the Conservative government of John Major, narrowing the range of policies that were ‘imaginable’ for all political parties (Newburn, 2007: 458). As a consequence, the lasting legacies of the social and economic policies of Thatcherism might be seen as: a) the foregrounding of crime as a political issue; b) the creation of a series of social and economic circumstances (in particular mass unemployment, the geographical concentration of the socially and economically disadvantaged through implementation of housing policies (Muri, 1997) and growth of inequalities coupled with real term reductions in social benefits) which were conducive to the production of crime at the aggregate level; c) the strengthening of the effect of unemployment on the national rate of property crime, and d) flowing from the new social and economic circumstances, widespread dominance of an issue definition of the problem of crime which emphasised punitive policies in place of the social welfare model adopted by successive governments since 1945, as part of the post-war consensus on economic and social policies (Kavanagh and Morris, 1989).


It is evident is that the growing magnitude of the effect of unemployment on the rate of property crime in Britain during the 1970s and 1980s coincided with the monetarist revolution, and the policies of successive British governments directed at economic liberalisation and labour market reform. While monetarist policies brought the inflation so problematic during the 1970s under control, subsequent upturns in the national level of unemployment were associated with increases in the rate of property crime and strengthening of the link between unemployment and property crime. These rising levels of crime also contributed to the rightward shift of criminal and policing policies that was noted in the introduction (Newburn, 2007 and Farrall and Hay, 2010).

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1756061612000067

No, the phenomenon is well known. Have you not heard of Freakonomics? See link below. See 2nd link re robbery in the US. Your link falls flat on its face as in the period since crime has gone down whilst unemployment has gone up. Did you not realise that? See bbc link?


Again I think its a stupid policy. As is a heap of other things the Libs have done. AND I agree with you re super.

The tax deductions re super are on track to soon cost as much as the pension. Yet 80% of people still get the pension. What is the point of these tax deductions that overwhelmingly favour the rich and yet do little to stop people getting the pension. You are correct re super deductions almost by themselves being able to eliminate the budget deficit.

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/l...s-why-crime-continues-fall-during-bad-economy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13799616

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703580904574638024055735590?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703580904574638024055735590.html

Read the link I posted, I am happy to keep citing and quoting peer reviewed studies if you desire, since you don't have access to paywalled material.

There you have it, the conversation in it's entirety. I cited specific, relevant studies. You aregued largely on the basis of ideology, with a few random news articles, negligibly related and a general position that across the board crime was down with no context. Yet crime specifically related to poverty increased in response to social welfare cuts and a rise in unemployment. As did youth homelessness and poverty.

 

[medusala]

There you have it, the conversation in it's entirety. I cited specific, relevant studies.

Absolute nonsense. You just quote left wing papers however even they back my case. Again you ignore the academic study of Levitt.

The academic papers you quoted re PRE GFC just as I stated! How convenient!!

e.g. Freeman 1983; Cantor and Land, 1985, Chiricos, 1987, Land et al., 1990, Hale and Sabbagh, 1991 and Pyle and Deadman, 1994).


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rders-down-again-statistics-show-9081599.html

The mysterious case of the falling criminal offences: burglary and murders down again, statistics show

The trend, which defies the conventional wisdom that offending levels increase in tough times, was underlined today by the latest report from the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/24/surprise-8-percent-fall-crime

The latest figures for the 12 months to September show surprise falls on both measures of crime, with the crime survey of England and Wales down 8% and police recorded crime figures showing a 7% drop. The falls were driven by drops in vandalism, burglary and vehicle-related thefts.
One sub-category that showed a 6% rise was personal thefts, such as pickpocketing and mobile phone snatches

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jan/24/fall-uk-crime-rate-baffles-experts

The classic theory that property crime rises faster in times of economic strife no longer seems to apply, latest figures show

Nearly all the criminologists and experts say the classic explanation that property crime, as opposed to violent crime, tends to rise faster in times of economic strife, no longer seems to apply.



Correlation doesn't exist in recent times. Causation most certainly doesn't

As Bill would say "that isn't opinion, that is fact"

Its the same old story from the delusional left ie spending cuts will result in massive crime and unemployment increases. Fairy tale on a Keynesian scale.

And one more just to make the cause clear. 2011/12 was in the middle of Austerity. Once again showing up your out of date stats.

.........

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime...s/focus-on-property-crime--2011-12/index.html

Crime Statistics, Focus on Property Crime, 2011/12

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) shows substantial falls in property crime, with levels having fallen by half since they peaked in the mid-1990s.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Absolute nonsense. You just quote left wing papers however even they back my case. Again you ignore the academic study of Levitt.

A lie stays a lie, no matter how often you repeat it.

 

[Maggie5]

"And here are the facts from a reputable news outlet ie not New Muppetry or the Guardian". A certain poster wrote to me.
The Guardian - good newspaper if agrees with me
The Guardian - bad newspaper if showing me up.
Ha ha
You are nothing but predictable medusala.

 

[Elroo]

Toughening welfare provisions leads to increased employment. This has been seen time and time again in numerous countries. Despite the facts the usual suspects preach Armageddon. If they weren't so hysterical people may be more prepared to listen to them.

If you increase welfare more people opt for it and work becomes less attractive. One wouldn't think that is a particularly controversial statement yet going by the reaction of some one would think it is.

No toughing welfare provisions doesn't increase employment, economic growth in most cases does; #Okun's Law.

 

[madmug]

No toughing welfare provisions doesn't increase employment, economic growth in most cases does; #Okun's Law.

Generally speaking, yes. Its sad that some companies sack staff just to give a boost to company profits, the market price & thus increase their own 'compensation package' as a result. All short term.
Amongst other things, a good education & a good world economy help to grow employment.

 

[Dry Rot]

But, but, but Ecca Abetz has "anecdotal evidence" that it does.

Uncle Otto was a Nazi, admits senior Liberal

Andrew Darby
March 2, 2008

A RELATIVE of senior Liberal politician Eric Abetz was Adolf Hitler's ambassador in occupied France and was later convicted as a Nazi war criminal.

Senator Abetz, the deputy Liberal leader in the Senate, last night volunteered that his great uncle Otto Abetz had been a high-ranking Nazi as he sought to head off what he said was a slur by association.

He confirmed that Otto Abetz was Nazi ambassador to occupied France, where he is believed to have ordered anti-Jewish drives and adopted a style that earned him the nickname King Otto I.

Makes sense. Abetz is a nasty ****. Follows the party line.

Sieg Heil! Eric

 

[medusala]

No toughing welfare provisions doesn't increase employment, economic growth in most cases does; #Okun's Law.

Okuns law is irrelevant to topic The evidence is clear and overwhelming. Germany a good example


http://www.economist.com/news/europ...ermanys-agenda-2010-package-rate-wunderreform
The aim was to make Germany’s labour market flexible again. It allowed small businesses to fire more easily, thus lowering their risk of hiring. It liberalised other rules, such as those for part-time and temporary work. Above all, it merged two types of benefits—federal assistance for the unemployed and municipal welfare payments—into one guarantee of a basic living standard (called Hartz IV, after the former Volkswagen manager who proposed it).
The reform package also included rules that prod the unemployed into seeking, and accepting, work. Their time on benefits is limited to one year, or 18 months for those older than 55. And they cannot be picky about the jobs they take. This is what Mr Schröder calls “Fördern und Fordern”, a play on an umlaut that translates roughly as “assist and challenge”.

 

[Floor Pie]

Okuns law is irrelevant to topic The evidence is clear and overwhelming. Germany a good example


http://www.economist.com/news/europ...ermanys-agenda-2010-package-rate-wunderreform
The aim was to make Germany’s labour market flexible again. It allowed small businesses to fire more easily, thus lowering their risk of hiring. It liberalised other rules, such as those for part-time and temporary work. Above all, it merged two types of benefits—federal assistance for the unemployed and municipal welfare payments—into one guarantee of a basic living standard (called Hartz IV, after the former Volkswagen manager who proposed it).
The reform package also included rules that prod the unemployed into seeking, and accepting, work. Their time on benefits is limited to one year, or 18 months for those older than 55. And they cannot be picky about the jobs they take. This is what Mr Schröder calls “Fördern und Fordern”, a play on an umlaut that translates roughly as “assist and challenge”.

With the jobs that people "cannot be picky about", don't they usually have probation periods, or have staff on as mostly casual?
How hard is it to fire a casual, or someone on probation?

What jobs are you talking about, when you talk about not being picky?

 

[Elroo]

Okuns law is irrelevant to topic The evidence is clear and overwhelming. Germany a good example


http://www.economist.com/news/europ...ermanys-agenda-2010-package-rate-wunderreform
The aim was to make Germany’s labour market flexible again. It allowed small businesses to fire more easily, thus lowering their risk of hiring. It liberalised other rules, such as those for part-time and temporary work. Above all, it merged two types of benefits—federal assistance for the unemployed and municipal welfare payments—into one guarantee of a basic living standard (called Hartz IV, after the former Volkswagen manager who proposed it).
The reform package also included rules that prod the unemployed into seeking, and accepting, work. Their time on benefits is limited to one year, or 18 months for those older than 55. And they cannot be picky about the jobs they take. This is what Mr Schröder calls “Fördern und Fordern”, a play on an umlaut that translates roughly as “assist and challenge”.

Okun's law is the topic on regards to employment growth and creating jobs for the unemployed. This evidence is it as overwhelming as your belief that free markets can only occur with government involvement?

 

[medusala]

Okun's law is the topic on regards to employment growth and creating jobs for the unemployed. This evidence is it as overwhelming as your belief that free markets can only occur with government involvement?

Noone disputes growth creates jobs (although the current recovery in many countries has created far less than one would have expected). However, that in no way conflicts with cutting welfare / deregulating the labour market.

 

[Elroo]

Noone disputes growth creates jobs (although the current recovery in many countries has created far less than one would have expected). However, that in no way conflicts with cutting welfare / deregulating the labour market.

Thank you, it is economic growth that creates employment/ jobs not simply saying "cut welfare to create employment/jobs".

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Makes sense. Abetz is a nasty ****. Follows the party line.

Sieg Heil! Eric

True story, there was a significant Nazi presence in the libs within the 40's and 50's, maybe even later. Some interesting articles written on it.

 

[medusala]

Thank you, it is economic growth that creates employment/ jobs not simply saying "cut welfare to create employment/jobs".

No. Read again. They aren't mutually exclusive. Italy can have the same economic growth as Germany yet have far higher unemployment. The reason for that is very obvious.

Unfair dismissal, high min wages etc costs jobs.

 

[Dry Rot]

True story, there was a significant Nazi presence in the libs within the 40's and 50's, maybe even later. Some interesting articles written on it.

Interesting. Got some links?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Interesting. Got some links?

They have been posted before, maybe by blackat? I'm not sure. I can't find the good one, but here is one that I have read.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/obituari...ral-to-extremes/2006/03/03/1141191845008.html

The way I understand it is, there were sympathies for the Nazi party in the early stages of the war, however this soon dissipated. Post WW2, many Nazi collaborators and suspected Nazi's fled to Australia, however instead of being turned away, or turned over in response to extradition orders, were often welcomed due to being both virulently anti communist and politically active. Over the following decade, many gained influence within migrant communities, especially Baltic and Eastern European, whilst gaining a degree of influence within the Liberal party itself.

 

[Dry Rot]

Thanks. Ah, yes, the NSW Uglies.

Anti-comunism Nazis would make for strange bed fellows in various parts of the parts of the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II)

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Still some interesting history documenting the beginnings of the NSW right, and associated fascist organisations in the 20's (New Guard etc.), to more tenuous stuff like Menzie's being accused of being a Nazi sympathizer (that long bow, ie bullshit), because there are historical records of him being an advocate both here and in communication with the UK for appeasement. Likewise, because the security services under Menzies were positively glowing in their description of many of the hard right anti communist immigrant groups.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...uted-by-liberals/story-fn59niix-1226562178102

Thanks. Ah, yes, the NSW Uglies.

Anti-comunism Nazis would make for strange bed fellows in various parts of the parts of the world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_(World_War_II)

This also briefly touches on the uglies:
http://www.independentaustralia.net...dh-and-the-liberal-partys-fascist-affair,6411

Interesting link re the Ratlines and German colonies in SA, and yes, the whole former fascist/Nazi anti communist thing was played out in more countries than Australia. Still to this day the Yanks aren't afraid of getting behind hard right factions (Ukraine), if it means dicking ol mother Russia.

 

[Dry Rot]

Still some interesting history documenting the beginnings of the NSW right, and associated fascist organisations in the 20's (New Guard etc.), to more tenuous stuff like Menzie's being accused of being a Nazi sympathizer (that long bow, ie bullshit), because there are historical records of him being an advocate both here and in communication with the UK for appeasement. Likewise, because the security services under Menzies were positively glowing in their description of many of the hard right anti communist immigrant groups.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/mps-claim-menzies-was-a-nazi-sympathiser-refuted-by-liberals/story-fn59niix-1226562178102


This also briefly touches on the uglies:
http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/tony-abbott-the-ndh-and-the-liberal-partys-fascist-affair,6411

Interesting link re the Ratlines and German colonies in SA, and yes, the whole former fascist/Nazi anti communist thing was played out in more countries than Australia. Still to this day the Yanks aren't afraid of getting behind hard right factions (Ukraine), if it means dicking ol mother Russia.

Great links. Thanks.

Forgot that the Uglies were linked to the Croats, who IIRC often disgusted hardened SS guys in the Balkans in WW2.

The New Guard were an interesting lot in desperate times. I suspect one of my relatives was a member. The politics here of the 1930s and 1940s make the current stuff look like dishwater. Love him or hate him, Jack Lang was a giant.

I suspect all members of the NSW Liberals would be at least acquainted with the Uglies, including Abbott. IIRC they weren't too dissimilar to Obeid's Terrigals in handing out political favours for loyalty. No surprise that turd David Clarke pops up in one of your articles. Weren't they more recently active down south in Scott Morrison's seat?

 

[DivideandMultiply]

No surprise that turd David Clarke pops up in one of your articles. Weren't they more recently active down south in Scott Morrison's seat?

I don't know, but this wouldn't surprise me.

As for the New Guard and Australian fascism, it really is an odd but interesting topic. Strangely many of the movements were not overtly racist or discriminatory, though some certainly were. Likewise, it had large support not just amongst the moneyed, or downtroddent fringes, the two polar demographics usually attracted to this sort of thing, but also among bourgeoisie intellectuals, especially Australian writers and poets. In fact some of Australia's most prominent literary clubs or circles pre 1940's, were at least sympathetic to the ideals of fascism and it filtered through to a lot of their work, especially in NSW.

 

[Dry Rot]

I don't know, but this wouldn't surprise me.

As for the New Guard and Australian fascism, it really is an odd but interesting topic. Strangely many of the movements were not overtly racist or discriminatory, though some certainly were. Likewise, it had large support not just amongst the moneyed, or downtroddent fringes, the two polar demographics usually attracted to this sort of thing, but also among bourgeoisie intellectuals, especially Australian writers and poets. In fact some of Australia's most prominent literary clubs or circles pre 1940's, were at least sympathetic to the ideals of fascism and it filtered through to a lot of their work, especially in NSW.

I suppose there are different flavours of fascism. With the horrors of the Great Depression in the 1930s, the alleged wonder world of the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Union would have increasingly appealed to many working people. And I suspect that anti-semitism was alive and well here and the UK. Just as the foreign visiting apologists spruiked the USSR back home, the glittering Nuremberg rallies and autobahns and order in the streets would have appealed to many well heeled people.

I read a great history of the New Guard in the late eighties (wish I could remember the title). It did seem to involve a lot of ordinary people and returned soldiers. The 1920s were not too kind to many returned soldiers here, and then the Depression hit. I don't really judge the New Guard folk and sometimes wonder what you and I would have done back then.

Either way, the New Guard and the right movement you posted about seem to have been air brushed from our popular history, which IMO is a pity. Another chapter of our dodgy history fading away which deserves better attention IMO.

 

[noddy]

Great read guys, must admit i had no knowledge of how much fascism had infected the Liberals of the past.

 

[scon]

...present and future.