Politics Centrelink

Remove this Banner Ad

herculez09 said:
Does anyone here actually know many living on Newstart because they're too lazy to get a job?

I've never met anyone with that disposition other than dealers.
Click to expand...
I live in a country town and there is definitely people in the neighbourhood that haven't had jobs in years and I'm not sure that they are even looking.
 
Kram said:
I live in a country town and there is definitely people in the neighbourhood that haven't had jobs in years and I'm not sure that they are even looking.
Click to expand...
I spent time in a small country town growing up and knew of similar people. Their homes were not what I would call in a great state and the living environment for youngsters was far from ideal. I mean, first world problems, sure, but still not great. It would contribute to continued cycles of dependence and low SES living for generations I'm sure.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Australian Council of Social Services call for $75 a week, same as the Greens.

The costs would be a thirds as much as the tax cuts given to wealthy Australians. This is vindictive at this point.

Neil Mitchell disagrees.

"But you have to look at the bottom line, you can't just keep dragging money out of the system which we as taxpayers fund, it's not fair to us."
 
Soft Downhill Skier said:
Australian Council of Social Services call for $75 a week, same as the Greens.

The costs would be a thirds as much as the tax cuts given to wealthy Australians. This is vindictive at this point.

Neil Mitchell disagrees.

"But you have to look at the bottom line, you can't just keep dragging money out of the system which we as taxpayers fund, it's not fair to us."
Click to expand...

Did Neil mention anything about MP’s salary increases?
 
Royal Flush said:
Get the whole amount, buy some gear and start selling
Should go upward from there.
Tax free too.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I was about to say I’d spend it on drugs, and that was just to take. And I don’t even do drugs. But your ideas better. I’d try to do that, and then end up getting high off my own supply anyway...
 
CBF reading the thread, and I am sure there is the normal Greens screaming.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:o_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_O
However, benefits are to be spent on necessities...ya know...like your kids.
Not on goon, smokes and pot.

The 'evil card' needs to be brought in nationally, and now.

Yes, some of you are deeply offended.
How dare you say that!! You bastard!

My response?

Come and have a look at a few aboriginal communities where the change in circumstances has been PROFOUND. Ask the women.
Why that can't work in city ghetto's...and in the broader 'UNEMPLOYED" community is beyond me.

I shall now quickly back into my nuclear bomb shelter and weld up the door.
 
I’d be pretty okay with social benefits/state welfare coming with a proviso that it be spent on necessities. Where to draw that line would be an interesting discussion, but not as difficult as some other discussions about where to draw some other lines.
 
stretcharmstrong said:
I’d be pretty okay with social benefits/state welfare coming with a proviso that it be spent on necessities. Where to draw that line would be an interesting discussion, but not as difficult as some other discussions about where to draw some other lines.
Click to expand...
... because it's not your freedom that's being restricted.

Either we're a free society or we are not. Why should freedom only be for those with the wherewithal to purchase it?
 
CatFan79 said:
There's 300,000 jobs available right now, forced? LOL. Anyone got a Violin?
Click to expand...

Aren't there also substantially more applicants?

Social programs are important but most lack the foresight that giving people more free money doesn't help them.
Click to expand...

No, but nor does keeping legitimate jobseekers well below the poverty line just to root out a few dole bludgers.

Root out dole bludgers by all means, but if someone wants to live on the poverty line or (god forbid) below, then they're almost certainly unemployable anyway. There are a few of those in every society no matter what you do.

The point of Newstart, as many people rightly point out, is to act as a safety net for people in-between jobs. I personally don't think that a payment well below the poverty line counts as one. Concession cards IMO skirt around the edges of this problem rather than directly addressing it.

WRT the question, you'd spend Newstart on essentials + job-seeking.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gethelred said:
... because it's not your freedom that's being restricted.

Either we're a free society or we are not. Why should freedom only be for those with the wherewithal to purchase it?
Click to expand...
No, not really. There is no need to be so absolutist about it. We can be a free society that imposes some limitations and restrictions sometimes.

In fact, that is precisely what we are.
 
Rob R said:
Might be more believable if there was something in the picture to show it was actually sent on 11 Jun and wasn't sent as evidence of the appt he claims he didn't know about. If he was telling the truth, it would be easily fixed with centrelink and he could have shared better evidence.

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
It is believable imo. But this is why people should never be reliant on the state. The state is cold and uncaring, it always will be.
 
Rob R said:
Might be more believable if there was something in the picture to show it was actually sent on 11 Jun and wasn't sent as evidence of the appt he claims he didn't know about. If he was telling the truth, it would be easily fixed with centrelink and he could have shared better evidence.

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

Easily fixed with Centrelink?
Have you read the comments on that post? There are claims by people that they had payments ceased when they turned up to appointments - as well as no notifications that an appointment had been made to them even though they did all the additional subscribe to notifications etc.
 
I know of a full time carer parent of a child with a disability. When that child turned 18, the parent recieved a letter that her carer's allowance would be stopped. Because the letter arrived before a long weekend, that was 3-4 days of wondering how she was going to support herself and her child.

Another hoop had to be jumped through to restore the payment, and this was all automated, but they do some s**t things.
 
CatFan79 said:
There's 300,000 jobs available right now, forced? LOL. Anyone got a Violin?
Click to expand...


Ahh yes, the ignorant "there is a job for anyone who wants one" argument trotted out by callous conservatives with no understanding of basic economics.:rolleyes:
 
stretcharmstrong said:
No, not really. There is no need to be so absolutist about it. We can be a free society that imposes some limitations and restrictions sometimes.

In fact, that is precisely what we are.
Click to expand...
Generally speaking, the social contract entails that you are free right up until your freedom begins to interfere with someone else's. How does someone on the Newstart spending some of their money - when they have precious little to spare - on non-essentials interfere with yours or anyone else's freedom in any way whatsoever?

Is coffee non-essential?
CatFan79 said:
You're free to purchase whatever you want with YOUR money.

Freedom.
Click to expand...
Precisely.

The second it leaves the government and enters your possession, it's yours. It would take more money to alter this into a workable situation - via new legislation and legislative bodies designed to rule over the new status quo - than it does simply to treat people with the dignity they deserve as members of a free society.

Why should the extremely poor have one rule about how money apportioned to them must spend their money, but corporations granted tax breaks do not?
 
Last edited:
Gethelred said:
Generally speaking, the social contract entails that you are free right up until your freedom begins to interfere with someone else's. How does someone on the Newstart spending some of their money - when they have precious little to spare - on non-essentials interfere with yours or anyone else's freedom in any way whatsoever?

Is coffee non-essential?

Precisely.

The second it leaves the government and enters your possession, it's yours. It would take more money to alter this into a workable situation - via new legislation and legislative bodies designed to rule over the new status quo - than it does simply to treat people with the dignity they deserve as members of a free society.

Why should the extremely poor have one rule about how money apportioned to them must spend their money, but corporations granted tax breaks do not?
Click to expand...
I’m definitely not going to comment on corporations and their tax situations.

I think it affects us by inflating the slice of tax revenue required to fund welfare. That results in either less money for other public services, or higher taxes on workers. I’d say that’s a plausible connection?

Regarding coffee, and the challenge of such an idea in general, as I mentioned earlier the difficulty (besides how you might implement it) would be what’s in and what’s out. Where you would draw the line.
 
stretcharmstrong said:
I’m definitely not going to comment on corporations and their tax situations.

I think it affects us by inflating the slice of tax revenue required to fund welfare. That results in either less money for other public services, or higher taxes on workers. I’d say that’s a plausible connection?

Regarding coffee, and the challenge of such an idea in general, as I mentioned earlier the difficulty (besides how you might implement it) would be what’s in and what’s out. Where you would draw the line.
Click to expand...
I think it's nothing short of rank elitism for someone with money to tell someone without that they cannot drink a beer or two.
 
Gethelred said:
I think it's nothing short of rank elitism for someone with money to tell someone without that they cannot drink a beer or two.
Click to expand...
But that’s not quite what we’re doing.

We’re only discussing the idea that because these allowances are so skint for the receiving individual, but also quite expensive to society, that perhaps there’s merit in ensuring they get utilised efficiently.

Sigh, maybe it is, I don’t know. It’s so hard to know what’s okay these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top