Politics Centrelink

[geelong_crazy26]

By the way the idea that someone who is under 50 and without a disability can not get a job within 1 year is ridiculous.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

By the way the idea that someone who is under 50 and without a disability can not get a job within 1 year is ridiculous.

I hope I never have to find out about this but I know tradesman that were made redundant 3 1/2 years ago that took anywhere from a year to 3 to get work again and there's still a couple that aren't working. All 40+

 

[Big_Luch]

I hope I never have to find out about this but I know tradesman that were made redundant 3 1/2 years ago that took anywhere from a year to 3 to get work again and there's still a couple that aren't working. All 40+

Only looking at tradie jobs? Unwilling to move?

I think people need to think outside of the box when looking for work

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I hope I never have to find out about this but I know tradesman that were made redundant 3 1/2 years ago that took anywhere from a year to 3 to get work again and there's still a couple that aren't working. All 40+

I would say with certainty they were not doing everything the could to find a job , most likely they were just looking for tradesman jobs when they should be applying for anything the can do which includes unskilled jobs .

 

[JackOutback]

Can you please explain what is wrong with the government's approach?

The government is simply saying that they expect someone on unemployment to leave no stone unturned to get a job.

Some on the dole will do whatever it takes to get a job while some will do whatever it takes not to get a job.

The government's is also saying that after a certain amount of time people on the dole have to work for it just like people on a wage do

The first and main thing they are doing wrong is providing an allowance that is at poverty levels. If someone with a mortgage and family loses their job and can't find one immediately, they are not getting enough to live on. This runs the risk of bankrupting them and making them more dependent on welfare. It is counterintuitive. And it is unfair if that someone has spent their life contributing to the system that is supposed to help them.

The second problem is that there are less jobs than there are people seeking work. It's fantasy to suggest otherwise and means some people will always be unemployed regardless of their best efforts.

 

[Number37]

The first and main thing they are doing wrong is providing an allowance that is at poverty levels. If someone with a mortgage and family loses their job and can't find one immediately, they are not getting enough to live on. This runs the risk of bankrupting them and making them more dependent on welfare. It is counterintuitive. And it is unfair if that someone has spent their life contributing to the system that is supposed to help them.

The second problem is that there are less jobs than there are people seeking work. It's fantasy to suggest otherwise and means some people will always be unemployed regardless of their best efforts.

Good point:
Even if all the unemployed people took whatever job they could there would still be unemployed people.
'Social wage' advocates argue that the welfare bill would still be something like 90% of what it is even if all the unemployed people took whatever job they could.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

The first and main thing they are doing wrong is providing an allowance that is at poverty levels. If someone with a mortgage and family loses their job and can't find one immediately, they are not getting enough to live on. This runs the risk of bankrupting them and making them more dependent on welfare. It is counterintuitive. And it is unfair if that someone has spent their life contributing to the system that is supposed to help them.

The second problem is that there are less jobs than there are people seeking work. It's fantasy to suggest otherwise and means some people will always be unemployed regardless of their best efforts.

People are not entitled to have government provide an income for them . 6 out of 10 households pay no net tax so without doubt most people on the dole would have payed very little tax and the small amount they have paid will go to other areas of government expenditure they have used. Are you suggesting the dole payment should be based on the amount of tax a person has paid ?

I know people 2 that come to mind with no qualifications who can find jobs overnight almost , they just apply for 20 jobs a day and that includes going to a business in person and asking if they are looking for work . 12 months is more than enough .

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Good point:
Even if all the unemployed people took whatever job they could there would still be unemployed people.
'Social wage' advocates argue that the welfare bill would still be something like 90% of what it is even if all the unemployed people took whatever job they could.

The issue is the long term unemployed , people lose their jobs all the time and new jobs are created all the time .

Also some industry's are actually struggling to find workers , people just need to move and take whatever they can.

 

[Number37]

The issue is the long term unemployed , people lose their jobs all the time and new jobs are created all the time .

Also some industry's are actually struggling to find workers , people just need to able to move and take whatever they can.

The number of unemployed people that are gaming the system is very small.
Stop believing all the Murdoch media rubbish that characterises all welfare recipients as 'dole bludgers'.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

The issue is the long term unemployed , people lose their jobs all the time and new jobs are created all the time .

Also some industry's are actually struggling to find workers , people just need to able to move and take whatever they can.

I 100% agree with the bolded. My wife and I have been married for almost 25 years and together for 28, we have 2 daughters, 13 and 10. She's known from very early on that if it's needed I'll leave at the drop of a hat to chase work and support them.

As someone who is almost 50, I'm going to be making some difficult choices at the end of this year if I'm not allowed to change my roster, but it's what I'm going to have to do because I won't just walk away from my job with nothing else lined up. I could potentially only be seeing my family for a week every 4 until I can come up with something else or a better arrangement.

You look at times like the depression. Fathers just up and left and went on the road for months or years, scraping together what they could and sending or taking it home to their families.

During the wars, families may not see fathers for years if ever.

Tough times, tough people.

Edit : I should temper the highlighted by saying that it may not be practical or financially viable for people to just up and move for work. It's by no means a cheap exercise and if you're not successful then you're just burnt through whatever savings you may have and put yourself in an even worse position which could have all sorts of other ramifications.

Having a family, mates, close ties etc etc, shouldn't be an excuse not to move for work, financial viability certainly is.

 

[Reynolds Number]

There is no reason why an engineer living in Perth should not relocate to say Kunnunurra if an employer there is keen on them.

Relication for most people when it does not guarantee a job at the end of it is a hell of a financially risky exercise, especially those with mortgages and families etc. The work needs to be almost readily available in order to pull off a relocation.

 

[JackOutback]

People like to throw up relocation but it's far from practical. If you have a mortgage and a family, you have to sell the house, change your kids' school, move away from family and the support network they provide. If just one parent moves, you're now paying mortgage and rent, and breaking up the family unit. Not everyone is 20 with no obligations and able to just drop everything and move.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

People like to throw up relocation but it's far from practical. If you have a mortgage and a family, you have to sell the house, change your kids' school, move away from family and the support network they provide. If just one parent moves, you're now paying mortgage and rent, and breaking up the family unit. Not everyone is 20 with no obligations and able to just drop everything and move.

Sorry but if your going to live on government money you have to leave no stone unturned to get a job , you are also not entitled to have enough money provided for you to pay a mortgage. Why should someone who rents because they can not afford a mortgage have to pay taxes too support someone else who doesn't work to pay a mortgage.

 

[GreyCrow]

Sorry but if your going to live on government money you have to leave no stone unturned to get a job , you are also not entitled to have enough money provided for you to pay a mortgage. Why should someone who rents because they can not afford a mortgage have to pay taxes too support someone else who doesn't work to pay a mortgage.

Best check Centrelinks own rules Darren.

You are not required to accept work more than 1 and a half hours using your normal mode of transport from home. ie if you have a car you must attend interviews up to 60km away. If you catch a bus then the distance it takes a bus or train to arrive.

 

[JackOutback]

Sorry but if your going to live on government money you have to leave no stone unturned to get a job , you are also not entitled to have enough money provided for you to pay a mortgage. Why should someone who rents because they can not afford a mortgage have to pay taxes too support someone else who doesn't work to pay a mortgage.

So you'd rather see a person go bankrupt, turf the family on the streets and pay substantially more in social and welfare costs than pay a genuine job seeker a decent allowance? Counterintuitive doesn't even begin to describe this manner of thinking.

 

[MAGA]

How do I get some of this money for nothing?

 

[MAGA]

Good point:
Even if all the unemployed people took whatever job they could there would still be unemployed people.
'Social wage' advocates argue that the welfare bill would still be something like 90% of what it is even if all the unemployed people took whatever job they could.

Yeah only approximate $1b in savings.

 

[Broar]

How do I get some of this money for nothing?

Corporate welfare is where it's at now, recruit a couple of slaves (whoops I mean interns) and put your feet up and watch the dollars roll in.

 

[MAGA]

Corporate welfare is where it's at now, recruit a couple of slaves (whoops I mean interns) and put your feet up and watch the dollars roll in.

How do I apply, do I just ask the government to give me money for nothing? I need exact details, of what and how much I can get.

 

[GreyCrow]

How do I apply, do I just ask the government to give me money for nothing? I need exact details, of what and how much I can get.

Go down to your local Centrelink office , say you dont work, provide 24 pieces of ID and sit there for 8 hours ( and thats just the 1st day), sign up to a website that is harder to navigate than central Afghanistan, get told to come back tomorrow as the person handling your file isnt in.

Tomorrow you return only to be told ' no just go over and do it on the computer'' and then have the security guard walk over when you raise your concerns.

Then lo and behold 1 month later you will start magically receive 544 magic beans you can plant in your garden and find that fatted golden goose everyone believes the unemployed have access to.

 

[Big_Luch]

People like to throw up relocation but it's far from practical. If you have a mortgage and a family, you have to sell the house, change your kids' school, move away from family and the support network they provide. If just one parent moves, you're now paying mortgage and rent, and breaking up the family unit. Not everyone is 20 with no obligations and able to just drop everything and move.

I'd say it is more a cultural impediment compared to a practical one.

Funny how moving isn't so much an issue when someone is getting promoted or paid more.

The point is if you cannot find work you should be open to moving or changing professions.

 

[GreyCrow]

I'd say it is more a cultural impediment compared to a practical one.

Funny how moving isn't so much an issue when someone is getting promoted or paid more.

The point is if you cannot find work you should be open to moving or changing professions.

I agree with your 2nd point. I agree with the general tone of this but your 2nd point maybe explains the issue of the rest.

Its prudent in a high profile/technical field to track down the best in the land and offer them the money and help to move. It makes less sense to hire a Traffic Controller or forklift driver from Dapto to work in Adelaide for the same money he can earn in the Dapto area.

Another barrier is the employer often wont even look at Resumes from opposite ends of a city. I was told in an interview I was there because I lived close. '' Yeah we throw any resumes from north in the bin, we need people local and reliable''

Going on the Dapto example, as an employer , how long before the forkie called Dangerfield wants to go home?

 

[MAGA]

Go down to your local Centrelink office , say you dont work, provide 24 pieces of ID and sit there for 8 hours ( and thats just the 1st day), sign up to a website that is harder to navigate than central Afghanistan, get told to come back tomorrow as the person handling your file isnt in.

Tomorrow you return only to be told ' no just go over and do it on the computer'' and then have the security guard walk over when you raise your concerns.

Then lo and behold 1 month later you will start magically receive 544 magic beans you can plant in your garden and find that fatted golden goose everyone believes the unemployed have access to.

Greycrow I am looking for corporate welfare, going by Bigfooty it just comes to you in millions and millions of dollars. Not interested in Centrelink

 

[FredLeDeux]

Greycrow I am looking for corporate welfare, going by Bigfooty it just comes to you in millions and millions of dollars. Not interested in Centrelink

Donate 10 grand to the Liberal Party, and a few of your company shares to the local Liberal MP's wife, and you'll end up rolling in it.

 

[GreyCrow]

Greycrow I am looking for corporate welfare, going by Bigfooty it just comes to you in millions and millions of dollars. Not interested in Centrelink

Oh Corporate Welfare. Join Port Adelaide Football Club