Welfare

Remove this Banner Ad

nut said:
Why dont we have a national unemployment insurance scheme like some Nordic countries?
Click to expand...
LOL.

The Libs would run it.
You pay some shelf company every week,contracted by your employer to provide insurance against your unemployment, and then when you are let go because the parent company which owns your employer, a desert based rice farming company, that your tax dollars have subsidised for decades fails, they will tell you are not covered, or fall into bankruptcy themselves.
The Liberal Government then bails out the rice farming company that failed leaving you unemployed in the first place while handing out a few hundred million to the failed insurer as "industry assistance" due to the effect of the poor weather conditions on the rice crop.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Pie eyed said:
LOL.

The Libs would run it.
You pay some shelf company every week,contracted by your employer to provide insurance against your unemployment, and then when you are let go because the parent company which owns your employer, a desert based rice farming company, that your tax dollars have subsidised for decades fails, they will tell you are not covered, or fall into bankruptcy themselves.
The Liberal Government then bails out the rice farming company that failed leaving you unemployed in the first place while handing out a few hundred million to the failed insurer as "industry assistance" due to the effect of the poor weather conditions on the rice crop.
Click to expand...

You win😂. What hope would it have….
 
nut said:
Why dont we have a national unemployment insurance scheme like some Nordic countries?
Click to expand...

Because it would incentivize leaners.

Only bludgers take welfare, because everyone can be rich if they work hard.

That's why all those brown people come here remember, spend tends of thousands of dollars, risk their lives, for the dream of $40 a day
 
Hojuman said:
Nut, you're hearts in the right place 👍🙂
Click to expand...

Australia was on track to be very similar to the Nordic system… until neoliberalism arrived .. old money destroying any hope that we could capitalize on our natural wealth.

I reckon if you could sit down with any Aussie and explain what Australia would actually be like under this system, everyone would want it. A hut in the hills and a boat on the water would be birth right …😂
But it’ll never happen because of the “old money” …
 
We should simply increase the dole and treat everyone equal rather than reward higher income earners over lower income earners when they become unemployed.

I can't fathom why would would reward higher income earners?
 
Power Raid said:
We should simply increase the dole and treat everyone equal rather than reward higher income earners over lower income earners when they become unemployed.

I can't fathom why would would reward higher income earners?
Click to expand...

??? …. Why not have system where every contributes to secure their livelihoods? Why not follow a system that works?
 
nut said:
??? …. Why not have system where every contributes to secure their livelihoods? Why not follow a system that works?
Click to expand...
I thought this was about the welfare outcome?

personally if one finds themselves unemployed, they should know they are being treated equally and fairly. Paying higher income earners a higher dole or paying higher income earners for a longer period is not what I would call fair.

as highlighted I would prefer the dole was increased along with the pension.
 
Because welfare has been turned into a dirty word and the unemployed are looked at as bludgers. Witness Labor's abject refusal to consider raising welfare payments above the poverty line, but they're going to match the Stage 3 tax cuts which has a similar hit to the budget each year. The right may not have won the war against the welfare state (yet), but they've won enough battles to influence the public mood, at least.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Power Raid said:
I thought this was about the welfare outcome?

personally if one finds themselves unemployed, they should know they are being treated equally and fairly. Paying higher income earners a higher dole or paying higher income earners for a longer period is not what I would call fair.

as highlighted I would prefer the dole was increased along with the pension.
Click to expand...

Welfare … security …. Livelihood …. Happier life …. Knowing if you lose your job the world around you doesn’t fall apart.
Lots of people already have income protection … why not have a state funded one where everyone is in it and it’s not for profit?

Think of it like super …. Higher incomes contribute more so they will end up with more.

Same goes with the pension…. Someone who works more years contributes more to the states purse so they deserve more?

There is the incentive to work harder??? To get a better job?
 
nut said:
Welfare … security …. Livelihood …. Happier life …. Knowing if you lose your job the world around you doesn’t fall apart.
Lots of people already have income protection … why not have a state funded one where everyone is in it and it’s not for profit?

Think of it like super …. Higher incomes contribute more so they will end up with more.

Same goes with the pension…. Someone who works more years contributes more to the states purse so they deserve more?

There is the incentive to work harder??? To get a better job?
Click to expand...

I hear you

but I feel if one is unemployed after earning a low income or high income; they find themselves in the same situation being unemployed. Thus I feel they should receive the same safety net, being the same amount for the same amount of time (unlimited as opposed to being cut off after 52 or 104 weeks).

the pension simply isn't high enough but I guess superannuation is effectively what you seek being a reward for higher income earners going into retirement.

the dole certainly isn't high enough and should be the same as the pension and if one falls under hard times in Oz you can draw down on super under extreme circumstances
 
Power Raid said:
I hear you

but I feel if one is unemployed after earning a low income or high income; they find themselves in the same situation being unemployed. Thus I feel they should receive the same safety net, being the same amount for the same amount of time (unlimited as opposed to being cut off after 52 or 104 weeks).

the pension simply isn't high enough but I guess superannuation is effectively what you seek being a reward for higher income earners going into retirement.

the dole certainly isn't high enough and should be the same as the pension and if one falls under hard times in Oz you can draw down on super under extreme circumstances
Click to expand...

I think the system gives you 80% for 2 years… in that time the government will help retrain you into another job.
Like I said why not copy a system that is better and works?
It reduces crime costs and other costs to society associated with poor welfare.
 
nut said:
I think the system gives you 80% for 2 years… in that time the government will help retrain you into another job.
Like I said why not copy a system that is better and works?
It reduces crime costs and other costs to society associated with poor welfare.
Click to expand...

new zealand and switzerland have lower crime rates. do they both have this scheme or is it possible their are other factors?
 
Ned_Flanders said:
Because it would incentivize leaners.

Only bludgers take welfare, because everyone can be rich if they work hard.

That's why all those brown people come here remember, spend tends of thousands of dollars, risk their lives, for the dream of $40 a day
Click to expand...
40% more people are on unemployment benefits than are unemployed..
So either the Libs are lying about how many are unemployed or they are lying about how many are employed or lying about how many are on unemployment benefits.

All as is most likely the case, lying about all three.
 
Power Raid said:
new zealand and switzerland have lower crime rates. do they both have this scheme or is it possible their are other factors?
Click to expand...
New Zealand’s crime is higher

Switzerland has poverty payments about half the average monthly wage… so yer it’s a massive factor in crime.
 

Number 12: A compendium of legislative changes in social security 1908-1982 | Department of Social Services, Australian Government

Improving the lifetime wellbeing of people and families in Australia.
www.dss.gov.au

After skim-reading this and its companion pieces, Australia's welfare system is an historical artifact. It's designed to be a non-timed, non-contributory system rather than an insurance-based system. It's s**t in its present form, and deliberately so.

I think rather than adopting the insurance model we should invest in a higher Jobseeker Payment and lower the bar for Disability Pension. I am utterly disgusted by Labor abandoning any promise to raise the rate, even though I know why they did so. I am disgusted that you need to use homeless unemployed people as 'budget repair' as the Overton window has shifted this far to the right. Thanks Rupert Murdoch, you traitor.
 
Power Raid said:
I hear you

but I feel if one is unemployed after earning a low income or high income; they find themselves in the same situation being unemployed. Thus I feel they should receive the same safety net, being the same amount for the same amount of time (unlimited as opposed to being cut off after 52 or 104 weeks).

the pension simply isn't high enough but I guess superannuation is effectively what you seek being a reward for higher income earners going into retirement.

the dole certainly isn't high enough and should be the same as the pension and if one falls under hard times in Oz you can draw down on super under extreme circumstances
Click to expand...
Why are you discussing this, you are a self confessed none-voter

You don't get to have an opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top