|
|
Post by peter on Sept 17, 2012 12:01:39 GMT 7
The real problem of playing the game starts at the political level when they tailor the welfare system to the mood of the times, and always as a vote winning system...................either for more of it or less of it according to the political mood.
Then over time, the system gets stretched, patched and repainted according to the times.
That does away with consistency and a system based on need.
So, as regards those who game the system, I would fault the politicians as most at fault. Example should come from down as well as up, but those in control have the higher responsibility. Leadership by example is a duty for leaders. (Please do not mention parliamentary pensions).
From my local Labor Senator I recently received a propaganda sheet, listing all the things Labor had done to increase the pension. True enough and praiseworthy.
But, it was only half the story. The sheet crowed about the money increase, but neglected to say that the government had rejected the other half of the increase recommendation, which was that rent allowances also be increased.
So, there is an example of officials gaming the truth, for their own political benefit.
Honesty would get them respect and people tend to appreciate that more than half truths and deceit.
It would also set an example for people to follow and over time put sincerity into the welfare system, as a means to a welfare end and not a political end.
As for NewStart, let us have a proper NewStart system, and not one where people stay on it for years.
Something wrong with a system where people can stay on it for twenty years.
If one thinks about it, the problem with DSP is that there is only one definition and those who fail go to NewStart.
There are grades of DSP. Some forever, and some not. They could have a DSP1, DSP2, before they got to NewStart. The gap between DSP and NewStart as is, is just too big.
Those fellows on NewStart for twenty years should either be on DSP1 or DSP2, or off NewStart.
The more one looks at the welfare system we got, the more in need of reform and refinement it seems to need.
At present its an ossified system suffering from sclerosis, so it would qualify for the classification of DSP1.
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 17, 2012 12:35:01 GMT 7
Indeed, good points.
I made a similar post last week about the gap between DSP and N/S being too wide.
|
|
|
|
Post by peter on Sept 18, 2012 16:06:43 GMT 7
At the library today, I read in the Australian newspaper some startling figures, as to what is happening to the welfare system..............which is really abused by the government at the expense of the Australian people. The system is sick and the politics are sick.
For migration, under the skilled migration programme, 28% are on Centrelink payments five years after arrival.
For humanitarian visas, 91% of Afghanis are on Centrelink payments five years after arrival
and for Iraqis, its 88% on Centrelink payments five years after arrival.
The article did not categorise the types of Centrelink payments hosting these new arrivals.
So now we know some additional reasons why the welfare rolls are so crowded in this country.
What a farce to have a "skilled migration " programme where 28% are on welfare five years later.
Two dogs and one bone, is not a fair way to handle a welfare system, especially when the Government decides to tighten the system up by taking away the bone.
It would be better by far to take away the new dog, and leave the original one in peace.
|
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 18, 2012 16:21:43 GMT 7
It's amazing what the Australian manages to do with statistics while proclaiming itself an independent news source. You should read something like newmatilda.com and then form an opinion that falls somewhere between the two.  |
|
|
|
Post by chillout on Sept 18, 2012 19:54:07 GMT 7
At the library today, I read in the Australian newspaper some startling figures, as to what is happening to the welfare system..............which is really abused by the government at the expense of the Australian people. The system is sick and the politics are sick. For migration, under the skilled migration programme, 28% are on Centrelink payments five years after arrival. For humanitarian visas, 91% of Afghanis are on Centrelink payments five years after arrival and for Iraqis, its 88% on Centrelink payments five years after arrival. The article did not categorise the types of Centrelink payments hosting these new arrivals. So now we know some additional reasons why the welfare rolls are so crowded in this country. What a farce to have a "skilled migration " programme where 28% are on welfare five years later. Two dogs and one bone, is not a fair way to handle a welfare system, especially when the Government decides to tighten the system up by taking away the bone. It would be better by far to take away the new dog, and leave the original one in peace. Thank you for your contribution Peter. You have said some wise things in some of your previous posts. However, Banjo, breadrolls, and others have made many comments about this issue, and they are well worth reading, and re-reading. Essentially, the Murdoch press, i.e. Rupert, is trying to install a rabidly right wing Abbott government, and will probably be successful. One of the main policies of the Abbott government will be to further restrict and abolish the overseas portability of both the DSP and the OAP, by increasing the AWLR, reducing the 26 week free portability period of the OAP to 6 weeks or ZERO weeks. Liberal Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey said he wants to increase the Old Age Pension age to 70. Tony Abbott himself made it very clear in his book Battlelines, that he wants Australians be more self reliant, to self fund their own retirement, and he is going to reduce and remove the Old Age Pension. For those elderly who cannot pay for their own retirement, there will be a Mutual Obligation Requirement, they will have to participate in Australia if they want to receive their OAP, and so the overseas portability of the OAP will be reduced and abolished. How are they going to sell this to the Australian people? Well, as Banjo has pointed out many times, Abbott and the Murdoch press, i.e. The Australian, have been, and will continue to, whip up racist hysteria and hate-mongering about immigration, especially the boat people. For migration, under the skilled migration programme, 28% are on Centrelink payments five years after arrival. This has been covered before on this discussion board. "Centrelink Payments" includes Family Tax Benefit, which is received by most families with children, and therefore "Centrelink Payments" are received by a large part of the Australian population. Peter and The Australian are suggesting there is something wrong with migrants having children. More than 50% of the migrants to Australia are of the white European race. Oooh, we cant have those nasty Scandinavian migrants having all of those blond haired babies, can we? It has also been previously raised, and is widely known, that migrants to Australia must reside permanently in Australia for 10 years before receiving the DSP. With regard to the humanitarian refugees, boat people et cetera, this is a very small group of immigrants, less than 5% of the total, but it is a favourite target for Abbott and The Australian, to whip up racist hatred and hysteria. A few isolated and irregular statistics are selectively quoted to give a distorted picture of immigration, in order to whip up racial hatred and hysteria, that Australia is being swamped by strange and oily welfare freeloaders. It would be better by far to take away the new dog, and leave the original one in peace. Quote--''to take away the new dog" Take away the new dog to where? To Auschwitz? Oh, I see, take away the new dog to the veterinarian, to be castrated, and then they won't be able to receive Centrelink payments, ie Family Tax Benefit, for their children. More than 50% of immigrants to Australia are of the white European race. We can't have those nasty Scandinavian migrants having all of those blond haired babies, can we? However, I think that Tony Abbott will win the election next year, largely based on whipping up racist hysteria and hatred, sending out subliminal race-hate messages, particularly towards the boat people, as this was a very successful formula for John Howard, it served him well for 11 years, and the Australian people are generally parochial and anachronistic, and easily misled by demagogues. |
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Sept 18, 2012 20:04:59 GMT 7
OK, everyone has had their say, or all that,s going to get it.
If you like to continue the discussion do it by PM please.
|
|
