JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[Pollushon]

I don't think you're an arse at all mate, I sympathise. If it's about to go belly up then you're in for a shitful ride, but take some solace, it gets better. The clown comment wasn't intended at you personally, it was intended at those who whinge and whine at these drops in the ocean that really have no impact on the grand scheme of things and the socioeconomic way of life we're afforded here. I speak most of text with my tongue in my cheek, why take life so seriously?

If you must know, it smashed me financially, but my wife owns her house now, she's a great human being and a fantastic mother. More importantly our kids have a secure house and inheritance, that's all we wanted and that was a bullet I was willing to take, I was best poised to, she would have done the same if things were switched. That's what it's all about at the end of the day; providing. It's not like I'm a martyr or anything that resembles one. Anyone with kids will know what you'd do for them.

I hope it works out for you VR one way or the other. Feel free to drop me a PM man, I've seen the blackness and made it out the other side, lots of folk here have. There's no reason you can't do the same.

 

[vr94ss]

I don't think you're an arse at all mate, I sympathise. If it's about to go belly up then you're in for a shitful ride, but take some solace, it gets better. The clown comment wasn't intended at you personally, it was intended at those who whinge and whine at these drops in the ocean that really have no impact on the grand scheme of things and the socioeconomic way of life we're afforded here. I speak most of text with my tongue in my cheek, why take life so seriously?

If you must know, it smashed me financially, but my wife owns her house now, she's a great human being and a fantastic mother. More importantly our kids have a secure house and inheritance, that's all we wanted and that was a bullet I was willing to take, I was best poised to, she would have done the same if things were switched. That's what it's all about at the end of the day; providing. It's not like I'm a martyr or anything that resembles one. Anyone with kids will know what you'd do for them.

I hope it works out for you VR one way or the other. Feel free to drop me a PM man, I've seen the blackness and made it out the other side, lots of folk here have. There's no reason you can't do the same.

Nah, mine is not going belly up, 30th anniversary in a few months, pearl I believe, I reckon she deserves a necklace My eldest son is the one in heartache atm, his son is 18 months old, he lives in Melbourne so he doesn't even have family close. We flew him up over christmas to give him a break. I hope it works out for them as well, or better, as yours has for you. Cheers.

edit: Just reading your post again, you two have your heads screw on right, at least now, good on ya.

 

[Pollushon]

Lol, gross dude. Hahaha.....

 

[iChris]

so what are people's thoughts on this? do I even need to ask?

Abbott government set to revive and expand work-for-dole scheme | News.com.au

 

[Reaper]

so what are people's thoughts on this? do I even need to ask?

Abbott government set to revive and expand work-for-dole scheme | News.com.au

News limited are the devil in-carnate. They should be strung up and burned at the cross and anything they write is clearly right wing propaganda that is entirely bias and should never have seen the light of day.

How 'bout your opinion?

 

[c2105026]

On one hand it could work, giving the long term unemployed something to do. They did this in the Depressions. Its actually how the 1930s-1980s incarnation of the Great western highway was built.. From an ethics perspective, though, the work should be in the public/not for profit sector.

Conversely, if there are now people 'rorting' the welfare system, omg you now give them opportunity to rort the workers comp system. (assuming workers comp applies to this situation - I think it should to protect whoever is employing the workers).
There is also the logistical nightmare of getting 800,000 people police-checked, etc. The number of public servants you'd need to employ to oversee this system would be large, reducing any fiscal advantage.

Finally, the argument 'it gives unemployed people skills to help them find a job'......yes along with all the other unemployed. It could just mean employers have higher expectations when rehiring long term unemployed.

So in closing I say 'OK' to this but remain a bit skeptical.

 

[Calaber]

lSeeing as IChris raised the issue, I'd like to know his opinions too.

Until then, for my two bob's worth, I believe WFTD can be used to considerable benefit if allied to local government, rather than some of the rudimentary and questionable tasks that have been suggested. For example, park and garden maintenance, road and footpath construction, and provision of Federally funded projects that would benefit the local community by providing additional, "free" labour for councils to use, with the Government picking up the tab via payment of unemployment benefits.

The scheme would need additional funds provided to councils to ensure adequate supervision of the WFTD people, but their actual labour cost would be the dole they receive. The person would have to sign on and off for a prescribed number of hours work, paid at the going rate for the particular skill level they undertake, to meet the value of their unemployment benefit. Council would either provide written certification to the employee to take to Centrelink to guarantee payment, or could do so on-line. Work performance would have to be monitored and supervised (which is where the additional cost to council could enter the picture), poor performers would be subject to the same sort of employment conditions as permanent staff and sub-standard performance could either be terminated, or paid at a reduced rate. For good performers, there would always be the possibility of permanent employment and even if the scheme was for long terms, rather than three months, it could be carried out without jeopardising permanent employees and not be used to prevent councils from employing additional staff. Unions would have to be involved of course, as they always dislike this sort of scheme because they maintain it is carried out at the expense of permanent jobs.

This way, the employee gets to perform meaningful and necessary work, so the dole actually achieves an input for its cost. The council gets unpaid additional personnel and funding to carry out important and urgent minor (and perhaps major) tasks, without having to increase rates. Local ratepayers (most of whom are also taxpayers), get more bang for their rates buck and can see that the WFTD scheme directly benefits them as well as the unemployed.

Some issues, such as Workers Comp and superannuation, might get in the way of this idea, but if they could be overcome, I believe this would be the best way of operating an WFTD scheme.

Edit: This proposal would principally be aimed at the unskilled or those who had applicable and relevant experience. As per C3P0's post below, it would not be applied to people with irrelevant or inappropriate skills, unless they personally opted to undertake the scheme.

 

[c2105026]

Another thing is that the work assigned to a person should be linked into any vocational training and experience the person may already have. EG if they have been an accountant, place them in an administrative/clerical environment for example. No point teaching them how to patch a pothole if they have no long term future in road maintenance. Give them skills they can take to their next job.

 

[iChris]

lSeeing as IChris raised the issue, I'd like to know his opinions too.

Personally I think there may be problems with insurances, OH&S and people rorting it by claiming workers comp, etc.

I think a program that funnels the unemployed into skills shortage areas would be beneficial, or give them the opportunity to join the army or something. Leave the trash picking up and gardening as a last resort for those who can't help themselves.

I myself am a full time employed tradesperson and my trade is considered to be one where there is a skills shortage in my state but there still isn't much going if you're looking for a job in what I do, so on the other hand I think the skills shortage in some areas is a load of crap so maybe conscripting the unemployed into the army reserves is the way to go

 

[Calaber]

The army often gets suggested for absorbing the unemployed, but it would be a challenging environment for many, if not most of them. Physical standards would have to be met - what percentage of the unemployed youth would meet the Army's stringent minimum standards? What age groups would be targeted? Mental aptitude is another consideration. The capacity of the Army to train the additional personnel has to be taken into account . What size of peacetime army does the nation need or can it support? Where (and how) will they be housed if the bases are unable to accommodate them? It might need a large-scale upgrade of existing bases for the scheme to succeed. And finally, how long do they serve?

I agree that any schemes should work in conjunction with addressing national skills shortages, though. My local government proposal was intended to utilise the unemployed to the community's benefit as well as provide meaningful employment to large numbers of people. It might only address the more basic skills and not really develop more complex tasks, but it could be applied on a large scale nationally to "sop-up" substantial numbers of people with minimal or no specific skills.