JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[c2105026]

I have to agree that jobs are there for those prepared to swallow their pride and put their backs into it.

I retired on medical grounds in 2008, at the age of 56 and enjoy the benefits of a government superannuation pension (ie not a "pension" in the more general terms - I contributed for nearly 40 years). For a few years after retiring, I enjoyed the quiet life, with the hardest thing being caring for my first grandchild.

We moved to a small regional town in 2012 and I soon found that the cost of living had outstripped my super. I needed to supplement my income somehow.

I was fortunate enough to get a job doing newspaper deliveries seven days a week, then off for a week, then back for the next seven. My run is shared with another older bloke who does the alternate seven day shift. The hours are from 1.30 am to around 5.30 am each day, and from 9.30 pm to 5.00 am on Sunday mornings. At my age, you get very tired and you have to juggle your rest times with the other half who still wants to get out and about during the day and has to care for the (now) two grandkids four days per week.

I don't think of how tiring it is. I'm bloody grateful to be able to get work at 62 years of age in a small semi-rural community where jobs are not readily available, particularly for someone my age.

I guess that attitude is typical of my generation. Pity some of the younger ones can't have the same work ethic.

When I was employed, I lived on the NSW Central Coast and for a while, was stationed in the inner Western Suburbs. The distance between home and work was around 90 km. The journey involved two trains because I worked near an intermediate stop that Central Coast trains passed through and the journey each way took over two hours. My work was actually two kilometres from the station so there was a bit of walking involved as well. I did that job for over two years (and absolutely detested the travel), but it was where the job was and the promotion that accompanied it was financially worthwhile. My working day commenced at 7am and finished after 7pm (inclusive of travel) but I was only getting paid for seven of those 12+ hours.

I have absolutely NO sympathy for people who claim that the job is too far away from home. If that is their excuse and it means they can get the dole instead of working, then they get my utter contempt, nothing less.

By gar when I was a youngin I had to walk 10k each day to school, with a sack of coal on my back, in barefoot, in the snow. LOL JK

On a serious note, this budget had no suprises for me (apart from a $20 billion future fund for medical research, didn't see that one coming, although it is funded by the basic end of bulk billing).

As for unemployment, given that those on unemployment benefits are in a definite minority, not sure why they get a disproportionate amount of flack from the Right. Indeed it is problematic but I am unsure if the problem could ever be solved.

If you have the work ethic to look after yourself and pay your own way, good for you. Commendations are in order. But just because you have a certain set of values, it would be silly to assume that everyone else had the same values system, or that everyone has learned the same life lessons you did, learnt through upbringing or general life experience.

As some of you may know I have been studying to be a teacher; last year I did a prac at a private school that went well. I only had one student out of about 75 that didn't really give a ****. All others, despite levels of ability, were willing to at least have a go. It was quite an easy prac to do. Now, I am doing a prac at a local public high school. ####, it's like night and day. Granted most of my students will listen and do their work with a reasonable amount of effort (albeit with an amount of coaxing), but I have come across a few that just won't try, no matter how much I or any other teacher will coax them. Attitudes are 'I can't do this, so I won't'. Attitudes like this don't spring up overnight. They go long back into childhood. Often such students, I have later learnt, come from broken homes, and/or are abused and neglected. Very sad.

True, many from that situation do pull themselves out of it but it is often because they have been exposed to a great role model in the form of a local community member, coach, teacher etc. and got courage, the courage to try - which is also courage to fail. However I find it very sad that such attitudes of malaise are present in a 15 year old. And then to compound the issue many of these under-achieving students have emotional difficulties that limit social skills, meaning they can't function in the workplace as teens and young adults. Sure such difficulties are overcome but the help required isn't affordable to this demographic, and more often than not are unresolved.

In closing - negative attitudes can be instilled in children when young, this reflects in their schooling and arguably this is a reasonable predictor for vocational gusto. If a child sees a parent and their grandparent milking benefits - what do you think the child will see as a normal vocational behaviour? Issue sometimes goes a bit deeper than job-snobbery or a sense of entitlement.

 

[gopher]

The boats are at a trickle. So meh. Problem solved.

Serious question here.

What is more important to you? A broken promise or a responsible return to surplus?

What is more important to you. That the government BLINLDY tries and fulfils a promise at the same time being potentially irresponsible. That is, raising taxes, cutting massive expenditure and all round being scrooges.

Or would you prefer, they break that promise and do it gradually? More responsibly by doing it SLOWLY with proper expenditure cuts and less wastage?

Are you one of those people who will not be pleased either way?

Personally, I would rather they break the promise (a promise that was stupid in the first place) in order to slowly build back the economy. I would rather they get 20% of the way back to surplus within 3 years and they go to the election saying debt has been reduced by 20% by these measures, in the next 3 years we aim to be at 50% with these measure and we hope to introduce more cuts for taxes.

So it's quite okay in your opinion to make all these fanciful promises to get elected but then break just about every one of them once elected?
He made all those promises and promised to bring the budget into surplus as well
Never said he would have to break every one of them to bring the surplus back
Until now 8 months after the election

 

[Reaper]

By gar when I was a youngin I had to walk 10k each day to school, with a sack of coal on my back, in barefoot, in the snow. LOL JK

On a serious note, this budget had no suprises for me (apart from a $20 billion future fund for medical research, didn't see that one coming, although it is funded by the basic end of bulk billing).

As for unemployment, given that those on unemployment benefits are in a definite minority, not sure why they get a disproportionate amount of flack from the Right. Indeed it is problematic but I am unsure if the problem could ever be solved.

If you have the work ethic to look after yourself and pay your own way, good for you. Commendations are in order. But just because you have a certain set of values, it would be silly to assume that everyone else had the same values system, or that everyone has learned the same life lessons you did, learnt through upbringing or general life experience.

As some of you may know I have been studying to be a teacher; last year I did a prac at a private school that went well. I only had one student out of about 75 that didn't really give a ****. All others, despite levels of ability, were willing to at least have a go. It was quite an easy prac to do. Now, I am doing a prac at a local public high school. ####, it's like night and day. Granted most of my students will listen and do their work with a reasonable amount of effort (albeit with an amount of coaxing), but I have come across a few that just won't try, no matter how much I or any other teacher will coax them. Attitudes are 'I can't do this, so I won't'. Attitudes like this don't spring up overnight. They go long back into childhood. Often such students, I have later learnt, come from broken homes, and/or are abused and neglected. Very sad.

True, many from that situation do pull themselves out of it but it is often because they have been exposed to a great role model in the form of a local community member, coach, teacher etc. and got courage, the courage to try - which is also courage to fail. However I find it very sad that such attitudes of malaise are present in a 15 year old. And then to compound the issue many of these under-achieving students have emotional difficulties that limit social skills, meaning they can't function in the workplace as teens and young adults. Sure such difficulties are overcome but the help required isn't affordable to this demographic, and more often than not are unresolved.

In closing - negative attitudes can be instilled in children when young, this reflects in their schooling and arguably this is a reasonable predictor for vocational gusto. If a child sees a parent and their grandparent milking benefits - what do you think the child will see as a normal vocational behaviour? Issue sometimes goes a bit deeper than job-snobbery or a sense of entitlement.

Sooo the question becomes what to do about such people to break the cycle? Not giving a **** or bad parenting should not entitle anybody to a free ride off the taxpayer for life. Here's an idea - not have the entitlement available which leaves the options of either getting a job or starving. Will motivate the vast majority I'm tipping .

So it's quite okay in your opinion to make all these fanciful promises to get elected but then break just about every one of them once elected?
He made all those promises and promised to bring the budget into surplus as well
Never said he would have to break every one of them to bring the surplus back
Until now 8 months after the election

Ok - we get it. I haven't seen anybody here trying to argue that commitments have been renegged on. Really now it comes down to a decision - which is more important, the greater good for Australia or what was said before an election? And before you crap on about the Gillard mallarki - there is a huge difference on her promise - Australia and the environment had zero benefit from her change in policy what so ever. Nil, nada, nix, nein, ziltch, zero NONE!

....... how about some intelligent argument beyond quoting newspaper articles

 

[c2105026]

Sooo the question becomes what to do about such people to break the cycle? Not giving a **** or bad parenting should not entitle anybody to a free ride off the taxpayer for life. Here's an idea - not have the entitlement available which leaves the options of either getting a job or starving. Will motivate the vast majority I'm tipping .

Indeed it absolutely shouldn't be a free ticket for life but world will never be perfect.

As for your two scenarios of finding work or starving.......

Suppose one chose to look for work. What if...they had no skills and have a learning difficulty? What if the economy is bad and there are actually a net shortage of jobs? They had no jobseeking skills, and are unable to learn them? What if they are illiterate? What if they need to travel to find work, but cannot afford to do so?

Suppose one didn't choose to work. Well yes starving to death would be an option. But for those who do rort the system, I wouldn't put it past them to turn to crime. Police are busy enough as it is. I'd rather give them a handout than to break into my home and threaten my family. Or they become homeless, which in itself is raises economic problems, crime problems, and logistical problems of finding work etc.
Not sure if you actually thought that one through....

You also seem to believe that career dole people are actually in a positive lifestyle situation as it is, that they are fundamentally happy. This is highly debatable. I'd argue many would get out of it if they could. But some invisible something is holding them back, be it lack of knowledge, skills, or even self worth.

 

[Tasmaniak]

Ok - we get it. I haven't seen anybody here trying to argue that commitments have been renegged on. Really now it comes down to a decision - which is more important, the greater good for Australia or what was said before an election? And before you crap on about the Gillard mallarki - there is a huge difference on her promise - Australia and the environment had zero benefit from her change in policy what so ever. Nil, nada, nix, nein, ziltch, zero NONE!

....... how about some intelligent argument beyond quoting newspaper articles

Christ, Abbott himself has come out now and effectively confirmed the same thing. Not that he lied but things had to be changed and that if people weren't happy with it then they should show that at the next election. I wish I could find the article. I think it was part of one of the articles to do with Vilma.

 

[Grennan]

So it's quite okay in your opinion to make all these fanciful promises to get elected but then break just about every one of them once elected?
He made all those promises and promised to bring the budget into surplus as well
Never said he would have to break every one of them to bring the surplus back
Until now 8 months after the election

I asked you a simple question. There are three answers.

A) The promise is paramount B) Surplus is paramount C) You cannot be pleased

What you cannot or do not want to accept is that figures presented to a Govt before and after the election are two different things. Yes, he did promise to return to surplus, he didnt promise a date. Did he mean he will do it in 10 years?

What this comes down to is what is the damage of a broken promise compared to a budget that absolutely REEEEEAAAAAPS money from everyone.

I would say being the bigger man, accepting that the promise was a bad choice and then taking the fiscally responsible path of slowly creeping back to surplus is a lot better than promising the world and delivering pain.

So I ask you again, A, B or C?

I suspect you are C and you are deliberating just being difficult but meh.

 

[gopher]

is a lot better than promising the world and delivering pain.

Isn't that exactly what he did?
Promised the world and delivered pain

 

[AirStrike]

Isn't that exactly what he did?
Promised the world and delivered pain

What would you suggest be done? I see the greens/labor crowd scream blue murder but offer no solutions.

 

[c2105026]

It was foolish for Abbott and Co to promise no cuts or no new taxes to a variety of areas.
That they have gone back on these promises have utterly destroyed their integrity in the eyes of many.
There are solutions that are ALP/Greens friendly but would having Lib supporters (i.e. most forum users) screaming blue murder.

Personally I would have placed centrelink disability recipients under a bit more scruitiny to weed out those who are obviously not legit
Restore personal taxation back to inflation-adjusted 2005 levels (or increased GST - our 10% is low by international standards)
Greatly clamped down on tax loopholes by simplifying tax system, including what can be deducted etc
Scrap the 58 (?) new fighter planes
Lower the HECs paying-back threshold
Reintroduce tariffs on imported goods if they have a local competitor (in a broad sense).
Dump the chaplaincy program and NAPLAN (former saves $250 million, later would save a few million)
Those are some ideas I would have put forth........some leftie, some rightie......

 

[iChris]

There are solutions that are ALP/Greens friendly but would having Lib supporters (i.e. most forum users) screaming blue murder.

like dumping the paid parental leave scheme?

I find it incredible that after all the cuts, tax hikes, assaults on the hip pockets of lower middle class families and students, belt tightening and bigoted "live within your means" speeches from fat cats who have no idea how things work in the real world, they are still going to pay people to take time off work to have kids. kids that will potentially become bludgers themselves.

golloy gosh, these are the same people who moan about welfare recipients putting the country into the red and talk nothing other than them being a drain on government coffers and at the same time wanting to pay people to sit at home and do nothing whilst having kids. and blowing big money on fighter jets we can't afford and hoping people will be die before 70 so they can't claim the pension.