by Gozu » Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:00 pm
by Psyber » Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:21 pm
by mick » Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:37 pm
Psyber wrote:PM defends work rules as teens lose jobs: http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/676 ... lose-jobs/
by Psyber » Fri Feb 05, 2010 12:41 pm
Yes probably lots, but dogma and inflexibility are the priority...mick wrote:We have to expect collateral damage.Psyber wrote:PM defends work rules as teens lose jobs: http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/676 ... lose-jobs/
by Psyber » Fri Feb 05, 2010 1:02 pm
Beef import decision 'risks jobs': http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/676 ... isks-jobs/
by Gozu » Fri Feb 05, 2010 4:27 pm
by Psyber » Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:57 pm
by Gozu » Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:31 pm
Psyber wrote:I agree with you in general principal there, Gozu, but I couldn't imagine it getting up in any branch of the Liberal Party I was ever involved in.
[That's Mayo, Higgins, and La Trobe - though I am not sure how the present incumbent in Mayo may lean. I've only met him twice.]
From what my father told me, I understand the original "dole" was not money, but food in a bag, and there were rorts by the contractors resulting in the contents being of questionable edibility.
He was a staunch Labor man, and although this scheme may not allow those rorts it would concern him.
I can see why the plan may make sense applied to those with a demonstrated pattern of neglecting their children's nutritional needs.
But I can see no justification to apply it globally.
Unfortunately, there seem to be a sub-group of politicians and bureaucrats who simply enjoy exercising control, as described in the book "1984".
They may push this on to allow them to dictate to Aged an Invalid Pensioners, too, if this gets up as it stands, and call it "preventative health strategy".
[They are already trying to tell doctors how to treat patients.]
by Psyber » Fri Feb 05, 2010 8:05 pm
I agree, Gozu, that the Libs sometimes go overboard with their ideas about ways of dealing with the minority of real bludgers, and overestimate how many there are, as the Howard government did.Gozu wrote: I agree Psyber. What I meant by saying this would be something you'd expect from the Libs is they're known to go hard at poorer people on welfare (Howard's work for the dole-which by the way he said he would never bring in, another one of those non-core promises) and that Labor in the past has traditionally been more compassionate towards the less well off in society.
It's disgraceful that firstly a Labor government is going to do this but it is in effect saying that all single parents and unemployed people can't manager the pittance they get. I could understand if someone with children like you said has demonstrated that they aren't managing their money well and thus the child is being neglected and I'd hope they were pushed into counselling and what not before going down this route. There is no way this should apply to people who aren't parents and even so counselling, financial management help etc should be done before quarantining payments.
Even going beyond the no booze/smokes stuff into the noted possibility of banning single parents/unemployed from buying things like chocolate biscuits, soft drink etc is the over the top nanny state BS this Rudd government seems to love. This whole thing is purely so they can avoid being labelled as racist for already doing this to people in Aboriginal communities in the NT because they had to suspend the racial discrimination act to do so.
They won't ever go after old age pensioners Psyber, there's too many of them. There's no votes in the unemployed.
by fish » Fri Feb 05, 2010 8:23 pm
Gozu wrote:I agree Psyber
Psyber wrote:I agree, Gozu
by Gozu » Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:59 pm
Psyber wrote:You are probably right, too, about them not going after pensioners directly, but they are already getting at them with the pressure they are putting on doctors regarding medication costs through Medicare.
["Mediscare" is what most GPs call it.]
by Psyber » Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:25 am
Yes it is a growing issue...Gozu wrote:I'm not sure if this is common but I know of one doctor who's about to stop bulk-billing old age pensioners at his clinic because he says they take up too much of his time because they come in with a list of things.Psyber wrote:You are probably right, too, about them not going after pensioners directly, but they are already getting at them with the pressure they are putting on doctors regarding medication costs through Medicare.
["Mediscare" is what most GPs call it.]
by Psyber » Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:45 am
mick wrote:We have to expect collateral damage.Psyber wrote:PM defends work rules as teens lose jobs: http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/676 ... lose-jobs/
Mr Rudd said the laws were aimed at preventing workers from being exploited and denied he had broken a promise that workers would not be worse off under the new system.
"What we said from the beginning is we are going to have a fair and balanced system," Mr Rudd said on Friday.
But in March 2008, just four months after coming to office, Mr Rudd told the parliament "no working families in this country will be worse off as a consequence of the industrial relations laws that we have advanced".
by Psyber » Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:16 am
It is the first time I have heard of a politician not blaming all road accidents and deaths on speed while ignoring this aspect.Mr Rudd told the audience, including 200 high school students, that booze, like alcopops, was a concerning factor in P-Plate driving deaths.
"(The) drinking rates of young teenagers (is) going through the roof ... and hugely affecting their ability to, frankly, manoeuvre a car."
by Gozu » Sat Feb 13, 2010 2:28 am
by Jimmy_041 » Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:35 am
by Gozu » Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:18 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:Some people should spend a bit of time in the NT and ask the locals what the income management and restrictions on alcohol and porn have done for some aboriginal communities, but more importantly; children who now get fed and feel some safety from abuse
by mick » Mon Feb 15, 2010 9:55 am
by Leaping Lindner » Mon Feb 15, 2010 12:20 pm
mick wrote:Will KRudd be a one termer? http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,1,26722423-13360,00.html
by Gozu » Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:04 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |