Swampfox wrote:
> "Hunter01" <hunter01@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:4826e240$0$22177$5a62ac22@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> Nope, the way I read it it's only going to be
>> trialed in pretty much the exact same places Howard
>> was going to implement it. Howard also said it would
>> also be later rolled into other areas if the same
>> problems were seen to be present. Rudd has not
>> really clarified exactly where-else he will roll it
>> out yet, other than that it could be rolled out in
>> cases where the Child Protection Agency makes a
>> recommendation, not really far off Liberals stand at
>> all.
>
> Not a quantum leap, but substantially different
> nonetheless.
> Macklin stated categorically the other day that the
> same system would be rolled out Australia wide later
> this year, not a "maybe, if the need arises" that
> Howard proposed.
> Labor has also done the nuts and bolts work that was
> lacking from anything Howard proposed.
Yeah we'll see, I heard Australia wide "where appropriate", eg. skipping
the semantics the general meaning of "if the need arises" is really no
different at all. As for the nuts and bolts, yep agreed, and I already
said so myself, but that's no different than any system already put in
place at a change of govt, the govt that follows either adopts and
attachs the wheels to a new scheme, or they shun it and can it.
Obviously Labor in this case like the idea (as much as they said
otherwise) and shaped it to their design (and no complaints there,
Liberal did the same with certain Labor schemes way back on the last
change of govt, only a fool would not take the good and drop the bad,
and of course they will always reshape, to leave it as is is as good as
to say it was right in the first place, and no side will ever do that).
>> Personally I think that it should be universal to
>> welfare recipients, but with some latitude, if said
>> recipient needs to spend the dosh on something that
>> is not a part of the program but is still reasonable
>> that flexibility should be there, in the form of
>> Centrelink evaluating the situation and making the
>> payment for the recipient if deemed to be fair
>> enough, or some such other form. If the recipient is
>> willing to live on Maggi noodles for a period of
>> time to try to get a vehicle which may help to get a
>> job, or to pick up a suit for interviews, or
>> whatever else, that latitude must be there.
>
> Sounds good in theory, but it will need another layer
> of bureacracy to administer and could become just
> another work for the dole type white elephant.
> It'll give the punters a warm inner glow though so
> it's politically irresistable.
Agreed entirely, but you can't implement a scheme in a half-arsed manner
which is more likely to cripple rather than improve the chances of
building the workforce. It needs to be done properly, and the only way
to do that is to include that latitude. I reckon a much simpler approach
would be to do the Austudy loan idea without the payback reasoning
behind it (that in itself negates the attractiveness of doing it). 50%
again on the dole for those willing to go into training, assistance in
getting the first job, and if employment is successfully obtained no
payback, it was worth the investment. You might say what about all the
bludgers who don't get a job and just do it for the extra dosh? Well
welcome to now-land, that's already the case with those who take up the
loan scheme, no payback required providing you don't get a job, sort of
an incentive not to get a job really isn't it... Take the payback out of
it and you might find people who are actually after a job are much more
keen to take the offer as opposed to just those seeing it as a free
paying lark with no likelihood of ever having to make repayments, and
then given a few years for these people to emerge into the workforce we
wouldn't have to im****t labour at the same rate we're currently forced to.
Personally it saddens me that people in Aus now need to be bribed to get
an education and get a job in many cases. I personally work with a
number of im****ted workers who are much more Australian in their
attitudes than a lot of the younger homeborn people, and are also damn
good friends. It saddens me that our own people are much less interested
today in getting a trade or a profession than they were when I was a
youngun, but I spose who really gives a **** in the end, I'd rather
knock around with people who are as Australian in attitude as it comes,
with the full mate****p ethic, work ethic and love their partying than
any of the gen-c mob (c for ****) coming up these days that think the
world owes them a living and would rather be ****ing yanks than Aussies.
I'd love to see things change and see homeborn pride restored, but it's
not looking good with the greenleft influence destroying our local
population, so maybe the influx of good people from overseas is exactly
what we need until Australia can grow some balls, kick the greenlefters
in the head, and restore some pride to this country. Perhaps these
people from overseas who have seen life can be hard are what we need,
because the younguns of today don't seem to have a ****ing clue for the
most part, and that taints their morals, ethics and everything else. My
apologies to the good up-and-comings out there, but I'm sure they also
see that a lot of their age bracket these days truly are just ****s.
Off-tangent tirade ended, had a few tonight, and personally couldn't
give a **** if the above offends people. I see my country going
down-hill as far as our local mob are concerned, and that ****s me.
>> Of course this will all cost the tax payer money,
>> but with the ****e the current state and federal
>> govts are blowing money on (and the previous govt as
>> well, that's a problem common to all govts) I think
>> this may be a worthwhile investment, and the ROI
>> would be high even if intangible, these people would
>> have food, would find it much harder to blow our tax
>> dollars on drugs and alcohol, etc.etc. ****, if they
>> want to drink and smoke they just might go out and
>> get a job! 8]
>
> The types of people likely to blow their cash on piss
> and dope and neglect their kids are highly unlikely to
> get a job.
> Sounds good though.
Other than neglecting kids (got none and want none, would conflict with
my lifestyle!) I blow the bulk of my income on partying, but I work
****ing hard for that, and reckon that's perfectly within my rights, so
bad call to say that those types aren't the types to get jobs, in fact
plenty of my mob (and we ain't kids any more) are the same. Some with
the wife and kids baggage, they just attend less pissups! 8]
>> It's not like there's a shortage of work in this
>> country...
>
> Doesn't matter how much work's about, there will
> always be dropkicks.
Agree entirely, the totally useless will always exist, the beauty of
this nation is that we don't let anyone starve. If we gave the right
incentives to get work though we'd have only those that truly can't be
employed, not those that vaguely can't be bothered, which is the current
situation. Need to make it hard for those that don't want to, but
compassionate to those that have true problems, a fine art of
brinkman****p which ain't likely in a public service sort of area, but
hey, the world will never be perfect.
>> I don't agree with you, and neither do the likes of
>> Noel Pearson, who made the same point you make above
>> about the welfare quarantine, he couldn't give two
>> ****s about who does it or who gets the credit, all
>> he gives a **** about is Australia has known about
>> the problems (kiddy rapes, violence, disease,
>> poverty, lawlessness, these great so-called
>> communities only have criminals enjoying life there,
>> everyone else lives in fear) for a very long time,
>> but has been too gutless due to greenleft kneejerk
>> activist reactionaries to ever previously do
>> anything about it.
>
> Howard did **** all about it for over a decade, and
> since when has he worried about greenleft kneejerk
> activist reactionaries?
All govts have and always will be buddy, that's the problem. Howard I
think realised he was going under and thought he'd try something
reactionary for a final sink or swim reaction, it didn't go well for him.
Unfortunately it was for the purposes of politics... Noel Pearson was
dead right, he said he didn't like Howard but at least he did something,
and he didn't care what the reasons were or who did it, he just wanted
someone to do something. That help has been lacking for far too long,
forget the politics of it, at least the ball is now rolling, I just pray
Labor keeps it rolling, and drops the politics long enough to get it
right despite whatever negativity they may attract from their
traditional core voting greenleft crowd, they'd earn a lot of respect
from people like myself if they had the balls to help the victims in
these communities...
> The bald truth of the matter is that to actually do
> something constructive will cost a **** load of money,
> far more than we've ever spent on abo's, and the
> average city living Aussie doesn't give a stuff about
> blackfellas living out in **** creek, and they don't
> want a bucket load of their taxes spent on them.
Nope, neither do I. Treat them like everyone else. Abuse/neglect your
kids then lose them, no more of this stolen generation part II stigma.
If the community ain't working close it down, like anyone or anywhere
else. It ain't rocket science.
> By average city living Aussie I mean Aussies of Anglo,
> Greek, Viet, Lebanese and every other ethnic mix that
> makes up our society, not just your stereotype white
> bigot.
Plenty of Anglo, Greek, Viet, Lebanese and everyone else bigots too.
Especially so in the Aboriginal community. Being a bigot is certainly
not a colourblind affliction.
> None of them give a stuff about blackfellas, and the
> politicians know it.
Some of us actually do. Some of us have actually spent a lot of time
knocking around with, working with and dealing with them. They're not
another species, they're just other people. Some are good people, some
are ****s. The biggest ****ing problem is the greenleft mob do
effectively want them classified as a seperate species. The elders are
sick of this approach, but these ****s know better than the elders...
The Nyungar elders in Perth begged for the gloves to be removed some
years back, and to be given the ability to discipline their kids, and
for the courts to ****ing do something about their s***bags, and they
were totally ignored. Last I heard on it is one of the elders had died
and the other got headlines saying he'd divorced himself from the
Nyungar community, because as far as he was concerned it was now dead
and unsaveable, and blamed it entirely on the welfare greenleft ****
mentality that had destroyed his people. That makes me sick, but that's
the reality of what has happened.... That elder was dead ****ing right,
hope he's keeled over and not had to see how even further down the slide
they've gone here. Thank **** there's communities out there that have
retained their pride and strength, because where-ever the greenleft have
become involved their communities have become broken and been destroyed.
>> Thank **** something at least is finally being done.
>> Perhaps it could be done better, but at least the
>> women and children of these communities are no
>> longer copping the usual "leave it to them, it's the
>> way they live" that they've been victims of for
>> decades, most notably recently by the QLD state govt
>> which seems to have been caught out trying to bury
>> child abuse records in these communities.
>
> I have no idea what motivated Howard, and I wouldn't
> even guess as I wouldn't believe a word he said, but
> Brough struck me as a decent man who was committed to
> making a difference, and when he lost his seat it was
> a loss both for the parliament and the Coalition.
The only difference that is going to be made in some of these
communities is going to take boots, not arse-kissing. It's gone well
beyond that..... Hiding reality from the public is only compounding the
issue, and is also criminal in my opinion.
>> Agree completely, and if any non-Indigenous (forget
>> White, we're all Australian) communities have the
>> same problems I'd want the army sent in post-haste
>> to round up the ****s responsible and lock them up
>> and throw away the key, and return some semblance of
>> law and order to the place.
>>
>> In fact if the same treatment was applied
>> universally we wouldn't be blowing untold amounts of
>> tax paying dollars to try to sup****t these
>> communities in the first place, they'd be considered
>> unviable and the people would have to move somewhere
>> viable, just like happens in any other town in
>> Australia that ends up unable to sup****t itself. I'd
>> have absolutely no problems with that either, 2
>> birds with one stone.
>
> And you're not alone.
> I heard a blackfella from Cape York on radio a few
> months ago saying that many remote communities are
> simply unviable due to the exhorbitant cost of
> providing services and that they can never produce
> sustainable employment.
> The catch is that no one else in Australia has been
> told where they have to live or forcibly removed from
> their homes.
> There were thousands of hippies living in **** creek
> in the 70's collecting the dole and with no chance
> whatsoever of doing a day's work, and nothing was done
> about them so it's gonna be a cute trick to sell the
> idea when it comes to abos.
Nothing to sell, stop wasting money on the communities, nothing spent at
all on them. Become self-sustaining or give up and move, the same as
would happen with anyone else (much like those hippies).
I'm sure those hippies managed to get to the nearest dole office to put
their forms in, let these guys do the same.
|
