Politics Young people won't embrace progressive politics when they see its failures

[bzparkes]

Meanwhile conservative governments jump on whatever the latest scare campaign is.

Yeah, no shit. Not what the thread's about though.

The electorate simply isn't going to vote for policies likely to result in genuine change because it's so easy to run scare campaigns to stop that happening.

Well, most people don't read a policy before deciding who to vote for, they simply get their opinions off their favourite news source, or just vote for whoever their family's traditionally voted for.

People get all up in arms about increasing the welfare payment but the tax bracket changes were a-ok.

No issue with increasing welfare to match the cost of living, however stricter measures should be in place to combat people taking the system for a ride.

Tax-reform definitely needs to take pressure off the middle class and ensure the wealthiest of people are taxed accordingly. Seems the ones who can afford it the most end up paying the least. Guess it's easy when you have money and influence.

 

[faible]

however stricter measures should be in place to combat people taking the system for a ride.

See this is the great trick, there's a small number of people that might be ripping off the welfare system for a relatively small amount of money. We spend an enormous amount of money on red tape and bureaucracy via Centrelink to try to stop it, IMO we'd be spending vastly more on stopping it than we're actually being ripped off. During Covid we removed a massive amount of the hurdles involved in accessing welfare, and it should have stayed that way permanently.

Tax-reform definitely needs to take pressure off the middle class and ensure the wealthiest of people are taxed accordingly. Seems the ones who can afford it the most end up paying the least. Guess it's easy when you have money and influence.

Meanwhile, we're losing staggering amounts of tax revenue through loopholes that poor people can't exploit but rich people and multi-national corporations can.

But people fixate on the welfare cheats, who are small in number and snag a very limited amount of money, most of which is likely to be picked up by the ATO anyway because the ATO are actually pretty good at what they do.

 

[bzparkes]

See this is the great trick, there's a small number of people that might be ripping off the welfare system for a relatively small amount of money. We spend an enormous amount of money on red tape and bureaucracy via Centrelink to try to stop it, IMO we'd be spending vastly more on stopping it than we're actually being ripped off. During Covid we removed a massive amount of the hurdles involved in accessing welfare, and it should have stayed that way permanently.

I agree with removing hurdles to accessing welfare. I lost my job a number of years ago when living in Sydney and couldn't get Centrelink because the because trying to set me up kept screwing up my application(over an 8 week period) and at the end of it, they said my application timed-out and I had to begin the process again, which would've taken another month.

Ended up breaking my lease and moving into my best mate's place in Brisbane, as he separated from his wife int eh UK and came back alone, so I had to drag my wife and kid here.

having said that, I've known many people who blatantly rort the system, because it's so bloody easy to do so.

Meanwhile, we're losing staggering amounts of tax revenue through loopholes that poor people can't exploit but rich people and multi-national corporations can.

Because poor people have no ability to lobby the government. I don't think you'll find many people disagreeing with you that this needs serious reform, especially considering the housing crisis and rise in cost of living.

But people fixate on the welfare cheats, who are small in number and snag a very limited amount of money, most of which is likely to be picked up by the ATO anyway because the ATO are actually pretty good at what they do.

Not sure if you're alluding to my comment but it is possible to do both.

 

[faible]

hurdles to accessing welfare.

it's so bloody easy to do so.

Sounds like it's probably not as easy as you're saying, or as lucrative.

Again, it's a great distraction though. We spend a shitload of taxpayer money and resources on 'stopping welfare cheats' who likely represent an extremely small loss, whilst the rich and multinationals absolutely pillage the system.

Adding more red-tape to welfare is simply going to stop people who desperately need it actually getting access to it, all in the name of stopping a handful of people rorting the system for a small amount of money.

Say I'm really clever and manage to get the full jobkeeper payment for a single person with no kids, that's ~ $19,480 / year. Assuming I'm not actually entitled to any welfare payments at all.

Meanwhile Rio Tinto got busted for dodging taxes to the tune of ~ $1b.

Rio Tinto agrees to pay nearly $1 billion in tax avoidance settlement with ATO

Rio Tinto will hand over $1 billion in unpaid taxes after an ATO investigation, in one of the largest settlements in Australian tax history.

www.abc.net.au

How many welfare cheats do we need to stop to make up for the one multi-national that took a decade of pursuit and audits to recoup the money from (and let's be honest, it's probably not the full amount they'd actually owe either).

How many welfare cheats do we need to stop to justify the amount of money we spend on managing the red-tape and bureaucracy of Centrelink, and the hardship imposed on those who genuinely need welfare that can't access it due to the hurdles to stop the dishonest actors?

It's a pretty simple cost:benefit equation, and I'd have thought it's almost certainly better to let the few bad actors willing to cheat the welfare system for another extra $10k - $20k get that - and likely a number of them get caught by the ATO anyway - than to pay all those staff and use those resources stopping it when they could be far better used elsewhere.

I'd also argue we should remove a lot of the allowances permitted in your tax return e.g. uniform / donations below certain thresholds don't require evidence, and simply increase the tax free threshold to cover it.

 

[bzparkes]

Sounds like it's probably not as easy as you're saying, or as lucrative.

Again, it's a great distraction though. We spend a shitload of taxpayer money and resources on 'stopping welfare cheats' who likely represent an extremely small loss, whilst the rich and multinationals absolutely pillage the system.

Adding more red-tape to welfare is simply going to stop people who desperately need it actually getting access to it, all in the name of stopping a handful of people rorting the system for a small amount of money.

Say I'm really clever and manage to get the full jobkeeper payment for a single person with no kids, that's ~ $19,480 / year. Assuming I'm not actually entitled to any welfare payments at all.

Meanwhile Rio Tinto got busted for dodging taxes to the tune of ~ $1b.

Rio Tinto agrees to pay nearly $1 billion in tax avoidance settlement with ATO

Rio Tinto will hand over $1 billion in unpaid taxes after an ATO investigation, in one of the largest settlements in Australian tax history.

www.abc.net.au

How many welfare cheats do we need to stop to make up for the one multi-national that took a decade of pursuit and audits to recoup the money from (and let's be honest, it's probably not the full amount they'd actually owe either).

How many welfare cheats do we need to stop to justify the amount of money we spend on managing the red-tape and bureaucracy of Centrelink, and the hardship imposed on those who genuinely need welfare that can't access it due to the hurdles to stop the dishonest actors?

It's a pretty simple cost:benefit equation, and I'd have thought it's almost certainly better to let the few bad actors willing to cheat the welfare system for another extra $10k - $20k get that - and likely a number of them get caught by the ATO anyway - than to pay all those staff and use those resources stopping it when they could be far better used elsewhere.

I'd also argue we should remove a lot of the allowances permitted in your tax return e.g. uniform / donations below certain thresholds don't require evidence, and simply increase the tax free threshold to cover it.

I think you're missing my point entirely.

I'm not saying make it harder to access, I thought I made that fairly clear.

I'm saying that people who spend years rorting the system(I grew up in Launceston, I know plenty, trust me...) need greater incentives to go into the workforce, or at least have to provide a reasonable reason as to why they can't.

There's plenty of additional initiatives that could be created to achieve this. We already have work for the dole, this could be expanded to include study and qualifications, as well as industries other then menial labour, to entice people to actually want to take advantage of the program instead of feeling inconvenienced from it.

 

[barreness]

I think you're missing my point entirely.

I'm not saying make it harder to access, I thought I made that fairly clear.

I'm saying that people who spend years rorting the system(I grew up in Launceston, I know plenty, trust me...) need greater incentives to go into the workforce, or at least have to provide a reasonable reason as to why they can't.

There's plenty of additional initiatives that could be created to achieve this. We already have work for the dole, this could be expanded to include study and qualifications, as well as industries other then menial labour, to entice people to actually want to take advantage of the program instead of feeling inconvenienced from it.

It's a very different system these days, how many years ago was this?

Services australia is basically in collapse, do they even have a CEO at the moment, current applications take about three months for processing and you''l likely receive a negative with no further information.

Dealing with 'job providers' will make you want to beat your head against a wall repeatedly, I suspect this is the point, quite lucrative for the 'providers'. Years of neoliberal 'reform' as usual resulting in an ever degrading public services and fantastic profits for private contractors to suckle off the public tit.

There's a massive incentive to go into the workforce atm, to finally be free of those deadshits.

Shame for those with genuine need I guess

 

[bzparkes]

It's a very different system these days, how many years ago was this?

Services australia is basically in collapse, do they even have a CEO at the moment, current applications take about three months for processing and you''l likely receive a negative with no further information.

Dealing with 'job providers' will make you want to beat your head against a wall repeatedly, I suspect this is the point, quite lucrative for the 'providers'. Years of neoliberal 'reform' as usual resulting in an ever degrading public services and fantastic profits for private contractors to suckle off the public tit.

There's a massive incentive to go into the workforce atm, to finally be free of those deadshits.

Shame for those with genuine need I guess

Not really aware of the current state of things with Services Australia myself, I hate dealing with them, so thankfully in the past couple of years my income has increased to a point(I career changed from Hospitality into IT) where I no longer qualify for assistance, so I no longer need to go to them for help.

I do remember dealing with job providers around 20 years ago and that was painful. Literally just trying to convince people to take any cleaner job available to fill openings, without considering your prior education or work history. Nothing tailored to your interests, etc.

Definitely needs an overhaul but I think they should afford people the opportunity for heavily subsidised/free higher education for long term recipients who are struggling to find work, instead of trying to ship them off to manual labour/cleaning jobs they may be ultimately unsuitable for.

 

[barreness]

Not really aware of the current state of things with Services Australia myself, I hate dealing with them, so thankfully in the past couple of years my income has increased to a point(I career changed from Hospitality into IT) where I no longer qualify for assistance, so I no longer need to go to them for help.

I do remember dealing with job providers around 20 years ago and that was painful. Literally just trying to convince people to take any cleaner job available to fill openings, without considering your prior education or work history. Nothing tailored to your interests, etc.

Definitely needs an overhaul but I think they should afford people the opportunity for heavily subsidised/free higher education for long term recipients who are struggling to find work, instead of trying to ship them off to manual labour/cleaning jobs they may be ultimately unsuitable for.

Yeh so I knew some bludgers in the 80's probably doesn't hold much weight

 

[bzparkes]

Yeh so I knew some bludgers in the 80's probably doesn't hold much weight

I know a lot of bludgers right now

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Why do dole bludgers get demonized more than council worker bludgers, or public service bludgers?

It's the same thing, except the dole bludgers get paid less and work (bludge) from home.

 

[faible]

Why do dole bludgers get demonized more than council worker bludgers, or public service bludgers?

It's the same thing, except the dole bludgers get paid less and work (bludge) from home.

Easier to punch down, and a compliant media likes to distract from where the real fraud is going on; the ultra wealthy and multi-nationals.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Sure they apply to both.

It's 'progressive' governments that tend to jump onboard whatever the popular cause is though, far more than any other kinds, simply to drum up support and still do nothing about it.

Beyond one poorly timed and poorly argued referendum, what evidence is there to support this?

I'm saying that people who spend years rorting the system(I grew up in Launceston, I know plenty, trust me...) need greater incentives to go into the workforce, or at least have to provide a reasonable reason as to why they can't.

You may know better than I do on this, but I wonder if many of these people are actually suffering from mental health issues of some sort, and whether some sort of therapy or life coaching might help them back into the workforce. Everyone needs a reason to get out of bed in the morning, after all.

 

[10571z]

Not suprised young people aren’t embracing “progressive politics” , apprently it’s a crime for being white these days and your opinion is invalid.

 

[Leeda]

Young people won't embrace conservative politics once their IQ passes double digits

It is a celebratory of the millennial time warp.."if it's not about me then get...ucked"

 

[evolved2]

Not suprised young people aren’t embracing “progressive politics” , apprently it’s a crime for being white these days and your opinion is invalid.

White progressives seem to embrace the mantra of hating themselves over something they can't control. It's absurd.

 

[Engimal v3]

Not suprised young people aren’t embracing “progressive politics” , apprently it’s a crime for being white these days and your opinion is invalid.

Is being white a crime, or did you just get scolded for saying the N word?

 

[Taylor]

Is being white a crime, or did you just get scolded for saying the N word?

I saw a progressive call an Irish person "coloniser".

I wonder how much I need to explain that so people understand.

 

[Engimal v3]

I saw a progressive call an Irish person "coloniser".

I wonder how much I need to explain that so people understand.

In what context? Irish people did help colonise Australia

 

[peetoo]

In what context? Irish people did help colonise Australia

And the Scottish america


Which country is the most racist? Is it racist to call some countries more racist than others?

 

[evolved2]

Is being white a crime, or did you just get scolded for saying the N word?

That's another example of bigoteering.

It's more that being a white cis heterosexual Christian male means your opinion doesn't count with progressives. They're only interested in hearing from minority groups, including those who follow religion that's the antithesis of all progressive values.

 

[peetoo]

That's another example of bigoteering.

It's more that being a white cis heterosexual Christian male means your opinion doesn't count with progressives. They're only interested in hearing from minority groups, including those who follow religion that's the antithesis of all progressive values.

And heretosexua Christian’s don’t have obvious hypocrites either? Hating said other religions power Over population yet working hard to maintain or strengthen own religions power over populations

There plenty of white Christian’s being offended ‘on behalf of ‘the Jewish state right now. Calling anti semitism which is a different thing altogether

 

[10571z]

Is being white a crime, or did you just get scolded for saying the N word?

To some progressives White Males are the devil… we couldn’t possibly have an informed opinion.

 

[evolved2]

And heretosexua Christian’s don’t have obvious hypocrites either? Hating said other religions power Over population yet working hard to maintain or strengthen own religions power over populations

There plenty of white Christian’s being offended ‘on behalf of ‘the Jewish state right now. Calling anti semitism which is a different thing altogether

I rather we just call all religion out on their bullshit. The term 'Islamophobia' gives me the shits.

 

[Engimal v3]

That's another example of bigoteering.

It's more that being a white cis heterosexual Christian male means your opinion doesn't count with progressives. They're only interested in hearing from minority groups, including those who follow religion that's the antithesis of all progressive values.

On the topics of race and racism - what more could be said by white people that hasn't already been said over the last few hundred of years we've had discourse on it?

I get what you're saying here - but I think you'd have to be very fragile to feel slighted by it.

 

[evolved2]

On the topics of race and racism - what more could be said by white people that hasn't already been said over the last few hundred of years we've had discourse on it?

I get what you're saying here - but I think you'd have to be very fragile to feel slighted by it.

There's a false assumption that people of colour can't be racist.

I'm in a mixed racial marriage with kids that can almost pass as Caucasian. I remember my then primary school son being excluded by a kid at school who was born in the same nation as my sons mum over what basically amounts to my kid not being brown enough.