Australians are "welfare addicts"

[Jamie]

Hi all,

Found an article today I thought was particularly relevant, seeing the amount of debate going on in the current thread The Savings Nightmare regarding poverty in Australia, and the choices people make (bolded sections in the text are mine, not the author's)

Australians 'are welfare addicts'
By Paul Osborne
August 3, 2004

AUSTRALIANS were addicted to welfare and political parties were too scared of voters to ask the junkies to quit, an academic said today.

Professor Peter Saunders, from the right wing Centre for Independent Studies, has painted a scathing picture of government welfare policies over recent decades in his new book, Australia's Welfare Habit, being launched in Sydney today.

Prof Saunders said Australia's welfare dependency had increased by 500 per cent in four decades.

Forty years ago three per cent of working age Australians lived off welfare. Now the figure is 16 per cent.

"There's a sense that I think ever since the '60s we've got increasingly linked to the idea that a large chunk of the population will live on welfare and there's not much we can do about it," Prof Saunders said.

But increased spending on welfare, which now cost $60 billion a year, had not solved poverty, he said.

While some social justice groups claimed up to four million people lived in poverty in Australia, Prof Saunders said the poverty figure was probably closer to three to five per cent of Australians.

But nonetheless, he said, a radical and integrated approach was needed to help Australians kick the welfare habit.

Prof Saunders has taken a leaf out of the book of former US president Bill Clinton, whose 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act set targets for each state to encourage those on the dole to be involved in "work activities".

While many claimed it would blow out poverty, the laws - coupled with tax changes - cut the number of Americans on welfare payments by 60 per cent over five years and child poverty dropped to its lowest level in 30 years.

The solution for Australia lay in a number of economic and social measures, Prof Saunders said:

• Time limits for unemployment benefits with full-time Work For the Dole after six months;

• An expectation that parenting payment claimants should return to work once their children went to school;

• Tighter eligibility criteria for disability support pensions, which had ballooned in the past 20 years even though Australians have become more healthy;

• Financial penalties for welfare system abusers;

• Lower income taxes;

• A freer labour market to create more jobs for the low-skilled;

• And, support for families to save and insure for unforeseen expenses.

Prof Saunders said while there had been some positive reform by the Keating and Howard governments, such as the move towards the principle of mutual obligation, governments were still too afraid of alienating voters.

"There is a failure of imagination in both of our political parties on this - they are running scared," he said.

He said while it was more likely that voters would support welfare reform under a Labor government than a coalition administration, the issue cut across political ideologies.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10330173%255E421,00.html

As someone who has previously worked in community health settings and in both behavioural and chemical addictions, I agree that the problems of drugs and alcohol are endemic in Australian society... but I am also astounded by the number of people who knowingly and willingly stay on welfare for no other reason than they find it easier than full time work - and the ease with which they are able to do so means the welfare system does little to disabuse people of the notion that this is a productive way to live.

I personally think Professor Saunders has a number of intelligent ideas on reforming the welfare system - any thoughts from anyone else?

Jamie.

 

[Aceyducey]

Jamie,

I heard an interview with him on the radio today.

He was saying he'd done some Neilsen pnone polls & they'd come back with 70% of people would like to see a limit on how long you can get the dole & 80% said they'd like to see single parents go back into the workforce part-time when their kids are at school.

Interesting numbers considering that political parties are often very cautious about addressing the welfare area.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[Lissy]

Perhaps the fact that once the baby boomers start retiring and wanting pensions, welfare is going to blow out even more, is starting to sink in.
Personally I agree that welfare needs to be "capped" or limited in some way for working age recipients, whether it's by setting time limits or expecting work for the dole or whatever it might be - I've seen too many people sitting back and "enjoying" life on welfare (albeit a fairly limited lifestyle!). I've also seen the other side, where people who genuinely deserve it seem to have to fight the hardest to get it. It's an incredibly difficult area to monitor and administer.

 

[Sunfish]

Perhaps the fact that once the baby boomers start retiring and wanting pensions, welfare is going to blow out even more, is starting to sink in.
Personally I agree that welfare needs to be "capped" or limited in some way for working age recipients, whether it's by setting time limits or expecting work for the dole or whatever it might be - I've seen too many people sitting back and "enjoying" life on welfare (albeit a fairly limited lifestyle!). I've also seen the other side, where people who genuinely deserve it seem to have to fight the hardest to get it. It's an incredibly difficult area to monitor and administer.

The trouble is, everybody wants welfare.

A poster recently suggested that CGT should be removed and other incentives given, to us investors. Thats middle class welfare and there's a lot of that too.

Farmers want handouts or they will plough out their trees and destroy their holdings. Others want them to save them from their own bad business decissions. Others want them every time there's a drought, or flood or whatever.

Clapped Out Diggers (their term) get a generous TPI pension if they can show they are alcoholic among other things.

So yes, we are "Welfare Addicts" but there is no easily identified villian.

Thommo

 

[Lplate]

"Professor Peter Saunders, from the right wing Centre for Independent Studies...."

Divisive stuff. But then we are in election mode and it is not unusual for a bit of victim bashing to go on. A vestige of truth helps the spin.

By way of preparation for the spin to come (and enthusiastically helped of hacks in the media):

-some people would avoid work at any cost, but not all people who are unemployed are malingerers;

-some people are poor and cannot manage their money, but not all poor people are that way because they are incompetent, or losers or druggies;

and (for the other side)

-some entrepreneurs are rogues, but not all entrepreneurs are out there trying to rip people off.

You could make up a few similar statements from the labels attached to property owners recently by those with gain in mind (and ably assisted by the media hacks).

We've seen the success of attempts to promote intergenerational jealousy through labelling and half-truths. For example, that fat-assed 'Baby Boomers' are gobbling up all real estate opportunities, effectively excluding 'young people' from buying 'homes'. Then again, teenagers cop a bit for all sorts of mis-deeds, especially for having a good time.

Why let others steer our thinking by promoting jealousy and hatred?

 

[MarkB]

Are we really welfare addicts?

Or simply utility maximising?

Or are we being bribed?

I'm not saying that more people living off welfare is a good thing, only questioning whether we are actually "putting our hands out" or being "force-fed" so to speak.

No doubt it is a combination of both.

We should also remember that as a collective, we pay more taxes now than at any other time in out history - and if we do have more people on welfare now - then certainly the means to support them exist.

MB

 

[Garry K]

Clapped Out Diggers (their term) get a generous TPI pension if they can show they are alcoholic among other things.

Thommo

Thommo
As someone who has a father, and a father in law on a TPI pension I find this statement troubling.

Knowing the difficulty they had trying to prove that the injuries they received in the theatre of war affected their current health, I am interetsed to read that being an alcoholic is sufficient - unless the "other things" are, for instance, having your legs blown off.

As far as it being "generous", try living on it from age 40, and bringing up 4 kids, with a mortgage, with little prospects of work due to your poor health (war induced), because you volunteered to defend your country.

I would prefer that you refrained from statements such as this, even if you can quote one isolated incident, I am confident it does not apply across the board.

GarryK

 

[Sunfish]

Thommo
As someone who has a father, and a father in law on a TPI pension I find this statement troubling.

Knowing the difficulty they had trying to prove that the injuries they received in the theatre of war affected their current health, I am interetsed to read that being an alcoholic is sufficient - unless the "other things" are, for instance, having your legs blown off.

As far as it being "generous", try living on it from age 40, and bringing up 4 kids, with a mortgage, with little prospects of work due to your poor health (war induced), because you volunteered to defend your country.

I would prefer that you refrained from statements such as this, even if you can quote one isolated incident, I am confident it does not apply across the board.

GarryK

Absolutely no offence meant. I also come from a military family. My dad and his brothers were in France during WW1. My brothers and I all served too (peace time). One uncle in particular was gassed and died young. Dad limped for the rest of his life but there was little available for these diggers.

I know a 20yr time server who never saw a shot fired in anger who get's a "generous" TPI over and above his regular pension even though he is "normally" healthy for his age. His wife get's a carer's pension too so it all totals over $1k/wk.

There are other examples but we shouldn't go there. But there are rorters out there, I'm sorry to tell, and I included these as another example of welfare.

It must be a generational thing but Vietnam and later veterans don't have the same onus of proof put upon them as those from the major wars did. The RSL is very pro-active here and the Fed Gov seems reluctant to upset the lobby.

I have great respect for the diggers......... Thommo

 

[Andrew]

An Australian, an Irishman and an Englishman were sitting in a bar.

There was only one other person in the bar; a man.

The three men kept looking at this other man, for he seemed terribly
familiar.

They stared and stared, wondering where they had seen him before,when
suddenly the Irishman cried out, "My God, I know who that man is. It's
Jesus

The others looked again and, sure enough, it was Jesus himself,sitting
alone at a table. The Irishman call out, "Hey!, you!!! Are you Jesus?"

The man looks over at him, smiles a small smile and nods his head."Yes,
I am Jesus" he says.

The Irishman calls the bartender over and says to him "I'd like you to
give Jesus over there a pint of Guinness from me."

So the bartender pours Jesus a Guinness and takes it over to his
table.Jesus looks over, raises his glass, smiles thank you and drinks.
The Englishman then calls out, "Errr, excuse me Sir, but would you be
Jesus?"

Jesus smiles and says, "Yes, I am Jesus."

The Englishman beckons the bartender and tells him to send Over a pint
of Newcastle Brown Ale for Jesus, which the bartender duly does.

As before, Jesus accepts the drink and smiles over at the men.

Then the Australian calls out, "Oi, you! D'ya reckon you're Jesus, or
what?" Jesus nods and says, "Yes, I am Jesus."

The Australian is mighty impressed and has the bartender send Over a
pot of Victoria Bitter for Jesus, which he accepts with pleasure.

Some time later, after finishing the drinks, Jesus leaves his seat
and approaches the three men.

He reaches for the hand of the Irishman and shakes it,Thanking him for
the Guinness. When he lets go, the Irishman gives a cry of amazement.
"Oh God,the arthritis is gone," he says. The arthritis I've had for
years is gone. It's a miracle!"

Jesus then shakes the hand of the Englishman, thanking him For the
Newcastle Brown Ale. Upon letting go, the Englishman's eyes widen in
shock. "By jove", he exclaims, " The migraine I've had for over 40
years is completely gone. It's a Miracle!"

Jesus then approaches the Australian, who has a terrified look on his
face.

The Aussie whispers ...


"F*** off, mate. I'm on workers comp."

 

[Garry K]

I have great respect for the diggers......... Thommo

Thommo

Thanks. (one issue I get a bit touchy about)

GarryK

 

[natmarie73]

I definately have to agree with the professor. Australians DO have a welfare addiction and it is a fact that Australians receive some of the highest welfare payments per head of capita than any other country. Maybe this is due to our "entitlements mentality".

Its not just so called "lazy" dolebludgers either. How many people on this forum would jump up and down if their baby bonuses and child payments - which in my book count as welfare - were scrapped even though we are obviously doing much better than the average joe. Quite a few I'm sure. Again, this is due to the rights mentality ie I've paid squillions in tax so I deserve this handout and that handout etc etc.

I think welfare is a necessity, but as suggested should be capped to perhaps six months, and definately only available to those people who truly need it ie homeless people and those who truly cant work such as the disabled. Perhaps some sort of compulsory insurance for disability and unemployment should be considered as well, so people are forced to save for such eventualities.

Unfortunately, the professor is right in saying governments are too gutless to do anything about it, so taxes will continue to rise and poverty will continue to rise also due to generations of families relying on welfare until they do not know how to get out even if they did want to.

 

[ger]

Once the parents go on welfare
a lot of the times the children get on
the same syndrome(I have seen it happen personally)
The other thing I hate is when people get benefits BUT
they are totally ungratefull
A couple of months back there was onb the news a
family and 3 teenage kids on walfare they have been
geting paid forever they were thown out from numerous
social secutiry homes as they had terorised neighbours
damage to property etc
The govt BOUGT a property for them in Sheparton with all the modcons
spa etc paid I think a couple hundred grandthat was not close to neighbours THEY DESTOYED the house in a couple of months
last time I heard when they destroyed that property they were put on motel rooms
There was a report that they have been comming down to melbourne every monday night TO PLAY THE POKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree that some people need it BUT where do you stop
i

 

[geoffw]

An article from the Google cache

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=c...4057,9184173%255E421,00.html+shepparton&hl=en

Not sure about a trashing
http://news.mcmedia.com.au/story.asp?TakeNo=200407153828310

(it's my home town)

 

[MarkB]

Once the parents go on welfare a lot of the times the children get on the same syndrome(I have seen it happen personally)

I too have seen that happen.

But not in all cases.


I am the youngest of 5 children and grew up in a family where welfare was the major (at many times the only) source of income. Needless to say, money was very tight when I was growing up. From 1980 we lived in a Housing Commission home which my parents still occupy. No phone (until 1987) and no car.

My father was on an invalid pension & my mother on a wife's pension.

With the assistance of the pension and (later) Austudy all 5 children finished Year 12 (the NSW Higher School Certificate) at a public school and went onto university.

The five children are, in order of age (oldest to youngest):

- Acting Deputy Principal at a Central School in Western NSW
- Senior Rehabilation Consultant with a Commonwealth Authority
- Senior Grade Oncology Nurse at a large private hospital
- Acting Principal at an Independant School
- and the 5th has delusions of adequacy when it comes to being an Economist.

My father readily concedes that he is not a wealthy man, though he says he has no regrets and "considers himself a millionaire 5 times over" given that none of his children have any drug dependancy issues / history of violence / criminal records.


Of course, you know that Mark Latham grew up in a housing commission home?

MB

 

[nic]

<<Time limits for unemployment benefits with full-time Work For the Dole after six months>>

If people work they should be remunerated accordingly, otherwise it looks too much like slave labor. And the current unemployment benefits of under $200 p/w can hardly be considered an adequate remuneration for full-time work. If you live in Sydney and pay rent you can't even sub-exist on this amount. As someone who was brought up in a country with very strong dictatorial tendencies, work for the dole system makes me cringe. I know, I know, it's not the same as Russian labor camps where they used to put the 'delinquents', but still... like I said, - it makes me cringe.

Cheers
Nic

 

[Lplate]

Australia has the most favourable repatriation benefits in the world. I believe that extensive benefits were promulgated in the aftershock following WW1 - the 'war to end all wars'.

 

[Sunfish]

Australia has the most favourable repatriation benefits in the world. I believe that extensive benefits were promulgated in the aftershock following WW1 - the 'war to end all wars'.

Neither Garry K or I would agree with you about WW1 & WW2 returned diggers. There were simply too many of them to be cared for properly. We have a much larger economy now which can care for recent combatants much more generously. I'm guessing but I think we would have less than 2% of the number of "damaged" ex-servicemen now than we had in the '50s. My ex-Vietnam mates are pretty normal, including Doug who left both his feet behind.

Here comes the hard bit: It is now easy for the Feds to pork barrell such a popular minority. I not suggesting that servicemen who have come in harm's way do not deserve special care.

Thommo

 

[Aceyducey]

Once the parents go on welfare
a lot of the times the children get on

That's very true ger....

My parents got child support from the government, and low and behold my partner & I now get child support from the government!

My brother is even worse - he looks after foster kids & gets even more payments!!!!

I can imagine that when my children have children they will probably expect to receive this welfare payment as well.

It's terrible, this insidious welfare payment should be cut off for everyone immediately!

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[Sunfish]

It's terrible, this insidious welfare payment should be cut off for everyone immediately!

Cheers,

Aceyducey

Absolutely! Especially considering my kids are now adult and I'm missing out

 

[geoffw]

Once the parents go on welfare
a lot of the times the children get on
the same syndrome(I have seen it happen personally)i

I remember a story- it may have been from Anthony Robbins.

Father was derelict, alcoholic, with a continuing criminal record.

One son turned out the same.

The other became a school principal, a pillar of the community and very successful

When asked, each son replied.

"How else could turn out with my background?"