No Contraception, No Dole ???

There is no solution other than to accept the situation and build your own weath based on it and the likely outcomes to come. Like no pension.....

That is, I have never assumed I would get the pension at 65. Even when 20. Now almost 50 they first changes have come and before I get there, it will be no pension.

Unfortunately whilst ever we have a partisan political system that never agrees with the other we will not have any reform.

And what cache does that Reform have? Anyone can take any story and say, look at poor jimmy. Hungry, etc...lets ignore mummy smokes dope all day? take him away, noooooo that stolen generation stuff.

Add the welfare advocates who themselves live off the system administering it, don't want it end. They have job because it exists.

Macro economic and social reform is the only hope and it has two chances.

Peter 14.7

There are always solutions...it is just that many politicians are hesitant to use them.

The OP asks: No Contraception No Dole???
Well, that best way, is to stop it before it starts..as suggested.
That is why I always say, get rid of the incentive .....

Recipients will either move back with family, find a job, or risk losing custody of their children, if they can't provide for them.

Yes...there will always be exceptions
 
What do you suggest then?
I'd offer some juicy suggestions, but some of them may breach human rights laws and possibly end democracy outright.

Unfortunately, there's no straightforward, fix-everything answer. My point is that cutting taxes will not solve anything. (Unless, of course, you're extremely wealthy and don't need government services at all)
 
People keep saying this, but I'm yet to see any proper evidence of extensive "abuse".

I'm sure everyone's heard of stories of it, including myself, but I also know literally countless people who aren't abusing the system and genuinely need it.

I think it comes down to the same problems as reducing that last few percent of crime or unemployment - not really feasible or practical.

I encounter people on a regular basis who abuse the system. The prime example is people on their second marriage and for Centrelink purposes are "single" but are in all reality are a couple. (they just maintain separate addresses)

They then apply for 2 x the single aged pension which is larger than the rate of a combined couple.

2 x $21,000 is greater than $33,000 for a couple. in addition if the extra PPOR was counted as an asset they would get significantly less pension as well....

its not just single mums with 7 fathers who abuse the system its the oldies as well.....
 
There are always solutions...it is just that many politicians are hesitant to use them.

The OP asks: No Contraception No Dole???
Well, that best way, is to stop it before it starts..as suggested.
That is why I always say, get rid of the incentive .....

Recipients will either move back with family, find a job, or risk losing custody of their children, if they can't provide for them.

Yes...there will always be exceptions

I agree with the intent but the execution will work. Even in China were that actually had this with the one child policy, it failed. Corruption, twins, etc..

Lets say , we do take the money away, and the cild starves to death because mum does not care. Do we step in? Yes, but do they have visitation rights? Who pays for the care workers to run this system. Do they get legal aid to claim back the kids. Who pays for the kids if parents abandon it?

Where this fails is when we apply OUR morals and think, well, we would not of that.

I can quote an example I know as true.

3rd gen welfare mums, kids don't go to school, mum does not complain or care, 14 year old daughter already has live in boyfriend. All in one house on welfare.

How to work that out?

Cops go in? Raid?

Yes to less welfare but who it works is beyond me.

In society when there is not safety net, you get rampant, hard crime. Car jacking, rape, elderly mugging, house invasions, etc..

Then you spend MORE $$ on cops to control that and we all live in fear like South Africa, Most of South America.

When the government cannot even take the dole off youth who refuse to find work? reforms as above have no chance.

I would vote for one child family then forced sterilisation for all. But would you? Rich and Poor alike. Less demand on our resources,etc..less school costs, less mouths to feed and keep healthy. Seems like a solution but most would disagree.

Peter
 
I encounter people on a regular basis who abuse the system. The prime example is people on their second marriage and for Centrelink purposes are "single" but are in all reality are a couple. (they just maintain separate addresses)

They then apply for 2 x the single aged pension which is larger than the rate of a combined couple.

2 x $21,000 is greater than $33,000 for a couple. in addition if the extra PPOR was counted as an asset they would get significantly less pension as well....

its not just single mums with 7 fathers who abuse the system its the oldies as well.....

Exactly, one example of how easy it is to work around the system.

Still open to ideas but the best is what we have in some ways, make the kids want stuff, so they have to get a job to earn $ to buy it.

Peter
 
I'm not advocating for one child per family.

What I'm saying, bring it back to what it used to be...no welfare for single mums.That is the incentive...and that is where most of this starts.

I'm not referring to where the marriage broke down, I'm referring to teenagers/ women having babies without the ability to care for them.

I still think welfare is needed. It is always supposed to be a helping hand, not a way of life.

My best friend in school got pregnant at 17. She and the baby lived with her parents and they supported her. About 3 years later, she and her b/f (the father of the baby) got married, and are still together 36 years later.

For generational welfare, you can probably only work with the current generation.
In the case you mention, why aren't the kids taken away, for not attending schools? What government official is not doing their duty?



When population increases, you need to build more prisons.
Stop with the revolving door policy, it does not work. They serve their sentence, then they are released. They will then re-offend, and you lock them up longer next time. That person is already a lost cause, do not concern yourself with them.

Bring back mental institutions. They use it for the mentally ill and drug addicts. This is the usual cause for the 'homeless'. Don't try to treat them, just keep Them, and the rest of the population safe.

Being afraid of increased criminal behaviour is not the answer. You need to do something about it.
Law abiding citizens have the right to feel safe.
 
I'm not advocating for one child per family.

What I'm saying, bring it back to what it used to be...no welfare for single mums.That is the incentive...and that is where most of this starts.

I'm not referring to where the marriage broke down, I'm referring to teenagers/ women having babies without the ability to care for them.

So all a welfare mum needs to do is get married have the kids and then divorce. Not a single mum but and abandoned mum. Kit up the father you say, cannot get $ when he earns $0.

What stops a girl and guy getting married and then claiming welfare. He has no job>

I still think welfare is needed. It is always supposed to be a helping hand, not a way of life.
.

Agree completely.

My post was to note each solution has unintended consequences

More in prison you say? agree but....

The Council of Australian Governments reports that average real net operating expenditure per prisoner per day in Victoria 2012?13 was $270.12,

So that is $1890 a week per prisoner.

Let say we put another $10,000 away. That is 20M a week or $0.5BN a year.

We don't pay dole cheats $1890 tax free a week.

PS why done the police chase that kid who does not go to school? Unless parent complains, they cannot act, unless she is being abused, welfare cannot act, simply being uneducated is not against the system.

Sad but true, Peter
 
What I'm saying, bring it back to what it used to be...no welfare for single mums.That is the incentive...and that is where most of this starts.

I'm not referring to where the marriage broke down, I'm referring to teenagers/ women having babies without the ability to care for them.
But how do you know which is the case? And even if you cut welfare, there'll still be single mums - do you just let them become homeless?

Stop with the revolving door policy, it does not work. They serve their sentence, then they are released. They will then re-offend, and you lock them up longer next time. That person is already a lost cause, do not concern yourself with them.
So life sentences for all crimes? Also, it's quite expensive to keep people in prison, unless we do it medieval style (ie. dank dungeons and moldy bread).

Bring back mental institutions. They use it for the mentally ill and drug addicts. This is the usual cause for the 'homeless'. Don't try to treat them, just keep Them, and the rest of the population safe.
That would also cost a lot of money. More than prisons. (Again, unless we do it medieval style)
 
The Council of Australian Governments reports that average real net operating expenditure per prisoner per day in Victoria 2012?13 was $270.12,

So that is $1890 a week per prisoner.

See, that is just ridiculous! Prison is supposed to be a punishment, not a holiday camp!
 
See, that is just ridiculous! Prison is supposed to be a punishment, not a holiday camp!

I think you would find the actual care of the prisoner not that high but the infrastructure, buildings, security, management, transport, staff are where the money is being spent.

A quick search finds Scottish prisons cost about $3000AU per m2.

Peter
 
Hey...

I'm not a bleeding heart...never was, never will be (except when it comes to animals)

When you expect nothing from dole bludgers..that is exactly what you get.

Bludgers...is what I refer to people, who can work, but choose not to, and think everyone owes them a living.

Prison is only expensive, because of the way the government has it set up.
That can be changed...whether it ever will be, that is to be seen.


As a woman, you would think I would be more sympathetic to other women.
I'm not, because I know how these people take advantage.

Prisons built?... how about hiring some unemployed people who actually want a job.
 
I think you would find the actual care of the prisoner not that high but the infrastructure, buildings, security, management, transport, staff are where the money is being spent.

Obviously, I have no idea! I've never set foot inside of one, but even with all of the above, it still seems rather expensive.
 
Prison is supposed to be a punishment, not a holiday camp!

That's not technically true. Under our criminal justice system, when sentencing, the judge is supposed to take several factors into consideration including incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation, retribution and restoration.

A jail sentence focusing solely on punishment will not rehabilitate the prisoner, as can be seen the US which has the harshest sentencing laws in the West and high crime and re-offending rates.

Norway, on the other hand, run their prison system like holiday camps, focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment. They have low re-offending rates even for serious crimes.

Pampering prisoners may not seem fair, but society at large benefits from the low crime and re-offending rates in Norway.

In the US, there may be a greater sense of justice having been served, but the public are more likely to be victims of crimes when the suitably 'punished' criminals are released without rehabilitation and often more hardened than ever.

I know which society I'd feel safer in.

Edit: skater, I missed the paragraph you were responding to and took your quote out of context. I agree, the cost of keeping people locked up is ridiculous, especially given our heavily flawed prison system.
 
That's not technically true. Under our criminal justice system, when sentencing, the judge is supposed to take several factors into consideration including incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation, retribution and restoration.

A jail sentence focusing solely on punishment will not rehabilitate the prisoner, as can be seen the US which has the harshest sentencing laws in the West and high crime and re-offending rates.

Norway, on the other hand, run their prison system like holiday camps, focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment. They have low re-offending rates even for serious crimes.

Pampering prisoners may not seem fair, but society at large benefits from the low crime and re-offending rates in Norway.

In the US, there may be a greater sense of justice having been served, but the public are more likely to be victims of crimes when the suitably 'punished' criminals are released without rehabilitation and often more hardened than ever.

I know which society I'd feel safer in.

Edit: skater, I missed the paragraph you were responding to and took your quote out of context. I agree, the cost of keeping people locked up is ridiculous, especially given our heavily flawed prison system.

Agree to all of the above including the costs.

But being a commercial property constructor professional, $3000 is not bad.

Prison is not the answer.

Teaching people to take responsibility for their actions is.

But where do you stop?

Should smokers be entitled to free healthcare because in smoking, they caused the issue. OK.:confused:

What about being overweight? Adds to many medical risks? Should they forfeit free medical as well?

Need step, do we then screen people for gene issues so we decide who to invest in as they reach old age and who to let die because well, they are going to go in 5 years anyhow.

On that point, should we simply agree to euthanise all the dementia patients at aged care? I mean they don't know where they are?

And the severely disabled, kill them.

My point is at what point do people need to take responsibility and if not, be punished?

Peter 14.7
 
As per usual with such discussions there is a focus on the "extreme" events.

There is certainly a place for an unemployment benefit - a safety net if you will.

What I am very much against is paying the vast majority of tax payers a benefit.
As an example the Family Payment A and B. How is it possible that if you earn up to $150,000 you can still receive a government benefit.
The cost to control and administer this is just insane.

Again - Im not against providing a safety net. Im against mid-class welfare and a ridiculous tax system which is burdensome on individuals, companies and the govt.

Simplify the entire system, and reduce taxes.

Blacky
 
I think you would find the actual care of the prisoner not that high but the infrastructure, buildings, security, management, transport, staff are where the money is being spent.

A quick search finds Scottish prisons cost about $3000AU per m2.

Peter

Exactly.
If Australia were to suddenly crack down on crime and build prisons it would cost a fortune.

Personally I'd like to see a reduction in middle class welfare. Cutting family tax benefit b to familes earning 100k+ was a good start. I would also like to see the ATO get tough on cash jobs. Employers that pay cash are just as responsible for people rorting the system as the employee.

The problem with the Government is its middle management and top heavy. For every 1 frontline employee there seems to be 3 managers when it should obviously be vice versa.
 
I would also like to see the ATO get tough on cash jobs. Employers that pay cash are just as responsible for people rorting the system as the employee.
Oh yes! Anybody willing to pay cash to tradies in exchange for a lower price and no tax invoice is also culpable. (Including some property investors.)
 
Former Labor Minister Gary Johns suggests linking the dole to contraception

NO contraception, no dole - that's the view of an ex-Labor Minister who believes welfare should be linked to compulsory contraception. Gary Johns, writing in The Australian, suggests there should be ''no taxpayer inducement to have children".


But it does appear that some people on welfare, well, to be blunt, it seems their only talent in life is that their loins work.

Was sitting in a nth nsw front bar a few days ago and had a talk to 64 year old man who has been on welfare for over 35 years,he has six kids all grown up none working all on the disability pension,then inbetween the beers his new girlfriend walks in the Lady was only in her mid 20's never worked a day in her life and in the final days of pregnancy plus the Lady was also on some form of welfare disability pension because she had smoked too much medical cannabis ,so by just looking around the people in that hotel in a crowd of 42 people 50 % were working the other 50% with the help of imagination and some intellectual courage were just playing the system..
 
Exactly.
If Australia were to suddenly crack down on crime and build prisons it would cost a fortune.
Unless we brought back dungeons, leg irons and gruel...

Also I always thought the stocks would make good punishments for petty crooks. And also crooked politicians. Actually, all politicians should be put in the stocks once in a while to keep them humble.
 
Back
Top