Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Welfare system

Julia

In Memoriam
Joined
10 May 2005
Posts
16,986
Reactions
1,975
I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.

Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves. (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)

Is this at least partly true? Do we make it just too easy for people not to take responsibility for their own outcomes?

Personally, I don't really think so, as payment levels of welfare are poverty level incomes. I have no idea, for example, how an adult on unemployment benefit of about $220 p.w. manages, given it would be difficult to find rental accommodation for that, before you pay for all other expenses.

On the other hand, I've seen plenty of single parents with multiple children whose weekly income is considerably more than some working people who are paying the taxes that support these welfare recipients. That, plus the baby bonus, would seem to encourage some young women to keep on procreating. I can remember speaking with one woman who had six children.
The eldest was about to turn 16, at which stage she would no longer receive a benefit for that child. She found that unacceptable so happily announced she would get pregnant again to keep the budget in the black. I'm not suggesting such an attitude is by any means common.

Then there is subsidised child care. One view of this is that if we expect mothers to work, then we need to provide the environment for them to access cheap child care.
A different view would be that if you are going to have children, then it should be up to you to provide for them.

Then I gather we are about to have several months of maternity leave (or paternity leave if that's what you want), taxpayer funded. Is this justified?

The age pension: should we expect this to continue? Should compulsory contributions percentage be increased to the level where this can be phased out, except for those who have never been able to work?

Some of you will have other situations that I haven't described.
 
I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.

Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves. (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)

Is this at least partly true? Do we make it just too easy for people not to take responsibility for their own outcomes?

Personally, I don't really think so, as payment levels of welfare are poverty level incomes. I have no idea, for example, how an adult on unemployment benefit of about $220 p.w. manages, given it would be difficult to find rental accommodation for that, before you pay for all other expenses.

On the other hand, I've seen plenty of single parents with multiple children whose weekly income is considerably more than some working people who are paying the taxes that support these welfare recipients. That, plus the baby bonus, would seem to encourage some young women to keep on procreating. I can remember speaking with one woman who had six children.
The eldest was about to turn 16, at which stage she would no longer receive a benefit for that child. She found that unacceptable so happily announced she would get pregnant again to keep the budget in the black. I'm not suggesting such an attitude is by any means common.

Then there is subsidised child care. One view of this is that if we expect mothers to work, then we need to provide the environment for them to access cheap child care.
A different view would be that if you are going to have children, then it should be up to you to provide for them.

Then I gather we are about to have several months of maternity leave (or paternity leave if that's what you want), taxpayer funded. Is this justified?

The age pension: should we expect this to continue? Should compulsory contributions percentage be increased to the level where this can be phased out, except for those who have never been able to work?

Some of you will have other situations that I haven't described.
IMO the welfare system should be regarded as a safety net only to assist those going through tough times or are at retirement age.
I know of some people on the dole who thinks its their right to stay on it until they find a job that they really want..In this day and age this attitude bugs me. When I went through uni, I used to spend many nights cleaning toilets in order to pay the bills. I also worked for Woolworths in the freezer department. For both jobs I was the only applicant.
Instead of the super rules being changed all the time, the government should be encouraging more people to save even more for their retirement. The Howard Government did very well on this front, but more could still be done.
There should not be any employer contributions tax whatsoever. Those who have been in the workforce for around 30 yrs might never need to get the pension. This will save the government a fortune.
 
Welfare as lifestyle choice bugs me and getting extra child to balance the books should ring the welfare's bell.

I believe that person on the dole should not venture out to get pregnant, but since we have such a generous welfare system, this is now norm rather than exception.

We have 4-th and possibly 5-th generation never employed on some kind of benefit recipients and I think it stinks!
 
Im about to head out so Im going to summarize my response.

Long story short, when I lost my job at the start of this year due to company going in to administration, I went to centrelink to claim to get some assistance paying the mortgage we had acquired three months earlier. I was told I would receive the handsome amount of $26 a fortnight for being unemployed because my gf worked (on a minimum wage, shes a student). Ive worked since the age of 12 (albeit illegal and not paying taxes until 14, 25 now) and this was the first time Ive required assistance due to being unlucky really.

SO my point about welfare is, it seemed like people who actually need it (myself) just to tie them over in a sticky situation get screwed and those that f**k the system reap the rewards. :2twocents
 
I am a student and on centrelink payments which pay for some of my living expenses, the tax and welfare system is quite complicated but its reasonably fair at least in my case and you don't need to be dishonest i.e. "f..." the system to get an adequate outcome, just need to know how it works and be flexible with how you arrange your finances.

I figure i'm going to pay more than my fair share of tax when i start working next year, without the centrelink payments and parental support it would have been a struggle for me to finish and I admire my classmates who weren't so fortunate and have nearly made it through but some have had to quit or defer because of finances, which is silly given how much money the government has spent to train us.

The welfare system should be there to help you if you need it. Its a shame that some people abuse it but there are a lot of other areas where revenue leaks.

I think that taxes should be progressive or at least flat and expenditure/ tax benefits the opposite targeted to the poor. In general the government does this well but tax benefits are utilised disproportionately by the rich.

I.e. salary sacrificing to super, negative gearing, the discuont on profit derived by capital gains, family tax benift part b.

It may be popular to denegrate dole bludgers but that's not where the money is, they don't have that much.
 
I thought a thread on welfare might be interesting, given the diverse views on the hijacked different travel costs thread.

Jono, e.g., feels people on any form of welfare are on the whole undeserving and should be able to provide for themselves. (Jono, obviously you will correct me if I've misinterpreted your comments.)

I do believe most people on welfare are undeserving, after seeing developing nations with 0 wellfare system, their population is still able to survive.. although at subsistence levels, they still work and find ways to survive.

They make it way to easy in Australia.. I believe welfare should only go to the physically and mentally disabled.

There are so many forms of payment in the system that are a complete waste of tax payers funds. The Abstudy program is probably the most discriminatory system in this country. Why do aboriginals and torres-straight islanders get special treatment just because they're ancestors were mistreated a few generations ago. I know someone who is 1/8 or 1/16 aboriginal with middleclass earning parents yet she is still able to get Abstudy... this is absurd. We say welfare is to provide equality, but why to aboriginals get free money, where as the rest of us don't... this is equality?? :confused:

I am even more annoyed by the pensioners that protest on today tonite for increased payments. What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives?? Havn't they been able to save any money to fund their retirement... obviously that money has been used to maintain higher than appropriate living standards whilst they were still working that now they do not have any funds to be self sufficient... Oh, and for all those pensioners that have lost significant portions of their savings in the recent downturn.. what kind of idiot pensioner has significant portions of their savings and primary income stream in high risk assets when you are retired :confused: further stupidity on their part. Whats even worse is hearing the stories of those who have leveraged against the homes that they had owned and are now losing those aswell...

Now for the unemployed. Quite simply, the system is inefficient in a market economy. It is placing incentives in the wrong places. As written in the previous post.. some people are happy to wait and keep looking for jobs that 'suit them' whilst living of our tax dollars. If there were no unemployment benefits, I am certain a person would even be willing to take a job at mcdonalds or woolworths regardless of their education level just until they are able to get the job that 'suits them'.
 
I am even more annoyed by the pensioners that protest on today tonite for increased payments. What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives?? Havn't they been able to save any money to fund their retirement...

Superannuation was only brought 15 years ago. I imagine many thought they would have a pension waiting for them.

Oh, and for all those pensioners that have lost significant portions of their savings in the recent downturn.. what kind of idiot pensioner has significant portions of their savings and primary income stream in high risk assets when you are retired

Because some 'expert' tells them it is what they should do, and the vast majority seem to have believed it.

Oh, some people may be interested to know how many qualifiers I put in my sentences. They're usually there.
 
What have they been doing for the last 40-50 years of they're working lives?? .


paying taxes to build this bloody country!

paying taxes to send you to school

paying taxes to let you drive on there roads

paying taxes so you can have healthcare when its needed

paying taxes so you are protected by police , armed forces etc

need i continue or are they still undeserving of help after paying for this fine country ?

oh hang on .. . i think they may have even paid for the phone line(if laid b4 telstra floated) you used to access the internet to type that selfish dribble

may misfortune never shine on you or your family
 
Superannuation was only brought 15 years ago. I imagine many thought they would have a pension waiting for them.

Big mistake.. never go through life assuming someone else is out there will help you. Why make this assumption.. I'm not assuming the govt will help me out when I retire. And why would you want to live a life dependent on the govt anyway when you can be self sufficient?

Even if there was no superannuation, wouldn't you think to save money for your retirement? You couldn't possibly life comfortably on the amount they give you on the pension without any savings..
And this is another reason why welfare payments is inefficient... especially with a growing population. How do you expect newer generations to pay for the aging population?? In a system with no welfare payments... having each person responsible for saving their own funds for future retirement is the most efficient way of funding retirement. I don't see why the younger generation should bear the burden of previous generations failure to save..

Because some 'expert' tells them it is what they should do, and the vast majority seem to have believed it.

Oh, some people may be interested to know how many qualifiers I put in my sentences. They're usually there.

Another mistakes.. who actually believes that what these 'experts' tell them is for their benefit and not for the benefit of the expert? Perhaps I'm just cynical.. but what kind of idiot thinks that there is no risk in leveraging against your own home? :confused: Besides.. they have been alive to see so many stock market and economic collapses in their time, 97 asian crisis, 00 .com bubble bursting.. just a few that were in my time. How about all the others during their working lives. You can't naively assume that the stock market will always rise..

You would think that with age comes wisdom, but apparently not...
 
paying taxes to build this bloody country!

paying taxes to send you to school
paying taxes to let you drive on there roads
paying taxes so you can have healthcare when its needed
paying taxes so you are protected by police , armed forces etc
need i continue or are they still undeserving of help after paying for this fine country ?
oh hang on .. . i think they may have even paid for the phone line(if laid b4 telstra floated) you used to access the internet to type that selfish dribble

may misfortune never shine on you or your family

Oh really... so what you're saying is that they paid higher tax rates than what my parents paid, or what I'm paying now??
- I've been on scholarhsip for most of my schooling life.. its the dumbasses with the rich parents that have been paying for my schooling :p:
- I'm sure its my parents and my taxes that are paying for the roads that I'm driving on.. most of the roads we drive on are not more than 30-4o years old..
- Health care.. aren't we all paying a 1.5% medicare levi? I'm paying for my own healthcare, the rest is subsidized by the rich ppl :p:
- Oh.. they paid for the phone lines.. so what, we're paying for a fibre optic system... I think glass tubing is more expensive than copper wiring

You can't say that they paid for all the infrastructure that we now use. We're paying for it too...
 
Oh really... so what you're saying is that they paid higher tax rates than what my parents paid, or what I'm paying now??
- I've been on scholarhsip for most of my schooling life.. its the dumbasses with the rich parents that have been paying for my schooling :p:
- I'm sure its my parents and my taxes that are paying for the roads that I'm driving on.. most of the roads we drive on are not more than 30-4o years old..
- Health care.. aren't we all paying a 1.5% medicare levi? I'm paying for my own healthcare, the rest is subsidized by the rich ppl :p:
- Oh.. they paid for the phone lines.. so what, we're paying for a fibre optic system... I think glass tubing is more expensive than copper wiring

You can't say that they paid for all the infrastructure that we now use. We're paying for it too...

mmmmmmmmmm you missed my point completely

glad to see you found another form of welfare tho . sponging off "richer people" .......

tax builds the country ........ they paid 50 years of it

some may even have fought for this country to protect your right to walk this land in freedom

you obviously cant see past your "its ok to milk the rich " but not ok for the "less fortunate pensioners that have paid there way to get some back " ideas ........ so i will leave it at that

have a nice day
 
I got a Chinese woman over her about 3 yrs ago, got married because Migration said we had to and open a joint account because it looks like a genuine marriage and they told us in 4 yrs time she would be and Aussie, 6 months ago she got the best legal advice in the country from her Chinese friend's and claimed Violence ( it is on the from page of the application for migration form to make sure you know it is available ) took off, collect every penny the Feds could throw at her took the money out of our join account and is now suing me for wages with the help of Legal Aids.

Why would and one want to live in China when the Feds encourage this plus she is now an Aussie Migration won't eve enforce their own policy. So all of those who pay tax's she thanks you.
 
They make it way to easy in Australia.. I believe welfare should only go to the physically and mentally disabled.

Hi jono1887,

With ridiculous statements like these it's no wonder you rub people up the wrong way, you talk about subsidies by the rich to the poor but how about the subsidies payed for by the working poor keeping the rich afloat, i.e negative gearing and depreciation routs.

You may have the rest of your life mapped out bro but thing's don't always pan out as they should.

I don't mind my taxes going towards people that need it, that includes the long term unemployed but paying for the routs the the rich employ that pisses me off.:mad:
 
Oh really... so what you're saying is that they paid higher tax rates than what my parents paid, or what I'm paying now??
- I've been on scholarhsip for most of my schooling life.. its the dumbasses with the rich parents that have been paying for my schooling :p:
- I'm sure its my parents and my taxes that are paying for the roads that I'm driving on.. most of the roads we drive on are not more than 30-4o years old..
- Health care.. aren't we all paying a 1.5% medicare levi? I'm paying for my own healthcare, the rest is subsidized by the rich ppl :p:
- Oh.. they paid for the phone lines.. so what, we're paying for a fibre optic system... I think glass tubing is more expensive than copper wiring

You can't say that they paid for all the infrastructure that we now use. We're paying for it too...


Your lack of knowledge of the history of economics and of this country in particular is what's making you come to the conclusions you have come to.

Look into it a bit more and you'll probably change your tune - hopefully.

Here's a starter for you - superannuation schemes haven't been in place in this country for very long at all. It used to be accepted practice that one works till the age of sixty, then goes on a pension. In those days, apparantly you could support yourself and your family, buy a house and car etc etc - on one wage. That's right, on one wage.

Things have changes veryrapidly in a hundred years or so. Some of those old guys you're complaing about made the country, figuratively speaking.

Anyway, I hope you don't cop dumb treatment from some jerk when you're in your dotage.

Paying for fiber optic indeed......
 
mmmmmmmmmm you missed my point completely

glad to see you found another form of welfare tho . sponging off "richer people" .......

tax builds the country ........ they paid 50 years of it

some may even have fought for this country to protect your right to walk this land in freedom

you obviously cant see past your "its ok to milk the rich " but not ok for the "less fortunate pensioners that have paid there way to get some back " ideas ........ so i will leave it at that

have a nice day
Nun is right, jono. I wonder if you appreciate how self-righteous you are, and how lacking in empathy for anyone who doesn't have your youth, intelligence (?), opportunities.

Let's make up a little hypothetical situation for you. Let's say you are involved in a car accident next week (not wishing this on you, of course) and are so severely injured that you are unable to complete your education or ever hold a job. Who would look after you? Who would pay for this care?

On the question of superannuation, as has already been pointed out, it has been compulsory only in recent times. A couple of generations ago, very few women worked outside the home, so had no income of their own from which to save anything. In those days it was simply accepted that taxes paid would cover the payment of an adequate pension in retirement.
Very, very few people would not have qualified for an age pension.

Whilst I agree with you that people who borrowed against their homes in retirement were very foolish, at least if they added to this further borrowing in the form of a margin loan, they were encouraged to do that out of fear that they would not - as you have pointed out - be able to live on the age pension. So, being of a generation which largely trusted "professional advisers" they felt safe in following the advice of licensed financial planners.
No, you wouldn't have done this, and neither would I, but we have the benefit of a bit more understanding and financial education.

Jono, I wonder if you do anything to make a contribution to our society?
Any voluntary work? Contributions to charities? Or is it all just about you?
You've said your chosen branch of medicine will probably be surgery.
Unfortunately, that still requires you to be able to communicate with patients, many of whom will be anxious and ill. I'm finding it pretty hard to imagine you with enough understanding, compassion and empathy to even get to first base of reassuring such patients.
 
mmmmmmmmmm you missed my point completely

glad to see you found another form of welfare tho . sponging off "richer people" .......

I didn't get it for nothing.. I've worked my ass of for the last 6+ years studying my ass off...

tax builds the country ........ they paid 50 years of it

some may even have fought for this country to protect your right to walk this land in freedom

you obviously cant see past your "its ok to milk the rich " but not ok for the "less fortunate pensioners that have paid there way to get some back " ideas

Them fighting for our country is irrelevant in this case. Sure welfare payments to the war widows would probably be appropriate.. but they are now long gone..

Taxes have built this country... yet we're still continually being built and growing. Infrastructure is still being formed, and we're still paying for it. Just because they paid it before us, doesn't mean that they are deserving of our taxes..

I wasn't milking the rich.. it was the only way I could get through a private school education. I worked to get that scholarship, and kept working to keep it. The system of scholarships has been set up so that people despite economic status, are able to get a better education..
 
Hi jono1887,

With ridiculous statements like these it's no wonder you rub people up the wrong way, you talk about subsidies by the rich to the poor but how about the subsidies payed for by the working poor keeping the rich afloat, i.e negative gearing and depreciation routs.

You may have the rest of your life mapped out bro but thing's don't always pan out as they should.

I don't mind my taxes going towards people that need it, that includes the long term unemployed but paying for the routs the the rich employ that pisses me off.:mad:

Ok, negative gearing and the likes does not take money away from the poor and gives it to the rich. It allows a way of reducing the amounts of money the rich give to the tax man (so that the poor don't get the money earnt by the rich), because as Paker once put it “I pay what I’m required to pay, not a penny more, not a penny less. If anybody in this country doesn’t minimise their tax, they want their heads read because, as a government, I can tell you you’re not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.”

Why would you pay anymore taxes than what you should be paying? If the negative gearing system is in place.. why not make use of it??

I don't get how you are paying for the routs that keep the rich afloat?
 
Jono said:
Big mistake.. never go through life assuming someone else is out there will help you. Why make this assumption.. I'm not assuming the govt will help me out when I retire. And why would you want to live a life dependent on the govt anyway when you can be self sufficient?

Whatever their reason, that is what they believed. Most of us make assumptions, and I certainly wouldn't call these people idiots. They just may not have seen the pension become what it has. Perhaps they thought that the country they helped build would in return take care of them later in life. It's not unreasonable.

Of course someone your age is more likely to have your view, as you have grown up in the era of super. We know how minimal the pension will be, and that it may not even exist for us. We've been brought up knowing we will probably have to be self-sufficient. Many pensioners were not.

Another mistakes.. who actually believes that what these 'experts' tell them is for their benefit and not for the benefit of the expert? Perhaps I'm just cynical..

Yes it was a mistake, but one that many have made. They believe these 'experts', because they believe the job of these experts is to guide them with sound financial advice. They may not understand how this really works. Some of us are probably naturally cynical, but our interest in finance/economics/business etc exposes us to a world most do not think about.

I'd like to think I would know better if I was in their shoes, but would I really know better? Before my venture into gambling/trading, I was far, far more ignorant of anything financially related than I am now. My ignorance may have lessened over time, but I'm sure I would still be far more ignorant than I am now.

You would think that with age comes wisdom, but apparently not...

What is our age worth if we don't learn from our experiences?
 
Your lack of knowledge of the history of economics and of this country in particular is what's making you come to the conclusions you have come to.

Here's a starter for you - superannuation schemes haven't been in place in this country for very long at all. It used to be accepted practice that one works till the age of sixty, then goes on a pension. In those days, apparantly you could support yourself and your family, buy a house and car etc etc - on one wage. That's right, on one wage.

I am well aware that superannuation just came in within the last 2 decades. Yet my granparents living in a developed country starting off with nothing have managed to save enough to live through retirement very comfortably without help from any of their children. This is through living in a country with no welfare payments throughout their whole lives...

Why are they, able to save money and pay for their retirement whereas the Australians living in a higher standard of living are not able to? Its the attitudes and mindsets that are people in Aust have that the govt will always be there to look after them. It is this mindset that has caused the lack of savings even up til now (household savings rate has been negative for several years until the recent crisis)...

If they were able to survive on 1 wage, with a house, car and all that.. why couldn't they save anything? If clearly life was all rosy, and only one source of income was needed, wouldn't you think they'd be floating in money by the time they retire?

Things have changes veryrapidly in a hundred years or so. Some of those old guys you're complaing about made the country, figuratively speaking.

True, the world has changed significantly in the last century... but if that mindset that the govt would bail you our or support you if you need it or are too lazy to support your self wasn't there, we would not need welfare payments for pensioners...

Anyway, I hope you don't cop dumb treatment from some jerk when you're in your dotage.

I hope so too... :p:
 
Nun is right, jono. I wonder if you appreciate how self-righteous you are, and how lacking in empathy for anyone who doesn't have your youth, intelligence (?), opportunities.

I do realise that I may come across as self-righteous in these forums, but I as just wanting to provide a point of view which may be slightly stronger than my personal beliefs...

Let's make up a little hypothetical situation for you. Let's say you are involved in a car accident next week (not wishing this on you, of course) and are so severely injured that you are unable to complete your education or ever hold a job. Who would look after you? Who would pay for this care?

I did write in a previous post that welfare payments for the disabled are justified..

Whilst I agree with you that people who borrowed against their homes in retirement were very foolish, at least if they added to this further borrowing in the form of a margin loan, they were encouraged to do that out of fear that they would not - as you have pointed out - be able to live on the age pension. So, being of a generation which largely trusted "professional advisers" they felt safe in following the advice of licensed financial planners.
No, you wouldn't have done this, and neither would I, but we have the benefit of a bit more understanding and financial education.
.

Even my grandparents with no financial or economic education would know that borrowing against your house is the biggest no no.... just because someone is qualified, certified, licensed or more educated than you, doesn't mean you trust them completely without doing your own research..

Jono, I wonder if you do anything to make a contribution to our society?
Any voluntary work? Contributions to charities? Or is it all just about you?
You've said your chosen branch of medicine will probably be surgery.
Unfortunately, that still requires you to be able to communicate with patients, many of whom will be anxious and ill. I'm finding it pretty hard to imagine you with enough understanding, compassion and empathy to even get to first base of reassuring such patients

contribution.. did 2-3hrs a week community service at salvos, local churches during my last 4 years of highschool... Life is not all about me, I just dislike people attitudes that they can rely on the gov't for things..
Well, if you're the best at what you do, patients will come regardless of your bedside manners... :p:
 


Write your reply...
Top