No, but if a job is available(that they are qualified for) and they don't want it, should they get the dole?
Who knows, but we don't seem to be doing well with manufacturing, they are offshoring.
With miners, which find it easy to strip our above ground minerals, no one seems to want to charge them.
Welfare is a huge problem, that is why we have the boat people problem, Indonesia doesn't seem to be a place they wanted to settle.
We have a system where the next generation pays for the last, it is braking down because the next generation won't have the jobs and are starting to take more welfare than the older generation. Add to that the amount of people arriving later in life, and qualifying for pensions after paying minimal tax, it all becomes onerous.
Therefore the burden is placed on the middle class wage earner, they can't avoid tax, and they get angry.
Not all jobs are established or worth enough for people to drive a couple hours each way, or move their family, right?
Then for jobs far away with people willing to sell their home and move, are the unemployed person qualified for it?
So we can't just simply say that there are jobs out there, so they go get it. A lot of factors must be considered.
Like I was repeating what Maestro Greenspan was saying - that unemployment is by design. That as part of social and political engineering - all for the benefit of the owners of the country - certain percentage of people in the country have to be made poor and made unemployed.
You do this through cutting education funding, you only permit certain number of places; you only invest and fund projects of certain size, requiring certain skills.
Then you ramp up the propaganda machine that says if you fail in life, it is all your fault. All of it. The gov't tried their best. That's not to say that an individual is blameless and should just sit around. But if we are to put the blame to either side, it rest at the feet of those in power - those whose job it is to either create jobs and lift their citizenry, or crush it.
----
Manufacturing is offshored, resources are not fairly taxed, "free trade" are signed everywhere... it's not for the benefit of the common folks.
It's like the good old days where voters and politicians are lords and barons. So just because we get to play the game and tick the box, we shouldn't ask for too much if we stop there. I mean, VN's communist party allow people to vote too. The plebs there can't protest, but we can. for now anyway.
-----
Every body gets welfare. Just welfare is call something else for the rich and their corporations.
So payment to the poor and sick are call "welfare", "entitlements".
Welfare to the rich are "subsidies", "security", "job creation", "incentives", "investment", "growth initiative".
A gov't is suppose to look after the welfare of all its people. What else is it there for? What are we paying taxes for?
So corporate welfare is fine, as long as it's not taking from the poor and give to the corporations. But that's what it is, but it's blamed on the poor.
If we want a better economy, it is better to just give money to the poor than to the rich.
the poor will spend it. Not on useless things, but spend it on a house, fix up the place; take a holiday they haven't had in a while; hire a few tradies, get their kids new clothes, get them a tutor or two etc. etc.
These kind of spending create demand, demand get business people interested to supply and so they hire people, invest in businesses they'll run etc. Results in higher revenue to the ATO. Better standard of living for the masses; more small businesses with adequate jobs to put food on the table and maybe a couple of apprentices.
Giving it to those who are already well off and what would they do?
All that they would spend they already have. So excess cash will either go to gambling or financial speculation. Maybe that too create jobs, but just ain't that bang for your local buck.
We all know these stuff. Why it's not implemented is not within our pay packet.