on 20-04-2014 10:21 PM
As it's more than 100 days now, it has been suggested that a new thread was needed. The current govt has been breaking promises and telling lies at a rate so fast it's hard to keep up.
This below is worrying, "independent" pffft, as if your own doctor is somehow what? biased, it's ridiculous. So far there is talk of only including people under a certain age 30-35, for now. Remember that if your injured in a car, injured at work or get ill, you too might need to go on the DSP. They have done a similar think in the UK with devastating consequences.
and this is the 2nd time recently where the Govt has referred to work as welfare???? So when you go to work tomorrow (or tuesday), just remember that's welfare.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598
Independent doctors could be called in to reassess disability pensioners, Federal Government says
The Federal Government is considering using independent doctors to examine disability pensioners and assess whether they should continue to receive payments.
Currently family doctors provide reports supporting claims for the Disability Support Pension (DSP).
But Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews is considering a measure that would see independent doctors reassess eligibility.
"We are concerned that where people can work, the best form of welfare is work," Mr Andrews said at a press conference.
on 07-01-2015 01:34 AM
Why is the gap so big between service workers and wealthy people. Did those people get wealthy because they own businesses that pay staff $5 p.h.?
Yes.
on 07-01-2015 01:37 AM
It's nothing but a cunning plan to keep as many people as poor and as desperate as it takes in order for them to agree to work for such a minimalistic wage that it beggars belief.
And the ones who profit from this policy are the ones aps describes as having earned their money so that they can jet about in private 'planes.
Those people have wealth inconceivable to those working for minimum wage.
And it's the people who work for minimum wage who "earn" those 1% ers their wealth.
Ask Monman to explain it to you.
A large pool of abjectly poor people is absolutely vital to the capitalist system in order to drive down as far as possible the cost of labour (wages).
And this is exactly what the Howard govt's Workchoices policy was designed to achieve.
and luckily, we didn't fall for it.
on 07-01-2015 02:01 AM
In the US millions of workers are are “lifters” but no matter how hard they work they’re still “leaners”. A recent study found that more than half of fast food workers receive public assistance which costs the taxpayer $7 billion a year.
Is this the kind of “competitive” economy Maurice Newman and the Abbott government want for us?
Be careful what you wish for.
Maurice Newman, who tooks large dollars for a few months work devising methods of financial punishment for those who earn many times less than that in a year.
on 07-01-2015 02:09 AM
In the US millions of workers are are “lifters” but no matter how hard they work they’re still “leaners”. A recent study found that more than half of fast food workers receive public assistance which costs the taxpayer $7 billion a year.
They are certainly not "leaners". That they need to rely on govt subsidies only illustrates the fact that even when working, they are being exploited.
And the taxpayer is effectively paying a subsidy to Business by kicking in that extra support for those workers when they should be able to rely on their wage to support themselves.
We, the taxpayers, subsidise big business by contributing support to those workers who aren't paid enough for what they do.
07-01-2015 02:28 AM - edited 07-01-2015 02:29 AM
on 07-01-2015 02:34 AM
A large pool of abjectly poor people is absolutely vital to the capitalist system in order to drive down as far as possible the cost of labour (wages).
And this is exactly what the Howard govt's Workchoices policy was designed to achieve.
and luckily, we didn't fall for it.
.................................................................................................................................................................................
Ahhh!! .........but watch this space
on 07-01-2015 03:06 AM
We, the taxpayers, subsidise big business by contributing support to those workers who aren't paid enough for what they do.
Where is the outrage?
Where is even the undersatnding that this is so?
07-01-2015 03:11 AM - edited 07-01-2015 03:13 AM
There are the sheep and then there are the wolves........the sheep dogs are becoming less in number
I guess the sheep are happy enough so long as they have enough green grass to eat.
The outrage will start once the credit is 'stopped' ?
07-01-2015 03:36 AM - edited 07-01-2015 03:40 AM
The sheep won't understand why the grass is shrivelling and they have nothing left to eat.
They are sheep after all, in possession of a limited understanding about what is going on around them.
All they know is that food is becoming harder to find and that shelter is becoming ever more scarce and that the people who they look to and rely upon to help them and to protect them are jetting off to private places to luxuriate in the wealth that they have gained by selling their wool for enormous profit.
baaa, baaaa, baaaah
07-01-2015 04:05 AM - edited 07-01-2015 04:08 AM
"Why is the gap so big between service workers and wealthy people. Did those people get wealthy because they own businesses that pay staff $5 p.h.?"
In some cases, yes
@am*3 wrote:
@aps1080 wrote:
glee
I understand the discussion we are having but I really can't see the relevance of this.
"Meanwhile the richest were flying directly into Aspen on their private jets, oblivious to the chaos in the swamp below."
So what if the rich fly direct ?
If they earn't it, why not ?
Why is the gap so big between service workers and wealthy people. Did those people get wealthy because they own businesses that pay staff $5 p.h.?
In some cases, yes.
In others, no.
Walmart being a good example of the yes. But on the other hand, if it wasn't there, one hell of a lot of people wouldn't be working.
And consumers, especially low income consumers benefit from Walmart.