Diary of our stinking Govt.

[boris1gary]

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.

[boris1gary]

so much for the hockey "welfare crisis".....everytime he opens his mouth another lie slips out...

Working age Australians have become far less reliant on welfare payments, new figures show

Working age Australians have become far less reliant on welfare payments since the turn of the century – undermining Abbott government claims of a crisis of welfare dependency in Australia.

The finding comes from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey, an authoritative Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research report that has tracked more than 12,000 people since 2001.

The latest HILDA report, for 2011, shows rising inequality in Australia as well as flat or even falling living standards for middle-class Australians in the years after the global financial crisis.

But it also shows a marked trend away from working age Australians – and even pensioners – being as reliant on welfare.

Last month’s federal budget included a number of measures to restrict welfare, including preventing unemployed people under 30 getting access to payments for up to six months.

Treasurer Joe Hockey, in a speech last week, described Australia’s welfare system as ‘‘unsustainable’’ and said claims the budget was unfair were misguided “old-style socialism”.

He said the government was spending, on average, more than $6000 on welfare for every Australian.

“The average working Australian, be they a cleaner, a plumber or a teacher, is working over one month full-time each year just to pay for the welfare of another Australian,’’ he said.

Yet the HILDA research shows that in 2001 23 per cent of people aged 18 to 64 had received welfare payments each week and a decade later that had fallen sharply to 18.5 per cent.

There has also been a big drop in the percentage of working age households where more than 90 per cent of their income came from welfare. In 2001 that accounted for 7.1 per cent of households while a decade later it was just 4.8 per cent.

The proportion of retired people who relied on benefits as their main source of income also declined across the decade from 65.8 per cent to 63.5 per cent.

The report's author, Associate Professor Roger Wilkins, said Australia was experiencing its lowest level of welfare reliance in decades, possibly since the 1980s.

‘‘I’m absolutely bewildered by Hockey’s obsession on welfare reliance in Australia,’’ he said. ‘‘It’s lower than it's been in a couple of decades, possibly longer.’’

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/working-age-australians-have-become-far-less-r...

[monman12]

"Working age Australians have become far less reliant on welfare payments, new figures show."

Why just "working age"?

The federal treasury produced its third comprehensive Intergenerational Report in 2010. The report, "Australia to 2050: future challenges"
Note the year as the Circus was in town, also it was a Treasury report (independent) and I do not mean the self-styled Myops Media "Independent" title and  "citizen bloggers" signatures.

The report says Australia is facing an increase in age-related spending, but more in health and aged care services than in welfare payments. It says that as a proportion of GDP, spending on health is projected to rise from 4 per cent to 7.1 per cent by 2049-50. Aged care is projected to rise from 0.8 per cent of GDP to 1.8 per cent. Spending on age-related pensions is projected to rise from 2.7 per cent of GDP to 3.9 per cent.

The number of people of eligible pension age is projected to increase by around 150 per cent by 2049-50, however the report predicts there will be a decline in the proportion of pensioners receiving a full age pension because of the increased value of superannuation and other private assets and income.

August 2013 (Circus in town time) Courier Mail.
ONE in every four households survives on social security payments, with Australian taxpayers now forking out more for welfare than health care.

In case  one does not read  C&P, or research !!,  try this graph, and consider it in conjunction with this C&P comment :

The report's author, Associate Professor Roger Wilkins, said Australia was experiencing its lowest level of welfare reliance in decades, possibly since the 1980s.

"Lowest leve lof welfare reliance in decades"?

nɥºɾ

[nero_bolt]

[boris1gary]

But it also shows a marked trend away from working age Australians – and even pensioners – being as reliant on welfare.

Yet the HILDA research shows that in 2001 23 per cent of people aged 18 to 64 had received welfare payments each week and a decade later that had fallen sharply to 18.5 per cent.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/working-age-australians-have-become-far-less-r...

[boris1gary]

[cherry*135]

I guess some posters have eyesight problems? Hence the need for  oversized images?

I can't even see one image complete on my smaller screen, scroll on by.

[cherry*135]

 ABS data is cross-sectional. Cross-sectional studies are carried out at one time point or over a short period.

HILDA ( Household, Income and Dynamics in Australia)  is a longitudinal survey. 

Longitudinal data crucial for public policy.
The adoption of any new policy is tantamount to making a prediction, a longitudinal claim –if we do X, then the future lives of our
policy target group will change in such and such ways

I am a participant in an ongoing survey - 45 and Up.  A study of healthy ageing in the Southern Hemisphere.

"The information we gather will give governments the tools to make better decisions about healthcare for people as they age.

The Study is also a rich source of information for researchers, with nearly 500 of them currently using it in research projects."

[fiestas*girl]

i say bring back sizing limits on pics posted.

[monman12]

"Yet the HILDA research shows that in 2001 23 per cent of people aged 18 to 64 had received welfare payments each week and a decade later that had fallen sharply to 18.5 per cent."

I would suggest some thought, and or research, (sorry) might indicate that as unemployment around 2001 was 6.5% then a decade later it was 5%,  the requirement for welfare would have reduced also.   So taking the fall in  unemployment ratio over the decade and applying it to welfare payments one would expect the payments to be 17.7% (a sharp fall?)
Simply, approximately the same proportion of welfare is still being claimed by the 18 to 64 working age group allowing for employment ratio over the decade.

"But it also shows a marked trend away from working age Australians – and even pensioners – being as reliant on welfare."

Interesting the qualification, the first covered above. Obviously with compulsory superannuation there will be a (small) trend in those not being eligible for welfare. However the overall rate of increase of monies required for those accessing  welfare (ageing population) is greater than the small reduction trend.

If one is to have a meaningful debate apropos welfare payments, I think it important to also actually address those aspects that consume the most in resources i.e. health and the aged pension.

It might also be of interest to note some trends in welfare  distribution,  Source: DHS and DVA administrative data.\ :     

Total income support recipients , 2002 to 2012,       2002: 4,859,661          2012:  5,033,323

"But it also shows a marked trend away from working age Australians – and even pensioners – being as reliant on welfare." Really ?

nɥºɾ

Oh gosh,  I forgot to do a C&P sans research.

[boris1gary]

When your dad is not the PM

Frances Abbott, 24 year-old daughter of Prime Minister Tony Abbott, made news a couple of weeks ago when it emerged she’d been offered a $60,000 scholarship to attend the Whitehouse Institute of Design. The scholarship has been awarded only once before, to the daughter of the school’s director, and students interviewed say they had no idea such a scholarship was available, and would have applied for it if they had.

As the scholarship is apparently awarded on merit, the Whitehouse Institute of Design appears to have a remarkably low number of meritorious students, the Director’s daughter and the daughter of the Prime Minister being the only ones considered worthy of such financial largesse in the Institute’s entire history.

Today it’s been revealed that Ms Abbott broke her lease agreement  on an apartment she rented in Prahan, citing lack of security in the ground floor dwelling, and telling a VCAT hearing that “My dad is the Prime Minister” and he and his security teams did not consider the apartment safe for her. Ms Abbott had signed the lease without first consulting her father on the security issue because she wanted to be “independent.”

For reasons I find completely incomprehensible, not least because they haven’t been explained, VCAT found in Ms Abbott’s favour, and she was not obliged to pay $1000 requested by the landlady, a single mother recovering from cancer who was forced to default on a mortgage payment to cover her costs after Ms Abbott broke the lease.

Nobody would disagree that members of the PM’s family need security, however, it is remarkable that Ms Abbott herself did not think about this, or consult her father prior to signing the lease. This does not sound like the same standard of mature, responsible behaviour Mr Abbott demands from other 24 year-old Australians, especially those who are unemployed.

Nobody would disagree that members of the PM’s family need security, however, it is remarkable that Ms Abbott herself did not think about this, or consult her father prior to signing the lease. This does not sound like the same standard of mature, responsible behaviour Mr Abbott demands from other 24 year-old Australians, especially those who are unemployed.

If you are in this category, and your dad is not the PM, you will have to apply for 40 jobs every month for six months before you are eligible for meagre government assistance, and quite how you are going to house, feed and clothe yourself during those six months is anybody’s guess.

Mr Abbott clearly believes young people ought to be independent, unless, of course, they are his young people. Handouts never encouraged anyone to stand on their own two feet, unless of course they are handed out to his children in the form of $60,000 scholarships. If your dad isn’t the Prime Minister, you won’t be offered scholarships nobody else knows about to get you through university, private college, or TAFE,  if you choose to learn instead of earn between the ages of seventeen and thirty. Indeed, the cost of your learning, set to double or triple in the coming years, plus interest, may make it difficult for you to carry the burden of a mortgage as well, so you will be facing extraordinary challenges of the kind we are not used to in Australia, where education has been a right, and not simply a privilege available to the wealthy and powerful.

The matter of Ms Abbott’s security, and the matter of the broken lease are two separate issues. While I sympathise with Ms Abbott’s struggle to carve out her independence, something many of us had to do before we were twenty-four but let’s not carp, surely it is Ms Abbott’s responsibility to fulfil her legal obligations. The lease was signed. The property proved inappropriate after the lease was signed. If this happened to me, or you, we’d be stuck with it or we’d pay the penalty for breaking our agreement. If our dad earned half a million dollars a year, he might help us out with whatever costs we’d incurred, but only if he had political power could we get off scot-free, leaving another out-of-pocket and paying for our irresponsibility.

Mr Abbott insists that families should be off-limits in the political arena. However, he did rely heavily on the presence of his wife and three daughters throughout the election campaign, not least of all to prove he isn’t a misogynist, though I remain unconvinced by that dubious evidence. When politicians’ families benefit from the spouse and parents’ occupation, it is impossible to argue that they should be left out of the fray. They can’t be in it for the goodies, and out of it for the critiques. Ms Abbott is an adult. Her father is making enormous demands on adults of the same age, and much younger.  It is these very demands made by their father that will continue to ensure the Abbott daughters remain under intense scrutiny. The Prime Minister cannot see his daughters favoured, while he subjects the daughters and sons of others to harsh and cruel demands that have the potential to ruin their lives.