---

@freakiness wrote:

As I said, I take "you're" to include me.

 

It's ok though because, although you post many times more political threads than I, you were not included in the spamster comment as you don't make a habit (with this ID) of attacking other posters because they don't agree with you  😄 

---

That's nice, thank you 🙂

Which ID do I use to attack other posters with because they don't agree with me?

They would have to be hiding it under their mattresses wouldn't they? With Centrelink, ATO & all govt. Dept's cross checking references as they do these days, I just don't see how it could be possible.

I don't believe they are representative of the majority.

 

I see this a lot, but does that mean we shouldnt try to stop the ones that are ripping off the system? Cos' lets face it, they're arent ripping off the system so much as ripping off the poor, the abused, the homeless....

 

 

Same goes for people on the dole, who cares if its only the minority that are taking advantage and dont actually want to work, or work for cash, do we just let them do that, is it ok because its not the majority?

 

 

I've recently been accused of not being sympathetic to disadvantaged people but its the disadvantaged that are hurt and further disadvantaged by the cheats, I'd like to see more money, help and houses for the truly needy but they need to find a way to cut off the leeches.

 

**not specifically directed at you EM, its just a phrase I see a lot lately and its used as a reason not to implement measures to catch people.

I didn't mean to imply they should be able to get away with it but I think it's unfair that if one person does something everyone is tainted, especially when regarding welfare.

Its the scammers that shine a bad light on public housing tenants and welfare recipients, if periodic scrutiny is needed to weed them out I doubt any honest tenant would care.

If that kind of thing still goes on they really need to crack down on it. There was also an issue recently where people were able to stay living in their 3 or 4 bedroom homes even when all the kids had moved out and there was only a couple or single person left.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I am aware, there is no such thing as a 4 bedroom department house... Or if there is they are VERY rare.

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

That's nice, thank you 🙂

Which ID do I use to attack other posters with because they don't agree with me?

---

You'd know better than me if you have that habit or not  😄

They also have introduced a bedroon tax in NSW, so if a single person is living in a two bedroom place they pay an extra $20. It's disgusting because there are not enough places around, it's not just a matter of - oh well, your a scammer because there is only 1 of you and you have 2 bedrooms. A lot of people need to stay where they are for all sorts of reasons.

---

@secondhand-wonderland wrote:

If that kind of thing still goes on they really need to crack down on it. There was also an issue recently where people were able to stay living in their 3 or 4 bedroom homes even when all the kids had moved out and there was only a couple or single person left.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I am aware, there is no such thing as a 4 bedroom department house... Or if there is they are VERY rare.

---

Of course they have 4 bedroom houses, they also 5 bedrooms but obviously not as many.