Welfare Payments - OzChess

**Chessic-Adventures** · 11-16-2007, 08:55 PM

To all "dole-bashers" out there (who have posted on other threads): -

Irregardless (I just love the double-negative irony of that false-word) of your assumptions & attitudes about Australia's so-called "bludgers"...

Structural unemployment, under-employment, underprivilege & poverty are complex social, economic & political issues. To blame any victim of circumstance is simply not on!

Please also remember that prejudice & divisiveness have proven to be two of Howard's most effective political tools! Clearly, the Coalition's agenda has been to deceive, divide & conquer.

Therefore, nobody, repeat NOBODY, should accept the propaganda (&/or support the policies) of any, repeat ANY, government that demonises & vilifies any, repeat ANY, group/s of its own underprivileged citizens with a draconian scheme called "WORK FOR THE DOLE" - or similarly insidious schemes under names with more devious euphemisms for "WHOSE/WHAT/WORSE Choices" or "Welfare to SLAVERY"....

No truly civilised & compassionate member of Parliament (or citizen) would have voted in favour of such abhorrent & inhumane legislation!

**Iconoclast** · 11-16-2007, 09:31 PM

Chessic, I love your call. I thought that real compassion and decency was never to be found on these boards. You have made my day.

**Arrogant-One** · 11-16-2007, 10:55 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

Chessic, I love your call. I thought that real compassion and decency was never to be found on these boards. You have made my day.

Well he hasn't made mine.

Facts of life mate, my taxes pay for your dole. That gives me a say in what you need to do to receive your dole. Howard has actually done a pretty good job articulating the contract. If you think I am prepared to just sit back and say 'hey, I don't care, go ahead, waste MY money doing nothing with your life for yourself or anyone else', then you are clearly mistaken.

Is poverty the result of complex issues? Sometimes. More often then not it is the result of laziness or self investment (ie.) studying at Uni for a few years in the hopes of ultimately securing a better job in the long term.

Sorry mate, but someone's gotta tell you the facts of life.

Regards

AO

Spiny Norman · 11-17-2007, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by Chessic-Adventures

To blame any victim of circumstance is simply not on!

I think you're missing the point of "us dole bludger bashers". Most of us are not just blaming the victim of circumstances because of his/her circumstances. I've been unemployed. I know what a soul-destroying thing it can be. What we "blame" them for is for not doing what is obviously necessary in order to correct the problem.

Those that are incapable of correcting the problem (e.g. perhaps they are mentally or physically disabled, things like that) we have no problem with at all, and we think they ought to be helped and protected.

Its the perfectly able-bodied, intelligent, LAZY SOBs who are leeches on society that we have a problem with. If they won't work (as opposed to can't work) and if they won't get retraining in a new skill (as opposed to can't be retrained), then they are bludgers and parasites.

**Chessic-Adventures** · 11-17-2007, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by Spiny Norman

I think you're missing the point of "us dole bludger bashers". Most of us are not just blaming the victim of circumstances because of his/her circumstances. I've been unemployed. I know what a soul-destroying thing it can be. What we "blame" them for is for not doing what is obviously necessary in order to correct the problem.

Those that are incapable of correcting the problem (e.g. perhaps they are mentally or physically disabled, things like that) we have no problem with at all, and we think they ought to be helped and protected.

Its the perfectly able-bodied, intelligent, LAZY SOBs who are leeches on society that we have a problem with. If they won't work (as opposed to can't work) and if they won't get retraining in a new skill (as opposed to can't be retrained), then they are bludgers and parasites.

AO,

I am not on the dole. Spiny, if you have been unemployed and found work, that's great for you. Many unemployed do not have that opton because they are discriminated against. I never have and never will believe in kicking a man when he is down. I am sad that you are so willing too.

We need to help these people get a job and not punish them with work for the dole. "Work for the dole", in it's current way - does not help these marginalised people find work. Send them to TAFE, perhaps let them do some 'temp' work - which may lead to permanent employment. Almost anything, would be a great step forward from the current mess.

These people are:

* Often from ethnic/minority groups;
* Often depressed
* All extremely anxious & embarrassed
* Generally from "tough" backgrounds - they often come in with their "drunk/abusive (and obviously not working) father etc...
* PREGNANT
* Sometimes slightly disabled.

These people are being treated like scum, there is no other word for it - there must be a better way.

But the John Howard "there just dole bludgers" is a compelling vote catcher for him; if only the average Aussie knew the truth - they'd think twice about it!

Spiny Norman · 11-17-2007, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by Chessic-Adventures

Spiny, if you have been unemployed and found work, that's great for you. Many unemployed do not have that opton because they are discriminated against. I never have and never will believe in kicking a man when he is down. I am sad that you are so willing too.

I think you need to carefully re-read what I wrote, put aside the preconceptions that you might have about what I wrote, and just assess it as written.

I repeat, abbreviated of comments, to make it even clearer:

Those that are incapable of correcting the problem we have no problem with at all, and we think they ought to be helped and protected. Its the perfectly able-bodied, intelligent, LAZY SOBs who are leeches on society that we have a problem with. If they won't work (as opposed to can't work) and if they won't get retraining in a new skill (as opposed to can't be retrained), then they are bludgers and parasites.

Can you tell me to which part of the above paragraph you find particularly objectionable? Do you think that people who choose not to work (or be retrained) are owed a living by those of us who choose to work? Or is it something else that I have missed?

**Iconoclast** · 11-17-2007, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by Arrogant-One

Facts of life mate, my taxes pay for your dole. That gives me a say in what you need to do to receive your dole.

Not correct. You pay your taxes and you get what you pay for. You have NO say in what you get because the social contract between individual and state is already written. You all pay some money into the pool and we will try to keep all your lives smooth.

If you think I am prepared to just sit back and say 'hey, I don't care, go ahead, waste MY money doing nothing with your life for yourself or anyone else', then you are clearly mistaken.

Stiff shit matey. A democratic government will on average, do what the voters think on average. Kick and scream as much as you like but you are not the boss - the population is the boss, and we want welfare for the people who fall through the cracks.

Is poverty the result of complex issues? Sometimes. More often then not it is the result of laziness or self investment

Really? I will be sure to tell that to 900 million rural Chinese and Indians. And then I will tell it to children living in remote aboriginal communities, and my 55 year old layed-off blue collar neighbors and the pregnant teen with an abusive partner and the dim wit and the damaged exjunky just out of gaol and 95% of the people who we support during their period(s) of unproductivity.

We are insanely rich. If a 1% of us are paracites, why should we implement practices that humiliate the 10% who are simply garden variety losers. This is not a catastrophy of food supply or war. We can afford to be kind and need not be mean.

**Iconoclast** · 11-17-2007, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Spiny Norman

Do you think that people who choose not to work (or be retrained) are owed a living by those of us who choose to work? Or is it something else that I have missed?

It is something that you have missed. The fact is people do not "choose not to work." They choose to do something else which you/we do not class as work, whatever that may be.

These so called bludgers are mostly expending as many kJ as you, walking as many km as you and juggling as many thoughts as you each day. Their lives are simply not directed toward economic production.

The problem is you cannot see these people for what they REALLY are, because you have protestant work ethic filters on your glasses. Instead of smacking them up the chops, take some time to think how/why it is that their physical and mental efforts are misdirected to unproductive pursuits. It is NOT laziness, nor is it evilness.

Spiny Norman · 11-17-2007, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

It is something that you have missed. The fact is people do not "choose not to work." They choose to do something else which you/we do not class as work, whatever that may be.

Choosing to do something else other than working is exactly the same, from a results perspective, as choosing not to work. So don't play silly word games. Deal with the issues.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

These so called bludgers are mostly expending as many kJ as you, walking as many km as you and juggling as many thoughts as you each day. Their lives are simply not directed toward economic production.

Correct. So perhaps you can explain why should they receive the benefits of said economic production?

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

The problem is you cannot see these people for what they REALLY are, because you have protestant work ethic filters ...
<rest of rant snipped>

Quite pathetic mate, seriously, you ought to learn how to engage with people's arguments, rather than dismissing them because you can't see past your own atheistic, left-wing, bleeding heart, psycho-babble filters ...

See ... I can launch ad hominems too ... lets see how far it gets us ...

**Iconoclast** · 11-17-2007, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by Spiny Norman

Choosing to do something else other than working is exactly the same, from a results perspective, as choosing not to work. So don't play silly word games.

It is not silly word games at all. (Nor am I playing ad hominem

). I am using words to say exactly what I mean.

From, as you say, "a results perspective," a corps it the result of: Murder; manslaughter, negligence, misadventure et cetera. The results of someone being a "dole bludger" is not as important as why. The results are what you appear to be taking offense to. However, the problems that the the person is having, appear to be lower on your list. UNless you deal with that question you have little hope of getting the outcome you desire.

So perhaps you can explain why should they receive the benefits of said economic production?

This atheist subscribes to the small C Christian ethics of compassion and love of your fellow man, even when they are arseholes.

Quite pathetic mate, seriously, you ought to learn how to engage with people's arguments, rather than dismissing them because you can't see past your own atheistic, left-wing, bleeding heart, psycho-babble filters ...

See ... I can launch ad hominems too ... lets see how far it gets us ...

1. You know that I DO enguage with peoples arguments.

2. "Protestant work ethic" attitudes are more or less a descriptor of a person's morality base than, say, "bleeding heart" - which I do not object to.
3. You wont find anyone more left wing than Jesus. So, if you want to return my leftist views to me as a prejoritive, start praying for forgiveness.

I am with Chessic-A on "Work for the Dole." How about some civilized approach to maintain dignity, like I don't know ... what about "Work for a Living Wage."

**Arrogant-One** · 11-17-2007, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

These so called bludgers are mostly expending as many kJ as you, walking as many km as you and juggling as many thoughts as you each day. Their lives are simply not directed toward economic production.

Some of them are expending calories surfing and picking up their regular fortnightly welfare cheques while I slave at least 40 hours a week to give it to them!

As a simple observation, I find most of the left wingers who advocate social policies like free dole, etc. are the one's who contribute the least to the overall tax pool from which such programs are funded.

Just one of those things I guess.

Spiny Norman · 11-18-2007, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

This atheist subscribes to the small C Christian ethics of compassion and love of your fellow man, even when they are arseholes.

Very good. I'm impressed (seriously). Some atheists go the other way and advocate eugenics programs to get rid of the 'bludgers' (but they use the code word 'unfit' to describe them).

Okay, now all you should need to do is demonstrate that giving handouts to someone who is able to produce their own food/shelter is actually beneficial to the recipient.

1. You know that I DO enguage with peoples arguments.
2. "Protestant work ethic" attitudes are more or less a descriptor of a person's morality base than, say, "bleeding heart" - which I do not object to.

Aw, come on, you could have used far less religiously-biased language if you chose to do so. You were just trying to wind me up. I just chose to play the same game. I have absolutely zero problem with having a work ethic. Its got nothing to do with being a Protestant though.

3. You wont find anyone more left wing than Jesus. So, if you want to return my leftist views to me as a prejoritive, start praying for forgiveness.

I don't think he was any wing, either left or right ... on some occasions he definitely ends up in "left wing space" though ... on others, he's positively right wing (e.g. "render unto Caesar").

I am with Chessic-A on "Work for the Dole." How about some civilized approach to maintain dignity, like I don't know ... what about "Work for a Living Wage."

You're arguing about the name of the program?

I'm talking about substance. It works like this:
-- basic principle of our society: everyone who can work, should work. It is not a basic responsiblity of society to feed everyone, only the weak.
-- those who choose not to work are free to do so. Some retirees choose not to work. But they have resources available to them (legally acquired) which enable them to feed themselves. Nobody is arguing that they should have to work
-- those who are unable to work through some kind of disability (mental, physical, whatever) the society can (and should) care for. This is because we value human life, even if it is not a productive life from the society's work ethic perspective. (This is a very Christian idea, where western nations are concerned, and is stemming from our historical biblical morality that values all life as inherently worthwhile)

If anyone can come up with a better framework than that, post it and let everyone know:
-- what it looks like; and
-- how it would work in a number of different scenarios; and
-- why it is better

In the mean time, I don't give a rats what you call it ... you can call it the Work Life Balance Program for all I care ...

(Incidentally, if those who choose not to work starve themselves to death, that's their free choice and I for one would argue against force-feeding them to keep them alive. So really we're just arguing about degrees of coercion, and over just WHO is coercing who).

**Arrogant-One** · 11-18-2007, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by Spiny Norman

I don't think he was any wing, either left or right ... on some occasions he definitely ends up in "left wing space" though ... on others, he's positively right wing (e.g. "render unto Caesar").

I would tend to agree with Matt on this one, I think he was far more left wing than right wing in his overall nature. However, its completely immaterial to the thread topic and general discussion of welfare. We cannot feed 5000 people from a couple loaves of bread. We need to use tax payer money to do that.

Indeed, everyone would be a left winger if the pool of resources to feed the hungry and provide shelter to the battered wives, etc. was inexhaustible.

AO

**Fischer-Fan** · 11-18-2007, 05:05 PM

I can't speak for all people on welfare, but the ones I've seen - who are longer term unemployed...

NONE, NO-ONE, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM is happy to be on welfare. They are highly embarrassed, and do want to work. As we all know, welfare is a cycle - nothing to do with laziness.

They money you get on welfare is minimal; it's enough to get by - and not much else.

I personally, have no issue paying taxes to support these people. And I've got no problem if they use some of that cash to have a few drinks at the pub, or take their kids to the cinema's to see "Happy Feet"!

It's called looking after people in our society who are less fortunate.

Yes we shopuld help them move to work, the problem is they don't have the "experience" most employers are after. Picking up dog-sh*t at the pound (part time), hardly looks great on a resume; therefore - IMO - it isn't helping them one little bit. It's making them depressed, which only makes things worse.

There is a place where people don't care about people, and want the less fortunate in our society living in the streets to suffer even more than they are now. That place is called America.

**Iconoclast** · 11-19-2007, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by Fischer-Fan

NONE, NO-ONE, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM is happy to be on welfare.

Mate, you are so right.

My story (only part thereof):
For years I would work my arse off on building sites in the summer months, then work my arse off at the snow fields in winter. In between I took "holidays." These are the "no work but paid days" that the holier than thou PERMANENT employees get. Well, these DOLE days are sooooo evil that you are made to feel as if you are filth, even when you are pulling your weight.

Employers would often pay you AS IF you were still pulling the DOLE. Their businesses were thus being SUBSIDISED by the tax payer. Most of your liberal voting, right wing, tax dodging types are users and abusers of the system. PHKEM!

EAT THE RICH

11-16-2007, 08:55 PM	#1 (permalink)
Chessic-Adventures Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 204	Welfare Payments To all "dole-bashers" out there (who have posted on other threads): - Irregardless (I just love the double-negative irony of that false-word) of your assumptions & attitudes about Australia's so-called "bludgers"... Structural unemployment, under-employment, underprivilege & poverty are complex social, economic & political issues. To blame any victim of circumstance is simply not on! Please also remember that prejudice & divisiveness have proven to be two of Howard's most effective political tools! Clearly, the Coalition's agenda has been to deceive, divide & conquer. Therefore, nobody, repeat NOBODY, should accept the propaganda (&/or support the policies) of any, repeat ANY, government that demonises & vilifies any, repeat ANY, group/s of its own underprivileged citizens with a draconian scheme called "WORK FOR THE DOLE" - or similarly insidious schemes under names with more devious euphemisms for "WHOSE/WHAT/WORSE Choices" or "Welfare to SLAVERY".... No truly civilised & compassionate member of Parliament (or citizen) would have voted in favour of such abhorrent & inhumane legislation!

11-16-2007, 09:31 PM	#2 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 1,006	Chessic, I love your call. I thought that real compassion and decency was never to be found on these boards. You have made my day. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

11-16-2007, 10:55 PM	#3 (permalink)
Arrogant-One Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 1,682 ICC Handle: Just2Good FICS Handle: Advantage	Originally Posted by Iconoclast Chessic, I love your call. I thought that real compassion and decency was never to be found on these boards. You have made my day. Well he hasn't made mine. Facts of life mate, my taxes pay for your dole. That gives me a say in what you need to do to receive your dole. Howard has actually done a pretty good job articulating the contract. If you think I am prepared to just sit back and say 'hey, I don't care, go ahead, waste MY money doing nothing with your life for yourself or anyone else', then you are clearly mistaken. Is poverty the result of complex issues? Sometimes. More often then not it is the result of laziness or self investment (ie.) studying at Uni for a few years in the hopes of ultimately securing a better job in the long term. Sorry mate, but someone's gotta tell you the facts of life. Regards AO __________________ . ... for it is always the person not in the predicament who knows what ought to have been done in it, and would unquestionably have done it too . . . ~ Charles Dickens novel ~

11-17-2007, 07:42 AM	#4 (permalink)
Spiny Norman Suspended Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 223	Originally Posted by Chessic-Adventures To blame any victim of circumstance is simply not on! I think you're missing the point of "us dole bludger bashers". Most of us are not just blaming the victim of circumstances because of his/her circumstances. I've been unemployed. I know what a soul-destroying thing it can be. What we "blame" them for is for not doing what is obviously necessary in order to correct the problem. Those that are incapable of correcting the problem (e.g. perhaps they are mentally or physically disabled, things like that) we have no problem with at all, and we think they ought to be helped and protected. Its the perfectly able-bodied, intelligent, LAZY SOBs who are leeches on society that we have a problem with. If they won't work (as opposed to can't work) and if they won't get retraining in a new skill (as opposed to can't be retrained), then they are bludgers and parasites.

11-17-2007, 12:36 PM	#5 (permalink)
Chessic-Adventures Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 204	Originally Posted by Spiny Norman I think you're missing the point of "us dole bludger bashers". Most of us are not just blaming the victim of circumstances because of his/her circumstances. I've been unemployed. I know what a soul-destroying thing it can be. What we "blame" them for is for not doing what is obviously necessary in order to correct the problem. Those that are incapable of correcting the problem (e.g. perhaps they are mentally or physically disabled, things like that) we have no problem with at all, and we think they ought to be helped and protected. Its the perfectly able-bodied, intelligent, LAZY SOBs who are leeches on society that we have a problem with. If they won't work (as opposed to can't work) and if they won't get retraining in a new skill (as opposed to can't be retrained), then they are bludgers and parasites. AO, I am not on the dole. Spiny, if you have been unemployed and found work, that's great for you. Many unemployed do not have that opton because they are discriminated against. I never have and never will believe in kicking a man when he is down. I am sad that you are so willing too. We need to help these people get a job and not punish them with work for the dole. "Work for the dole", in it's current way - does not help these marginalised people find work. Send them to TAFE, perhaps let them do some 'temp' work - which may lead to permanent employment. Almost anything, would be a great step forward from the current mess. These people are: * Often from ethnic/minority groups; * Often depressed * All extremely anxious & embarrassed * Generally from "tough" backgrounds - they often come in with their "drunk/abusive (and obviously not working) father etc... * PREGNANT * Sometimes slightly disabled. These people are being treated like scum, there is no other word for it - there must be a better way. But the John Howard "there just dole bludgers" is a compelling vote catcher for him; if only the average Aussie knew the truth - they'd think twice about it!

11-17-2007, 01:15 PM	#6 (permalink)
Spiny Norman Suspended Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 223	Originally Posted by Chessic-Adventures Spiny, if you have been unemployed and found work, that's great for you. Many unemployed do not have that opton because they are discriminated against. I never have and never will believe in kicking a man when he is down. I am sad that you are so willing too. I think you need to carefully re-read what I wrote, put aside the preconceptions that you might have about what I wrote, and just assess it as written. I repeat, abbreviated of comments, to make it even clearer: Those that are incapable of correcting the problem we have no problem with at all, and we think they ought to be helped and protected. Its the perfectly able-bodied, intelligent, LAZY SOBs who are leeches on society that we have a problem with. If they won't work (as opposed to can't work) and if they won't get retraining in a new skill (as opposed to can't be retrained), then they are bludgers and parasites. Can you tell me to which part of the above paragraph you find particularly objectionable? Do you think that people who choose not to work (or be retrained) are owed a living by those of us who choose to work? Or is it something else that I have missed?

11-17-2007, 02:19 PM	#7 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 1,006	Originally Posted by Arrogant-One Facts of life mate, my taxes pay for your dole. That gives me a say in what you need to do to receive your dole. Not correct. You pay your taxes and you get what you pay for. You have NO say in what you get because the social contract between individual and state is already written. You all pay some money into the pool and we will try to keep all your lives smooth. If you think I am prepared to just sit back and say 'hey, I don't care, go ahead, waste MY money doing nothing with your life for yourself or anyone else', then you are clearly mistaken. Stiff shit matey. A democratic government will on average, do what the voters think on average. Kick and scream as much as you like but you are not the boss - the population is the boss, and we want welfare for the people who fall through the cracks. Is poverty the result of complex issues? Sometimes. More often then not it is the result of laziness or self investment Really? I will be sure to tell that to 900 million rural Chinese and Indians. And then I will tell it to children living in remote aboriginal communities, and my 55 year old layed-off blue collar neighbors and the pregnant teen with an abusive partner and the dim wit and the damaged exjunky just out of gaol and 95% of the people who we support during their period(s) of unproductivity. We are insanely rich. If a 1% of us are paracites, why should we implement practices that humiliate the 10% who are simply garden variety losers. This is not a catastrophy of food supply or war. We can afford to be kind and need not be mean. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

11-17-2007, 02:34 PM	#8 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 1,006	Originally Posted by Spiny Norman Do you think that people who choose not to work (or be retrained) are owed a living by those of us who choose to work? Or is it something else that I have missed? It is something that you have missed. The fact is people do not "choose not to work." They choose to do something else which you/we do not class as work, whatever that may be. These so called bludgers are mostly expending as many kJ as you, walking as many km as you and juggling as many thoughts as you each day. Their lives are simply not directed toward economic production. The problem is you cannot see these people for what they REALLY are, because you have protestant work ethic filters on your glasses. Instead of smacking them up the chops, take some time to think how/why it is that their physical and mental efforts are misdirected to unproductive pursuits. It is NOT laziness, nor is it evilness. __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

11-17-2007, 02:54 PM	#9 (permalink)
Spiny Norman Suspended Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 223	Originally Posted by Iconoclast It is something that you have missed. The fact is people do not "choose not to work." They choose to do something else which you/we do not class as work, whatever that may be. Choosing to do something else other than working is exactly the same, from a results perspective, as choosing not to work. So don't play silly word games. Deal with the issues. Originally Posted by Iconoclast These so called bludgers are mostly expending as many kJ as you, walking as many km as you and juggling as many thoughts as you each day. Their lives are simply not directed toward economic production. Correct. So perhaps you can explain why should they receive the benefits of said economic production? Originally Posted by Iconoclast The problem is you cannot see these people for what they REALLY are, because you have protestant work ethic filters ... <rest of rant snipped> Quite pathetic mate, seriously, you ought to learn how to engage with people's arguments, rather than dismissing them because you can't see past your own atheistic, left-wing, bleeding heart, psycho-babble filters ... See ... I can launch ad hominems too ... lets see how far it gets us ...

11-17-2007, 07:08 PM	#10 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 1,006	Originally Posted by Spiny Norman Choosing to do something else other than working is exactly the same, from a results perspective, as choosing not to work. So don't play silly word games. It is not silly word games at all. (Nor am I playing ad hominem ). I am using words to say exactly what I mean. From, as you say, "a results perspective," a corps it the result of: Murder; manslaughter, negligence, misadventure et cetera. The results of someone being a "dole bludger" is not as important as why. The results are what you appear to be taking offense to. However, the problems that the the person is having, appear to be lower on your list. UNless you deal with that question you have little hope of getting the outcome you desire. So perhaps you can explain why should they receive the benefits of said economic production? This atheist subscribes to the small C Christian ethics of compassion and love of your fellow man, even when they are arseholes. Quite pathetic mate, seriously, you ought to learn how to engage with people's arguments, rather than dismissing them because you can't see past your own atheistic, left-wing, bleeding heart, psycho-babble filters ... See ... I can launch ad hominems too ... lets see how far it gets us ... 1. You know that I DO enguage with peoples arguments. 2. "Protestant work ethic" attitudes are more or less a descriptor of a person's morality base than, say, "bleeding heart" - which I do not object to. 3. You wont find anyone more left wing than Jesus. So, if you want to return my leftist views to me as a prejoritive, start praying for forgiveness. I am with Chessic-A on "Work for the Dole." How about some civilized approach to maintain dignity, like I don't know ... what about "Work for a Living Wage." __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

11-17-2007, 07:14 PM	#11 (permalink)
Arrogant-One Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 1,682 ICC Handle: Just2Good FICS Handle: Advantage	Lets get back to issues gents Originally Posted by Iconoclast These so called bludgers are mostly expending as many kJ as you, walking as many km as you and juggling as many thoughts as you each day. Their lives are simply not directed toward economic production. Some of them are expending calories surfing and picking up their regular fortnightly welfare cheques while I slave at least 40 hours a week to give it to them! As a simple observation, I find most of the left wingers who advocate social policies like free dole, etc. are the one's who contribute the least to the overall tax pool from which such programs are funded. Just one of those things I guess. __________________ . ... for it is always the person not in the predicament who knows what ought to have been done in it, and would unquestionably have done it too . . . ~ Charles Dickens novel ~

11-18-2007, 08:42 AM	#12 (permalink)
Spiny Norman Suspended Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 223	Originally Posted by Iconoclast This atheist subscribes to the small C Christian ethics of compassion and love of your fellow man, even when they are arseholes. Very good. I'm impressed (seriously). Some atheists go the other way and advocate eugenics programs to get rid of the 'bludgers' (but they use the code word 'unfit' to describe them). Okay, now all you should need to do is demonstrate that giving handouts to someone who is able to produce their own food/shelter is actually beneficial to the recipient. 1. You know that I DO enguage with peoples arguments. 2. "Protestant work ethic" attitudes are more or less a descriptor of a person's morality base than, say, "bleeding heart" - which I do not object to. Aw, come on, you could have used far less religiously-biased language if you chose to do so. You were just trying to wind me up. I just chose to play the same game. I have absolutely zero problem with having a work ethic. Its got nothing to do with being a Protestant though. 3. You wont find anyone more left wing than Jesus. So, if you want to return my leftist views to me as a prejoritive, start praying for forgiveness. I don't think he was any wing, either left or right ... on some occasions he definitely ends up in "left wing space" though ... on others, he's positively right wing (e.g. "render unto Caesar"). I am with Chessic-A on "Work for the Dole." How about some civilized approach to maintain dignity, like I don't know ... what about "Work for a Living Wage." You're arguing about the name of the program? I'm talking about substance. It works like this: -- basic principle of our society: everyone who can work, should work. It is not a basic responsiblity of society to feed everyone, only the weak. -- those who choose not to work are free to do so. Some retirees choose not to work. But they have resources available to them (legally acquired) which enable them to feed themselves. Nobody is arguing that they should have to work -- those who are unable to work through some kind of disability (mental, physical, whatever) the society can (and should) care for. This is because we value human life, even if it is not a productive life from the society's work ethic perspective. (This is a very Christian idea, where western nations are concerned, and is stemming from our historical biblical morality that values all life as inherently worthwhile) If anyone can come up with a better framework than that, post it and let everyone know: -- what it looks like; and -- how it would work in a number of different scenarios; and -- why it is better In the mean time, I don't give a rats what you call it ... you can call it the Work Life Balance Program for all I care ... (Incidentally, if those who choose not to work starve themselves to death, that's their free choice and I for one would argue against force-feeding them to keep them alive. So really we're just arguing about degrees of coercion, and over just WHO is coercing who).

11-18-2007, 02:17 PM	#13 (permalink)
Arrogant-One Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 1,682 ICC Handle: Just2Good FICS Handle: Advantage	Originally Posted by Spiny Norman I don't think he was any wing, either left or right ... on some occasions he definitely ends up in "left wing space" though ... on others, he's positively right wing (e.g. "render unto Caesar"). I would tend to agree with Matt on this one, I think he was far more left wing than right wing in his overall nature. However, its completely immaterial to the thread topic and general discussion of welfare. We cannot feed 5000 people from a couple loaves of bread. We need to use tax payer money to do that. Indeed, everyone would be a left winger if the pool of resources to feed the hungry and provide shelter to the battered wives, etc. was inexhaustible. AO __________________ . ... for it is always the person not in the predicament who knows what ought to have been done in it, and would unquestionably have done it too . . . ~ Charles Dickens novel ~

11-18-2007, 05:05 PM	#14 (permalink)
Fischer-Fan Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Perth Posts: 147	I can't speak for all people on welfare, but the ones I've seen - who are longer term unemployed... NONE, NO-ONE, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM is happy to be on welfare. They are highly embarrassed, and do want to work. As we all know, welfare is a cycle - nothing to do with laziness. They money you get on welfare is minimal; it's enough to get by - and not much else. I personally, have no issue paying taxes to support these people. And I've got no problem if they use some of that cash to have a few drinks at the pub, or take their kids to the cinema's to see "Happy Feet"! It's called looking after people in our society who are less fortunate. Yes we shopuld help them move to work, the problem is they don't have the "experience" most employers are after. Picking up dog-sh*t at the pound (part time), hardly looks great on a resume; therefore - IMO - it isn't helping them one little bit. It's making them depressed, which only makes things worse. There is a place where people don't care about people, and want the less fortunate in our society living in the streets to suffer even more than they are now. That place is called America. __________________ Patzer see check, patzer give check! - Bobby Fischer

11-19-2007, 12:06 AM	#15 (permalink)
Iconoclast Immoderator Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Wollongong NSW Posts: 1,006	Originally Posted by Fischer-Fan NONE, NO-ONE, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM is happy to be on welfare. Mate, you are so right. My story (only part thereof): For years I would work my arse off on building sites in the summer months, then work my arse off at the snow fields in winter. In between I took "holidays." These are the "no work but paid days" that the holier than thou PERMANENT employees get. Well, these DOLE days are sooooo evil that you are made to feel as if you are filth, even when you are pulling your weight. Employers would often pay you AS IF you were still pulling the DOLE. Their businesses were thus being SUBSIDISED by the tax payer. Most of your liberal voting, right wing, tax dodging types are users and abusers of the system. PHKEM! EAT THE RICH __________________ The individual is hopeless without the group. The group is hopeless without its individuals.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: