Dole payments to be managed
I know we have had some heated debates on here of late but against my normal habits ACA has been on at home and caught a story on there that alomst made me fall out of my chair and wanted to get everyone else’s take on it.
The govt is planning to manage what people who receive welfare payments are allowed to spend it on, eg: alcohol and gambling are out, rent, utilities and food are in. As is the usual modus operandi for ACA they went out and interviewed some locals from the area it was to be trialed in. Needless to say they were not in favour of the scheme for various reasons none of which really had much credibility, only a desire to keep receiving something for nothing and spend it on whatever they please.
On the other side of the coin they had a 2ue broadcaster who made some valid points about they didn’t earn so why should they be allowed to choose what to spend it on.
Anyway I almost fell off my chair in surprise as I couldn’t believe that a Govt capable of such stupidity could come up with a such a policy. I’m hoping that this goes Australia wide, if you’re doing the right thing with your dole cheque and using it for rent groceries, utilities bills etc you really have nothing to worry about. As far as I’m concerned if you didn’t earn it you don’t deserve the right to spend it how you want.
What do the rest of you think?
I’m all for it!!!!!!
Why should others go to work in order to pay for someone that sits around all day, smokes, drinks and plays the pokies?????
F%$^ That!!!!!!
They should also be pickin up rubbish, cleanin graffiti and mowin/weedin our parks and bushland!!!!!!
If I was 18 again and sitting around drinking, smoking and skating I’d so NOOO WAYYY DUUUDE!!!!
But seeing as though that was 17 years ago and I’m now an entrenched (and bitter) taxpayer, I say screw em!! Go get a job ya lazy bastards!!!
Maybe they could have a $20 a week beer allowance though… It’d be unaustralian to deprive even the most obnoxious dole bludger his weekly six-pack.
But no smokes… It’ll just cost the health system more in the long run… And let’s face it… only a galah would suck tar 
long live the Bob Hawke Surfing Scholarship!
look all “good” Australians
if it doesn’t effect me and I’m all for it
baby bonus scheme - 5 years ago…pfft what a stupid idea…why we paying for people to have babies!
baby bonus scheme now….what they farking kidding me they taking it away!!
funny how circumstance changes your opinion on things
and like all good Australians i will take the quintessential fence sitting role
only to say…how much will be cost to implement/policy/upkeep?
**sorry dont know any finer details of the matter**
baby bonus was implemented to increase a population or taxation base to cover the cost of the Baby Boomer Generation and their medical/social welfare expenses
at the time it was implemented was to cater for the future where there were going to be more older Australians retired than those who were working
i don’t think it was a great idea (wrong people were having kids - as i was means tested - should have been more of a tax rebate or other system
Dole
the Dole in my parents time was a bad word, or had a bad stigma attached to it
my meaning of this was that it was the last resort for people. my grandparents and my parents would be mortified and ashamed to be on the dole
they didn’t think it was right for them to get a hand out, as there were people worse off than them - you have to remember that my/some of your grandparents were born/lived through the great depression - where they had nothing
i never had an option to think about the dole, my parents would disown me if i even considered the dole while i still have breath in my body
i guess i am the same - if you are fit enough to work you should work, to help the greater community/Australia as a whole if not your own sense of worth and improving your lot in life
if i’m paying more tax it means i’m earning more money 
unfortunately our government is wasting all that money, so next election vote better people into government please
SOZ i’m a bit bored today
that is part of the problem with democracy (as i see it)
the governments in power only focus on the term they are elected (which in terms of policies…is very short)
long term visions policies get shot down in flames or if they do happen they are rushed in
The cost to elect/re-elect is absurd
if this cost on both sides is channelled for something meaningful the world would be a better place
anyway ill stop dreaming in lah lah land cause thats part and parcel in the “cost” of freedom
anyway its Friday comic relief time
Sounds like a great idea to me.
i don’t think it was a great idea (wrong people were having kids - as i was means tested - should have been more of a tax rebate or other system
This is the exact reason it failed miserably, low income earners and those on benefits saw it as a way to supplement their income with a big cash injection. If you were living hand to mouth $5000 in one hit would be a great incentive, unfortunately it will be impossible to quantify if it has had any effect on the future, there are just too many variables. I believe now that apart from being means tested it is also restricted in what you can buy with the funds.
The dole management scheme is IMO the best piece of policy the govt has come up with in some time. Personally if I were in charge it would be a shedload harder to get any form of welfare. Having said that it is about 3% of the total govt spend, I wonder how much is spent on maintaining our enormous public sector?
Far too many people want something for nothing. . .
THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100…
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do..
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20”. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got $10!”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”
“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible
So what did ya spend ya $10 on, Chucky?????
Beer. 
Hope ya got me one too?????
I’ve only had my one free one today!!!!!
I have to agree on the sentiment of the “beer theory”
The more money you earn, the more tax you pay, fair enough.
The more you earn, the greater the % of your earnings you pay in tax, does not make sense.
Why do we penalise someone for going out, working hard and making lots of $$$$ ?
Would it not be better to make EVERYONE pay the same amount of tax, lets say through a higher GST?
Sweden has a flat tax rate of 33% or so. Its sweet. Seems high, but they have excellent schools, health care, infrastructure and all the rest. It’ll never happen cos aussies in general hate the idea of paying for something that might not directly benefit them.
Baby bonus since the last election, is now paid in smaller installments, to avoid people having babies just so they can get a 5K cheque.