Printable View
Everyone does have a fair crack. Having worked in government welfare and job network I can give you many examples of people dragging themselves out of the gutter to become a great success and also people sabotaging any job offer by being a dick eg (rocking up drunk first day).Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
I have interviewed 16yo kids whose ambition is to "get me pension". Anyone can be prosperous if they put in the hard yards.
nah. there are genuine mistakes with pay rates (as an employer, i encourage everyone to go look up the award rates handbook - my goodness if you think you're getting every shift exactly right every time then you're kidding yourself). One miscalculation if left unchecked can result in millions over the course of a few years if you have a lot of staff (like the companies you speak of). Every big company has HR and legal because......they need to make sure they are paying their staff correctly and have all their legal rights maintained. there are laws available to govts to prosecute employers who break their laws. i dont know any major company that has had a HR and legal staff working in conjunction with 'the bosses' to scam staff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
i used the Grill'd example because everyone made out like they were cheating their staff when it looks like they were acting legally but taking advantage of a govt program. again, there is a difference.
if you've got examples of this systemic illegal behaviour then please point me in the right direction.
The alternative is to actually make sure that people are treated with dignity, respect and to ensure irrespective of a person's background they have the same chances as everyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
That is it.
Now if it means multi-nationals get taxed. Large companies get broken up and the government nationalises certains industry to be able to do it. Then that is what we need to do.
Australia in 2019 should not have a single homeless person.
Australia in 2019 should not have old pensioners skipping macular degeneration injections because of a lack of money
Australia in 2019 should not have kids skipping meals
Australia in 2019 should not have a higher proportion of Indigenous peoples in custody
Australia in 2019 should not have the lowest unemployment benefit in the OECD
Australia in 2019 should not have a single person in poverty
It's the sheer number of companies involved. And it's not just restricted to dodgy cafes and fast food joints. Optus, Bunnings it's endless.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
And I'll say it straight out. Directors need to start being held criminally liable and be sent to gaol. This whole thing is systemic.
ok for context. the Bunnings "wage theft" (Albos words, not yours) was an average underpayment of around $90 per staff member affected (around $160 once interest and compensation was attached). So this big scandal of ****ing over the workers was really such a miniscule clerical error that multiplied over time into a big sexy number.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
in that same time their bills have gone through the roof, as has their taxes as the pollies find millions and billions more each time to fund submarines, blue cables and fix the great barrier reef. there is more theft going on via the government than any employer will ever sting them with.
if any worker out there thinks their employer was out to get them because they 'lost' the grand sum of about $160 over the course of 10 years then my god they need to understand what real struggle is.
now, your other point. im absolutely down with throwing any and all of the real ****ers behind bars. but we just had a royal commission into the biggest scumbags of them all (financial sector) and not one charge will be laid and not one day will be spent in jail.
even the ones that lost their jobs walked away with a payout. and again, that was both sides of politics that let all this slide. the one time the hippies want to listen to Hanson etc her appeals get no support in Parliament because theres no way the suits are gonna lock up their donors. that not how the system works.
and yes, the system sucks.
That the bit that Skirt Boy seems to missQuote:
Originally Posted by Jetmaster
The opportunity is there for all people in Western countries to have a prosperous life
So many ****s piss away the opportunity then they expect a ****ing hand out after they have failed to have a go
Under Skirt Boys view of the world those that actually did bend their backs and pay for the lazy ****ers who didn't
Then he will whine about some unfairness yet not see the unfairness he inflicts on those who are doing the right thing by holding down.employment and taking care of their own shit
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
To be honest I don't believe anyone in here, even you Jetmaster, has any real insight into the systems and lifestyles that "breed"/create welfare recipients. And I think that's a positive. The welfare system is trash, everyone agrees with that, the main difference it seems is that some of you want these people on the streets and into our hospitals with easily treatable diseases and spiralling further down a hole and some of us hope there's a better way.
I know wealthy people, and I know full well that they don't work hard for their money. The rich like to use the story of battling hard workers who blossom into millionaires to tease the sheep into thinking that hard work = success when it's pretty simple logic to understand that it doesn't.
Money breeds money. Poverty breeds poverty.
I'd be happy with a system that removes the second of those at a minimum, but I'm also on board for eating the rich and removing the first.
Real wages are growing slower than profits. That means workers incomes are not sufficient to purchase the goods and services they produce.
Hot tip. Real wages are determined with the cpi. Real gdp is determined with a gdp deflator.
You can't simply use nominal data as cpi takes into account both domestic and imported goods purchased as a basket for the the "normal consumer". The gdp deflator is only concerned with domestic incomes but for all goods and services produced including those not in the basket of goods the CPI takes into account.
In layman's terms the wages share of total income is shrinking and no matter how hard you work in aggregate your productivity gains are being appropriated towards profits not wages.
The Member is once again wrong. Some people will benefit but many will miss out.
None of this affects me but it certainly makes things hard for the younger generations - there are opportunities - but the day of simply choosing to work hard to make a good living are well and truly gone.
Governments control employment through their budgetary stance and they do this because of massive pressure from lobby groups over the past 45 years or more.
Unemployment exists because governments choose it - not because people don't want to work.
If the private sector wishes to save and the current account is in deficit then the only way to keep employment stable is for the government to run a deficit - it's not politics - it's arithmetic.
If you leave employment up to the private sector without any government involvement you have unemployment - and lots of it because the private sector is inherently unstable and incapable of producing full employment.
Of course the system benefits someQuote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
The system we have in place benefits those that are prepared to bend their backs at the expense of those wanting a handout
I am 100% for this
You are right that the government is a massive factor in this situation
The excessive levels of regulation and excessive levels if government that we have are a leech on the system and exacerbate the problems capitalism can bring
But that's simply not true. You don't get paid based on how much work you do, which is what you are trying to claim is how the system works.Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
Nowadays the main factors that determine what you get paid are outside of your control. (Country of birth, parents wealth, timing, availability of opportunities, etc).
And again, you talk about handouts but fail to recognise things like the $498 billion bailout from the 2008 recession. How does that compare to welfare payments??
Capitalism is a terrible system that only benefits a certain few. Unfortunately though, we don't have an alternative. So we are all screwed.
Even billionaires are victims of capitalism. There are no winners in terms of what Adam Smith or later on Karl Marx discussed with respect to people being "separated from their species being" through the division of labour. [Alienation and self-estrangement].
It doesn't matter how many tickets you can afford to buy in the raffle - the end prize is the same for all of us.
Despite being a communist sympathiser I do actually believe that capitalism works. But it needs to be highly regulated.
Some things that would bring fairness to the system.
1. Minimum wage based around the idea that a single person can afford a basic apartment, transportation and basic entertainment.
2. Rental controls based on the idea that rent is capped to 30% of a person's income. Rich people will still rent in rich suburbs, poor in poor suburbs. But what it does do is equalise rental costs to income.
3. Unemployed rate set at a level as a fixed percentage of the minimum wage.
4. Social Welfare insurance levy of 1% for workers and 5% for corporate entities. Setup similar to superannuation. After 12 months of continuous employment a person can receive up to 75% of the income of the last job and this decreases over time to the base unemployment rate.
5. Remove the medicare safety net and abolish gap payments and scrap private health insurance. Dental and optical to be fully covered by Medicare.
6. 100% free education. Entry to university to be purely by merit with allowances for disadvantage.
7. Remove tax concessions for entities with a gross revenue of a certain amount adjusted to inflation.
8. Introduce taxation to religious organisations.
9. Government to take over all charitable services with such services funded by the taxation of religion and the removal of aid grants to organisations who provide such services.
10. Baby/Education bonus. A lump sum is deposited into a special account similar to superannuation up on the birth of a child. Provided the child finishes school and gains qualifications (degree, trade) or full time employment for 5 years after finishing education. They have their house deposit.
11. Complete phasing out of fossil fuels for electricity generation and the cessation of export. National company established to mine, manufacture and sell renewable energy.
12. Renewal of the rail network.
13. Limit the size of trucks
14. Disability pension and aged pension to be set at the rate of minimum wage
15. Introduce proportional representation into parliament and double the size of members in the house of reps.
Remove the word University and I'm in. TAFE can be more useful than University for most industries, it's just not as profitable for the higher ups. If education is free, university's can fine tune their programs and TAFE can increase into more specialised centres. Trade school, business school, nursing school, IT school, etc. Yes, you'll need to travel to cities to get some specific degrees but you'll walk out with the correct skills to do the job. Rather than a degree that taught you half of what you need to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
thats gotta be the most rad post ive ever read on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
theres so much going on.
what about poor people that want to live in rich suburbs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
this is how the system already works.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
you have to meet the standards, and then theres other ways to get in if you dont yeah?
get them to eat more?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
supplements?
bah gawd, image how big Kim Beazley would have been under this policy.
House of Reps would look like a WWE road show.
Government is not hard. You could implement all of these policies and a few more in a similar way and Canberra would only need council workers to maintain the parks and run the museums. The problem is that nobody likes to give and everyone likes to take so the governments of the day generally do things that get them the most votes.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
It's up to the property owner to decide who ultimately rents. They simply have a limit to what they can charge.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
your whole manifesto up there is pretty much about taking shit off people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
whats to say they deserve to get it taken off them?
so poor people wont get a place at all. because someone is always gonna have more than the other guy to rent the joint. whats the motivator for the landlord to take less money and give it to a poor person?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
this policy does not work the way you intend it to.
It's full of compromise. You will notice that even the poor have to contribute to the social welfare insurance. The labour pool in mining can easily be transferred to manufacturing and transportation..............Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Let's look at it another way. A standard two adult, two kid family irrespective of whether they live in Windale or Rankin Park would in general terms have very similar cost of living expenses excluding housing. The same car rego, same light bills, same phone bills, same fuel bills. The difference is actually quite small. Yet because of income levels the rich as a proportion of income spend less.
What ideas like my manifesto float is to equalise the cost of living without preventing people from moving up and ensuring fairness.
Who wants to move to Windale or Hamo South?Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
i dunno, why wouldnt people want to live there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
yeah this here is some absolute codswallop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
this whole "yeah finish one job on friday start your new one monday" is some bullshit that keeps getting peddled.
im not sure you know the % of 'unskilled' labour up in the mines and to just say 'oh yeah dumptruck driver on $120k+ theres a job for you at the windmill on the same cash with no down period' is crap and you all know it.
meanwhile dumptruck driver still getting that mortgage hit every month, and his kids gotta eat every day. but yeah, im sure him and all the other TA's up there are cool cool with all the uncertainty of whether they have any sort of future based on the whim of Politicians eager to get in that photo with Greta.
legit nonsense.
No it's not. A dump truck driver can easily be transferred over into road truck driving. Providing we make our own renewables you still need drivers. You still need unskilled labour in manufacturing. You still need the unskilled labour to work on the rail renewal.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Skirt Boys version of capitalism looks awfully communist in appearance
Forcing people to accept lower than market value for providing of goods and services ain't gonna wash for anyone
Just as being told where you can live won't wash
Imagine being told to live in Woy Woy or Gosford ??
The problem with you communist sympathisers wanting to put your utopian dream on the rest of us is that you can currently go live in China or Nth Korea and live your dream now
Why don't you??
again, nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
road drivers earn about 1/2 what the guys in the mines do.
plus with an oversupply in the market why would any wages increase due to demand for drivers.So does the govt now subsidise wages? awesome, more middle class welfare. making renewables even more costly. exactly what you want.
its a lovely concept in theory but it just wont work. and this is where the argument always falls down, and why getting idiots like teenagers and bartenders to be your spokespeople is foolish.
its equivalent to just telling people "she'll be right mate" and no one wants to hear that about their livelihood.
no one.
Mining has always been boom and bust and people need to realise that. It's kinda stupid living the life of a person earning 120k a year when in 5 years you will be earning the average wage like the rest of society.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Theres enough coal to last 100 years under current rates. Why would something think the industry has only 5 years left?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
even as 'we' move away from it, they are still gonna export it to other countries.
you guys love telling other people how to spend their money. if hes on $120k and has a house and a couple of kids you'd be shocked to learn how little that kind of cheque covers.
why you want everyone else to be miserable just because y'all are?
Climate change...........................Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
I could add so much more but Messrs Memba and Plague are doing my talking for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
i mean, they set off not one but two ****ing nukes about 75 years ago and we all still out here going "you know what, those things are bad we should get rid of them".Quote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
legit, China Japan and India are building coal fired stations at a cracking pace. you think they are planning on shutting them down in 5, 10 or 20 years?
nah. we gonna be selling that black death for many many years to come.
oh wait, sorry forgot AOC said the world will end in 12 anyway. no need to stress, lets just party and hope the Jets get another Prem between now and Doomsday.
please dont group me and the Member together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetmaster
the only thing we agree on is the winner in the Messi v Ronaldo debate (and we are both right).
hes on his own island for the rest of it.
No one wants to build new coal fired power plants other than a select few nations, so once the current plants shut down who's gonna buy it? The boom is done. Investors are staying away from it, it's only the government trying to keep the dream going cause they don't want to the stress of revolutionising our economy without it.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
I used to work for a fabrication shop that probably made 80% of its money working on mining equipment but within 5 years us, and another 10 or so similar shops, either shut down or had to diversify. The coal beast is shrinking faster than you can imagine.
And the guy on $120k a year knows full well that he's not going to have that cheque long, if he doesn't get skilled up to find a new job then that's on him/her. Plus they will have decent welfare to fall back on in SBs world so don't worry too much.
No I ain't claiming that you get paid according to how much work you doQuote:
Originally Posted by Frodo
I am saying that you are successful when you work hard. That is a common theme in life for successful people
They actually work hard
Messi don't just rock up and kick a ball about on the weekend.
Tiger don't just stroll onto the first tee and shoot in the 60s
These guys work their arses off away from competition to be as successful as they are
Talent only gets them so far
Same as all that other crap you offered up
It only gets you so far
It what you do that determines whether you are successful or not
So working hard = success?Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
Cause that's an absolute load of BS. You show me 1 example of it and I can show a million other than don't.
There is absolutely no proof that working hard will guarantee you success, there's also little proof that successful people have worked hard. Most of them are just lucky enough to be born into the right family.
I could sit here and tear most of this socialist dream apart piece by pieceQuote:
Originally Posted by Skirt Boy
But let's just focus on 6 and 15
Why exactly are you suggesting initiatives that will institutionalise racism and sexism ??
Considering the left are all for Equal Opportunity and all that BS .....
Why exactly are you wanting to force weaker candidates into education opportunities over others who achieved better on merit and you do so based on their alleged victim status levels and secondly why do you wish to force quotas in parliament where you are trying to put token candidates in their based on their sex or race??
If they are good enough they get voted in the first place. There is a perfectly good reason why there is a small supply of women in parliament. The public does not vote based on whether the candidates have a vagina or not. They actually vote on who they think is the better candidate
Here is a giant problem with your stance you are actually trying to force ideas into practice that are sexist and racist in nature all the while failing to accept a merit based system
There are only a few guarantees in lifeQuote:
Originally Posted by Frodo
Just being born into the right family isn't one.
Everyone has opportunities and challenges
You though seem to be focused on the rich as you seem to envy and be jealous of them
There is only one man on the planet that I am envious of and if you are that worried about what others have and have not then that says more about you and your failings as a human