How can anyone possibly complain about Australian welfare?

SlavOz on 26/03/2020 - 11:31
Last edited 30/03/2020 - 14:51 by 1 other user

I'm sorry, but I have to vent here. I probably deserve the dose of stupidity I've experienced the last couple of days because it's my fault for spending so much time reading social media, but I really can't fathom how so many of our people have the nerve to complain about Australia's welfare system.

Our welfare is so good that the main complaint against it in recent years has been that it's too good. We have among the highest rates of tax redistribution in the world and have rightfully earned the moniker of a "welfare state".

Now we suddenly have a massive influx of unemployment, and Centrelink has agreed to waive the requirements to means test or even prove that you're looking for another job, and people are still complaining!

Where is this coming from? Have we really bred an entire generation of adult brats who have been taught that the world is an injustice if they don't get exactly what they want, when they want it?

Mod: Discussions are welcome and not everyone has the same point of view. If you are struggling, please see our Mental Health Wiki

Financial

Comments

      • gravel on 28/03/2020 - 09:01
        -1

        Oh so we measure of strength of our welfare system by comparison to the worst ( or close to it ). That's great logic. Try it at court. Your Honour I only robbed two houses but there are people that rob dozens I'm actually not that bad.
        A welfare system needs to be measured in isolation not in comparison with others.

        • JimmyF on 28/03/2020 - 10:41
          +1

          Oh so we measure of strength of our welfare system by comparison to the worst

          How do you 'measure' something without comparing it another welfare system? We only have one in this country, so we need to look 'elsewhere' if you want to compare it.

          The fact is people complaining how bad our system is, really don't understand how good it really is compared to other 'western' systems around.

          If I wanted to compare it to the worst, then I would compare it to places that don't even have these types of systems.

          A welfare system needs to be measured in isolation not in comparison with others.

          Bull dust, How do you know how good you have it unless you 'measure' it against others? If you want to piss and moan like the OP is, then go see how bad it really could be. If you lived in the USA you'll have something to whine about, if you lived in Asia, you'll have something to whine about.

          • gravel on 28/03/2020 - 11:18

            @JimmyF: "How do you 'measure' something without comparing it another welfare system" The same way you measure anything. Your confusing measurement with comparitive analysys. A welfare system aught to provide for those in need.
            So it's ok to have people way below the poverty line because that's the case in Asia? Now that's a great argument.

            • JimmyF on 28/03/2020 - 11:27

              @gravel:

              So it's ok to have people way below the poverty line because that's the case in Asia? Now that's a great argument.

              I'm guessing you're on the 'system' as you seem to think your hard done by and the world owes you so much than its giving you.

              Yes you should be thankful that Australia has a system unlike most of Asia, you should also be thankful that Australias is better than the USA system. Continue to piss and moan that Australias very is so bad, at least we offer a system. If you don't like what you're getting, there are other things you can do to get off the system. Its not a career.

              The fact you can't be grateful for what you're getting, is really a reflection on you, not the system or maybe you are right? Australias is so bad, lets just shut it down and stop payments as its a useless worthless system not delivering.

      • sarahlump on 28/03/2020 - 18:03

        I think you'e delusional. Go out tomorrow, quit your job, and see how long it takes you to find another job.

        • JimmyF on 28/03/2020 - 20:12
          -1

          I think you'e delusional

          Why? Because I don't agree with all the people on welfare that they should be paid more?

          Welfare isn't a career, its enough to scrap by until you get a job. So yeah you might have to go 'without' for a while. Boo hoo.

          If most people could rack in $1000/wk like they all think they should be getting while on welfare, then most people wouldn't even bother going to work and will sit at home and rack in $1000/wk each tax free.

          Go out tomorrow, quit your job, and see how long it takes you to find another job.

          I have no issue finding a job. I do mostly contract work. These contracts normally last between 6-18 months. So at the end of them, I do have to go out and find a new job. I've been finding a new job every 6-18 months when the contracts expires once my job is done, how about you? When was the last time you found a new job or had a job?

      • hayne on 27/03/2020 - 21:56

        I know you keep recycling this link. But the article lost me at the point where it explained that it calculates 85% of the “handouts“ to the “wealthy” as people saving for retirement (concessional rates for super) and to buy their family home (capital gains exemption on the family home).

      • darkchoc on 27/03/2020 - 22:05

        But home much tax does a wealthy person pay?

        https://www.firstlinks.com.au/marks-and-the-tax-system-expla…

  • trex on 26/03/2020 - 12:09
    +16

    There's nothing certain in life except for death, taxes… and people complaining…

    • Hamlet on 30/03/2020 - 11:19

      According to plenty of epidemiologist, you can add 'epidemics/pandemics' in there too…

  • iforgotmysocks on 26/03/2020 - 12:10
    +9

    Because complaining is fun

    • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 12:35
      +9

      Sigh. Hate it when people complain about complaining.

      • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 12:43
        +6

        Why do you have to go about complaining about complaining about complaining? That's hardly productive don't you think.

        • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 12:43
          +5

          Are you… complaining about complaining about complaining about complaining…?

      • kolorijo on 26/03/2020 - 12:44
        +2

        You're not having fun

      • Bargain80 on 26/03/2020 - 17:26
        +1

        I also hate people who hate people that complain about complaining.

  • CyberMurning on 26/03/2020 - 12:52

    Because we are human and human never satisfied

  • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 12:58
    +10

    The ones whinging are the loudest. A lot of people are grateful for the support they receive.

  • JimmyF on 26/03/2020 - 13:02
    +4

    We really bred an entire generation of adult brats who have been taught that the world is an injustice if they don't get exactly what they want, when they want it!

    There fixed that for you.

  • Caped Baldy on 26/03/2020 - 13:12
    +6

    People of all ages have become increasingly selfish. With the rise of the internet and social media especially, people are focusing on themselves and comparing themselves to others.

    • mskeggs on 26/03/2020 - 13:40
      +6

      This post is almost perfectly ambiguous.
      It can be read as critical of the unemployed, or equally, critical of the people complaining!

      • Caped Baldy on 26/03/2020 - 14:51
        +8

        I'm just trying to hate on everyone ;)

        • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 14:58
          +4

          and that's the spirit! ;)

    • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 13:44

      Have they though? Or is just the fact they can be anonymous from behind their keyboard made them more “vocal”?

    • Diji1 on 26/03/2020 - 15:06

      That's just basic consumerism bro. It started with lifestyle advertising in the 80s.

  • LuffyTuffyFluffy on 26/03/2020 - 13:18
    +10

    They confuse eligible for welfare with entitled to welfare.

    • tessel on 26/03/2020 - 16:02
      +1

      Hate it when people say "entitled". Your not entitled to anything. I always reply back with "eligible" blah blah but I don't think they pick up on the difference.

      • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 23:53
        +3

        I always reply back ‘you’re’. It’s a fun game.

        • tessel on 27/03/2020 - 07:51

          Then it gets wild with no full stops

  • aspirepranesh on 26/03/2020 - 13:28
    +20

    Seeing all of these welfare announcements, a co-worker/friend of mine who is currently on a Student visa , but hardly ever works (barely works 5 hours a week), travels/parties every weekend (sponsored by her family back in the UK) has the nerve to sign a petition for the govt to give students like her free rent or allow them to work more than 20 hours. Makes my blood boil when I see shit like this! I came here as as student in 2008 during the GFC and struggled, but never expected anything from the govt and have never once claimed welfare.

    I sympathize with the students(and anyone on student visas)/people who work hard and have lost their jobs and deserve help in this time of need. I personally know 3 people who have all held stable jobs for 10+ years, but lost their jobs recently and have to seek welfare for the first time ever! I hate to see my tax money go to people who are worthy of it and really need it than to someone who doesnt do shit but complains that nothing is ever enough!

    • aspirepranesh on 26/03/2020 - 14:34
      +3

      ^ I hate to see my tax money go to someone who doesnt do shit but complains that nothing is ever enough. I would rather have it go to someone who is worthy of it and really need it

    • zine21 on 27/03/2020 - 00:01
      -5

      Your co-worker signing a petition to allow students the ability to work more enrages you - yet you complain about them not working hard enough. There’s so much “me first “ mentality driving judgement and comments here

      • aspirepranesh on 27/03/2020 - 05:10
        +11

        Read my post clearly this time: My coworker is an International student. International Students are allowed to work 20 hours a week. I have been there. She has/had the opportunity to work 20 hours, but refuses to do so because she likes to travel and party. She was in Vietnam for 6 weeks partying and not working.

        Now that the Virus is here and people are losing jobs left right and centre, she has the nerve to ask for free rent or work hours increase. Why didnt she work for 20 hours a week over the last few months. She is just wanting an excuse for free rent so she can keep her partying life sustainable. This is the same person who went to Sydney last weekend from Brisbane to party when the govt was asking people to reconsider non essential travel.

        Why doesnt she work the extra 15 hours now when she can?

        If there was a student who works 20 hours a week, even if it means doing multiple jobs, I am willing to help in whatever way I can. FYI, my partner works in an international language school and we have are considering offering one of her hard working japanese students a place to stay free of cost if she is out of work. This is someone who is deserving of things.

        • MilkDrinker on 27/03/2020 - 08:50
          +4

          Is it possible that this overseas student is just supporting an idea to allow international students to work more than 20 hours a week?

          Surely a person like her would be ineligible for “free rent” if such an idea was passed?

          • aspirepranesh on 27/03/2020 - 09:01
            +2

            @MilkDrinker: You make a valid point - is this person doing this for the welfare of others?

            I thought the same initially, but her recent actions have shown that she has no concern for anyone. Here are a few examples:

            • Going to Sydney last weekend, when she could have gotten a refund for the flights. This is when the govt is pleading with people to avoid non essential travel.

            • partying all weekend in Sydney(proof from instagram stories) with over 50 people. Govt was urging people for social distancing to flatten the curve. Remember the group of Bondi backpackers who partied on the beach and now have all turned positive for Covid19!

            My wife has voluntarily stopped teaching at her international language school (doesnt get paid now) because we are afraid to spread the virus to some high risk people we know. It is only a matter if time the school will be shut. I still have a job working from home and have some decent savings and we are willing to do it for the sake of saving a few lives. We have friends in Italy Germany and the US who are pleading everyone to stay indoors and here is someone who goes to sydney just for the weekend to party.

            • gravel on 28/03/2020 - 09:06
              +1

              @aspirepranesh: It is unwise to construct policy based on a few examples ( either good or bad ). This is where the hatred of the unemployed and welfare generally comes from. " i have neighbours that get benefits and do nothing" .

              • aspirepranesh on 29/03/2020 - 16:09

                @gravel: I totally agree with you mate!

                Like I said, I can only state a good example and a bad example close to home!

                As International students, we all have to prove the financial records to support ourselves for 2 years before we even get into the country. That includes paying for rent, monthly expenses even in the event of not working.

                I can only state things from my perspective as an International student who came here during the 2008 GFC.

        • zine21 on 27/03/2020 - 09:04
          +2

          Why do you jump to the conclusion that I haven't read your comment ? I did - that's what made it bizarre. I'd understand complaining about her wanting rent assistance etc but her wanting to be allowed to work more isn't something that's negative and would help a lot of other international students that do work quite hard.

          • aspirepranesh on 27/03/2020 - 09:14

            @zine21:

            There’s so much “me first “ mentality driving judgement and comments here

            I have no idea what part of my comment gave you the impression that I was putting myself first over anyone else!

            I can understand and sympathise with the plight of someone who is working the full 20 and cant make ends meet in these conditions. I have been there myself, so I am not going to let someone go through the same and would rather help them!

            My issue is with someone who is not working the full 20 hours when she can. So why is she asking for free rent or even more hours.

        • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 28/03/2020 - 08:20

          She is just wanting an excuse for free rent so she can keep her partying life sustainable.

          Where are these parties right now?

          • aspirepranesh on 28/03/2020 - 09:48

            @Typical16-bitEnjoyer: As long as the bottle shops are open and people are allowed to get together without the cops enforcing things, house parties are a norm for her every weekend. Source:instagram videos from the last 3 weekends. Face-palm!!!! I am so glad that the clubs and the pubs are shut down.

  • mskeggs on 26/03/2020 - 13:35
    +88

    I find this post extraordinary.
    The unemployment rate is projected to double in the next fortnight.
    The unemployment benefit has just been doubled in recognition that it is unsustainably low to be fit for purpose.
    And the complaint is it is too generous?

    Maybe posters could explain their approach to dealing with short notice unemployment if they have been earning a limited income?
    Is there a budget that can save 6 months of income if you are earning $22 an hour but live in Australia with high housing costs and other expenses?

    If people complaining here lose their "secure" jobs, will they refuse all assistance?
    Is there a measure of time we should support people who can't find work before we forbid them welfare to keep them housed and fed?

    • mskeggs on 26/03/2020 - 13:37
      +39

      I realise part of the response is fear that your own preparations will be inadequate, with cratering stock markets and layoffs. But trying demonise people who have found themselves unemployed is pretty rank.

        • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 15:02
          +41

          Okay. What percentage of welfare recipients do you think have a 'comfortable lifestyle' or a mortgage? Firstly, many recipients were living fortnight-by-fortnight even before this crisis, and the ones who were job seeking or working part time now have that suddenly disappear. Affording food and rent is a far more plausible fear, especially as the bulk of new recipients were recently laid off from service jobs like hospo or retail… which we all know funds 'comfortable lifestyles' and home ownership. /s

          The system is not perfect, but the malcontents are a minority, so don't try to convince people otherwise. This is just another 'SlavOz punching down' thread, whether it's you complaining about female workplaces, or ads condemning abuse of fast food workers. Dragging welfare recipients was probably your next logical step, but complaining about complainers is the ouroboros of dumb internet grievances.

          • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 15:09
            +10

            @SydStrand:

            What percentage of welfare recipients do you think have a 'comfortable lifestyle'

            That percentage should be 0%. Welfare isn't supposed to let you live comfortably, it's (at most) supposed to help with the bare essentials. That's it.

            There are people out there working hard jobs for 40, 50, 60hrs a week who have barely comfortable lives. Why does someone who gets to laze in bed all day deserve the same level of living?

            • Strahany on 26/03/2020 - 15:20
              +17

              @HighAndDry: Someone who lazes around in bed, all day, does not deserve to be receiving a wage similar to that of someone working. When I was studying, I used to complain about my cohort who received ~half of my weekly earnings, on youth allowance, for 0 hours worked, whilst I had to sacrifice my weekends (and thus a 7 day/week roster) to earn what I did.

              But we're not talking about people who "laze in bed all day"; we're talking about people who receive welfare payments. Asserting that they are mutually exclusive, or even highly correlated, is being deliberately disingenuous and something that I would have like to have thought you're intelligent enough to avoid.

              • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 15:26
                +1

                @Strahany:

                Asserting that they are mutually exclusive

                Did you mean the opposite, e.g. that I'm asserting the two groups correlate exactly? In any case,

                we're talking about people who receive welfare payments.

                I was talking about people who receive welfare for unemployment. Even taking into account part time workers, students, etc - the welfare they receive does not correlate to any work done - that portion of their income they get for lazing around.

              • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 21:41
                +3

                @Strahany:

                When I was studying, I used to complain about my cohort who received ~half of my weekly earnings, on youth allowance, for 0 hours worked, whilst I had to sacrifice my weekends (and thus a 7 day/week roster) to earn what I did.

                Just because you had the time to work that much through your studies doesn't mean that a) everyone else does, or b) that we should therefore not help people while they study.

                Never ceases to amaze me how people denigrate uni students in this country. Taxpayers and the government subsidise universities and youth allowance/AusStudy etc. and in turn receive (on average) far more innovative and productive workers that boost the Australian economy. It's an investment for the government, not a handout.

                Do you think the student slaving away for 30, 40, 50 hours a week working and slotting in a lecture or a rushed assessment is learning and creating as much as one who has time and energy to commit to their studies? Many countries pay students a living wage just to go study, regardless of whether they apply or need it, as they know they will get better outcomes for the economy.

                • Strahany on 27/03/2020 - 09:28
                  +2

                  @[Deactivated]: I had 35 contact hours (32 if on clinical placement; unpaid) and was maintaining 20-35 hours of work, per week. You're preaching to the wrong person.

                  • [Deactivated] on 27/03/2020 - 10:32
                    -1

                    @Strahany: Sounds like I'm preaching to exactly the right person.

                    You more than anyone should know that your performance at university would be better if you weren't forced to work 20-35hrs a week.

            • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 15:24
              +16

              @HighAndDry:

              Welfare isn't supposed to let you live comfortably

              No one is claiming it is. But the notion that this is the 'real problem' of welfare is a canard, and the OP is attempting that age-old tactic of AM talk radio that frames welfare recipients as a bunch of moochers sucking at the taxpayers' teat. Does welfare fraud exist? Sure. Is it a big problem? Possibly. Is it what we should be complaining about now, when the vast majority of Centrelink payments (particularly new ones) are undoubtedly due to legitimate financial stress? Absolutely not.

                • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 15:52
                  +16

                  @HighAndDry: Okay, dude. The fact that you're assuming all welfare recipients are mooches 'lazing around' speaks volumes. How dare anyone be on Newstart and looking for work! It's their own fault for being laid off or between jobs!

                • miicah on 26/03/2020 - 16:23
                  +14

                  @HighAndDry:

                  All welfare is payment for zero productive work done.

                  Would you rather they just live on the street then?

                • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 28/03/2020 - 08:25

                  @HighAndDry: HighAndDry just simply hates the poor.

                  It's a recurring theme in their post history.

                  • markathome on 29/03/2020 - 18:23
                    +3

                    @Typical16-bitEnjoyer:

                    HighAndDry just simply hates the poor. It's a recurring theme in their post history.

                    Guess you could say…he wants to leave them high and dry?

                    Thank you. I'm here all night.

              • SlavOz on 28/03/2020 - 10:36
                -3

                @SydStrand:

                when the vast majority of Centrelink payments (particularly new ones) are undoubtedly due to legitimate financial stress?

                Do you have a source for this? Sounds like you're the one making wild presumptions about welfare recipients now.

                Did a lot of recent welfare recipients lose their jobs? Sure. Do some of them have savings to fall back on? Possibly. Do some of them still hold employable skills that would yield them a job if they looked? 100%.

                • SydStrand on 29/03/2020 - 01:46
                  +1

                  @SlavOz: Let me get this straight… MyGov crashing and lines outside Centrelink just happened to coincide with tens of thousands of workers recently being laid off? Or are you seriously chastising them for not finding new jobs the day after? The fact that your brain immediately defaulted to the 'incurable dole bludgers' theory speaks volumes about your thought process.

            • [Deactivated] on 27/03/2020 - 00:07
              +5

              @HighAndDry: Wrap your head around what welfare is, then make an informed comment. You explicitly said ‘welfare’ so how do we know you mean a specific section? Stereotyping and ignorance leads to hate and the spread of misinformation.

              There are all sorts of welfare - disability, aged pension, New Start/Jobseeker, Aus/ABSTUDY, Carer etc. From your comment, you are saying those with a disability shouldn’t be assisted to live comfortably, and away from the edge of poverty? That’s what it sounds like from your post.

          • Thaal Sinestro on 27/03/2020 - 06:07

            @SydStrand: Absolutely no way even 2 people on welfare (age pension, DSP, dole) can afford a mortgage on a (cheap) $500,000 home. Assuming you could get someone to lend you money on welfare, you would only be able to borrow around $100,000 on a single full pension.

        • gravel on 28/03/2020 - 09:10
          +1

          Actually you are demonising them and free money? What an odd way to look at welfare. If you NG an existing property your taxable income gets reduced and we pay for your wealth accumulation. Is that free money?

          • ozbjunkie on 30/03/2020 - 05:31
            +1

            @gravel: Actually yeah I'm pretty sure negative gearing is free money. Or at least a discount on speculation in the housing market. Which sounds like free money to me.

    • aspirepranesh on 26/03/2020 - 13:42
      +1

      I dont believe that the OP is complaining that it is too high!

      The complaint is that the people who receive these welfare saying that it is not enough for them! The ones who complain that it is not enough are those self entitled ones who have been on welfare for a long time and think it is their god given right and refuse to work or even look for work.

      I have no issues in my tax money being used to help someone in need, the hundreds of thousands who have suddenly lost their jobs.

    • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 14:09
      +5

      The unemployment benefit has just been doubled in recognition that it is unsustainably low to be fit for purpose.

      This is incorrect and almost deliberately misleading. It was increased as a stimulus to the economy, not because it was inadequate.

      Is there a budget that can save 6 months of income if you are earning $22 an hour but live in Australia with high housing costs and other expenses?

      Yes. I managed to save $10k over the course of a year while in full time uni, working 3 jobs. Oh and earning far below $22/hr.

      Worked weekends, plus a weekday, plus two weeknights.

      • aspirepranesh on 26/03/2020 - 14:26
        +8

        Yes. I managed to save $10k over the course of a year while in full time uni, working 3 jobs. Oh and earning far below $22/hr. Worked weekends, plus a weekday, plus two weeknights.

        ^ This! If people want to find a way to save, they will. I always find a whole heap of excuses when people are lazy or make bad financial decisions.

        There are certainly a few that work hard and still struggle to make ends meet. They deserve all the benefits they can get.

        • fossilfuel on 26/03/2020 - 21:52
          +1

          ^ This! If people want to find a way to save, they will. I always find a whole heap of excuses when people are lazy or make bad financial decisions.

          Completely agree. I know people who make a killing but save nothing because they're eating out every meal, getting multiple coffees a day and buying frivalous wants like a new coat from Superdry. It's not that hard to buy half price stuff at woolies/coles to make a cheap and delicious meal, making instant coffee and wearing basics from Target/Kmart.

      • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 15:16
        +20

        Yes. I managed to save $10k over the course of a year while in full time uni, working 3 jobs. Oh and earning far below $22/hr.

        When I was studying, I spent 35-40 hours a week in lectures, pracs, and internal rotations + 12-20 weeks of extramural placement a year.. which meant I couldn't work during holidays, while adding travel and lodging costs. Austudy + rent assistance barely covered my $200-250pw rent (pretty standard for Melbourne) but not utilities, food, or fuel - forget holidays, eating out, or big ticket purchases. I took 1-2 week night shift for the first couple of years, until the workload made it untenable. If my parents didn't help me out, I would not have been able to afford it.

        While it's nice that you could work as much as you did during uni, there are many people who simply can't. The notion of saving even 1 month of income in my situation was impossible, let alone $10k over a year.

        • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 15:22
          -6

          $200-250pw rent

          Be honest. Is this the an absolute cheapest you could find? (Hint - no, you can find a room in Sydney for $150/wk).

          That leaves $100 extra for "utilities, food, or fuel".

          I took 1-2 week night shift for the first couple of years, until the workload made it untenable.

          Untenable or just tiring? Because yeah, I was tired that whole year. Didn't go out much, slept when I could, including in lectures that I would record.

          forget holidays, eating out, or big ticket purchases.

          The fact you even mention these says it all. What right do you have to ask taxpayers to foot the bill for your leisure spending?

          I would not have been able to afford it.

          Ok. My point is that I could save up even despite uni. A uni degree isn't an entitlement or a right. If you can't afford it, whether ability, energy, or money wise, then you can't afford it. What do you do with any other luxury expense that you can't afford?

          • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 15:43
            +32

            @HighAndDry:

            Be honest. Is this the an absolute cheapest you could find?

            Right. Shame on me for paying $200pw rent in a 5 person share house and not a 10 person party house while studying for a doctorate.

            Untenable or just tiring? Because yeah, I was tired that whole year. Didn't go out much, slept when I could, including in lectures that I would record.

            Untenable. Tiring was the first two years. When I started pulling nights and was on-call, yes, it was untenable. Also, you can stop with the gate-keeping. Many people had to take their lumps in uni, and without knowing the exact situations of each individual case, it's extremely presumptuous to assume that others can tolerate the same amount of financial stress while attempting to pass.

            The fact you even mention these says it all. What right do you have to ask taxpayers to foot the bill for your leisure spending?

            Oh, please. I don't, nor did I expect it. This is a response to the insinuation that welfare recipients are somehow living it large. If I could barely afford to eat out with friends every once in a while, then I definitely wasn't using Centrelink payments to fund a comfortable lifestyle or a mortgage.

            Ok. My point is that I could save up even despite uni.

            Cool. And others can't. Lets leave that there.

            A uni degree isn't an entitlement or a right. If you can't afford it, whether ability, energy, or money wise, then you can't afford it.

            What an inspiring message for Australia's young: higher learning is for the privileged, unless you happen to also be studying a degree that allows you to work yourself to the bone.

              • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 16:08
                +14

                @HighAndDry:

                How far from uni/the CBD?

                30min. But the fact you're taking this new angle in an attempt to invalidate my experience is rich.

                Other people weren't doing the same?

                Other people were either lucky enough to have family help, or borrowed. This should not be the state of public university in Australia, where higher education should be available for any who aspire to it, and entry is determined by ability rather than money.

                • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 17:16
                  -4

                  @SydStrand: You paid more for better accommodations. That's the point all along - you didn't have to pay that much, you paid that much because you felt the extra price was worth the benefit.

                  You don't then get to turn around and cry about it when you're getting the benefit of paying more.

                  • SydStrand on 26/03/2020 - 17:29
                    +6

                    @HighAndDry: So you think my housing situation wasn't crummy enough to deserve an opinion on Austudy. It guess it's my fault for spending an extra $7 a night for slightly more livable housing during study. You have such wonderful opinions!

                    • ozbjunkie on 30/03/2020 - 05:35

                      @SydStrand: Not to mention living twice as far from uni would eat up that $7 on public transport each day.

              • miicah on 26/03/2020 - 16:25
                +18

                @HighAndDry:

                How far from uni/the CBD?

                Oh lets all get into a pissing match, because "I lived 4 hours from the CBD to go to uni 8 hours a day then worked my 14 hour night shift only to come home and sleep for -2 hours before I had to go to uni again!"

                (profanity) off

                • ThithLord on 26/03/2020 - 16:28
                  +9

                  @miicah:

                  14 hour night shift only to come home and sleep for -2 hours

                  You got two hours of sleep? Luxury! Pure luxury!

                • HighAndDry on 26/03/2020 - 17:17
                  +1

                  @miicah: Literally the point is that everything has a price. Pay more for better accommodations, don't cry later that you're saving less.

                  Spending more means saving less. That's not rocket science.

                  • zine21 on 27/03/2020 - 00:52
                    +9

                    @HighAndDry: It’s funny how this post is full of your bs comments claiming people are “crying” about xyz when you’re on this platform complaining non stop about supposed scenarios you think are unfair.

                    education is not - and should never be a luxury. It shouldn’t be reserved for those with financial means since it will create groups that are chronically left behind.
                    if you’re recommending individuals should just work 24/7 and sleep in the lectures - why bother at all ? Don’t take these classes just work 3-4 jobs and forget study all together - it’s a luxury after all right ? Let the rich cement their positions and create social hierarchies that are impossible to bridge, and while we’re at it lets kick all and any that may be struggling in any way - cause how dare they accept poor little ‘highanddry’s hard earned tax payments. No -no - no we need to encourage a “ me first “ attitude in order to allow humanity to thrive in the jungle. Survival of the fittest right ? Why stop there though - lets allow the virus to do its job - get rid of the weak for us. The elderly, immunocompromised or any other weak chains don’t deserve to live after all they’re just wasting our precious tax payers money and resources. Why is it our responsibility to keep them alive. right ?.

                    Selfish people like yourself should try living in the jungle but I’m afraid people like you have also destroyed those habitats so you may struggle.

                      • zine21 on 27/03/2020 - 08:08
                        +3

                        @HighAndDry: Basic humans rights. I know it’s tough for you to comprehend.

              • [Deactivated] on 27/03/2020 - 00:14
                +6

                @HighAndDry: It’s clear from your posts you believe you know everyone’s personal circumstances and what they need to do with their lives.This attitude is not one that fits with what you’re studying and I can’t see you being successful whilst you harbour it. Your grasp on the fundamentals of the welfare system seems lacking and you sound obnoxious.

                • HighAndDry on 27/03/2020 - 01:37
                  +3

                  @[Deactivated]: I know no one's circumstances but I have an idea of what every adult's obligations to society ought to be.

                  Being financially responsible and self sufficient are, to me, fairly basic requirements to be a useful member of society.

        • Emerald Owl on 26/03/2020 - 19:02
          +3

          I'd like to echo your point. In my degree, albeit a demanding one, the University expects 30-40s hours study on top of attending class, which takes 20ish hours. Add onto that 9 hours commuting and im spending 70 hours a week on it.

          Youth Allowance is even lower than Austudy, it is simply not enough money to cover rent, etc. On top of working an extra 20 hours a week to survive, totalling a 90 hour work week, it is killing me.

          I'd say this is why USYD has such an overwhelming number of private school kids. In order to stay academically competitive, you can't be working much, which requires wealthy parents. Alternatively, students from selective schools tend to have Asian parents, who tend to more proportionately sacrifice alot for their adult children and where it is accepted culture for children to live at home well into adulthood.

          I'd say that we should go full American and house way more students on-campus. Further, instead of housing mainly rich and privileged students on-campus because their parents pay high fees, the Universities should house low income students. Reduce youth allowance to $100 a week and provide on-campus housing.

      • Emerald Owl on 26/03/2020 - 19:08
        +8

        Do you understand that most people live pay check to pay check and simply cannot afford to go weeks without money? Also, no companyies where linkedin is used for recruitment are hiring right now. You are out of touch.

        • srr on 26/03/2020 - 19:44
          +6

          I just don't understand how they manage to live exactly pay check to pay check but can't do budgeting and save some money for the rainy day. I.e. they already do budgeting! And they execute their budget perfectly pay check to pay check.

          • Emerald Owl on 26/03/2020 - 20:22
            +4

            @srr: I'd agree, but most people are financially illiterate and fail to plan. Further, they know that welfare is there and will not hesitate to say gimme gimme.

            • RockyRaccoon on 26/03/2020 - 23:56
              +2

              @Emerald Owl: both you and Slaveoz need to get out more.

              You both use bs terms, to further your arguments.

              Them “a lot”
              You “most”

              No stats, just personal opinions.

              So both could be right and both could be wrong 😀

              • Emerald Owl on 27/03/2020 - 18:31

                @RockyRaccoon: What makes you think I need to get out more?

                I know the stats and most Australians live pay check to pay check. Don’t complain about stats if you don’t provide your own.

          • Emerald Owl on 27/03/2020 - 18:32

            @srr: They don’t budget. They just spend money when they have it and stop spending when they don’t.

        • darkly on 27/03/2020 - 08:55

          Also, no companies where linkedin is used for recruitment are hiring right now.

          Says who exactly?

          There are plenty that are still hiring, and plenty of alternatives to that one dream job if you want to earn some moneyinstead of going on welfare (see Coles/Woolworths). These linkedin companies would rather see resumes with continuous work history than large periods of unemployment.

          My father, an accomplished businessman of 30 years couldn't find a fitting job for almost 6 months but still took up a job as a bus driver until he landed the one he really wanted.

          • hayne on 27/03/2020 - 23:10
            -2

            @darkly: @ndwalters. If you think plenty of employers are hiring right now, you’re living in a fantasy land.

            35,000 employees were stood down in three days. Coles/Woollies hiring isn’t going to absorb even those. Leading economists are predicting 800k jobs will go by June. (https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business…).

            Most businesses are reeling. Very few are considering hiring right now. You’re completely out of touch with what’s going on.

      • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 23:49
        +4

        Imagine if all those lining up outside Centrelink spent the day learning how to write a killer resume, updating their LinkedIN profile, and preparing applications and cover letters to potential employers.

        What? This is a bloodbath for white and blue collar workers alike. The market is being flooded with labour and no one is hiring. Starving is an interesting choice of words given the choice between food and rent thousands are now being forced to make.

        If you seriously think all poor people have no savings because they’re wasting it on luxury cars and iPhones, I’d suggest you’ve never experienced an ounce of true hardship in your life and have a narrow privileged view of the world.

    • [Deactivated] on 26/03/2020 - 14:50
      +16

      Is there a budget that can save 6 months of income if you are earning $22 an hour but live in Australia with high housing costs and other expenses?

      Uh, studied full time, had a part time job and paid rent and had savings.

      It's not hard at all. Just didn't buy a TV, had an old phone, rode an old bike and learnt to be self sufficient.

    • gromit on 26/03/2020 - 18:51
      +4

      The rate wasn't doubled because it was unsustainably low, it was doubled because those on welfare tend to be spenders and would inject the money back into the economy.

    • greatlamp on 27/03/2020 - 07:33

      I doubt most people in the service industry even get $22 an hour.

  • ddn2004 on 26/03/2020 - 13:41
    +1

    Maybe we should keep the asset and means test, mutual obligation and not have the coronavirus suppliment.

    • toliman on 27/03/2020 - 03:30
      +4

      Only problem with the idea is the numbers of people.

      If you put 2 to 5 million people on ~$250/week, $12k/yr. You might get riots and mass suicides happening. It looks attractive to some, but it's going to be accompanied by housing problems, transport costs, rates and utility rises etc when less people are paying bills or buying necessary items.

      Recession fears and an isolated, broken down population with mass anxiety and depression, could turn dark.

      Big picture,

      The "understood" 5.1% unemployed is 700k people as of February 2020 and ABS stats… IIRC.

      Under-employed, people who work less than 20h/week, parents, etc are 8.3%, about 1.1m and includes students, AusStudy, disability support, carers, parents, some retirees, TAFE, volunteers, and people on Newstart / Jobseeker who are self employed, do casual hours, or on Work for the Dole, etc. About 20k to 180k shift between unemployed and under employment each month, but it would likely be what Centrelink, now Service Australia handle regularly.

      Part Time work force is 4.2 million
      Full Time is 8.7 million, which is a rough working population of 13 million people.

      Another 2.8 million are retires / parents who aren't working or looking, etc.

      The available jobs, is around 1.2% of the working population, around 150k jobs for the 1.8 million people, that ~13.5% on Jobseeker payments, but also including the possible 30% the 4 million part time workforce.

      With the pandemic, most part time work will freeze up, pushing around 4 million people on a system re-designed badly to cover "up to 2 million" optimistically. Not all, it's a possibility. Some jobs will have a short term boost.

      Even then, there are perhaps 20k staff to handle 2 million people. Expect failure, delays of months, and simply losing paperwork, dropped phone Calls, etc. Whatever idea you have of Centrelink, it's probably better than the reality.

      And, around every few years, it gets an upgrade instead of replacement or retrofit, which slows down work as people relearn or find bugs in the software left behind. Or a "genius" feature like robodebt or automated appointments break the entire system, or drop/lose people entirely. There would be a few unique horror stories in the last 10 years, inevitably.

      The "intent to claim" queues, can likely handle 0.1% of the old workforce a month, or 13k claims a month is my guess.

      it may take 16 months (all those part time workers) registered and attending obligations, but it would have to be processing 100k applications a month, for 2 years… So they'll probably have to hook directly into the ATO records and systems to get that kind of Bureaucracy fast-tracked.

      It's also going to push the local 3rd party Job Search Providers into a bloodbath as they handle the brunt of the administration and paperwork, with 50-100 people a day having to apply for the same 20 or 40 jobs a fortnight, etc.

      Last time this happened, a lot of the agencies got caught exploiting people or setting up pyramid schemes, because they get commission on how long someone has been in the system. Fattening up the herd for 6 months, then Leveraging work with a 'local business', etc.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join