Did Jobkeeper cause more people to not work because they earn more money under Jobkeeper versus casual work?
What other negative effect did the Jobkeeper do? Rort is quite possible, and looks like the gubmint doesn't care.
Jobkeeper Negative Effects
spychiatrist on 14/09/2020 - 23:20
Related Stores
Comments
How much money do you make in a year?
I am a reasonably high earner and don’t mind paying taxes to support those who are less fortunate as one day I may need help you just don’t know what is around the corner. In fact I’d pay more to get people off the street. Maybe you should think the same, you are one stroke or accident from being there.
Government debts are never paid off. All they have to do is to hit the printer when they need more.
https://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/coronavirus-cov…
Do you believe that high income earners work harder than low income earners?
That has nothing to do with the issue.
High income earners will be burdened by taxation disproportionately to low income earners.
High inciome earners don't get any of the welfare benefits whilst the low end continue to take and take.
Do you believe that high income earners work harder than low income earners?
If you do a direct comparison, maybe not… but the majority almost certainly did a lot more previously to get that higher income they're getting now.
Also, the higher paid jobs are not necessarily "harder" than the lower paying jobs in terms of the volume of work. But the high paying positions tend to have a lot more responsibilities and it's much more taxing on the brain. It's not as easy as switching off and going home after work. Someone putting you in such a role means you've proved that you are likely able to be trusted to fulfil the duties in that role and the salary should match accordingly.
- The overpayment for some individuals who previously worked less.
- Similar to above but acting as a wage subsidy for those with multiple casual jobs where one is in an essential service.
- The excess administration work from both employers and ATO, Treasury etc for both claims, processing and fraud checks.
- The selective targeting of who is deemed to be eligible by the government (ie: no staff at universities, big banks etc)
- The exposure of company structures in trusts etc which were used to reduce tax now wanting to claim. ie: real estate agents were an example
- Employers could choose who would remain on jobkeeper and this may have favouritism OR it may lead to the worker declining to return to work at the same hours
- Zombie companies and once off revenue generating companies could apply
- Artificially understates unemployment and underemployment
- Sector specific timelines such as childcare
- Aimed at keeping staff on the books for a short period and expectation of a return to normal - not the case therefore will still cause waves of letting go.
- Administered via employer causing extra costs to the business in accounting etc
- Blanket approach vs targeting areas that are most affected by lockdown effects
- Cost blowout vs return
- Should have just provided payments to everyone…simpler, less administration, and recycles the funds through the economy.
Its clear that it was meant to be a temporary measure/bandaid
People not all rushing out to work is kind of a plus point, when it comes to covid states. How many more people would have been moving about if not for jobkeeper, accepting any job they can because they can't even afford to just stay at home without stressing about debt.
The money may have been better spent elsewhere, but I didn't hear anyone come up with better ideas at the time. Jobkeeper was better than inaction. I think the ALP would have come up with a more elegant solution as the ALP sees Centrelink and taxes as social tools and not as political tools, but they weren't in power.
There is no more elegant solution, Jobseeker/Jobkeeper was a band-aid and it worked no point attacking them over it. The question is now that there is time to plan can the LNP put together a plan that keeps the cash flowing but actually creates some value for Australians.
So far they've failed but I guess they get a few more chances before the election.
You have identified a critical point, in my view, about how the Federal government handled the COVID economic impacts.
Leaving aside the late to act, they established a 'National Cabinet' with each state leader and the Feds represented. One problem with that is that the major opposition party was not represented at a Federal level, when they probably have some members who are more skilled / educated in the key areas of policy that needed to be managed. I imagine that was purely a political move.
Another problem is that a 'National Cabinet' provides no transparency, as Cabinet discussions are deemed to be confidential. So when we see the PM and the Premiers saying different things, we don't really know what was agreed (or not agreed to) during those meetings.
I think you have gotten Job Seeker and Job Keeper mixed up.
It did kinda sound like that…
The worst impact is high income earners will have to repay this debt, whilst low income Australia keep their snouts in the trough.
I despise Socialism.