 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Skids context was based on many visits to such communities. That is valuable and real context.
If the federal govt numbers replace state expenditure, then unless the states are spending twice as much on non-aboriginal communities, his point remains that overall spending per year on aboriginal is around twice as high.
It was, I repeat, a quality post based on real experience plus hard numbers, whether you like the implications or not.
If you have better numbers, by all means post them.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:27 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
 |
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | If they were still down the mines from 12, none of this would be happening. If we marched them all to war against cannons as infantrymen with bayonets, none of this would be happening. If we made sure they were weakened by diseas and malnutrition, none of this would be happening. If .... |
Yes, the poor are so much better off than the middle ages and the neanderthal days . What the hell is wrong with them? They have no excuse, if only they could learn to behave like the rest of us.
I was raised in a hole in the ground and we were lucky, no crime then. We thanked our overlords, twice daily. |
Only the modern left could see violent crime as a consequence of better living standards for the poorer parts of our society. But then, the modern left has always been a libertarian movement devoted to removing tiresome restraints from the middle classes. The poor and precarious, who live in places where the thugs roam, cannot afford sarcasm about this, even sarcasm as cut-price as that above.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | Skids context was based on many visits to such communities. That is valuable and real context.
If the federal govt numbers replace state expenditure, then unless the states are spending twice as much on non-aboriginal communities, his point remains that overall spending per year on aboriginal is around twice as high.
It was, I repeat, a quality post based on real experience plus hard numbers, whether you like the implications or not.
If you have better numbers, by all means post them. |
You're a smart guy but do not accept the numbers as they are. Question the numbers.
If you choose to blindly accept whole numbers, not address the fact that state governments historically took monies away from they were meant to be spent, ignore cultural factors like kinship networks then you would find the numbers meaningful.
It was a less than informed post without context. But go ahead accept what you like sans explanation. Just because Skids may have worked there does not make him an expert on where & how money is spent. Good on him for being a plumber & if we need plumbing issues he should be number 1 but I would not expect a plumber to have detailed knowledge on federal & state expenditure.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Last edited by watt price tully on Thu Jul 13, 2017 12:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | Pies4shaw wrote: | | If they were still down the mines from 12, none of this would be happening. If we marched them all to war against cannons as infantrymen with bayonets, none of this would be happening. If we made sure they were weakened by diseas and malnutrition, none of this would be happening. If .... |
Yes, the poor are so much better off than the middle ages and the neanderthal days . What the hell is wrong with them? They have no excuse, if only they could learn to behave like the rest of us.
I was raised in a hole in the ground and we were lucky, no crime then. We thanked our overlords, twice daily. |
Only the modern left could see violent crime as a consequence of better living standards for the poorer parts of our society. But then, the modern left has always been a libertarian movement devoted to removing tiresome restraints from the middle classes. The poor and precarious, who live in places where the thugs roam, cannot afford sarcasm about this, even sarcasm as cut-price as that above. |
You're right, I'll get off your high horse. I know, its the 1960's wot done it.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The bigger the population, the bigger chance of more dickheads.
Australia's population has increased from roughly 16 million in 1986 to 24 million 30 years later.
That's a whopping 50% increase and it stands to reason that with far more people and more diversity that can bring it's own associated problems comes more chance of a crime being committed.
The reality might be that the ratio of crime committed per person may not change a great deal across the years but if you have millions of more people committing thousands of more crimes across the years our perception will change along with it as there is a constant flow of incidents the media can now report on and police need to intervene in.
If you think about it our perception of actual population growth would be marginal in comparison because our habits of living our daily life rarely change across the decades and we continue to live within our own bubble of family, close friends, school and work.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
No argument to make about a moral issue ?
1. Try sarcasm and misrepresentation.
2. If that doesn't work, try the "high horse" or the (assumed) "privilege" gambit and the eye roll.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| swoop42 wrote: | The bigger the population, the bigger chance of more dickheads.
Australia's population has increased from roughly 16 million in 1986 to 24 million 30 years later.
That's a whopping 50% increase and it stands to reason that with far more people and more diversity that can bring it's own associated problems comes more chance of a crime being committed.
The reality might be that the ratio of crime committed per person may not change a great deal across the years but if you have millions of more people committing thousands of more crimes across the years our perception will change along with it as there is a constant flow of incidents the media can now report on and police need to intervene in.
If you think about it our perception of actual population growth would be marginal in comparison because our habits of living our daily life rarely change across the decades and we continue to live within our own bubble of family, close friends, school and work. |
True, swoop, so it's the rate that matters. Most crime stats report incidents of x or y type, per 100,000 people. In the Uk this shows a dramatic rise in murder+attempted murder+GBH since the early 1970s. This number rose About 8x between 1965 and 2000. Population in that time sent up about 40℅. I reckon Australia will have seen about the same over that period, though there does not seem to be a comparable dataset.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | Skids context was based on many visits to such communities. That is valuable and real context.
If the federal govt numbers replace state expenditure, then unless the states are spending twice as much on non-aboriginal communities, his point remains that overall spending per year on aboriginal is around twice as high.
It was, I repeat, a quality post based on real experience plus hard numbers, whether you like the implications or not.
If you have better numbers, by all means post them. |
You're a smart guy but do not accept the numbers as they are. Question the numbers.
If you choose to blindly accept whole numbers, not address the fact that state governments historically took monies away from they were meant to be spent, ignore cultural factors like kinship networks then you would find the numbers meaningful.
It was a less than informed post without context. But go ahead accept what you like sans explanation. Just because Skids may have worked there does not make him an expert on where & how money is spent. Good on him for being a plumber & if we need plumbing issues he should be number 1 but I would not expect a plumber to have detailed knowledge on federal & state expenditure. |
This is not a subject I know well, so if you have more integrated numbers between state and federal expenditure, that may certainly change my view. On the face of it the spending is a big disparity, but I'm open to revising my view if you can show that these numbers don't reflect the reality.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
For me, the numbers Skids put up along with a few other of his stories about remote communities, just proves 1 point.
We can't fix those issues by throwing money at them.
Arguing over the whether the numbers are correct because of political accounting is pointless because the actual amount is irrelevant in the context.
fact is we spend a lot of money on indigenous issues and get far call ROI from what's intended. More money isn't the answer, it's better oversight on where, how and what to spend it on to actually make a difference.
I also like Swoop's point. The only problem with that is he assumes the number of dickheads as a percentage of population remains the same where in fact, it's increasing.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | For me, the numbers Skids put up along with a few other of his stories about remote communities, just proves 1 point.
We can't fix those issues by throwing money at them.
Arguing over the whether the numbers are correct because of political accounting is pointless because the actual amount is irrelevant in the context.
fact is we spend a lot of money on indigenous issues and get far call ROI from what's intended. More money isn't the answer, it's better oversight on where, how and what to spend it on to actually make a difference.
I also like Swoop's point. The only problem with that is he assumes the number of dickheads as a percentage of population remains the same where in fact, it's increasing. |
They're not dickheads, just greedy, lazy, self important, <snip>heads who should do hard labour to earn their place back in society. Criminals I mean.
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Skids 
Quitting drinking will be one of the best choices you make in your life.
Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Location: Joined 3/6/02 . Member #175
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | Mugwump wrote: | Skids context was based on many visits to such communities. That is valuable and real context.
If the federal govt numbers replace state expenditure, then unless the states are spending twice as much on non-aboriginal communities, his point remains that overall spending per year on aboriginal is around twice as high.
It was, I repeat, a quality post based on real experience plus hard numbers, whether you like the implications or not.
If you have better numbers, by all means post them. |
You're a smart guy but do not accept the numbers as they are. Question the numbers.
If you choose to blindly accept whole numbers, not address the fact that state governments historically took monies away from they were meant to be spent, ignore cultural factors like kinship networks then you would find the numbers meaningful.
It was a less than informed post without context. But go ahead accept what you like sans explanation. Just because Skids may have worked there does not make him an expert on where & how money is spent. Good on him for being a plumber & if we need plumbing issues he should be number 1 but I would not expect a plumber to have detailed knowledge on federal & state expenditure. |
No claim to being an expert on anything WPT, funny how my occupation seems to have me in some sort of uneducated moron category at every opportunity you can grasp 
Here you go, someone did... http://theconversation.com/factcheck-qanda-is-30-billion-spent-every-year-on-500-000-indigenous-people-in-australia-64658
Review
I have reviewed this FactCheck. Mundine was right on the figure of $30 billion; total direct expenditure on services for Indigenous Australians in 2012-13 was estimated to be $30.3 billion, as detailed on page one of the Productivity Commissions 2014 report. Based on the 2011 Census, the Indigenous population was approximately 550,000 people, with most living in urban areas. Researcher Sara Hudsons August 2016 report, published by the Centre for Independent Studies, outlines the continued waste and duplication of government funding as raised by Mundine. Dennis Foley.
While its true Warren Mundine used the most up-to-date figures, his quote didnt quite convey the full story. It didnt get across the fact that only a really small chunk of the overall Indigenous spending is on Indigenous-specific programs. Most is on mainstream programs.
As the article notes, Productivity Commission estimates that only $5.6 billion or 18.6% of the $30 billion Mundine refers to is provided through Indigenous-specific or targeted services. The Productivity Commission does not examine how much of this $5.6 billion actually goes to Indigenous organisations within community or Indigenous peoples themselves and how much is spent on government businesses.
Warren Mundines broader point that current spending is not yielding results needs further attention. The governments Closing the Gap targets are nowhere near being met, and in some cases, widening, suggesting that these programs are, by and large, failing. Policy logic underpinning spending should be examined. Elise Klein.
As Stui noted - "We can't fix those issues by throwing money at them."
I only highlighted this in response to Davids quote about crime being linked to poverty. The whole throwing money at a problem and not fixing it is another issue.
_________________
Don't count the days, make the days count. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Criminal shcriminal, the number of dickheads per capita is on the rise and education has nothing to do with it.
My team deal with highly educated dickheads every day. *
*caveat, some of them are actually smart. 
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | Criminal shcriminal, the number of dickheads per capita is on the rise and education has nothing to do with it.
My team deal with highly educated dickheads every day. *
*caveat, some of them are actually smart. |
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Morrigu 
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Skids wrote: | | No claim to being an expert on anything WPT, funny how my occupation seems to have me in some sort of uneducated moron category at every opportunity you can grasp |
Have you never noticed that your eyes and ears are painted on then? 
FWIW I worked in many remote communities ( a good many years ago now granted) as a nurse and quite frankly a plumber was in many instances a bloody side more useful!!
A significant amount of funding never reached where it should because of tribal and kinship affiliations - harsh but true!
_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Morrigu wrote: | | Skids wrote: | | No claim to being an expert on anything WPT, funny how my occupation seems to have me in some sort of uneducated moron category at every opportunity you can grasp |
........
FWIW I worked in many remote communities ( a good many years ago now granted) as a nurse and quite frankly a plumber was in many instances a bloody side more useful!!
A significant amount of funding never reached where it should because of tribal and kinship affiliations - harsh but true! |
That's exactly the point I was making with respect to kinship networks and a problem with top down policy. making a decision without community consultation /involvement is bizarre and destined to fail.
A plumber indeed any trade would be a highly regarded asset in remote communities
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman
Last edited by watt price tully on Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:29 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
