| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should all citizens be granted a minimum standard of living? |
| Yes, unconditionally. |
|
43% |
[ 13 ] |
| Only if they are pulling their weight or are physically/mentally incapable of doing so. |
|
53% |
[ 16 ] |
| No. We are not entitled to anything from our government. |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| Other (please specify in post). |
|
3% |
[ 1 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 30 |
|
| Author |
Message |
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Well said, Tannin. Means-testing the pension is possibly one of those cases where the potential for significant rorting is probably far less significant than the potential damage caused by regulating it too punitively. So, as much as they're more obsessed with not breaking policy taboo than actual costs and benefits, I probably reluctantly agree with Morrison and Shorten here.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
 |
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Dave The Man wrote: | | Well the ASSHOLDS in Government are trying to Penalise Pensioners that own there own home by saying IF you do own you own house then Sell it and go rent or live on the Streets |
Actually, Dave, I believe they just ruled that out. Actually, I'd support a form of means testing so long as people were not forced into selling their house. One solution I thought of is that pensioners could be given the option of either having the house included as an asset or handing the property rights over to the governmentthat is, they could live there as long as they like and draw the full pension, but once they died it would be used for social housing (or the government could claim the pension amount back from any sale or inheritance). Alternatively, I heard a guy from the Australia Institute suggest that they could draw their pension as a reverse mortgage, or something. Anyway, it seems irrelevant as both parties have declared it off the table. |
I dont trust them as far as I can Throw Them.
They went back on so many Promises Pre-Election
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Repairs would have to come from the owner's pocket, as they would anyway. |
Why would anyone bother repairing something they are effectively losing anyway? |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| In any case, What do you do in your spare time? |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| HAL wrote: | | In any case, What do you do in your spare time? |
I build the HAL2000 |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 1061 wrote: | | David wrote: | | Repairs would have to come from the owner's pocket, as they would anyway. |
Why would anyone bother repairing something they are effectively losing anyway? |
bingo!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ This is all nitpicking though, really. I'm sure the finer details could be sorted out in the planning, and in fact I think the guy from the Australia Institute suggested that a scheme like this already exists (the Pension Loans Scheme, I think?).
http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/pension-loans-scheme
The basic point is, most don't want our government to be a charity for people not in need, but at the same time most don't want it to be so focused on collecting revenue that it ends up making people's lives miserable. So, any solution to this issueif one is even neededneeds to fall somewhere in that middle ground.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | ^ This is all nitpicking though, really. I'm sure the finer details could be sorted out in the planning, and in fact I think the guy from the Australia Institute suggested that a scheme like this already exists (the Pension Loans Scheme, I think?).
http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/pension-loans-scheme
The basic point is, most don't want our government to be a charity for people not in need, but at the same time most don't want it to be so focused on collecting revenue that it ends up making people's lives miserable. So, any solution to this issueif one is even neededneeds to fall somewhere in that middle ground. |
Agree - Dont want Free Loaders getting the Pension but dont want people who need it to have miserable lives because of lack of money to live off
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
If someone takes their super as a lump sum and buys a huge house and collects the aged pension then that shouldn't be allowed to happen. Someone who is wanting to claim the aged pension who has super should have to take their super as a pension first before claiming benefits. Let people keep and pass down the family home, the last thing I want is banks repossessing houses after people die or the government taking them as some kind of proxy death duty.
I'm all for government getting out of peoples way and out of peoples lives, but if they want to stick their hand out (note want to, not have to) then they better be willing to do things in a fair way that costs the taxpayer as little as possible. Not taking lump sums, not upgrading housing is a start. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | If someone takes their super as a lump sum and buys a huge house and collects the aged pension then that shouldn't be allowed to happen. Someone who is wanting to claim the aged pension who has super should have to take their super as a pension first before claiming benefits. Let people keep and pass down the family home, the last thing I want is banks repossessing houses after people die or the government taking them as some kind of proxy death duty.
I'm all for government getting out of peoples way and out of peoples lives, but if they want to stick their hand out (note want to, not have to) then they better be willing to do things in a fair way that costs the taxpayer as little as possible. Not taking lump sums, not upgrading housing is a start. |
Fair Enough saying that people on Pensions should not upgrade there Houses
What do you mean by Not Have To?
I dont agree in getting Large Sums of Cash but should be the normal Pension that they give out Fortnightly
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Museman wrote: | People actively seeking work deserve a whole lot better than they are getting for a start, if the protypes figures are somewhere near right, $400 per fortnight.
I want to meet the idiot who come up with this number and thinks somehow a person could survive on this.
And whats an MP take home? near enough 200k annually.
Are we fooked in the head? |
$524 per fortnight for newstart allowance. add $75 per f/n if you are entitled to rent assistance.
the whole notion of this is so that the amount is a contribution to your cost of living and a disincentive to remain long term unemployed. if people could live on the welfare subsidy many more would opt out.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | Museman wrote: | People actively seeking work deserve a whole lot better than they are getting for a start, if the protypes figures are somewhere near right, $400 per fortnight.
I want to meet the idiot who come up with this number and thinks somehow a person could survive on this.
And whats an MP take home? near enough 200k annually.
Are we fooked in the head? |
$524 per fortnight for newstart allowance. add $75 per f/n if you are entitled to rent assistance.
the whole notion of this is so that the amount is a contribution to your cost of living and a disincentive to remain long term unemployed. if people could live on the welfare subsidy many more would opt out. |
Well some people who are Long Term Unemployed has more then just because they can do it for a reason
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
there are many who are only too happy to shirk work even though they are capable.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| John Wren wrote: | | there are many who are only too happy to shirk work even though they are capable. |
I am not saying that is false and you are correct there are quite a few on it that just take advantage of it.
I known someone in the past who parents told there kids just to fake Depression so they can just get the Pension. That type really pisses me off.
Someone like me who actually has difficulties/need help and that kind of people make the proper ones look bad
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
Morrigu 
Joined: 11 Aug 2001
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | If someone takes their super as a lump sum and buys a huge house and collects the aged pension then that shouldn't be allowed to happen. Someone who is wanting to claim the aged pension who has super should have to take their super as a pension first before claiming benefits.. |
Why?
Why should I not be allowed to take my super and buy the house of my choice and then collect the aged care pension?
I have worked full time since I was 17 mainly in public health so have payed my taxes, never had kids who need healthcare, education etc etc, paid for my one hospitalisation for cancer surgery and treatment in a private hospital out of my money , never received a penny from the government and never bought investment properties to negative gear or set up trusts to minimise the tax I pay.
Why should I have to take my super as a pension - when people who have never bothered to actually work and earn super get a pension?
Why?
_________________
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
