Figures belie Newstart reality for single parents, say Greens

    by: PATRICIA KARVELAS
    From: The Australian
    April 10, 2013


Greens senator Rachel Siewert says the government is 'spinning' the number of single parents reporting earnings income.

THE Greens have accused the Gillard Government of trying to "spin" the number of single parents reporting earnings income in order to justify "their unfair payment cuts".     :(

Greens Senator Rachel Siewert said the Government should not be patting themselves on the back so quickly.

"These figures cannot simply be interpreted as straightforward evidence as to this policy's effectiveness," she said today.

It comes after The Australian reported that the Gillard goverment's tough-love budget decision to force thousands of single mothers on to the dole is achieving one of its key objectives, with almost 4000 parents who were relying exclusively on welfare now drawing their own income.

While Labor's decision to shift single parents off the higher Parenting Payment was mainly motivated by the desire to save $700 million for the budget, the government has maintained the move, which is opposed by the majority of caucus, was about increasing work participation and ending welfare dependence.


The Australian revealed that 3861, or 11.7 per cent, of the 32,896 parents who had no fortnightly earnings as of January 1 when they were shifted from Parenting Payment to Newstart Allowance now have income.

Employment Minister Bill Shorten, who has been travelling with Julia Gillard in China, said yesterday he was pleased the policy was having its desired effect.

"The government has always said our priority is getting people into work," Mr Shorten said. "I'm pleased that over 3800 single parents have found jobs."

Labor MPs have become increasingly angry at the decision to move about 84,000 parents to Newstart when their youngest child turns eight. About 72,000 single parents now receive between $60 and $100 a week less than before the change.

But the Greens say that in reality the majority of single parents were already working before being moved to Newstart and they are now worse off as a result of the payment's lower income threshold of $62 per fortnight. "Some have even had to drop their work hours because of this".     :(

"There is a lot that these numbers don't tell us. In particular, we don' know if these parents that are now reporting earnings are financially actually better off.

"We don't know whether they have they managed to replace the income lost by moving to Newstart, or if they have adequate childcare arrangements.

"It is entirely possible that these parents, as with those who were previously working and have dropped out of the income support system altogether, are not better off when their overall financial position is taken into consideration.     :(

"It is also likely that these jobs are in insecure and temporary work, which can end at very short notice. Such roles do not offer important benefits such as personal leave or carers leave, and they are not viable replacements for a stable job," the Greens Senator said.

"My office has already been contacted by one mother who has taken up an extra 15 hours a week since the payment cuts took effect. With Newstart's taper rates and additional childcare fees taken into consideration, she's estimated that she is working for an extra $3 per hour. On top of this, her extra shifts are limiting the time she can spend with her family.     :(

"This policy has never been about helping people into work, rather, it's been a way for the Government to top up the budget without being forced to stand up to the mining industry and fix the MRRT.     :(

"Punishing people with low income support and forcing them into insecure work is not a sustainable way to ensure they become financially independent and are able to raise their children," Senator Siewert concluded.

a)  What on earth does reporting income have to do with the receipt of benefits for those with no income?  That is just a nonsense and a total obfuscation put forward by the number crunchers to somehow justify.  If xx% of benefit recipients report income - what possible impact does that have on the rest?

b)  Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be going to?  Even those without children are struggling to find work. :D

SHOW ME, Miz Gillard!

aaargh.. tried to post a new issue and it ended up here... internat has gone insane tonight.

The ALP is a lot more smarter and orthodox than the Liberals, but they are now showing how UN-AUSTRALIAN they are becoming all the more compared to the Liberals.

They prefer Boat People influx rather than supporting a domestic population growth, even if the OZ mothers happen to be single.
Don't breed - Import !!! Via the Gillard, anti-children policy. ;D

THE Greens have accused the Gillard Government of trying to "spin" the number of single parents reporting earnings income in order to justify "their unfair payment cuts".     :(

wrote on Apr 11^th, 2013 at 7:03am:

THE Greens have accused the Gillard Government of trying to "spin" the number of single parents reporting earnings income in order to justify "their unfair payment cuts".     :(

You cannot justify the unjustifiable.

And this filthy attack on welfare recipients is certainly unjustifiable.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 10^th, 2013 at 8:20pm:

The ALP is a lot more smarter and orthodox than the Liberals

that's not true, the amount of dumb things they've committed is innumerable.  :'(

The policy is not unfair.

Hypocrital yes.... but not unfair.

Is this really a Labor Government, always finding ways of screwing the weakest and most defenceless in our society.

John Curtin would have turned in his grave. Labor stands for these days, Ex Union thugs with portfolios as Government Ministers, skulduggery, cover ups and more front than an elephant.

Gillard should have been turfed eons ago yet she continues to cling to mirage that she is some sort of world leader.

The Chinese must have been laughing their heads off at her, going cap in hand to them.

But I digress, the meanest most spiteful act this Government and I use that word loosely, was to slaughter the single parent families out there and send them like sheep to the slaughter with Newstart.

Yet 34,000 bludgers who turned up with their hands out are now feeding off the system. How much money could have been used to continue to support single parent families; when it is being blown on bludgers incorporated which has blown out to billions.

Come September, we will kick their sorry arses out into the gutter where most of those slimebuckets belong.

sterilise them

JC Denton wrote on Apr 11^th, 2013 at 2:50pm:

sterilise them

Big on the sterilization calls today Imp

Been reading Eugenics again?


As for the thread, I don't have a problem with it, your kid (or youngest kid) is 8, they are more then capable of being home alone.
Hell they might even start to display responsibility and all that sort of stuff.

The biggest problem with today's youth is they have had everything & earnt NOTHING.

No rejection at school , hell no failure

Nothing close to discipline outside of the home.

All to create jobs for useless humanities graduates >:(

Swagman wrote on Apr 11^th, 2013 at 10:43am:

The policy is not unfair. Hypocrital yes.... but not unfair.

Hey swagman did you ever acknowledge this post?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1365459525/17

SOB

Well To all you IGNORANTS that post here, If you don't like Single parents, getting Welfare, well then GET OFF you dam ARSE and get them a JOB, and provide them with care for their children.

I support the Single-Mother's Industry
I pay $150 for an hour of their time
so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 5:43am:

Swagman wrote on Apr 11th, 2013 at 10:43am: The policy is not unfair. Hypocrital yes.... but not unfair. Hey swagman did you ever acknowledge this post? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1365459525/17 SOB

Hullo Borg.  Yes I did.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 7:44am:

I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat.

...does that invovle a happy ending?

dingo2 wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 7:28am:

Well To all you IGNORANTS that post here, If you don't like Single parents, getting Welfare, well then GET OFF you dam ARSE and get them a JOB, and provide them with care for their children.

They're single parents, not unemployed, stupid.  And Julia Gillard's right to impose her leftist (and John Howard's economic) agenda on to this unfortunate group of people is clearly questionable (but, of course, wont be questioned in Aussiesland). And what percentage of these people represent the legacy of John Howard's  Baby Bonus/single parenting initiative (in effect) scheme? (If anything these people should be taking some sort of class action to compensate themselves for being offered money to have kids while already living below the poverty line).

GA wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

[quote author=dingo2 link=1365583152/12#12 date=1365715730]Well To all you IGNORANTS that post here, If you don't like Single parents, getting Welfare, well then GET OFF you dam ARSE and get them a JOB, and provide them with care for their children.

They're single parents, not unemployed, stupid.  And Julia Gillard's right to impose her leftist (and John Howard's economic) agenda on to this unfortunate group of people is clearly questionable (but, of course, wont be questioned in Aussieland). And what percentage of these people represent the legacy of John Howard's  Baby Bonus/single parenting initiative (in effect) scheme? (If anything these people should be taking some sort of class action to compensate themselves for being offered money to have kids while already living below the poverty line).

GA wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 5:24pm:

They're single parents, not unemployed, stupid.

Employed or not, I think it's irrelevant. If I understand him correctly, he is saying everyone who complains about single parents getting welfare should pay for their lunch, breakfast, nappies, water/power/gas bills and drive their kids to/from child care, preschool and primary school -- maybe even to the point of looking after the kids while these single parents go to work. It's called community service. It's not every man for himself.


GA wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 5:24pm:

And Julia Gillard's right to impose her leftist (and John Howard's economic) agenda on to this unfortunate group of people is clearly questionable (but, of course, wont be questioned in Aussieland). And what percentage of these people represent the legacy of John Howard's  Baby Bonus/single parenting initiative (in effect) scheme? (If anything these people should be taking some sort of class action to compensate themselves for being offered money to have kids while already living below the poverty line).

If having kids is a good thing, single parents should not be worse off. People are getting married later, putting off having kids or abstaining from it altogether. Those who abstain from it leave the deed to immigrants and there are plenty of people crying foul over the higher birth rates of immigrants. If Julia tries to force single parents to work more hours, she might just force currently childless people to become even more repulsed by the idea of having kids. This is going to have consequences in the near future. We're going to fall lower and lower below the 2.1 babies per woman required for a stable population.

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 7:44am:

I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat.

Not A lot of respect for people by posters on this Forum is there.


why do you just make thing up from my comments here.

Its simple if society expects all people to WORK including single parent iving below the poverty line, well its simple create , MAKE Jobs for them, Then their won't be Unemployment or single parents on welfare, that you are all whinging about.

dingo2 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 7:52am:

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12th, 2013 at 7:44am: I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat. Not A lot of respect for people by posters on this Forum is there. why do you just make thing up from my comments here. Its simple if society expects all people to WORK including single parent iving below the poverty line, well its simple create , MAKE Jobs for them, Then their won't be Unemployment or single parents on welfare, that you are all whinging about.

Wonder who owns these posts?

Whoever it is certainly is IGNORANT.

Well To all you IGNORANTS that post here, If you don't like Single parents, getting Welfare, well then GET OFF you dam ARSE and get them a JOB, and provide them with care for their children.

Its a Pity you wouldn't demise red barron, You IGNORANT BASTARD

Lets just
Double tap you BIG OL and be done with it.

Your a IGNORANT BASTARD

If you want to find a SCUM BAG Big OL
Look in the Mirror.

IGNORANT BASTARD

Well how about we send an IGNORANT old bugger like you John Smith overseas for service in the Army


OK then PROVIDE A JOB you Ignorant Bastard Swagman.
Exactly the Ignorants here need to Understand that people need to work.

Stay here to keep these Bastards onest, thats what I do a thorn in the side of these dick wits

Just the facts KJT 1981

If you want to be as IGNORANT as red barron and his mates you welcome to join them.

Nothing will improve if you do nothing and don't act to HELP people.

Oh you forgot to post my Gina Reihardt comments, That fat cow has the power and wealth to make a difference in society. To actually be able to help people archive normal lives, but she won't help them.

IF you do nothing, nothing will change for the poverty sticken in this country.

KICK DOWN DOORS and Make changes happen.

If there is a BOAT people problem FIX IT. Deal with it, ACT.


If there is bad unemployment FIX IT.  deal with it ACT.

If you don't like single parents on welfare fix the situation so there not on wealfare. HELP them. ACT.

ACT NOW BEFORE ITS TOO LATE.

Swagman wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 2:47pm:

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12th, 2013 at 7:44am: I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat. ...does that invovle a happy ending?

Yes Swagman it should have a Happy ending .

Single woman makes a mistake and gets pregnant and has child , but then is able to archive a comfortable life for herself and her kids, and that includes being able to work, the same as any other person out there.

Live comfortably, IE the same as any one else. the hard workeres of this country it is posible to archive.

KJT1981 wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 8:11am:

dingo2 wrote on Apr 13th, 2013 at 7:52am: It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12th, 2013 at 7:44am: I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat. Not A lot of respect for people by posters on this Forum is there. why do you just make thing up from my comments here. Its simple if society expects all people to WORK including single parent iving below the poverty line, well its simple create , MAKE Jobs for them, Then their won't be Unemployment or single parents on welfare, that you are all whinging about. Wonder who owns these posts? Whoever it is certainly is IGNORANT. Well To all you IGNORANTS that post here, If you don't like Single parents, getting Welfare, well then GET OFF you dam ARSE and get them a JOB, and provide them with care for their children. Its a Pity you wouldn't demise red barron, You IGNORANT BASTARD Lets just Double tap you BIG OL and be done with it. Your a IGNORANT BASTARD If you want to find a SCUM BAG Big OL Look in the Mirror. IGNORANT BASTARD Well how about we send an IGNORANT old bugger like you John Smith overseas for service in the Army OK then PROVIDE A JOB you Ignorant Bastard Swagman. Exactly the Ignorants here need to Understand that people need to work. Stay here to keep these Bastards onest, thats what I do a thorn in the side of these dick wits

Oooooooooooh. Used the wrong sock didja?

SOB

Stupid solo mothers - opening their legs & thinking about that $5,000
baby bonus & the taxpayer paying all their bills.

Well - the plan didn't work out for them.

I only feel sorry for the poor kids they brought into a life of poverty.

Dumb government - encourages single motherhood as an ideological statement, then wonders why it's paying through the nose for the upkeep of bastard spawn.

Here we go again. Anybody got the stats of how many single mothers actually were single when they had the kids?

SOB

... wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 10:43am:

Dumb government - encourages single motherhood as an ideological statement, then wonders why it's paying through the nose for the upkeep of bastard spawn.

Yes -
the Govt. caused this with their silly baby bonus of $5,000.

Of course desperate women were going to cash in without
thinking of 18 years of having to support the child with no bread winner.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 9:22am:

KJT1981 wrote on Apr 13th, 2013 at 8:11am: dingo2 wrote on Apr 13th, 2013 at 7:52am: It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12th, 2013 at 7:44am: I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat. Not A lot of respect for people by posters on this Forum is there. why do you just make thing up from my comments here. Its simple if society expects all people to WORK including single parent iving below the poverty line, well its simple create , MAKE Jobs for them, Then their won't be Unemployment or single parents on welfare, that you are all whinging about. Wonder who owns these posts? Whoever it is certainly is IGNORANT. Well To all you IGNORANTS that post here, If you don't like Single parents, getting Welfare, well then GET OFF you dam ARSE and get them a JOB, and provide them with care for their children. Its a Pity you wouldn't demise red barron, You IGNORANT BASTARD Lets just Double tap you BIG OL and be done with it. Your a IGNORANT BASTARD If you want to find a SCUM BAG Big OL Look in the Mirror. IGNORANT BASTARD Well how about we send an IGNORANT old bugger like you John Smith overseas for service in the Army OK then PROVIDE A JOB you Ignorant Bastard Swagman. Exactly the Ignorants here need to Understand that people need to work. Stay here to keep these Bastards onest, thats what I do a thorn in the side of these dick wits Oooooooooooh. Used the wrong sock didja? SOB

WTF are you on about idiot?

It_is_the_Darkness wrote on Apr 12^th, 2013 at 7:44am:

I support the Single-Mother's Industry I pay $150 for an hour of their time so they can look after their snot nose kid they had with a darkie, probably one that is fresh off the boat.

That sounds a bit racist.  ;D

Bobby. wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 10:36am:

Stupid solo mothers - opening their legs & thinking about that $5,000 baby bonus & the taxpayer paying all their bills. Well - the plan didn't work out for them. I only feel sorry for the poor kids they brought into a life of poverty.

You're talking about people you don't even know. Not all single parents are women and even if they were, they could previously have been married. Maybe now they're divorced or have a deceased husband. It's easy to blame the woman when the man isn't part of the picture.

I don't think it really matters what the circumstances are because the important question is how we are going to maintain a birth rate of 2.1 babies per woman required for a stable population. Considering that less and less people want kids these days, it's great that some people have them, even in less-than-ideal circumstances. You see, not everyone grows up with two parents. Lots of people came into this world under less than ideal circumstances. Imagine what the birth rate would be if you had to be married or financially secure to have kids. I don't think it really matters if people bear children out of recklessness. What matters is that people are reproducing.

If you don't encourage people to reproduce, you're leaving that job to immigrants. The white separatists will be screaming in protest that in some 50 years time they are going to be a minority because their people didn't have enough babies and the government didn't give them the support they needed. Encouraging people to reproduce keeps these white separatists silent.

Single parents rally in Brisbane

Date
    April 13, 2013
Brisbane Times.

Single parents who have been forced onto the dole have rallied in Brisbane, saying the move condemns them and their children to poverty.     :-?

In January the federal government shook up its welfare system and moved about 84,000 people off the single parent payment onto the Newstart unemployment benefit to encourage them to rejoin the workforce.

On a rainy Saturday in Brisbane, about 30 people rallied outside City Hall and marched through the city to protest the changes which yanked as much as $120 out of their weekly budgets.

Single parent Bronwyn Rees said that, ironically, the change meant she had to quit her part-time job as a sales representative.     :(


She could no longer afford the fuel to get to work.

Under the single parent payment Ms Rees said she could earn $176 a fortnight before being taxed at a higher rate, but under Newstart that dropped to $68.     :(

Amber Skinner said her Newstart payment only covered rent for herself and two children, the rest of life’s expenses came out of her $200 a week part-time wage.

‘‘The kids have to miss out on doing sports.‘‘I can’t afford to take them to the dentist,’’ she said.    

‘‘It’s horrible.‘‘I don’t go out, I don’t have a social life.’’

Ms Skinner said the government should instead be penalising fathers who don’t pay child support.

Greens senator Larissa Waters spoke at the rally, saying she hopes Labor’s backbenchers revolt to the point where their changes are reversed in the upcoming budget.

‘‘It is a heartless decision which is condemning single parents to poverty and their children to poverty,’’ she said.    

Angry parents rally at Fed Square

Date
    April 13, 2013

The Age.

Single parents have renewed their demands the Gillard Government reverse its continuous cuts to the single parent payment amid claims women are now more likely to stay in an abusive relationship because they cannot afford to leave.     :(

About 50 people, including more than a dozen children, gathered at Federation Square on Saturday for the Melbourne arm of the nation-wide event. Single Parent Action Group said the payment was essential in giving woman the option to leave an abusive relationship, especially those who are stay-at-home mothers. Recent cuts, which came into effect on January 1 and forced about 84,000 single parents onto the lower-paid unemployment allowance, was putting women at risk.

SPAG organiser Karen Jones said the group welcomed recent comments from former human services minister Kim Carr, who lashed out at the cuts, saying he never supported them.

"We are waiting out for the May budget, then we will work out our next recourse of action.


Melbourne Greens MHR Adam Bandt said the government was picking on a vulnerable group because it was easier to do that than take on the powerful mining industry.     :(

In February it was revealed the mining tax had earned the government just $126 million, compared to savings of $728 million over four years from moving single parents to the dole.

"The fundamental role of government is to work in the public interest and if that means standing up to big business, then do it. The attacks on single parents and the failure to stand up to the miners is the reason we found it increasingly difficult to work with Labor."

Despite his opposition to the cuts, Mr Bandt said he would support the ALP again if the September 14 election delivered another hung parliament.

"We'd find it difficult to support Tony and I wouldn't do it. I think his policies would be bad for women, I think his real agenda Australia is very worrying indeed."     :(

In February, the Greens announced it would introduce a bill to ensure single parents received up to an extra $127 a week.   

Mnemonic wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

You're talking about people you don't even know. Not all single parents are women and even if they were, they could previously have been married. Maybe now they're divorced or have a deceased husband. It's easy to blame the woman when the man isn't part of the picture. I don't think it really matters what the circumstances are because the important question is how we are going to maintain a birth rate of 2.1 babies per woman required for a stable population. Considering that less and less people want kids these days, it's great that some people have them, even in less-than-ideal circumstances. You see, not everyone grows up with two parents. Lots of people came into this world under less than ideal circumstances. Imagine what the birth rate would be if you had to be married or financially secure to have kids. I don't think it really matters if people bear children out of recklessness. What matters is that people are reproducing. If you don't encourage people to reproduce, you're leaving that job to immigrants. The white separatists will be screaming in protest that in some 50 years time they are going to be a minority because their people didn't have enough babies and the government didn't give them the support they needed. Encouraging people to reproduce keeps these white separatists silent.

I agree with every word in this
Whilst some people might think that it's discriminative and racist to preserve the white race, I'd say it's even more racist to out breed the white race.
F**k EU and all their confederates combined, Australia is for Australians, and Australians choose who has the right or not.
Little off topic: I much prefer the Brazilian approach, the country that's done incredibly well, independently from US or EU. I like their approach to voting system for immigrants too, and how they stand firm with their religious predominance.  This way "minorities" have a good thought before they migrate. No one is allowed to dictate their rights: don't like it - piss off to Middle east. All benefits for Brazilians first. People are happier, securer, and encouraged to work, produce, learn, invest, etc

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 11:06am:

Here we go again. Anybody got the stats of how many single mothers actually were single when they had the kids? SOB

So What your really saying BOAG is Good become a single mother if you have grown up with wealthy parents, But don't if you had to grow up with poor parents.

Which class do you fit ito BOAG.

A Class Warfare

wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 6:27pm:

Angry parents rally at Fed Square Date April 13, 2013 The Age. In February, the Greens announced it would introduce a bill to ensure single parents received up to an extra $127 a week.

$127 Is useless to try to get these people back to the Lifestyle they deserve to have with there kids.

make it $1027

dingo2 wrote on Apr 14^th, 2013 at 7:05am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 13th, 2013 at 11:06am: Here we go again. Anybody got the stats of how many single mothers actually were single when they had the kids? SOB So What your really saying BOAG is Good become a single mother if you have grown up with wealthy parents, But don't if you had to grow up with poor parents. Which class do you fit ito BOAG. A Class Warfare

What? Where the heck did you get that out of what i said?

Single mothers are most of the time single because their husbands left them or died or something.

SOB

Why do these topics die so quick on this forum, Is it that there is no good answer, or is it that prople here are just living so Comfortably that they just don't care.

dingo2 wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 2:53am:

Why do these topics die so quick on this forum, Is it that there is no good answer, or is it that prople here are just living so Comfortably that they just don't care.

I think it's the other way round, dingo. Participation in these threads can become obsessive.

Mnemonic wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 1:22am:

GA wrote on Apr 12th, 2013 at 5:24pm: They're single parents, not unemployed, stupid. Employed or not, I think it's irrelevant. If I understand him correctly, he is saying everyone who complains about single parents getting welfare should pay for their lunch, breakfast, nappies, water/power/gas bills and drive their kids to/from child care, preschool and primary school -- maybe even to the point of looking after the kids while these single parents go to work. It's called community service. It's not every man for himself.

It's very relevant as they already have an important job to do. Being a mother would be one of the most important jobs on earth. And proof that it is a job is in that they then have to employ someone else to take on the task of raising their children, when they the parent gets paid employment.  Which would allow for the absurd scenario of the single parent taking up the degrading job of being a 'nanny' to someone else's children so that she then can afford to finance her own 'half' family.  So doesn't it, in the end, make more sense paying them income support?

And if you understand him correctly, then you are just as naive as he is. Why should we impose upon a community yet another user/loser pays scheme, when there is already in existence the much fairer welfare system. And we do already pay for all of these things, it's called taxation.



Mnemonic wrote on Apr 13^th, 2013 at 1:22am:

GA wrote on Apr 12th, 2013 at 5:24pm: And Julia Gillard's right to impose her leftist (and John Howard's economic) agenda on to this unfortunate group of people is clearly questionable (but, of course, wont be questioned in Aussieland). And what percentage of these people represent the legacy of John Howard's  Baby Bonus/single parenting initiative (in effect) scheme? (If anything these people should be taking some sort of class action to compensate themselves for being offered money to have kids while already living below the poverty line). If having kids is a good thing, single parents should not be worse off. People are getting married later, putting off having kids or abstaining from it altogether. Those who abstain from it leave the deed to immigrants and there are plenty of people crying foul over the higher birth rates of immigrants. If Julia tries to force single parents to work more hours, she might just force currently childless people to become even more repulsed by the idea of having kids. This is going to have consequences in the near future. We're going to fall lower and lower below the 2.1 babies per woman required for a stable population.

The expectation is that for someone to be claiming unemployment benefits they then should be looking for work. It follows that for a parent claiming single parenting allowance they should be looking for a partner, not employment.

(Single parents are getting paid because they are single, not being paid to be single).

We should be boosting our population to an economically & militarily sustainable level using immigration, not by recklessly encouraging the procreation of the lower 'non-working' class.