Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Feb 21
st, 2023 at 12:33pm:
Now that Langton has shot the voice idea down by coming straight out and declaring it as needing to ahve veto powers and control over governments - there will be no CDEP.
Has she done that? well, yes, likely the voice won't get up.
But the voice isn't related to CDEP-types schemes, which are needed to create (non-market) employment for people still steeped in cultural confusion re a h-g economy.
Quote:Stick to the subject - your solutions to their problems belong in another strand of its own and you need to stop coming up with mother heart ideas and feelings and good ideas and actually state HOW implementation will occur.
I can assist your anti-voice crusade by pointing to the economy and employment as a fundamental issues which need to be addressed, to close the gap.
Quote:How do you propose to get your Abos out there to attend CDEP courses that involve something more than emu dancing and dot painting?
Same way as in the 1977-2004 period when the CDEP was implemented.
Quote: They don't want to learn handling tractors and garbage trucks for their communities,
Of course they do, but the necessary resources need to be supplied by government.
Here's an interesting article taking a closer look at the CDEP (before it was abolished):
https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/bh%281%29_0.pdf"Noel Pearson has consistently advocated a less
“passive” and responsibility-based welfare system
over the last 10 years (Sanders, 2008). After noting
that CDEP was based on the “reciprocity princinples” that he advocated as the basis of welfare reform (i.e., locally run by Indigenous organisantions), Pearson (2000) elaborated on this point by indicating that while CDEP in some smaller communities was “very successful”, some projects in larger communities were “not very distinguishable from the dole” (p. 87). He developed this theme by arguing that the CDEP scheme had “not achieved as much as it could have in terms of community development” because it was “administered under
welfarist governance structures” and surrounded by
other programs within the social security system
that were “not based on reciprocity but are located
within the passive welfare paradigm” (Pearson,
2000, p. 88). To fix CDEP, Pearson argued “we need
to reinsert the original goals of reciprocity and
responsibility” into the scheme and “subject other
government programs to similar principles” (Pearson, 2000, p. 88; Sanders, 2008).We can see where Noel's interest in the JG came from; goal-based education resulting in paid work needed to develop communities, nothing to do with the welfare system.
Quote:Just once from you - how do you plan to make it happen in reality and outside of a theory bubble?
the same way as the Fraser and Whitlam govts. made it happen (but separate from the welfare system).
Quote:Modern Monetary THEORY ... one more theory to add to the wood pile .......
Even Chalmers knows neoclassical
government-debt orthodoxy is nonsense (like the periodic bun-fight over lifting the 'debt-ceiling' in the US - all political theatre). He just doesn't want to tell the public - it's easier to hide behind the orthodox nonsense, to shield him from owning up to his own policy failures.
Forum
Pages: 
The Aboriginal Voice referendum (Read 91697 times)
