Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

How did the Budget measure up to our fears?

By Emily Morris 13 May 2014 57

2014-budget

At the end of April many of you shared your thoughts on the upcoming budget – what you feared and predictions of what might take place.

Tonight Joe Hockey handed down his first budget.  It was expected to be harsh and speculation had been rife for weeks.  In some ways, having something set in stone to end that speculation was almost a relief.  Almost.

The main factors that had come up as concerns for you guys were:

  • Middle Class Welfare
  • Deficit Levy – hopes that it would be applied to companies and trusts
  • Politician entitelments
  • Inclusion of family homes > $500k in pension calculations
  • Paid Parental Leave (PPL)

For all the ‘sound-bites’ taking place tonight, the ones that stick are ‘we are a nation of lifters, not movers’ and that it is a ‘contribute and build’ process.  I can just imagine a team of people locked in a room for hours on end until they came up with the slogans for the budget.

They predict $36bn savings in 4 years.  The pragmatist (and I must confess economic gumby) in me can’t help but go back to the household income or small business mentality of keeping things in the black, although I can appreciate that the investment needs are much bigger, and indeed more complicated than that.  In part, although I found Tony’s face a bit smug for my liking given the scolding being handed out – there were parts I agreed with.

I am in no way an economic expert – far from it, but here I inscribe my thoughts in the stone that is RiotACT.

The ‘earn or learn’ theory to me is OK – I’m on board with the idea that young people should be either working or in education.  The bit that doesn’t sit well is the 6 month wait on Newstart for unemployed under 30 (kicking in and out in 6 month cycles until they find a job or turn 30).  I think it makes a fairly dated assumption that those studying (or under 30) are at home and fully supported by mum and dad.  I know a lot of students supporting themselves through their educations and plenty of people under 30 with no dependence on their folks (many of whom wouldn’t have the means to support them if they were) .  What happens to those who don’t have ‘the bank of mum and dad’ to fall back on?

The medical research fund was a surprise.  I am relieved that in some way we are attempting to stay cutting edge as a Nation.  The $7 co-payment that will fund this generally sits OK with me, but there is such a big ‘gap’ for GP visits, an extra $7 doesn’t seem overwhelming.  I would worry if it stops people seeing a GP who really need it – particularly children.  I feel the same about the extra $5 for prescriptions.  All well and good but what happens when someone can’t afford medicines for their kids?

Cutting the Carbon and Mining taxes.  As much as I’m lax to open the debate on this again, the carbon tax seemed to be bedding in – I wonder if it was more a ‘point making’ exercise than one that has real impact versus the cost and I tend to think the miners should pay a pretty nice slice of their toils back into the pocket of our fair country.

Fuel excise to rise in line with inflation – I remember the days of paying 60c a litre. Enough said.

Family Tax Benefits – There is always a population who is going to be really hurt by this, but I know plenty of families who are receiving tax benefits that are a bonus rather than something they really need to get by.  I do fear that along with cutting the benefit to those who don’t necessarily need it, it will really hurt those who do.

Gonski is gone-ski…  How are we going to thrive as a Nation without world class educations for our kids?  I think this is short-sighted.

PPL is in there and will include superannuation.  The $ terms are set as minimum wage (as a minimum) for 6 months.  I can’t find a cap on it, but generally think it should be minimum wage with a company having the option to ‘top it up’ as part of their remuneration package.

Hospitals able to charge for ER visits that only required a GP.  I am on board with this as long as it can be linked to the Healthcare line.  Many times I have called the healthline to be told to take them to emergency, when actually it was maybe something that could have been GP solved.  Without medical training, especially with kids – it can be a hard call to make.

There’s my 10c in any case.

The ABC is running a handy little ‘winners and losers’ page for those like me who have a bit of a challenge wading through the more analytical reports.

How do you see it?


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
57 Responses to
How did the Budget measure up to our fears?
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
rosscoact 7:38 pm 16 May 14

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

“The poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on”

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Would you like to rewrite that question?

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Ah, I think I see what you are getting at. I’m reasonably intelligent IMHO but not in the education sector that’s being shafted. I am very fortunate and don’t fit any of those categories, in fact the bastardry of the Lib’s budget doesn’t affect me directly very much at all.

Of course, as a home owner, their raping of the ACT will reduce the value of my investment property. My children will need to be pretty quick to overcome the affect on the education sector and they may lose their jobs with the recession that has recently started.

As we live in a society which is an organism, what hurts one part will inevitably hurt the entirety, either in the short or long term or both.

Until you mentioned that you were the owner of an investment home (negatively geared?) I was beginning to think you were actually championing the cause of the underclasses but you are clearly not.

I have a tenant who is living in a home, paying a low rent (for Canberra) until my wife and I wish to downsize. I’m not sure why that would disqualify me from wanting people who are in a less fortunate position to be treated fairly.

dungfungus 6:22 pm 16 May 14

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

“The poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on”

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Would you like to rewrite that question?

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Ah, I think I see what you are getting at. I’m reasonably intelligent IMHO but not in the education sector that’s being shafted. I am very fortunate and don’t fit any of those categories, in fact the bastardry of the Lib’s budget doesn’t affect me directly very much at all.

Of course, as a home owner, their raping of the ACT will reduce the value of my investment property. My children will need to be pretty quick to overcome the affect on the education sector and they may lose their jobs with the recession that has recently started.

As we live in a society which is an organism, what hurts one part will inevitably hurt the entirety, either in the short or long term or both.

Until you mentioned that you were the owner of an investment home (negatively geared?) I was beginning to think you were actually championing the cause of the underclasses but you are clearly not.

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 3:23 pm 16 May 14

wildturkeycanoe said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Why do you need 40 hours per week? Why do you need only one employer? Get 2 or 3 such jobs. I’ve done it in the past while studying, and yeah it’s not much fun but it paid the bills.

Assuming any work you get has to 40 hours per week from a single employer is severely limiting your thinking.

40 hours is required because the pay is only $15 per hour as casual, which may only be 8 hours a week. The second and third jobs are probably the same, but then you are juggling casual hours and might be called in to work at one job while you are at the next. All of a sudden, you lose the first job because you were not available for that shift.Understand yet?
If it was so easy, why are there so many people struggling? On paper anything is possible but in reality life is much tougher. And oh, fast food outlets are open till late, so if you are a student without work, it’s unlikely you have a car, so how does one get home after 11PM when public transport goes to sleep? The logistics of having a job for some is as big a hurdle as the interview.

It’s like you’re determined to fail.

I actually DID this multiple job arrangement for some years while I was studying full time. Yes, you get asked to work different shifts, so you have to be organised and know your upcoming schedule. Yes, you need to organise transport (I had bought an old car as a teen). Yes, you will be doing crummy work at inconvenient times.

So yes, I do understand exactly what it’s like, because I’ve lived it. But based on your ‘can’t do’ attitude I’m not sure you do.

If you want to throw yourself onto the mercy of welfare, put your hand on your forehead and cry “woe is me” then be my guest, but be aware there are people who actually get off their arses and help themselves, even if you won’t.

dungfungus 3:14 pm 16 May 14

Tetranitrate said :

dungfungus said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Why do you need 40 hours per week? Why do you need only one employer? Get 2 or 3 such jobs. I’ve done it in the past while studying, and yeah it’s not much fun but it paid the bills.

Assuming any work you get has to 40 hours per week from a single employer is severely limiting your thinking.

Or, (shock, horror to some) become self employed. Apply the skills you have gained in previous employ/trades. Avoid buying a franchise especially in the current climate. Several years hard work and sacrifice are required (this is an alien concept to a lot of Canberrans).

and what if you’re talking about someone who’s just been dropped from their job in retail? how are they to become self employed? It’s an obvious option if you’re skilled in a trade but not all jobs skills are so easily applied to starting a small business.
Moreover how the hell is anyone meant to do that with no capital? how are they meant to eat when most businesses lose money for some time before they start making a profit.

Ironically there IS actually a scheme designed precisely to help people who are unemployed start a small business that provides a decent level of support, the New Enterprise Incentive Scheme – but being cut off from the welfare system these young bludgers won’t be able to access that will they?

Well, if they are already bludgers they want want to work for anyone let alone take a risk and become self-employed.

rosscoact 2:55 pm 16 May 14

dungfungus said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

“The poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on”

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Would you like to rewrite that question?

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Ah, I think I see what you are getting at. I’m reasonably intelligent IMHO but not in the education sector that’s being shafted. I am very fortunate and don’t fit any of those categories, in fact the bastardry of the Lib’s budget doesn’t affect me directly very much at all.

Of course, as a home owner, their raping of the ACT will reduce the value of my investment property. My children will need to be pretty quick to overcome the affect on the education sector and they may lose their jobs with the recession that has recently started.

As we live in a society which is an organism, what hurts one part will inevitably hurt the entirety, either in the short or long term or both.

Tetranitrate 2:35 pm 16 May 14

dungfungus said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Why do you need 40 hours per week? Why do you need only one employer? Get 2 or 3 such jobs. I’ve done it in the past while studying, and yeah it’s not much fun but it paid the bills.

Assuming any work you get has to 40 hours per week from a single employer is severely limiting your thinking.

Or, (shock, horror to some) become self employed. Apply the skills you have gained in previous employ/trades. Avoid buying a franchise especially in the current climate. Several years hard work and sacrifice are required (this is an alien concept to a lot of Canberrans).

and what if you’re talking about someone who’s just been dropped from their job in retail? how are they to become self employed? It’s an obvious option if you’re skilled in a trade but not all jobs skills are so easily applied to starting a small business.
Moreover how the hell is anyone meant to do that with no capital? how are they meant to eat when most businesses lose money for some time before they start making a profit.

Ironically there IS actually a scheme designed precisely to help people who are unemployed start a small business that provides a decent level of support, the New Enterprise Incentive Scheme – but being cut off from the welfare system these young bludgers won’t be able to access that will they?

wildturkeycanoe 2:30 pm 16 May 14

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Why do you need 40 hours per week? Why do you need only one employer? Get 2 or 3 such jobs. I’ve done it in the past while studying, and yeah it’s not much fun but it paid the bills.

Assuming any work you get has to 40 hours per week from a single employer is severely limiting your thinking.

40 hours is required because the pay is only $15 per hour as casual, which may only be 8 hours a week. The second and third jobs are probably the same, but then you are juggling casual hours and might be called in to work at one job while you are at the next. All of a sudden, you lose the first job because you were not available for that shift.Understand yet?
If it was so easy, why are there so many people struggling? On paper anything is possible but in reality life is much tougher. And oh, fast food outlets are open till late, so if you are a student without work, it’s unlikely you have a car, so how does one get home after 11PM when public transport goes to sleep? The logistics of having a job for some is as big a hurdle as the interview.

dungfungus 1:37 pm 16 May 14

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Why do you need 40 hours per week? Why do you need only one employer? Get 2 or 3 such jobs. I’ve done it in the past while studying, and yeah it’s not much fun but it paid the bills.

Assuming any work you get has to 40 hours per week from a single employer is severely limiting your thinking.

Or, (shock, horror to some) become self employed. Apply the skills you have gained in previous employ/trades. Avoid buying a franchise especially in the current climate. Several years hard work and sacrifice are required (this is an alien concept to a lot of Canberrans).

VYBerlinaV8_is_back 12:38 pm 16 May 14

Why do you need 40 hours per week? Why do you need only one employer? Get 2 or 3 such jobs. I’ve done it in the past while studying, and yeah it’s not much fun but it paid the bills.

Assuming any work you get has to 40 hours per week from a single employer is severely limiting your thinking.

Tetranitrate 12:16 pm 16 May 14

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Work at one of the many, many businesses that need unskilled/semi-skilled labour, such as:
McDonalds
Pizza Hut
KFC
Local takeaway
Service station attendent
Retail shops
Target
KMart
Big W
Woolworths
Coles
etc
etc
etc

These places are always looking for fresh meat. Apply at a few, get a couple of jobs at least and you’ll be making more than the dole anyway if you work 40 hours each week.

You’re living in fantasy land.

-none of these places will offer anyone 40 hours a week in the present environment, hell, my housemate (student) who worked in retail just had his hours cut to zero. Canberra’s service economy is not doing so well right now. For the most part these sorts of businesses actually deliberately keep people ‘hungry’ for hours when they can so there’re always people willing to fill gaps at short notice.
You are utterly delusional if you think there’s an endless quantity of minimum wage work available to anybody who wants it at the drop of a hat, let alone *instantly* or within a couple of weeks, all businesses are going to hire based on supply/demand, there’s mechanism by when the fast food/retail sector can magically employ everyone who walks in.

-you’re going to have a hard time getting a Mcjob once you’re in your early 20s or older, they have to pay you too much. It’s not impossible, but most of the older people I see working at such places are those who are clearly going to be there for the long hall, if you know what I mean.
You’re going to have a hard time getting such a job if you’re ex-PS or obviously tertiary educated as they’d be paying you full $ to learn the job with the full expectation that you’ll be gone the moment something else comes along.

-plenty of cafes and the like are paying $10/hour to foreign students (working in more hours their visas allow).

Kellamity 10:57 am 16 May 14

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Work at one of the many, many businesses that need unskilled/semi-skilled labour, such as:
McDonalds
Pizza Hut
KFC
Local takeaway
Service station attendent
Retail shops
Target
KMart
Big W
Woolworths
Coles

Oh yeah, because when I was unemployed for 4 months, I never thought of applying for places like that. . If you think you can submit an online application to all of those places (and more) today and have a job two weeks from now, you’re living in fantasy land. Especially a full time job. Especially if you are over 21 and cost them more.

And if you think you can cover rent ($150 – $250 a week share housing, $250 – $450 a week living alone) by moving lawns and washing cars, I’d be very impressed. Throw in the possibility that you may have up to 12 months on a lease remaining, it’s a very bad situation even getting Newstart and rent assistance. Without it, I guess you’d just stop paying the rent and hope you find a job before they forcibly remove you?

dungfungus 9:21 am 16 May 14

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

“The poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on”

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Would you like to rewrite that question?

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

milkman 6:36 pm 15 May 14

Codders111 said :

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though, so it’s cool. What bugs me is when people unthinkingly repeat lines they’ve heard from the coalition or news ltd (eg comparing government debt to credit card debt – ridiculous!).

Welfare is wasted money. Sure it gets spent, but if it provided a net economic benefit then maybe we could all down tools and go on the dole.

Personally I think it’s better for people to work, earn and then spend.

dungfungus 6:31 pm 15 May 14

rosscoact said :

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

“The poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on”

Which category above best describes your situation and the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Would you like to rewrite that question?

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though.

dungfungus 5:56 pm 15 May 14

Codders111 said :

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Codders111 said :

farout said :

Gutsy and courageous in the most part. The other mob would have let the deficit blow out till it reached European levels.
Sad part is, after all the unpleasant work is done to bring the budget back into the black, a future Labor government will probably squander it on ill-advised and poorly managed projects, unsustainable welfare and other populist pork barreling for their vote bank.

I don’t get why people earning more than say $30,000 p.a. should expect to see a GP for free, or get blood tests done for free. These things cost money, and someone has to pay for them. At $7 a pop, its still just a small fraction of what it actually costs to deliver that service.

You are fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of government spending. A modest debt is not a bad thing – borrowing money is justifiable if can generate sufficient future growth to offset the debt. Growth = increased tax revenue = manageable debt. Look up keynesian multipliers if you feel inclined. I’m not advocating Greek-style recklessness, but it’s reductionist to treat government debt as undesirable per se.

2016 cannot come soon enough. In the meantime I only hope Abbott does not damage the country irreparably.

Having a debt growing faster that GDP is not desirable for any government in the longer term, and that’s exactly what we’ve had for a number of years. Far better to fix a structural issue now than before we have real problems.

I agree that governments running a managed debt is good, when that money is being used for measures that improve productivity. I’m not convinced, however, that handing out welfare is particularly productive.

There are things in this budget that seem quite odd to me, and some things that will hurt some people. But there’s no point bleating about how it’s unfair when the country is sliding deeper and deeper into debt which is not typically being used for productive purposes.

I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly. You’ve clearly thought about your position though, so it’s cool. What bugs me is when people unthinkingly repeat lines they’ve heard from the coalition or news ltd (eg comparing government debt to credit card debt – ridiculous!).

“I disagree with you on welfare – it gets spent on goods and services, so everyone benefits indirectly”
Correct; even the unemployed are consumers.
This is why big business do not want immigration to Australia to slow down or stop because regardless if they get a job or go on welfare for life they still need to buy stuff to live on.
On a similar issue, what benefit (if any) accrued from the millions of $900 cheques Kevin Rudd sent during the time of the GFC in the Northern hemisphere?

rosscoact 5:36 pm 15 May 14

dungfungus said :

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Would you like to rewrite that question?

dungfungus 5:01 pm 15 May 14

rosscoact said :

Confect a crisis, tell lies, make commitments that you have no intention of keeping, whatever it takes to justify meanness of spirit.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

This is what this mob of imbeciles stand for.

Hopefully the opposition will block supply so we can have a double dissolution and get rid of these repugnant cretins by Christmas.

Punish the poor, the sick, the elderly, the homeless, the intelligent, the public servants and people without jobs. In fact anybody who they look down on.

Which category above best describes your the consequenecs of the budget as applied to you?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site