Australian Politics (7 Viewers)

[Enteebee]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

No, you can't answer it with that. I quote my above reply to Captain Ghey:



I recently read one of the government's analyses of the aging population problem and it concluded that immigration is vital to solving the problem, but it is not the solution, as in order to solve the problem we would need exponentially higher levels of immigration each year. Not only is would it become impossible to satisfy those levels of immigration, but pretending we could, it would cause immense integration and displacement problems w.r.t. Australian culture and legal system.

I'll try to dig up the paper for you, but I imagine you can understand the basic idea behind it: trying to maintain exponential growth by addition requires ever higher additions each time to keep up.

Good post.

 

[withoutaface]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Not saving for your retirement is a choice...

 

[Slidey]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Malfoy: Obviously our culture is unique and our own, so we want to preserve it - only a fool would claim that makes us racist. But I'm not so much worried about loss of identity as the civil dissatisfaction problems which unrestricted immigration are known to cause. Furthermore, where do you plan to get this exponentially increasing number of immigrants from exactly?

Basically, you're side-stepping the issue with "you're a racist" rhetoric instead of actually outlining how you plan to deal with the population aging problem without recourse to encouraging children.

Here's a nasty little gem for you:

Major research by Access Economics found that the supply of young workers is likely to fall dramatically in coming decades. It will fall from the current 170,000 new entrants to the workforce per annum, to only 125,000 new entrants for the entire decade of the 2020s.

http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/Publishing.nsf/Content/ageing-ofoa-agepolicy-nsaa-nsaabk5.htm
*current = 2001

 

[Slidey]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

That's fine, how about we just pretend Australia doesn't have any culture. Can you answer my main questions now?

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Parenting classes are a load of bullshit and over my dead body would I support the government implementing such things.

Where I work we have a range of such classes targeted at;
- young mums
- low socioeconomic groups

And what they do, is they get a bunch of these girls together in a room and they patronise them and dull the shit out of them. By week two, the attendence rate is like 20%, and by week 3 it's pretty much cancelled.
So these target groups, the groups that really need the support and information aren't getting it, because those in power think it's acceptable to speak to them like they're 6 year olds.

So yeah. Get people in who aren't complete tards and these initiatives might work.

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

The issue I see Malfoy dodging and not addressing is this;

- Yes children are a choice.
- No growing old is not a choice
- This has been covered by Slidey, but to reiterate, we actually fucking need kids to populate an aging country.
- Providing support for people who choose ot have children is not government intervention. Maybe giving money to those who are irresponsible isn't the greatest idea, but there needs to be support offered to those who aren't as financially well off, but who choose to have children.

The argument I am seeing from you is basically 'if you can't afford to have kids don't have any', which I don't see is a feasable argument.

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Obviously. It'd be better if it came from other members of the community and it was more like a practical thing, rather than some outsider coming in and being a patronising twat. No one likes being talked down to, I guess. If it were done through the community rather than through some bureaucratic thing imposed from above, like your example sounds like, it'd be a good way to get older people who've been through that kind of thing to help out, build community structure/friendship, that kind of thing.

Should have qualified that, sorry Katie.

(I remember reading somewhere that they've got these kinds of things for at-risk kids, like community programs and stuff, that work cause as you say they're not being patronised by tards and they get some kind of support as well.)

Well that's just the thing. Ours is done at a local level, by local midwives and is still a massive fail effort.

We also don't have the resources to keep these initiatives going, because the country (like the rest of NSW) is massively short on nurses and midwives. Which is another issue.

Basically anything that has to do with health is a passion of mine, and it pains me to see what a shit fucking toilet health system we have.

That said, GUESS WHAT I'M DOING TOMORROW GUYS. HANDING OUT SOME MOAR FREE DIABETIC NEEDLES TO THE JUNKIES WHILST THE DIABETICS HAVE TO PAY.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA.

 

[chicky_pie]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Dental care is rotten

DURING the run-up to the last federal election, the then Rudd Labor opposition made a meal out of the then Howard Liberal government's dental policies - or the claimed lack of them.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23713809-5001030,00.html

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

That's basically what I believe, in honesty.

If I were being pragmatic, I'd prefer vouchers/goods&services provided over payments, and I'd prefer it to be targeted rather than blanket, just because you're right, it's not a great idea to give money to those who are irresponsible.

Okay well I'll completely disagree with you on this, but if it were going to be the case, it's unrealistic to expect that poor people are going to stop breeding.

If we were to implement such a thing we'd need;
- affordable housing
- affordable groceries. while we're at it, let's target the obesity and diabetes epidemic in one hit and make these vouchers only redeemable for fresh produce and not shit



Oh man, I mean, it totally shits me when I see fat slags with 6 kids, all of whom have no shoes or school lunch, pop out another 3 kids. But I'm not so far down the line that I think we can put a price on a persons reproductive rights.















I'd like to see them exterminated

 

[Enteebee]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

But then, it's not like it's just an up-front burden. Kids cost a LOT of money, continuously, until they're adults. It's in the hundreds of thousands per kid over their first 18 years. Using your argument, how will parents be able to afford the long-term costs?

I dunno? Maybe with the assistance of the myriad of other programs governments put in place/foster (i.e. tax breaks for companies that institute on site child care).

I'm saying that kids are a choice, and that being old/sick or disabled is not a choice.

So you're for welfare to old/sick/disabled people? I just want to clear this up...

Why is helping parents (who have kids by choice) valued over helping the disabled (who don't have a choice as to whether they're disabled)? It's middle-class, populist "working families" bullshit.

I said in my post... By fostering middle-class families (basically the majority of the workforce) to continue to exist (how do you do this? get them to have kids) you are investing in a productive work force/taxes for the future.

I don't support government intervention, you're right. If I had a country called "Libertopia" it wouldn't happen.

and in your country if rich people would rather drive their expensive car than drive a cheaper one and give to the disabled, that's fine. TBH, that's less 'liberty' than a country that takes away someones right to drive a more expensive car to guarentee someone mobility.

But pragmatically speaking, if you're going to have a welfare system direct the damn money to people who actually need the help.

...and also, think about where you're going to get your money from. Without a productive workforce, where do we get our money? If in giving payments to parents to have kids we take a burden off parents to have kids and foster more children to one day be productive in our nation (to support future welfare) then that seems a good thing to me. Anyway like I said, why not have both and tax luxury goods more?

Slidey: Why is Australian culture somehow vastly superior now, anyhow? That reminds me a little of Pauline Hanson's rhetoric regarding "Asian Invasion" and such. We've had large numbers of immigrants and they've done pretty well for the most part... of course there are exceptions, but that doesn't prove the superiority of Australian culture by any means, because there are some fucked parts of it as well.

It has nothing to do with cultural superiority... It's just that bringing more and more immigrants into a nation is an unstable way to achieve growth, a small number can assist in a productive workforce but they do have negatives to them, these can build up to be a much bigger problem than the cost of getting a more stable future population born by your current population.

Not to mention that people are more likely to invest in their own children and assist them as they grow up... Why will this generation of australians treat immigrants like their children to give them the best hope of becoming productive citizens?

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Dental. Pains me.
I would seriously advise most people with the means to take out some form of dental insurance, if nothing else.

I'd tell you all the story of the 1300 number, but it's epic and I'm lazy

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

The argument re:children annoys me a bit, because it's basically generalising that the blue collar workforce is a useless asset who contribute nothing and should therefore expect nothing in return....

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Tradesmen. Self employed tradesmen make quite a bit of money, then you have their lackeys that aren't necessarily on a great deal of money, but work hard and provide a service for the community none the less.

 

[chicky_pie]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Dental. Pains me.
I would seriously advise most people with the means to take out some form of dental insurance, if nothing else.

I'd tell you all the story of the 1300 number, but it's epic and I'm lazy

There's always tomorrow

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

There's always tomorrow

im at work tomorrow mang, as i said, handing out free needles and getting abused by fat people

love my job

 

[Slidey]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Hey Katie, I thought you might be interested in this:

Scientific study shows fat people cause global warming and poverty

http://news.slashdot.org/news/08/05/17/2138218.shtml

One of the comments:

I agree. Plus, when we run out of oil, we can burn them for heat, and they'll burn far longer than skinny people. Plus, when we have to resort to cannibalism, they'll taste better than their skinny and athletic counterparts, who will be tough and gamy. And, they will be far easier to hunt, as they will move slowly and tire quickly.

In conclusion, we should not be trying to eliminate obesity. Rather, we should establish "fat farms" where we can increase their numbers for our future needs.

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Yeah but with any welfare state, disabled people can still abuse it.

I know a lot of "disabled" people that could do a desk job, or call centre job pretty easily. Hell, if teenagers with Down Syndrome can work at McDonalds, wheel chair confined people can answer phones.

 

[boris]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

Hey Katie, I thought you might be interested in this:

Scientific study shows fat people cause global warming and poverty

http://news.slashdot.org/news/08/05/17/2138218.shtml

One of the comments:

Weighing more makes us harder for the aliens to suck out of our cars, the reserves mean we'll last longer in the coming famine years, and if any skinny little vegans give us any lip, all we gotta do is sit on 'em to quash the noise...
Seriously, extreme obesity is a darwin rule in action, usually - nobody wants to breed with us, and heart disease/stroke usually kill us "early" - rather like gay marriage, if you don't like 'em, don't join 'em, otherwise, back off: It's hard enough living in a world that wasn't built for us without having some smug, self-righteous ass-hat making comments because, while normal, we don't fit average... only made the worse when it's people who want their particular outside-of-average needs respected who fail the tolerance test...

Hahah. Morbidly obese people. Pissing me off since forever.

 

[Slidey]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

I'm saying if we can't remove the welfare state entirely

And thank god you can't. This isn't America.

 

[Enteebee]

Re: Australian Politics Chatter Thread

I could get behind your suggestion in that... that's actually quite a good one because it makes the company more attractive as well, allowing them to recruit more talented workers. And I'll always support tax cuts.

It only works because we have a tax system.

I'm saying if we can't remove the welfare state entirely, I'd rather it go to sick/disabled people than to more middle-class populism. You don't choose to be disabled. You do choose to have kids - so if you're in a financial mess purely because you had kids irresponsibly, it's different than if you're struggling because you're disabled.

Yeah but what do you think about what I said... That getting people to keep having kids is an investment for the future as well as a way to make people's lives a bit easier. Just because you made the choice doesn't mean your life shouldn't be easier... To provide a clear example: If someone chooses to dedicate their life to charity [i.e. not earning/saving much] I still support looking after them when they hit hard times themselves.

it's different than if you're struggling because you're disabled.

What if you're disabled because you hurt yourself, do they deserve less assistance?

I hate that argument. If people work hard and save up to buy luxury goods, why should we punish them for that? It's a disincentive and usually based on the politics of envy.

Obviously we don't want to create too big a disincentive otherwise we might drive away some talented people, but there's always room to tweak things and in my opinion the only reason we should care about people's desire for luxury goods is if by taxing them too much we end up with worse outcomes for those in the most need.

Good point. I don't understand why employers are often reluctant to take them on though. (I've had to be fairly selective in the jobs I take because of mine, but I've still got a job nevertheless.)

Depends, sometimes perhaps because they fear getting sued for futher injury, other times just because they don't think the person is as good.... For the most part though, I think most employers LOVE disabled workers (I know quite a few who do)... They're so much cheaper (thanks to good ole welfare) that it makes up for any incompitence they may have.