Spot the assumption

So a poverty-pimp has a piece in the Drum this morning carrying on about the “most vulnerable groups in our society” and how mean we are in our dealings with those individuals. Yes – whatever.

This sentence, however, is quite interesting (emphasis added):

Coupled with the fact that women go out of the workforce to have children and to care for them, without mandated superannuation contributions during this time, they start retirement on the back foot.

My first thought was, “What about her husband?”. Of course, that is bound to get me into trouble. In 2007 I caused a meltdown at the ABC when I asked if a young lady with three disabled children and allegedly struggling on welfare was married. The assumption seems to be that women exit the workforce and raise children in the absence of any societal support mechanisms. Of course the luvvies always assume that government is the only societal support mechanism – but that can’t be true.

The notion that super should be paid while individuals are not working or in the workforce is astonishing. Paid by whom? In any event those women in stable long-term relationships can look to their husbands (or partners if unmarried) to support them while they are raising children. Marriage is the social mechanism that has evolved for that very purpose.* Similarly in retirement the couple would have joint savings (including their super) to draw upon for support.

Of course we live in a world of unexpected pregnancies and divorce and so on. Yes – that is all true. Yet to generalise that somehow all women are worse off due to child rearing by abstracting from the non-government social institutions that support women in precisely that situation is very misleading.

* before the luvvies get hysterical it has other functions too.

This entry was posted in Cultural Issues. Bookmark the permalink.

62 Responses to Spot the assumption

  1. Geriatric Mayfly

    “Before the luvvies get hysterical…” Pavlov’s drooling dogs come to mind immediately. Ring the bell and they slaver away. This article will set the dribblers off, and true to form, ‘hysteria’ is their normal reflex.

  2. Percy

    Paid by whom?

    Wait, I think I can guess this one…….

  3. Brett

    Superannuation is a benefit of employment.

  4. wal1957

    Personally, I would prefer that my taxes don’t have ‘raise’ somebody’s kids.
    Rebates, endowments, bonuses etc…
    I know of one bloke who has a $20k sound system in his home, and he whinges to me about how costly it is to raise a family! FFS if you can’t afford to have a family, don’t have one, and don’t expect me to pay for it!

  5. .

    What a woman can earn from child support and welfare combined is truly middle class.

    Unless their estranged partner is unemployed, single mothers aren’t faring poorly.

    Generational poverty is a bigger problem than the perception of some true believers who think Government is congurent to benevolence.

  6. Bear Necessities

    Yes, but also men are going without income as well to look after children, both able and disabled. Good friends of us have decided that she, due to her very good position in a major bank, goes out and works and he takes care of 2 able children and 1 very disabled child. The disabled child is 7 years old and whilst he can walk, he can do little else. So it is not just women who are making the sacrifice in a stable “partnership”.

  7. sabrina

    Marriage and decision to have a child is matter of individual choice. No one should be paid to have a baby or rear a child. If unaffordable, one should not have a baby.

    Family tax benefits, baby bonus and paid parental leave should be reviewed and abolished gradually.

  8. The issue is more fundamental: why have a mandatory superannuation system at all, or old age support of any kind?

    The basic message of our human history – that we are SEPARATE individuals and families, fully responsible for ourselves and our decisions – is being diluted somewhere. Governments were created to provide a few common goods. Not to support people’s private goods (their children) or provide people with old age pensions.

    If government support stops, people WILL have more children (and look after them) since children will then become their main source of old age support and insurance. By governments taking responsibility for people’s old age support we create perverse incentives for families to not have children, and for families to disintegrate. The cost of divorce is now almost insignificant. Marriage has become equivalent to a casual fling of no consequence. Every risk is now passed on to others – the government.

    The intervention of government in all aspects of human existence is leading to a wide range of undesirable consequences all around.

  9. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    It is rare to hear it so clearly stated, Sinc, so please do keep on annoying the luvvies by pointing out the basic facts of life to them. Both men and women have children and should rear children together. Let’s just get back to that, start from there (as the comments above suggest) and let each family sort out its preferences. If you don’t have two parents doing this (if they chose to live apart or have new partners that is their lookout and their business) then the State can offer basic support and no more.

  10. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    to clarify – the State can offer basic support if the parent system fails in some way due to unemployment, illness, death or desertion without the other partner being traceable and made responsible.

  11. Chris M

    Very true, a persons first level of support is their spouse / immediate family then relatives, friends and church family.

    Should I post this on the drum?

  12. Apparently the rich-poor gap in Australia has narrowed a little.

    VCOSS comments -
    The improvements in income equality can be attributed to a number of elements. One likely contributing factor is the substantial increase to government pensions implemented by the Commonwealth Government since 2009. This demonstrates the importance of fair rates of government benefits to address income inequality in the Australian community.

    Some thoughts -
    1. Abolish stamp duty and negative gearing – Despite what the parasites in the real estate racket say, it does nothing to increase the supply of new homes. Investors generally buy established properties. It costs the Australian taxpayer billions.
    2. Use the funds recovered to bring Newstart closer to a level that is survivable.
    3. Save the billions wasted on off-shoring asylum seekers by bringing them to the mainland and allowing them to find jobs. They would be settled in designated ex-metropolitan areas and would need ID cards. Abbott reckons the boats have stopped, so off-shoring is no longer a deterrent.
    And before the bleatings about their human rights because they’d have to live in designated areas – consider what being locked up in gulags in remote offshore location does to these rights. Use the funds to improve wages for those (mostly women) working in the aged care and childcare industry.
    BTW Sinc, may I use the term “Haties”?
    Apparently it is OK = since “Luvvies” is acceptable.

  13. Percy

    Should I post this on the drum?

    Moderaters have been active there of late, something so offensive would be lucky to get through.

  14. blogstrop

    Language is used to hide truth.
    Political Activist is now code for well-intentioned and motivated, rather than troublemaker helping to break down our society.
    The Less Fortunate is code for victim of an uncaring capitalist society, with no recognition of either (i) how much we do help them, being a welfare state, and (ii) how much their own behaviour and choices might have led them to where they are now.

  15. Vicki

    The issue of state support for single mothers has always astonished me – even as, with many others, I watched it develop as a policy. It assumes either the disappearance of the birth father, or his refusal to financially contribute to the support of his offspring.

    Sadly, it has been a parallel development with the disappearance of personal accountability from western society & the growth of state assistance for all manner of claims.

  16. Sinclair Davidson

    BTW Sinc, may I use the term “Haties”?

    Bob Brown beat you to it, I think.

  17. candy

    ‘”luvvies” sounds cuter than “haties” …

  18. .

    1. Abolish stamp duty and negative gearing – Despite what the parasites in the real estate racket say, it does nothing to increase the supply of new homes. Investors generally buy established properties. It costs the Australian taxpayer billions.

    You are wrong. Taxes make things more expensive, otherwise they wouldn’t raise any revenue, or they create wealth simply by existing and making things nominally more expensive. Stamp duty kills labour mobility.

    2. Use the funds recovered to bring Newstart closer to a level that is survivable.

    No funds would be “recovered”. You are old enough to remember but forget when Keating reversed the abolition of negative gearing. negative gearing wouldn’t exist without income tax. Newstart is entirely survivable.

    3. Save the billions wasted on off-shoring asylum seekers by bringing them to the mainland and allowing them to find jobs. They would be settled in designated ex-metropolitan areas and would need ID cards

    If you stop the boats, you don’t need to spend $10 bn a year. This can be done by cutting off welfare to non-citizens. You want to set people free by making them unfree? What a terrifically stupid idea.

  19. Old Surfie

    Walking back from the beach this morning, I passed the local Centrelink office. At 8.25 am there was at least 50 people crowded around the front door and spread out onto the footpath – with more pulling up in cars. Looked like the local seafood shop on Christmas eve. Probably some genuine ones there, but I’m sure it’s a chosen lifestyle for the majority. In any case, I might have been passing a third world soup kitchen. I am still working beyond retirement age for the sole reason that I don’t want to join the crowd I saw this morning – I couldn’t lower myself to stand there.

  20. Toiling Mass

    Bear Necessities,

    You should check the Heirarchy or Vulnarability: If he is a white male he is somehow responsible for his and his spouses predicament.

    If he is black or a lesbian, however…

  21. lotocoti

    Her

    benefits like superannuation which workers should be entitled to.

    is a beauty too.
    I’ve always operated on the principle that super was a CYA mechanism which is wholly an individual’s responsibility.
    Perhaps Emily believes ‘workers’ should be entitled to some sort of ‘rainy day’ fund to smooth out the bumps in domestic life too.

  22. Joe Goodacre

    Sinclair identifies a broader blindspot – people focus on what income women earn, without focusing on what spending power they can access. The same blindspot becomes apparent when people talk about the pay gap between men and women.

    In a loving marriage, who earns the income is irrelevant – it becomes joint property.

    This principle explains why women with no income, live in comfortable homes, drive comfortable vehicles and spend $250 at the supermarket each week.

    It seems that the people most likely not to understand the nature of joint property in a loving marriage, are either those who haven’t married, or those who chose poorly.

  23. Joe Goodacre

    A related issue is that government intervention implicitly proposed on ”The Drum’, negates the benefit marriage provides (i.e. a stable and secure environment for men and women to raise children).

    This removes the natural advantage marriage has over other unions. Why is it the role of government to undermine marriage?

    Forget the argument that homosexual marriage undermines heterosexual marriage – there’s plenty of government interventions that are doing more damage.

  24. Noname
    Sometimes I doubt that you read anything I post.
    Or if you do, you imagine what it means.

    I wrote – Abolish stamp duty

    You wrote – You are wrong. Taxes make things more expensive,

    Unless you define stamp duty as something other than a tax, you’re making no sense at all.

    Stamp duty kills labour mobility.

    Yep – that’s another reason for abolishing it – you know, what I suggested upthread.

    You want to set people free by making them unfree?

    OK – your definition of freedom – Being banged up in a tropical gulag without any real idea when you will be released, and what will happen when you are.

  25. hammy

    If unaffordable, one should not have a baby.

    Oh, so the righties want to put a means test on having a baby now!

  26. Rabz

    Use the funds recovered to bring Newstart closer to a level that is survivable.

    What a top idea! That will really encourage all those useless bludgers out there to give up the dole and get a job.

    Your ignorance is astounding, spudpeeler, you monumental drooling cretin.

  27. Rabz

    Oh, so the righties want to put a means test on having a baby now!

    Way to completely miss the point, Hammburglar.

    Once more for the morons – if you can’t afford to have children, then don’t fucking have them. Don’t expect me to fund your lifestyle choices, you fucking pillock.

  28. Rabz
    #1128352, posted on December 30, 2013 at 7:02 pm
    Do not attempt to engage me in conversation, you fucking moron.

    Once again, you’re responding to my posts.
    You’re still swearing and abusing. Boring…………
    Short attention span or galloping Alzheimers?
    Pavlov would have had a field day.

  29. candy

    I think we’ve gone past the point of no return by now, and welfare is seen as a living, a right, and not gratefully as a bridge between unforeseen circumstances to better times. We generally follow America and that’s where we’re headed. Besides which no legislation that seeks to decrease welfare will ever get through our current Green/ALP alliance in parliament.

  30. .

    I’m shocked and impressed numbers actually wants to get rid of stamp duty, but then he decides I ‘don’t read what he writes” and proceeds to lecture me about offshore detention, when it would be made redundant by abolishing welfare to non-citizens.

    Clearly he didn’t read what I wrote, or thinks that the majority of asylum seekers don’t have a shocking record of taking up benefits.

  31. Rabz

    Spudpeeler, you are an infuriating moron and I’m sick to fucking death of the bilious horseshit you post here.

    It will be held up to ridicule as I see fit, you lobotomised ol’ creep.

  32. candy

    I do think New Start might be raised somewhat, however, along with more stringent requirements and working for the benefit.
    Some people just fall behind in life and try as they can, can never manage enough work or stay in work and don’t have family support and the wherewithal to retrain just is not there.
    Some people do fall between the cracks and we should be mindful.

  33. Leo G

    Superannuation is a benefit of employment.

    Surely superannuation has a labour cost to the employer and thereby has a compensating opportunity-cost effect to reduce employee incomes. It has probably a net long-term benefit to public sector workers, of course.

  34. .

    This is progress.

    Numbers is agitating for a tax to be abolished.

    The system works.

  35. Percy

    Anyone that liked this piece on the dumb should duck over and check out Tim Woodruff’s delightful piece on co-payments. Be sure you are seated when reading.

  36. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Any man and woman can ‘afford’ to have a baby in this society, and without benefits, if they are prepared to work and make do. It is the lack of ‘making do’ that comes into this ‘afford’ notion being bandied around. Babies can sleep very nicely in an old drawer, they feed on breast milk and later mashed family food. You start them off with a dozen or so washable nappies, grandma’s knitted bits and pieces or hand-me-downs, and lots of love. My first husband and I had two babies while on post-grad scholarships. We managed well, luxury in fact compared to the above, a tale from my Sainted Mother’s childhood. When The Philosopher left to do some more philosophising with his feminist girlfriends, I worked to keep me and the kids till he came to his senses, got a job, and started paying something too.

    Candy, I know some people do it tough, and I’d do whatever I could to help them help themselves. It should work more like that, and less like putting their palm up to Big Government Daddy.

    Onya, Old Surfie. You and my Sainted Mother were brought up on the same page I think.

  37. Jazza

    I wish we would return to the old way that supported all families and was pro rata,instead of all the additional to pension handouts to the “lucky” lazyoften few–it was to give tax deductions for things like insurance, education costs, house insurance and rates,and medical bills.
    Of course it didn’t please the leftie hypocrites who shout out “equality” every time anyone earning more than their set basic wages gets a break.
    But after a long life, I think we just might have lots more tax avoidance now with decent wage earners hit while the hypocrites and hangers on shout “more” while contributing about ZILCH

  38. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Numbers – a little correction – the Luvvies are also the Haties. They lurve Big Government and “Progressive thought” (the latter an oxymoron) and they Hate with a vengeance any opposition to their project of ending capitalism and imposing their will over all.

  39. Waldo

    Thanks Sinc, on the money as usual.
    Had some time so read (wouldn’t bother normally) the Drum article the best line was: ” let’s not forget the self-serving warfare that went on in the highest ranks of the parliamentary Labor Party over the course of the Gillard government, often with pistons aimed at the prime minister herself.” Pistons can do a lot of damage I suppose!
    Luvvies can’t help themselves, weaving discrimination, not to mention bad spelling, against our worst ever Prime Minister into every article.

  40. Boambee John

    Numbers (1129000):

    The greatest mistake governments (of both persuasions) have made in relation to “asylum seekers” was to give them access to medicare, social security, etc.

    The policy you offer has some excellent points – ID cards (subject to modification/revocation should genuine identities be discovered), restrictions on domicile locations (with limited numbers of any ethnic or religious group allowed in any place, to prevent “sympathetic clustering” and development of victimology, access to work definitely, but NO social security, Medicare or other government support.

    If private charities or religious groups wish to provide support, not using funds garnered from the government, that would be their free choice.

  41. JohnA

    So a poverty-pimp has a piece in the Drum this morning carrying on about the “most vulnerable groups in our society” and how mean we are in our dealings with those individuals.

    Merely starting from the baseline assumption of Social Darwinism’s survival of the fittest. It’s the current paradigm, much as it is contrary to human psychology and historical evidence, and offends my world-view, which is based on Biblical standards of self-responsibility and co-operation (see another thread).

    However Ms Millane (as a Research Fellow, she has to be a Ms, right?) immediately contradicts the starting assumption with this: “Decency is one of our defining national qualities” , and then goes on, as Sinc reports, to bemoan the lack thereof.

    With such confused thinking, no wonder the piece is such a mess. She manages to take a swipe at “the system” (not named as such), government, Holden, compliant media (where did that come from?), Abbott and almost every other Australian who doesn’t think as she does.

    Thank you to all who sacrifice their reading time so I can save myself the pain of The Drum.

  42. Mr Rusty

    I know of one bloke who has a $20k sound system in his home, and he whinges to me about how costly it is to raise a family!

    ————————————————

    Any man and woman can ‘afford’ to have a baby in this society, and without benefits, if they are prepared to work and make do. It is the lack of ‘making do’ that comes into this ‘afford’ notion being bandied around.

    Probably not the best forum to talk about banning words but I absolutely despise it when the left use the word “poverty”. No-one in this country lives in poverty. At a stretch I would say the number of poor number very few. There are well-off and those who are not so well-off but using the word “poverty” is a blood boiler for me. That even the lowest of the low can get a roof over their head, do not need to worry about the next meal, have access to healthcare and clean water is NOT poverty.
    There is a massive problem when people are considered poor because they don’t have the latest Xbox or iPhone, especially when it is expected that others should / must buy these things for them. Nobody has the right to my money or my hard work – not even my employer, it is a mutually agreed upon exchange.
    I actually don’t mind helping out genuine cases of hardship but all I see now is resentment, entitlement and jealousy and guess what that makes me feel?

  43. No-one in this country lives in poverty.

    As I occasionally observe to my sons, though officially below the poverty line, we enjoy a standard of living which was up to a few hundred years ago beyond the dreams of the richest kings.

  44. No-one in this country lives in poverty. At a stretch I would say the number of poor number very few.

    I am afraid I agree with you. We live in a suburb with a reasonably high proportion of state housing, and next door to a suburb with a very high proportion of state housing. The next-door suburb, where we go to church, is an education in itself.

    There are streets in it where the houses appear to have vomited on a regular basis. The verge is piled high with utter crap – but crap that has at one stage been decent furniture, electrical goods and bedding.

    What is so noteworthy is the level of destruction wreaked on this furniture. In other suburbs, when there is chuck-out day and you go round and help yourself to ‘recycled’ things, there are far smaller piles, and the stuff is usually in reasonable condition. In this suburb, the stuff is filthy and utterly destroyed, as if someone has taken to it with an axe.

    In other suburbs, chuck-out day comes once a year. But in this suburb, these piles appear constantly, and some mysterious force removes all the junk for these people. In our street, we’d be penalised for leaving piles of junk on the verge, but no one seems to mind in this suburb.

    Driving down these streets on a regular basis, I am forced to the same conclusion: there is no real material poverty here. Yet the kids are filthy, the women overweight and drunk, the men absent or very vocal and violent. Everyone smokes. They all have cars. They all have phones.

    The exterior of the church building used to be attacked and vandalised frequently, but the last PP put in security screens on the glass and stronger doors, so these attacks have now stopped. Our current PP lives below the poverty line on his stipend, and yet his verge is never piled with destroyed rubbish.

    No one likes to use the words ‘class’ or ‘race’ in this context, but we all know what we’re talking about. I am always tickled when the Australia Day river foreshore events have to be made alcohol-free or with alcohol-free zones, while the annual WA Symphony Orchestra free classical concert on the foreshore, which also attracts thousands of people, has never been declared alcohol-free.

  45. Beef

    Who is the most vulnerable person in this scenario?

    Drinking the Coca-Cola makes it the guy.

  46. Gab

    Thank you, Philippa. Thank you for telling it like it is.

    The killer line:

    I am always tickled when the Australia Day river foreshore events have to be made alcohol-free or with alcohol-free zones, while the annual WA Symphony Orchestra free classical concert on the foreshore, which also attracts thousands of people, has never been declared alcohol-free.

  47. Dan

    I do think New Start might be raised somewhat, however, along with more stringent requirements and working for the benefit.
    Some people just fall behind in life and try as they can, can never manage enough work or stay in work and don’t have family support and the wherewithal to retrain just is not there.
    Some people do fall between the cracks and we should be mindful.

    Maybe people fall through the cracks because of government interference in IR and the like? Or they allow groups, such as Unions, to corrupt the marketplace.

  48. I am always tickled when the Australia Day river foreshore events have to be made alcohol-free or with alcohol-free zones, while the annual WA Symphony Orchestra free classical concert on the foreshore, which also attracts thousands of people, has never been declared alcohol-free.

    It’s just the facts … And of course one almost never sees booze buses outside the Concert Hall after a Gala Performance of anything classical, even though I’m sure there would be easy money to be made there.

  49. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    As an additional note, Philippa, the No Carbon Tax rally I went to in Hyde Park in Sydney was polite, full of helpful friendly people, and everyone cleared up afterwards leaving the area spotless. In contrast to many greenie ‘protest’ sites, which are left full of rubbish and debris, and which are full of dirty, unkempt and thoughtless ferals.

  50. Dan

    Driving down these streets on a regular basis, I am forced to the same conclusion: there is no real material poverty here. Yet the kids are filthy, the women overweight and drunk, the men absent or very vocal and violent. Everyone smokes. They all have cars. They all have phones.

    Philippa, These states of being are now guaranteed Human Rights. A right to a mobile phone, grog, furniture and even unemployment. It’s the systems fault dontchaknow. We wuz robbed!

  51. And not only that, Dan, but a nice lady at Centrelink will even complete their forms for them. I have seen this with my own eyes at the Fremantle office, during my brief period on welfare back in late 2007.

    If I’d come in to that same office with an incomplete form, there would have been hell to pay, a lecture, being sent to the back of the queue until it was completed, and possibly a letter in the post shortly afterwards warning me of the consequences of messing with the Man.

  52. Dan

    The life of no consequence.

    Pays rather well too.

  53. Andrew

    No one likes to use the words ‘class’ or ‘race’ in this context, but we all know what we’re talking about.

    Middle class Swedish Presbytarians? Help us out with a few more clues Philippa.

  54. Yes, that’s right, Andrew.

    Middle class Swedish Presbyterians. I am proud to be one of them, and will drag you to the Human Rights Commission if you dare say anything agin it.

  55. It seems that the people most likely not to understand the nature of joint property in a loving marriage, are either those who haven’t married, or those who chose poorly.

    Or those who hate the thought that someone, somewhere, might be happy without the government making it so.

  56. Mick Gold Coast QLD

    From Philippa Martyr at 12:35 pm:

    “Watch this gorgeous Coke ad from Argentina.

    Who is the most vulnerable person in this scenario?”

    Thank you dear Philippa, that brought me undone – a fabulous scenario, and accurate. I loved it, even the hired help came running to ask “What so funny, white boy?”

    No-one’s vulnerable there, they are all blessed. What a marvelous image to end a year!

    I have sat on the sidelines and watched with amusement as Mick The Second and his three sisters sailed that same course (identical at times, I still cannot believe how much mountain climbing / long distance trekking gear they’d cart to the park where I used take them in only their speedos and bare feet) and I now see their emerging relief as the oldest ones enter ten-teen plus.

    For the wowser up the page – I’m a proud Coke-a-holic, for a lifetime. I’ve drunk mega giga litres of it, still do. Cholest-whatever within bounds, sugar normal, need to be poked with a stick to determine if there is any blood pressure operating at all, teeth good, hooves sound. The mates who have carked it are those who belted down half a dozen schooners, or half a bottle of whisky, a night, every night.

    I’d like to be around in 40 years to witness the aftermath of the odd little snort of powder for a high, or the passing around of a shared rollie, “‘cos it’s harmless”, for the omniscient young. They’re in for a wee surprise later in life, I say.

  57. H B Bear

    A lot of this tax-welfare churn could be eliminated overnight if the government would recognise the reality of the family as the primary economic unit and allow income splitting between couples with dependent children. Secondary income earners (predominantly women) would be freed from the mental gymnastics of marginal tax rates, subsidised child care arrangements and tax benefits through transfer of higher marginal rate income.

    It would also help make explicit the adverse economic outcome of single parenthood.

  58. stackja

    The notion that super should be paid while individuals are not working or in the workforce is astonishing.

    Not to the the luvvies.

  59. Notafan

    The US allows a family taxation option, the constant harping is the consequence of wanting women to be completely independent of men while at the same time forcing transfers from those who do work without breaks to those who do. At the same time this is intended to further undermine marriage and family as primary. Mrs Thatcher was so right. The Dutch are limiting welfare payments to households rather than mum and kids having separate entitlements and it appears their reforms are driven in part by the welfare dependency of recent migrants.
    In relation to irregular boat arrivals I believed the onshore costs are much higher than offshore. Under arrangements with Sri lanka most are sent straight home and there is a likelihood that those who came under RGR will also be sent home. I believe the recent chest beating about Sri Lankan war crimes has been to bolster Tamil asylum claims (while completely ignoring Tamil war crimes). It looked like Lee Rhiannon has her fingers in that pie. Scott Morrison’s weekly briefings include voluntary repatriations and Bishop has been in discussion with Iran in relation to involuntary repatriations.
    Even Bob Carr admitted that the irregular maritime arrivals were economic arrivals and I believe that LNP is hoping that as well as stopping the IRAs those already on Mamus and Nauru will recognise that the game is up and go home. Thin out Manus Naura then transfer everyone currently on Christmas Island till they all either go home and the few genuine refugees get resettled,

  60. duncanm

    HB Bear – you hit it on the head.

    however this would be decried as “middle class welfare” and examples of millionaire business types with stay-at-home nannies will be trotted out.

  61. cuckoo

    The poor. I always enjoy it when someone like the ABC digs up a ‘poor’ person to be the face of some sob-story. They did it a lot when Howard was PM. Not so much in the following 5 years. The last one I saw was a single dad (I forget the issue) with two boys. He was well-practised in telling us how ‘hard’ he was doing it. First they showed him playing with his dogs. Nice. But how much a week do they cost to feed? Then we moved inside for more interview – in the background of his kitchen we could see a two-door fridge, with an ice-maker. I’ve always wanted one of those. I’m just guessing they didn’t do the interview in the loungeroom, because there was probably a humungous flatscreen tv and Xbox which would have been hard to keep out of shot. Doin’ it hard, mate.

Comments are closed.