We made this comment at the Guardian: There is no use trying to argue statistically about Forrests proposals for 100% income management for all payments other than age pensions. The fact that he excludes aged and DVA pensions is a huge pointer to Forrests true motives. Forrests proposals are not about the government getting more bang for their buck. They are about signalling to the community that assistance from the government is considered anti social and will be treated as such. Poverty is a crime and those seeking assistance will be treated accordingly Lets not lose sight of the fact that what Forrest is proposing is apartheid. Under these proposals only essential food, rent, medical, transport and utilities can be purchased on the card. The disabled, their carers, those who have been widowed and other sole parents and those between paid work will not be able to, among a thousand other things; have a glass of wine with their meal, keep a pet, see a movie, join a sporting club, buy a book, shop at a farmers market or a local corner store or purchase anything privately. They will be exluded from society. The workhouse without walls. The Victorian attitude to poverty was that it was a moral failing not to be rewarded. The idea behind the workhouses was deterrence - make asking for assistance so degrading that people will do anything to avoid it; horror stories from the workhouses are legion. It didnt work. Workhouses filled up as quickly as they could build them. It is becoming ever more evident that this government is a plutocracy. The Prime Minister asked Forrest to formulate these proposals for his consideration. How far further from our traditional Australian values of Social Democracy, the fair go, and not leaving people behind will we stray? theguardian/business/grogonomics/2014/aug/04/andrew-forrest-is-wrong-welfare-spending-is-not-out-of-control
Posted on: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 04:44:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015