“This year the Australian government will spend on average over $6,000 on welfare for every man, woman and child in the country. Given that only around 45 per cent of the population pays income tax, the average taxpayer must pay more than twice this amount in tax to fund welfare expenditure.
“In other words, the average working Australian, be they a cleaner, a plumber or a teacher, is working over one month full-time each year just to pay for the welfare of another Australian. Is this fair?”
Ok, what’s the difference between Joe Hockey and Shrek?
Answer: One is a complete work of fiction and the other is green.
I’m trying to work out Joe’s figures in the above quote. If the average taxpayer has to pay twice $6,000 in tax to fund welfare expenditure ($12,000), how does that equate to say cleaner or a teacher or even a plumber working one month to pay for the welfare of another Australian? Is he suggesting that we pay $12,000 in tax every month? Or does he think that our wages are $12,000 a month.
Whatever way I look at it, it doesn’t make any sense at all. But I’m sure some Liberal supporter will have the answer and it’ll go something like this:
“Don’t you idiots realise that Labor broke the country and we have to do something to fix things, and this is something so you can’t criticise it!”
Of course, Joe did also complain that much of the criticism of his Budget was “political”.
Political? Imagine that! I mean, getting political is a terrible thing, isn’t it? Nobody should get political with the Budget…
I’m also intrigued as to when the media stopped demonising the government because people were unemployed and started blaming the unemployed themselves. After all, it’s the unemployed that chose to shut down the manufacturing sector and sack public servants. It’s the unemployed who make all the decisions about how the economy is structured. “Everyone who is capable should be working,” we’re now being told, as more and more decisions are made to create less and less jobs. I’d say something about easier rules on 457 visas, but Rupert finds that racist and disgusting. We only want stronger borders against asylum seekers.
But I’m more intrigued by the idea that the unemployed under 30 need to apply for forty jobs a month even in the six months before they start getting benefits. Or else they’ll have to wait another four weeks before being eligible for Newstart.
So this is how it works in practise. A person who is 26 and suddenly unemployed must spend what money they have – assuming they have savings – on photocopying resumes, stamps, stationery, internet access and various other items in order to make themselves eligible for the dole. Which – the Liberals are fond of telling us – should only be a temporary measure! If you run out of funds before you’re eligible, then you can never become eligible, because you’ll never have the money to meet the job application criteria.
Catch-22 had nothing on this.
Ah well, I guess some can move back in with their pensioner parents who had no cuts to their pension!
Still, this should be enough to make those under 30 demanding to be able to work for below the minimum wage. Anything rather than starve.
And Workchoices – which will was dead, buried and cremated – will become Zombie Workchoices. Or to give it the proper new name. Work(youhaveno)choice, you lazy bastard.
Read more articles from Rossleigh:
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
848 total views, 4 views today