Pension Debate: 'No One Has the Guts' to Let the Poor 'Wither and Die'

The system is a ponzi ... of course it is flawed and isnt going to work .... except to siphon any value from others to those at the top ... and they laughed at the Indians that sold their land for a few beads and blankets ... this fiat "system" is worse ...

 

The assumption that any system exists at all without our active and complicit participation is a fundamentally flawed concept. Who wants to trade their comfort for liberty? Or is your concept of liberty so tainted that it is measured in dollar terms?

 

Are you trying to imply that a poor person'slife has the same value as a rich persons life? That what a person does for a job does not affect the individuals worth?

Oh and I was being sarcastic before, I agree with what you are saying it is just I know a lot of other people will not.

People seem to be focussed on money and how they can keep it and screw everyone else.

 

I know you were being sarcastic mate.

Your first statement is interesting. I think that, rich or poor, every persons life has the same value but I do think what a person does for a job does indeed affect their worth to society. In that respect, the richest men in the world at the moment are also the most worthless in my eyes.

 

Interesting comment in regards to a persons job and their worth to society, a lot of jobs people think are crap and the people doing them are a lower "class" can actually be very important to how a society functions. An example would be a sewerage worker, really shitty job (ha ha) but where would people be if there was no working sewerage system?

Then you look at some of the people higher up in the finance industry dealing with derivitaves.

 

What have you got against Eugenics...?

 

I'm not sure if you are serious. I'll answer your question but could you answer it yourself first, do you believe in eugenics?

 

Nothing wrong with passive eugenics, but when you use it to justify murder, incest and forced marriges, you're going too far. Choosing a mate based on a desire for beneficial genetic traits for your offspring is part of many unions. It shouldn't be the only factor, but it is one of the reasons health and intelligence are considered attractive traits. IMO, it's more justified than relationships based on financial factors.

 

Once I would have said no, but I've met a lot more people since then.

 

Exactly, I always right someone should write "atlas shat". A book where all the hardworking underpaid cleaners, nurses, factory workers, farmers, truck drivers and other productive people decide to leave and form their own society full of people who actually get shit done. The highly paid CEO's, marketing gurus, magazine editors, celebrity chefs and high frequency trading managers are left to wallow in a society that cant feed or clothe itself and is generally falling apart.

I actually think that the world is better for marketing, CEO's and even high frequency traders buy something is wrong when a CEO is making more in a year than a nurse will in 5 lifetimes or more. Yes, it's what the market will bare but it isn't a reflection of their contribution.

With regards to entitlements I have seen them work first hand just the way they should. My grandfather relied on government money to complete his education as an electrical engineer. He grew up quite poor and would likely never have never been able to complete his education without it. He was provided for while he studied and then spent half a century being a massively productive member of society, helping build and develop the commanding Heights of the South Australian economy, contributing many times over in taxes what he took. My mother got a a free degree and similarly contributed much more than she took.

Because of some unfortunate personal circumstances our family was reliant on government benefits for a time. It Allowed me and my sister to stay in school and advance, she's a nurse now, earning good money and paying tax. It was very hard to make it work on so little money and we had a little help, I can't imagine what it's like for people who really have no extra help from family and friends.

I have NO time at all for people who fraudulently abuse the system and no time for people who have no intention to make the most of what have and show a little initiative to improve their circumstances. BUT and it's a big but, there are many people out there who have relied on government benefits and have been able to improve their circumstances and contribute to society in a much greater way than they would have without such support. If your moving in the right direction there's no reason society should support you until you can repay as best you can what you've taken. Whether that's the dole while your (actually) looking for work, support while your studying or those who are limited in their ability disability and age pensions.

The system of supporting students and providing free tertiary education in the third quater of this century created a generation of educated, successful and productive people, the likes of which we would be lucky to have now.

I pay tax and I'm studying, I'm happy that my tax dollars are going to support students and job seekers, it's not only the kind thing to do it's an investment in a stable, prosperous and wealthy society.

 

Is this addressed to me? I'll answer your questions anyway.

"Who wants to trade their comfort for liberty?"
A gilded cage is still a cage. And it's only gilded and comfortable for as long as those in power choose for it to be comfortable. Freedom brings prosperity and a life well-lived. Government's are a threat to that, not the provider of it, and history s pretty clear on this.

Or is your concept of liberty so tainted that it is measured in dollar terms?
No, but as mentioned above they just happen to coincide.

I guess Jefferson was one of those people where his actions didn't match his words.

 

What is your version of freedom / Liberty in relation to living in a society with other people in a healthy functioning society that takes the good of everyone into account?

Edit also you say Govt is a threat to freedom etc. can you provide a few examples of functioning societies that don't have a strong functioning Govt?

 

Public expenditure on every other direct welfare payment (including financial assistance for those working age) is 1/3rd of age pension liabilities.

US, UK, Australia, Canada, the same ratio repeats across almost every western democracy. Have a look at the pie charts in the links I've provided below.

Future pension liabilities is expected keep rising as demographics shift and life expectancy rises.

Australia
http://www.news.com.au/finance/econ...all-the-money-go/story-fn84fgcm-1226639950766

http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/co.../Fact Sheets/Overview_Tax_Transfer_System.htm


US Federal
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_budget_pie
2015 FY - US Federal Gov
Pensions 26%
(All Other Direct) Welfare 10%

UK
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_budget_pie_chart
2015 FY - UK
Pensions 20%
(All Other Direct) Welfare 15%

Canada
http://globalnews.ca/news/226865/interactive-graphic-how-ottawa-spends/
Old Age Security Payments - 13.33% of gov. expenditure
Canada Social Transfer - 5.17% of gov. expenditure

The rising cost of public healthcare commitments to the aging population is nothing to sniff at either.

 

Not addressing anyone specific, just howling at the wind. Totally agree with the gilded cage, and though dollar terms are the measure of the system we find ourselves in, unfortunately so is government, coinciding to build and guard the cage. Jeffo said a lot against Gov, I'd say he was a minarchist.

Wonder if that would be considered terrorism?

He also said some pro-gov stuff, I'm assuming after the independence. Mostly it was that, assuming the people were informed, educated and involved, it could be a good thing.

Context of his era is also to be taken into account. Some form of organisation was required to defeat the British monarchy, involving guns and free speech. They replaced it with something with more liberty, but he wasn't assuming it would last. He warned against Gov going too far.

 

I think Jefferson said so much throughout his life that he was bound to contradict himself a few times. And I think a lot of philosophy still hadn't been properly worked out at the time. The concept of property rights, I think, had only been around for a hundred years or so. And women weren't allowed to own property until the 20th century, I think. Slavery as well. Looking back, I have to say that government was the only thing they knew and the only thing that fit regarding the conventions of the time. It might be that we still have a few traditional conventions left to discard before we can properly consider abolishing govt.

Regarding the gilded cage, I think that what happens now is that due to all the inefficiencies of the public sector, we are naturally in a state of recession. Government overcomes this temporarily by creating credit booms, where they drop the interest rate and provide other inducements for people to borrow and therefore spend money, in order to artificially "stimulate" the economy. When you get the inevitable crash, when people as a whole become too indebted, then the public balance sheet gets loaded up to try and offset it. Which inevitably results in higher taxes and less spending power for people and your back to where you started (worse actually because of all the private and public debt). It's all craziness as it currently exists. Crazy economic theories. Government creates temporary prosperity at a very high medium-long term price in order to offset the problems it creates. Credit booms tend to favour a minority of people, those who already have plenty of capital, hence the 99%, rich-poor increasing gap stuff. Does all that make it worth it?

 

Future's so bright I'll have to wear shades!

It's pretty obvious to me that hard times are not far off. The current thread on WA's difficulty is only the start. It was always mining receipts that helped out previously. With mining in the descendant it looks like they've actually decided to bet their political futures on Housing.

Hockey in the papers today with some scheme to allow superannuation access to buy a first home. If I was young I'd be doing everything possible to stay clear of this timebomb.

And interesting article also on taxes and deficits in The Saturday Paper. Puts the lie to the view that any of this new breed of career politicians are prepared to act in anything other than their own interest in getting re-elected. Bow to the Mandarins because they don't have an intellectual patriotic brain cell to join a single other. Stuff the country. Stuff the poor, the elderly and the workers. Whatever it takes to get back into government cars and 5 star hotels on 'fact finding' missions.

Makes it harder to maintain a view that there is a generational conspiracy to move the world to a Feudal order doesn't it?

 

Agreed.
You will enjoy this one Jules....

Mmmmm... didn't know it was the unions that served the state?..... :lol: