Yping88 and 牧马人 on social benefit system

yping88

@牧马人

Group one: Crippled ans handicapped physically due to a number of reasons, and unfortunately lost their physical capability to fend themselves

Group two: Tortured and defeated by either birth defect or the long-term mental illness, and lost their intellectual capability to uphold a working position to support themselves

Group three: Being held obligated morally and willingly choose to take care their loved ones full time, hence, lost their opportunity to commit to working outside (This group live on their carer allowance)

Group four: Found nothing wrong with their physic condition, but, voluntarily opt to live on social benefit. But, in the meanwhile, they are making troubles, engaging in lots things anti-social, cracking drugs, alcohol abusing, committing serious crimes...and what have you

Group five: Some aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, they are perfectly capable of fending themselves, but opt not attend their duty as a citizen to fend themselves and live on their special birth-bond allowance. Just because their ancestors were once the only inhabitants and owned this land. (@牧马人 and I had a lengthy conversation on this topic, he has some brilliant insight on this. Please refer to https://freeoz.org/ibbs/forum.ph ... p;page=4#pid6217630 )

The reason I would like to categorize them is that when being critical about those who dig a huge loophole in the social benefit system, we won't accidentally generalize the whole population who depend on the social support just trying to survive!

yping88

For group one and two, the society will bear the obligation and morality to look after them. This democratic system is based on high moral ground and humanitarian value. That's one of the great reasons that makes a country stand out outstandingly in the international community. And every tax-payers should take pride in the excellent role they have played in taking care of those in need.

I have been caring for those who are crippled by their long-term mental morbidity, major depression, post traumatic distress syndrome, bi-polar disease, ...you name it.

To see how struggled they are to make sense of the reality on a daily basis while they are completely out of touch with the reality! When seeing them to be rushed in after their multiple suicidal attempts or psychotic crisis, your heart will sink with their loved ones and keep questioning yourself: What happened to your reality to make you find no any other way out but kill yourself? What can we do as a social family to make you feel wanted and stay with this human world?

I swear to God, nothing else ever crossed my mind but sympathy and willingness to help!

yping88

To be continued, please stay tuned

yping88

Group three include those who take care of their physically or intellectually handicapped loved ones. These people include parents and children.

Parents are legally bound to their care-receivers who were under 18 years of age. As long as the handicapped children turn into adults, parents' still own the legal guardianship over their legal decisions but not necessarily over their daily care needs any more.

In these cases, some parents opt to relocate their no-longer-dependent-children in the care facilities and rejoin the workforce if they are still capable of picking up wherever they left off or something else new. In these situation, the social benefits will be resigned with the handicapped care-receivers to the facilities that home them. The rest of the group who insist their adult children remaining home with parents, their once-called child support allowance will be changed to carer allowance (Not sure how much difference it is between these two benefits). Government will do its best to respect and support this decision, because it reduced so much more burden on the society and the handicapped adults still can enjoy their family life. Resource in the care facility will be redirected to those who need the most!

The other care group supported by social benefit system are those adult children who insist keeping home their elderly, non-functional parents and look after them full time. Of course, they will be paid for shouldering that responsibility that is supposed to be on governments' shoulder. Once again, aged care facilities and elderly parents are both happy.

Mazel tov! Everyone is happy!  

yping88

Group four--Phew, that's a tough one. To be perfectly clear with you all, I still have a hard time wrapping my head around this group's dealings. but, I will have to face it head on since I have got myself into this situation, then, I will have to find myself a way around it.

This group are perfectly healthy people (Well, at least physically), they have absolutely functional full limbs and strongly beating heart. However, instead of doing whatever they are capable of to be independent, they are feeding on social benefit. What the heck!!!!

To be clear, those in the group who can constantly produce to CentraLink the job-application rejection letters from the above discussion. I hold nothing but sympathy towards these people. I can imagine how frustrated it is to be rejected and deemed non-qualified for multiple applications they attempted. One significant concern over this group is that, in the long run, they will lose their confidence, their self-esteem, their certainty over their existence, and eventually fall vulnerable to depression and self-harm risk. Therefore, I believe it's necessary for the government to be there for them until they pull themselves through the hardship and find their solid footing in the society.

The rest among this group fended by social benefits, who show absolutely no attempts seeking jobs, no motivation getting on their own feet, in the meanwhile, living on a self destructive lifestyle (Drugs, alcohol) with the public financial aid. And the worst yet, after they squandered the benefit allowance, they come out redirect their destruction to the others. Under the influence of drugs and alcohol, they started stealing, robbery and even killing innocent people. How, how can we make sense out of this!!!

In here, I would like to draw back on my travel experience in Galapagos Islands, Ecuador. That's an amazing paradise for those beautiful tropical creatures. Sea Lions, Iguanas, all kinds of unusual birds, ...They all live in harmony in a co-inhabitant.

I remember the tour guide laughing off at the questions: Are they hurting one another? saying: No, there is no need for them to hurt one another, because there is enough food and shelters for everyone.

So, please allow me to put two and two together here: Are we too quick in making a judgement and saying that the way government financially supports those who are capable of fending themselves but choose not to encourages their laziness and depending on others behavour!

What if they are left on absolutely nothing, roaming around wildly on street, whose security will be at stake? Them or the general public? Will the society be safer if these people are taken of?

Now, I realize no matter how hard I try, I still have trouble figuring it all out. so, I will have to leave it at that.

My apology!

yping88

@牧马人

Sorry, I have to delay my discussion on Indigenous group on this topic

yping88

@yearshappy

年MM,
Would please point me to a direction? I know it's a sensitive topic, but it's Australia. Everyone is allowed to express themselves freely.

Come on!

yearshappy

yping88 发表于 29-9-2018 14:16
@yearshappy

年MM,

haha, it's a mess-up in which I mistook your group four for group five. Ignore it please. Don't want to ruin your train of thought.

yearshappy

um, it could have been 年JieJie or 年xyz etc

牧马人

yping88 发表于 29-9-2018 10:01
For group one and two, the society will bear the obligation and morality to look after them. This de ...

Good on ya.

Serin

yping88 发表于 29-9-2018 13:11
Group four--Phew, that's a tough one. To be perfectly clear with you all, I still have a hard time w ...

For every benefit system, there will be benefit parasites but with 10 parasites taking advantage, if the system can prevent one family from spirallin down to poverty and get it back to feet again, then I'd say it's a bargain. Having said 'bargain', social benefit is not a for-profit system and never should be. That's why no for-profit companies but only the government itself should take the responsibility.

How well the benefit system is working is another big question... which is somewhat more relevant to the situation of Group 5 than other groups. Handing money out is the easiest but laziest practice as it erodes people's will to become self-sustained and, especially towards indigenous people, it's like another round of colonisation that's even more effective to destroy their culture than firearms.

...And yes, it's easy for me to outline the problems with no panacea for them.

yping88

Thank you for weighing in, @Serin

God, I wish I don't have to tell you how much I missed talking to you!

春浅

看不明白，是牧马人和yping合影吗？

牧马人

Serin 发表于 1-10-2018 11:01
For every benefit system, there will be benefit parasites but with 10 parasites taking advantage,  ...

'Handing money out is the easiest but laziest practice as it erodes people's will to become self-sustained and, especially towards indigenous people, it's like another round of colonisation that's even more effective to destroy their culture than firearms.'

Can't agree more!

牧马人

春浅 发表于 1-10-2018 14:58
看不明白，是牧马人和yping合影吗？

这标题意思多明白，是yping88和牧马人在吃福利