This week is 'Versus Week'. Each Hello Noise blog post this week is going to be taking a brief look at a particular topic or question with one writer covering the positive and another the negative. We hope it gets you pumped up for our first Hello Noise debate night on November 3rd.
*Not every persons statement reflects their own personal beliefs.*
For the Positive: Solomon
The main argument against Centrelink payments is that people cheat the system. Everyone has heard the term “dole bludger,” and associates it with people who live on welfare, basically getting money for nothing. However, the media constantly neglect to mention that the overwhelming percentage of people who receive Centrelink payments are those who need it. Students, single mothers, the disabled, the elderly, and genuine job seekers are all good examples of this. To get rid of Centrelink would end the people who cheat the system, certainly, but it would also cripple the far greater number of people who depend upon it – students can't become doctors and teachers without the means to feed themselves in the meantime; single mothers can't feed and clothe their children with no money; and the elderly and disabled simply cannot survive without financial assistance, since their working days are over.
On a purely economical level, it's important to remember that any kind of money distribution stimulates the economy. The countries that best survived the recent GFC were also countries with extensive welfare systems – Australia and Sweden being good examples. When people spend money (whether it's on life-saving medicine or cigarettes) the economy keeps ticking over; when people don't spend, the economy grinds to a halt and you get an economic depression. In this way, the regular flow of Centrelink payments help to keep Australia's economy afloat, and that benefits every last person who lives here.
Essentially, Centrelink payments involve taking a fairly small percentage of taxpayer dollars (from those with enough money to be able to afford it) to solve a bigger problem, and the end result is a better country for everyone who lives here. When you take note of the high rates of homelessness, poverty and crime that exist in countries without welfare systems, a handful of “dole bludgers” seem like a small price to pay when the tradeoff is living in a country with an exceptional standard of living... and the alternative is a nation where the poor are starving in the streets.
For the Negative: Morgan
Whether it’s right or it’s wrong, the first things that tend to come to our minds when we talk about Centrelink are bogans, single teenage mothers and “the dole”. This isn’t necessarily because we’re judgemental, prejudiced or shallow; it’s because these are the types of things we see and hear about in the media: people from low income backgrounds making poor choices, causing trouble and generally running amuck … whilst happily being on the receiving end of generous Centrelink contributions. It’s no wonder that we often come to negative conclusions when it comes to Centrelink and the lifestyle it seems to be promoting.
Centrelink’s tag line – according to main page of its website – talks about assisting people to become self-sufficient and supporting those in need; however, it can often be difficult for those receiving a Centrelink payment, particularly the long-term unemployed, to become independent from Government support. Quite often, in fact, there’s simply no motivation to find work or continue with study or training: with their stable, sufficient income and related health care benefits in hand, individuals cease to be active members of society and nothing is given back to the community as a result.
Although it may be harsh to say that Centrelink is turning Australians into a country of lazy dole bludgers, it’s easy to see where that mindset might come from. Would we be more motivated to study, work full time, and train to earn qualifications if there were no Centrelink safety net to catch us? Would young women be less likely to fall pregnant and have children in their high school years if there was no Baby Bonus? If we take the media’s word as truth, the money distributed by Centrelink to “needy” Australians buys little more than cigarettes, alcohol and $2 scratchies – it all seems like a terrible waste of taxpayer dollars.
Do Australians deserve Centrelink? What do you think?
Leave a comment below or email us at info@hellonoise.com.au
