The latest round of welfare bashing focuses on a group they're calling the NEETS. NEETs are the new breed of dole bludger. They're aged 15-29 and according to the very somber and serious voice over and some vicious articles, they're Not in Employment, Education or Training and there's nearly 600,000 of them. Weird, cos the August 2016 figures as cited on tradingeconomics.com from the ABS say " The number of unemployed persons looking for full-time work increased 14,900 to 496,900 and the number of unemployed persons only looking for part-time work decreased by 25,400 to 216,400". 600,000 NEETS, 496,900 full time unemployed. Hmmmmm. I decided this phenomenon needed further investigation, so I braced myself and watched the A Current Affair segment, the one with the very somber and serious voice over, and I'll take you through it.
Leila McKinnon introduces the story with animated glee and a heavy emphasis on the keywords "dole bludger", "welfare" and "hardworking taxpayers".
Our roving reporter repeats the explanation of NEET, because repetition helps us learn. Of course, there is no such welfare group. Not really. Not in Education, Employment or Training is unemployed. Do I really have to explain this? If you're in education, you're a student, if you're in employment, you're employed or a worker and if you're in training, you're an apprentice or trainee or something. If you're not any of those things, you're unemployed or retired or rich or on holiday. (Or on DSP or Carers Payment). Aged 15-29? 15 year olds aren't generally included in unemployment figures, due to all but a small number being in school, but I suppose that's how they manage to have so many NEETS.
On with the show- first up we have Ashleigh and Amy, I don't know who's who. The first girl says "I tell them I don't want to work to die. I'd rather be a bum and spend time with my family ". They subtitle that, to make sure you got it. We don't have a clue what question she's answering or who she's telling this to, but it can't be Centrelink because they don't have a form or section where they ask you what you want. They just give you forms to fill out and see if you've filled them in, there is no "Do you want to work? If not, why not?". She doesn't actually say she doesn't want to work, she says "I tell them....".
Next we have a guy at a bus stop. He says there's work out there but a lot of people don't really fit the criteria. He doesn't say if he's unemployed or not. Then we have a blond guy. He says he's unemployed. That's it. That's all he says. The voice over reminds us this is funded by centrelink, because repetition helps us learn. They cut to an older gentleman, he says he sees a lot of people around and wonders why they aren't in work. He doesn't offer an opinion to why they aren't in work, for all we know he thinks it's because the government controls the unemployment rate. We don't know because we only get the statement that he wonders why they aren't in work.
The somber voiceover utters an intonation about "can't be bothered to get a job" and then they cut to a blonde woman, who's repeating the old classic about employers wanting experience and being unable to get that experience without work history.
Again with the 600,000 NEETS, because repetition helps us learn, but now some statistics- 41% want a job and are looking. Good for them. 19% want a job but aren't actively looking. No definition of what actively looking means. Do they mean, are you job hunting now or doing your groceries? We don't know. But that won't stop them flashing up 220,000 as the figure who aren't looking for work.
Social services assistant minister Alan Tudge (he's also the guy championing the cashless welfare card, because oppressing poor people is his portfolio) says the best form of welfare is a job. That's an adorable soundbite. It's wrong, but adorable. A job isn't a form of welfare at all. It's a job. They're totally different things.
Back to Amy and Ashleigh, who are described as happily unemployed. They don't actually say that. The younger girl gives the general advice of "live life to the fullest, if you get a job, good on you. If you don't, don't be upset". The girl is 17. That's actually a pretty optimistic attitude and outlook.
This upbeat attitude in the face of cameras when discussing your disadvantage continues with Tim, who says he lives on $250 a fortnight but that won't stop him being happy, even if after bills and food he has no funds to look for work.
All that positivity must've been too much, because now we're back with the blond guy on Newstart, who says "gambling, I love gambling". We don't know what question he's responding to at all. Could be anything from "what's your biggest vice?" to "what do you miss most about working?". Both are as likely as "what did you spend all your benefits on?".
Next up is Toula, who's too old to be a NEET. She pockets $369 a fortnight in taxpayers money. Yes, they said that. She says something about buying petrol and cigarettes but says the kids are her first priority. She then says it's hard to find work, so the reporter goes to the ,coal shopping centre where he says he found 7 job vacancies. We don't know if any of them were actually suitable for Toula, and I was left with the feeling she was expected to do all 7.
Alan Tudge, again, saying to take a job of its available and you're capable and that the government have had enough of entitled NEETS, which they only just made up, abusing welfare. (By being eligible for payment). He goes on to say that welfare dependence can be a poison that sucks motivation out of an individual. So can news stories designed to negatively portray the unemployed. Just saying. Tudge goes on to say that it's a moral challenge that some are on welfare for a long time. No, it's not! For those who cannot work, it's a blessing that they're on welfare for however long is necessary. Some of those people have life long and/or incurable conditions. They can be on welfare as long as necessary.
More stats. 40% of kids raised in jobless families will receive a benefit by the age of 20. Yeah? The family is jobless, right? So it follows that they're poor? And that when the ftb ends when the kid turns 16, the kid gets youth allowance and the family needs that money because they just lost what ere ftb payment they were getting but that child still needs to eat and stuff? And some of those benefits will be student allowances for people going to uni? And that even with those figures 60% of kids raised in jobless families DONT get benefits by age 20? That's great, by the way. 60%. No benefits. Go them! Just watch those kids raised in poverty soar.
Cut to a lady in a green hijab. She says kids get addicted to drugs and it's a problem and it's not benefitting anyone. Don't know what that has to do with NEETS. Unless they're just adding drug references to make NEETS look bad even thought they failed to actually associate NEETS with drugs.
"NEETS are just one part of Australia's welfare crisis". Really? Didn't we already establish it was a term for the already existing unemployed and the young thrown in?.
A woman tells the camera she didn't finish school, another woman says she wants out of here. A rich man in a suit bemoans, the lady in hijab wisely tells us it's a cycle and nothing changes and then we're in Broadmeadows, or the Broadie Bronx . They compare Broadie to New Yorks Bronx by showing some graffiti, then state there's crime, drugs and rubbish everywhere. It's bin night. The reporter is literally standing in front of bins, and there's not a lot of rubbish in shot, because it's in the bins.
A guy piggybacking a toddler says "Welcome to the Bronx". One of the women shown earlier talks about shootings and feeling unsafe. We're informed now that Broadmeadow has an unemployment rate 3 times higher than national average and there's definite pockets of disadvantage. I wonder how any of this NEET story is going to help with that.
We talk to Lisa, 43 and her daughter Nikita. Nikita is the one we saw earlier who didn't finish school. She seems much less sure of herself than many of the others featured. Lisa is asked if she feels trapped and she agrees that she does. Steve is next. He needs the dole to survive but is desperate for his 15 years old daughter to escape housing commission to escape the "things she's seen". When asked what she's seen, he replies "everything". No one has said a word about not wanting to work.
The guy in the suit is back. He's David Chalk and he talks about the consequences poor people face by being poor.
Next up they interview the kids. Articulate girl says she's lived there 4 or 5 years. The voice over intones about kids having spent their entire lives in public housing. She's at least 8-10. She said 4-5 years. And do you know, poor people raising kids their entire lives in public housing is a good thing? Those kids families have affordable accomodation. That's great. That's what it's for. Do these kids feel unsafe? Yes, there's racists who call the Muslims terrorists. Shame on anyone who said such a thing to a child.
Back to David Chalk, who says we have to start early to stop people becoming NEETS. We need to start at preschool. And then we finish with the success story of Alan, the man who welcomed us to the Bronx. He WAS relying on welfare, past tense. He's not now. He started his own lawn mowing/handyman business and earns enough to self sufficient. Congratulations, Alan, you receive no welfare, and everything is funky. They made a point of asking he drank or smoked when he received benefits. We're at the end, and the last half was more about the Broadie Bronx and public housing than NEETS and despite all that, there wasn't even a single definitive statement from anyone saying they didn't want to work. We go back to Leila McKinnon to wrap up the propaganda. In short, nothing but misleading demonisation.
No comments:
Post a Comment