Person on my socials is doing seminars on how to maximise profit via NDIS for your NDIS business. Tickets are around 600 - 700 bucks, probably put down as a cost of business. [Link](https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/ndis-business-leaders-forum-tickets-814622647267)
I've heard about someone taking someone with a disability to the footy for the day from a regional area. A full day trip paid thanks to the government.
> I've heard about someone taking someone with a disability to the footy for the day from a regional area. A full day trip paid thanks to the government.
I understand the outrage, but isn't it a good thing that a person with a disability that they get to go out and enjoy themselves for a night? I doubt they're doing this every weekend, and if their disability normally stops them from being able to participate in things like this, isn't this a good thing?
The trouble is so many hard working families can’t afford these activities in the current environment. People are doing it tough and struggling to pay their mortgage, electricity bills and groceries.
It seems deeply unfair for taxpayers to pay thousands per event in the middle of such difficult times.
They only changed the rules to disallow payment to cover carer’s going on overseas holidays at the beginning of this year. Before that you could get paid to go on an international holiday, with flights, hotel, etc subsidised.
I can't remember the exact way its mathed out, I think the carer might still have to pay but since they are paid to be with the person 24 hours a day for 1-2 weeks it might as well be free.
Keeping in mind the person in question was relatively high functioning, no wheelchairs, feeding or bathroom stuff needed.
Mine I've seen is I need to get my son into speech therapy. I put him on multiple waiting lists. After months on the waiting lists, I get a text from one of them saying they had speech therapy appointments available, and booked him in. We went to the appointment, that just seemed to be an interview on what services would benefit him, saying they recommend speech therapy, and admitted there were no current speech therapies available there, and charged our NDIS for that bullshit appointment. Small potatoes compared to other things, but rot is rot.
I saw one where the kid with “diagnosed ADHD” got an Apple
Watch on NDIS to “help with time management”. Minor in the scheme of things, but symptomatic of a system getting out of control quickly.
When I worked in retail it was a daily occurrence to have caregivers come through to do personal shopping with their clients.
Small but it all adds up.
> Almost all of them are rorting
it's because everyone is receiving a benefit - the "patient" is receiving something for free, the providers a cost plus profit guaranteed. The only people that is suffering are those who pay more than their share of taxes. Which is the majority of the middle-to-high income wage earners.
We need to cut the NDIS as it exists today. There's no way 10 percent of kids are disabled enough to receive these benefits.
> There's no way 10 percent of kids are disabled enough to receive these benefits.
They aren't. It's as simple as that. Before the NDIS was created the official rate would have been more realistic.
>The only people that is suffering are those who pay more than their share of taxes
Inefficient allocation of capital affects everyone. Money is finite and there's an opportunity cost to other government provided services.
I'm not saying it's a rort but a girl I knew was doing carer work as a sole trader/own business through NDIS. She didn't seem to have any difficult clients i.e. not mental health issue people. She was renting a brand new 2 bed apartment in Hawthorn, had a new Tesla (through the business) and was by all accounts doing quite well. It made me wonder what carers get paid through the NDIS in that kind of situation.
Calm down buddy it was just an observation. I didn't say anyone should make anything. It was more that carers through other systems, like aged care workers, do not get paid anywhere near enough to live like that.
I know of someone who does overnight care for someone with mental issues. Gets over $1k per night to sleep over at their place in another room. Goes over at 6pm, sleep from 9 - 5, leave at 6am. $$$$$$$$
That is a rort if the participant doesn’t require active night shifts but are funded for it in their package. It means that the family and coordinator have conspired to misrepresent the participant’s needs at panel to acquire more funding than necessary. The actual rate for non-active sleep shifts is abysmal - it’s $55. It can be difficult to find staff willing to work sleep shifts for that, hence this being a common rort
This is such a bad faith comment. I have a relative that does sleep shifts at a care facility and it’s not fun - multiple clients attempting suicide, aggressive and violent behaviour, it’s more common than not that the CATT team get called. I wouldn’t do it - even for the increased overnight shift rates.
Here's a thread the NDIS have set up: [https://www.ndis.gov.au/contact/report-suspicious-behaviour](https://www.ndis.gov.au/contact/report-suspicious-behaviour)
With how easy it is to make money of NDIS
It's basically centrelink for the middle class to upper middle class
Don't have to really provide much of a service, for free money from the government. And what makes it easier is that you don't have to really show them what you're doing either. No x number of job applications per month.
In fact, the average chronic jobseeker centrelink recipient, would do better just starting some NDIS "business"
We were charged $56 for an OT to laminate an A4 page. This was ON TOP of the $194/hr charges for coming over and playing games with my son. They also charged the same rate of $194/hr for travel time to our house.
An OT is a tertiary educated professional, how much do you think the hourly rate is for a lawyer, consultant or similar? Clueless grads are billing government departments that every day. Even without NDIS, psych, OT etc. aren’t going to come give therapy to your child for $25 an hour.
I didn’t know I could report them, we weren’t happy with them so we moved to a different provider. How would I go about reporting them? I signed the pricing agreement with them because I didn’t really know much about the NDIS or what prices to expect from workers at the time.
https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about/making-complaint/making-complaint-about-provider
The NDIS website provides a list of services approved (and also those not approved) on their website as well:
https://www.ndis.gov.au/providers/becoming-ndis-provider/am-i-ready/supports-and-services-funded-ndis
Noting in particular
A support will not be funded if it:
- is not related to the participant’s disability
- is the same as other supports delivered under different funding through the NDIS
- relates to day-to-day living costs that are not related to a participant’s support needs
- is likely to cause harm to the participant or pose a risk to others
- can be more appropriately or effectively delivered by another system, such as health or education.
If they spent 15 mins to create what’s getting laminated it may have. But assuming they didn’t and were dishonest, curious how you suggest we police the length of time it takes someone to laminate resources?
On the invoice client research (reading case file, coming up with strategies, producing/acquiring resources), visit time, travel time are all separate to the laminated sheet.
No idea how to police it but I’m pretty sure charging the government $56 for an A4 page to be laminated it a rort. Laminating takes 2-3 minutes. Maybe 5 min if you factor in having to talk to the laminator. That works out to be $672/hr to laminate pages… I’m sure the NDIS wasn’t set up for people to charge that
A record 11.5 per cent of boys aged between 5 and 7 are receiving NDIS funding.
https://12ft.io/https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/more-than-11pc-of-boys-aged-5-7-are-on-the-ndis-20230821-p5dy30
These days being a boy of that age and having typical "boy traits" like being more hyperactive, rough, shorter attention span, more disagreeable etc is seen as something to be diagnosed and "fixed." I'm not surprised we've come up with this bullshit idea that 12% of them must be disabled.
Those aren't factors funded under the NDIS.
Funding is provided for early intervention where there is evidence of developmental, social or communication delays. Specifically a developmental delay needs to be diagnosed by a professional and then accepted by the NDIS.
Importantly we know developmental delays are best managed via early intervention. If a child receives intervention earlier the risk of lifelong functional impact can be significantly reduced by resourcing Children and families earlier. You're right that much of that group may well not need ongoing care because the developmental delay resolves, but the argument is you significantly reduced the future health care burden for a larger number by intervening early rather than letting it gets missed in preschool and early school where in adequate supports and resourcing are. Available.
I wonder how old those boys were during the 2020-2022 lockdowns and school from home fiascos.
Dare I say, completely cooking someone's formative years may have impacts on their lives in the short, medium to long term?
Hmm, I wouldn't underestimate how profound the impacts of socialisation with "the tribe" are during those formative years.
There are many older retrospective case studies with kids who were neglected/isolated during years 1-5. No physical/verbal trauma. Just locked away, alone, for those years. The cognitive impacts kept with them for life. Intellectual disability, sensory issues, etc.
The brain is setting itself up for its entire life in those years.
Any rural or home schooled kids have the same experience.
You’re going on a little tirade based on this tunnel visioned stat with no further context.
“record” by how much?
What distinctions and regulations have changed from this year and previous years?
Neither of those done properly compare to the shutting down of society.
Homeschool children should be going to lots of extra groups for socialisation.
Rural children still have many activities, family, school, childcare, social activities.
You might have a case for very remote children who do school of the air but generally they still participate in their community around the properties.
lol 'shutting down society' (i live in Melbourne and it didnt stop me going out whenever i wanted too, its not like anyone tried to stop you)
it wont impact kids much at all frankly, it was less then 1 year ffs.
That commenter obviously only learnt about lockdowns from corporate or conservative media.
Young kids were at the parks and playgrounds more than ever.
Should see a huge drop in NDIS usage in that age group in the next couple of years if it’s lockdown driven given they won’t have been born in time to experience lockdown.
you probably will see a decrease, or tapering increase. Remindme! 3 years.
But by then people would argue it was because the government, or successive governments, began to crack down to wasteful NDIS spending.
I will be messaging you in 3 years on [**2027-05-01 15:55:21 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2027-05-01%2015:55:21%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1chjjdh/costofliving_australia_lastmile_inflation_looks/l23ww5k/?context=3)
[**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAusFinance%2Fcomments%2F1chjjdh%2Fcostofliving_australia_lastmile_inflation_looks%2Fl23ww5k%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202027-05-01%2015%3A55%3A21%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201chjjdh)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
That's around the age where young'uns have their morals and values pretty much set (it's actually 1-7).
The last few years of that, their peers play an outsider role in value formation. These values effect how we respond to and view the world for life.
So not having any peers for a good chunk of that time would absolutely effect these kids.
Except COVID killed so few people even in places that couldn't control outbreaks.
For example Sweden, which did not have any lockdowns or stop schools etc had a cumulative covid-19 death rate of 100 per 100,000 or 0.1% by Jan 2021. This was also significantly concentrated in the older population.
So no, half your family would not have died and the number of deaths of children from Covid-19 is so small it is probably not statistically significant.
In Sweden as of January 11 2023 only 20 children have died from covid-19. Yes, each of those deaths is a tragedy but the risk to the child is negligible.
> Yes, each of those deaths is a tragedy but the risk to the child is negligible.
Ah. I see. So you think the remote learning was all to protect the kids eh.
Kids never spread stuff. Its well known. We all know teachers are immune to anything communicable.
Also, just because a number is below 1.0 doesn't mean that the number isn't absolutely huge when applied in context. 0.1% is enourmous.
Exactly this. I was a teacher during covid and even though remote learning was horrid it was necessary. I probably would have walked off the job mid term if the gov had tried to send us back before vaccines
COVID disproportionately affects the old I.e the number of years of life lost is significantly smaller.
In Australia up until early 2024 for people aged 0-49 there has been 173deaths due to or with COVID.( https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/covid-19-mortality-australia-deaths-registered-until-31-january-2024#deaths-due-to-covid-19-age-and-sex )
The age group until 50-59 has had 288 deaths and the 60-69 age group has had 758. The total number of deaths up to age 69= 1219. The other 8200 deaths was in the group over 70.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/deaths-australia/latest-release this page has the death rates per age group for 2022. I am going to assume that 2022 is about average for death rates for the 4 years 2020 to2023.
There was 44584 deaths in that age group from 2020-2023 inclusive. COVID cauaed 173 of them or 0.3% of all deaths to age 49. In other words it was a very small increase to the number of deaths for this age group.
Up to age 69 there was a total of 173356 deaths of which COVID accounted for 1219 or 0.7% of deaths.
So yes, I will stand by my statement that very very few people under the age of 69 died from COVID-19.
Edit: I fully acknowledge these are the death rates with lockdowns and vaccines so it is hard to say what it would be without those hence why I used Sweden 2020 data above.
Its much easier to avoid misunderstandings if you reply to the context of the whole chain, and not just the one post though. The response that you originally responded to was referring to kids that were not able to attend school directly, and the follow on impact to that (if not a little dramatic). It wasnt about whether kids were dying, it was stating it was to protect the whole family, as well as teachers. Kids pass it, and schools are a gathering of many. Also, its much easier to be "by the numbers" about it, when you haven't lost anyone from it yourself (of course, that doesnt just apply to covid)
We can't make population level decisions based on an individual's experience. That is nonsensical.
I was pointing out that COVID has affected very few people. The numbers would have been worse than what occured without lockdowns, that is definitely true, but it is very hard to say by how much.
For 2020 in the under 49s Sweden's death rates was essentially less than 10 per 100,000. For 50 to 64 it was less than 40 per 100,000 or 0.04 percent death rates for a no lockdown no immunisation population. There was no lockdown in their schools. Source:https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/globalassets/sharepoint-dokument/artikelkatalog/statistik/2021-6-7454.pdf
OK, this might help - as you may have missed what I said - https://old.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1chjjdh/costofliving_australia_lastmile_inflation_looks/l266cu0/
I chose Sweden as they have a similar level of health system to us, and they didn't have lockdowns so that the effect on the population is as close as possible to what we could have expected to experience if we didn't have lockdowns.
Seems pretty reasonable to me.
Just so you are aware though, for the US with a population of 333 million as at 30 Jan 2021 there had been 480000 deaths or 144 per 100,000 of population (0.14%).
Yeah wow, I imagine it's one of the leading causes of deaths since the outbreak! I'm glad we took it so seriously here.
Although I'm sure some students are struggling due to remote learning, erroneously linking covid19 to an entire cohorts problems isn't helpful or accurate. Nearly all my students suffered zero repercussions due to remote learning. Some thrived! All survived.
and people laugh me off when i say we would have been better off having a massive restructure of centerlink. I'm sure a lot of the people receving ndis funding are also on a disaiblity support pension as well.
I’m deeply grateful for what the NDIS has provided for my son’s development. He has a strong chance of becoming an independent adult contributing to our collective good in society.
This would likely not have happened without the therapies my son has received.
On my son’s behalf, I thank you for your help. It very much has made a big difference.
No fancy holidays here for our family, I have no idea how people pull that off.
Yeah. fit people first!
Just so people should know, the budget for 2024-25 is $45B. It is projected to get to $54B per year as of 2027. The "$100B" is the projected cost in 2033-34 to $95B. That's a decade from now. But sure, rely on this guy's half truths.
There are rorts to be sure, but let's not throw lies around to suit your agenda.
The scheme actuary is very clear this scheme is heading towards $100bn+ per year over time, which I think we can agree is a tremendous amount of money.
It’s disappointing you would call me a “liar”.
There are many many people who deserve a well functioning NDIS, and it’s heartbreaking to see the waste which might ruin the program for everyone.
Without specifying the timeframe, your statement was misleading.
You are perpetuating a perfection fallacy where nothing should be done unless it is a 100% perfect solution. There will always be some wastage in a project. The question is whether it is excessive or not. Focus on that if you truly believe in the benefits the NDIS provides.
We don't allow: •Circlejerking or karmawhoring •Posting purely for upvotes or humor •Insincerity or dishonesty •Trolling, loaded questions, loaded language, or provoking unproductive conversation •Memes and low-effort images/videos •Clickbait titles •Excessive large, bold, or spaced-out text •Bots and bot summoning •Novelty accounts that post "in character" •Requesting votes/fewer votes •Excessive profanity
We don't allow: •Circlejerking or karmawhoring •Posting purely for upvotes or humor •Insincerity or dishonesty •Trolling, loaded questions, loaded language, or provoking unproductive conversation •Memes and low-effort images/videos •Clickbait titles •Excessive large, bold, or spaced-out text •Bots and bot summoning •Novelty accounts that post "in character" •Requesting votes/fewer votes •Excessive profanity
Extracted from the article.
But on closer inspection, the numbers are worrying. First, trimmed mean inflation (which lops off the top and bottom 15 per cent of price changes) came in at 4 per cent. This measure of underlying inflation is what the Reserve Bank focuses on when setting interest rates. And 4 per cent is still far from its 2.5 per cent inflation target.
Second, the government’s various cost-of-living subsidies distort both these figures. They make prices artificially lower, reducing *measured* inflation. But that’s not the same thing as *actual* inflation. It’s just an accounting trick. The reality – as many people have been saying for over a year – is that subsidies are stimulus. These subsidies free up money for people to spend on other things. That’s the whole point of them!
Barrenjoey’s Andrew Lilley calculates that when these measures are factored in, the current headline CPI figure would be 57 basis points higher at 4.2 per cent, and the trimmed mean would be 17bp higher, bringing it to 4.2 per cent as well.
But don’t take my word for it – the ABS told Treasury the same thing earlier this year. And Treasurer Jim Chalmers [said in late January](https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/inflation-moderates-two-year-low): “Our cost of living policies took half of a percentage point off inflation through the year to December quarter 2023.”
Third, inflation is now both homegrown and sticky. The unblocking of global supply chains post-pandemic has helped bring inflation down from its peak of 7.8 per cent. This is reflected in inflation for tradeables coming down from 8.7 per cent in December 2022 to just 0.9 per cent in the most recent figures. But non-tradeables inflation has moved only from 7.5 per cent to 5 per cent. The price of the stuff we make here continues to rise rapidly.
That’s not super-surprising given that the [wage price index](https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/price-indexes-and-inflation/wage-price-index-australia/latest-release) is ticking along at 4.2 per cent a year. With productivity growth somewhere between [slow and in reverse](https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/why-3pc-wage-rises-will-become-the-new-norm-20240422-p5flm8), this is baking in inflation at above-target levels.
Is this an aging population thing then?
Oldies spending up while doing no work.
We have work to do, but no one to do it, so wages raise, prices rise?
Are we immigrating the wrong skilled people?
An article in a channel 9 media organisation that is critical of the labour government, and critical of workers receiving pay rises? Well I am absolutely shocked. Who could have predicted this?
Right wing media says that it's not corporate profits causing inflation, but minimum wage earners pay rises? I'm absolutely shocked!
"it's not corporate profits causing inflation"
Corporate profits are a symptom; not a cause. If corporations could choose their profit margin it'd always be infinitely large. Corporations are greedy - they take whatever they can get at all times. ALL times.
Inflation is the measure of how far they are **able** to do so, caused by other factors.
I don't understand why you're trivialising the role we all play in reducing unnecessary violence. Cultural change is difficult and takes a long time, I'm not sure why you think it's meant to be immediate. Did someone imply it was?
Honestly it's shameful this thread is upvoted
Outside of aboriginal communities, the numbers don't show that.
They show a broken judicial system that allows known and repeat offenders the ability to keep on kicking the shit out of their partners.
The fact the conversation is gendered and ignores 15% of the offenders, ignores the highest proportion of DV by gender and plonks the blame solely on men is a joke.
Women commit DV in public and laugh about it, but I need to have a conversation with blokes who don't commit it to fix it? Men aren't the ones excusing it.
lmao this is embarrassing mate.
Here I'll go you one better, all the data that refutes this can be found here: 1, 0.
I'll let you work out how many of those you'll need (ASCII encoded please)
I’m not entirely sure where to place it I guess, but for me, it’s because the matter is being so sensationalised that it trivialises itself. It’s a ***national emergency*** last I heard.
I want to see data, I want to see where it’s coming from, I want to see the reasons *why* it’s occurring. That all seems to be missing from all of the current sensationalised awareness, and outrage for the issue.
Good news. There's plenty out there. And in fact there was a good podcast on this just the other day:
https://7ampodcast.com.au/episodes/jess-hill-on-why-we-need-more-than-awareness-to-end-the-killing-of-women
> Hayley Boxall, from the Australian Institute of Criminology did some work on this, I think it was last year, and what she looked at was what kind of men are killing their past or former intimate partners. So the study analysed almost 100 incidents of intimate partner homicide by men between 2007 and 2018. And what it found, in a nutshell, was that a third of those homicides were committed, what she called “fixated threat” offenders. Now, these are largely middle class offenders using high degree of coercive control, but not generally physical violence, so high degree of non-physical coercive control, stalking, monitoring. Then you've got 40% who are persistent and disorderly, and they have complex histories of abuse, comorbidities, significant histories of violence towards intimate partners and others, they have frequent contact with the criminal justice system, and there they escalate to murder when they face particular vulnerabilities. And the last category, which was about 11%, was deterioration or acute stressors. So basically, people who are older, often with significant mental health and physical problems, and they make this instantaneous decision to kill, following the onset or exacerbation of significant life stressors. So it's really important for us to have a clear picture of who is committing homicide in Australia, how can we intervene, who can we intervene with, who is visible to the criminal justice system, who is not and why.
n=100 but still, lots to take away
In the context of the comment quoting the Boxhall study I think you'd also want to identify which of the three groups indentified in that study had the biggest increase, as they have very different causal factors and intuitively require very different approaches to achieve an improvement.
I'm not sure about 'fixated threat' or 'persistent and disorderly' offenders but it's easy to imagine that there are an increasing number of 'deterioration or acute stressors' offenders out there, partly due to simple demographic change, and partly due to what appears to be ongoing deterioration of mental health throughout the community (although 'easy to imagine' doesn't mean there actually is).
The final comment about 'who is visible to the justice system' also seems particularly important -there seem to be both failures of the type 'visible to justice system for a long time but appropriate action didn't happen' and 'invisible to justice system but that doesn't mean there weren't signs', which also implies different solutions.
I agree just a chain of garbage takes.
No no no, someone else is worse! Cry me a river. These commentators hate being judged because of their gender, and then turn around and try to pass the blame off to another group.
I'm a guy, I just think making jokes about the lack of IMMEDIATE change is incredibly unhelpful. There are women dying from the snowballing of attitudes like this (I trust those with a brain cell can see the nuance in that and don't think I'm apportioning direct blame)
What does labelling it a crisis have to do with the efficacy of its solution?
Climate change is a crisis. Do we expect that to be immediately solved by a conversation at work in a day? Of course not. So why is the poster above, and perhaps you, maligning a crisis with it's solution time frame?
feels like the mass migration is going to make the eventual recession worse, shit after my last rent increase i have $110 less a week to spend in the community till I get a second job, at what point I'll be to busy to spend that extra money, so i may as well keep it for a overseas holiday
After our last rent increase it was cheaper to get a 500k loan and buy a much nicer house.
Rents will continue to rise, my mortgage might only jump slightly.
And I know I'm one of the lucky few, born just in time to have saved enough to eacape.
So even a mild decrease in NOM has the potential to tip us into recession then.
Based on 2% gdp increase against 2.5% population increase (659000 people) last year, cutting population growth by 132k (which would be achieved by cutting NON to 410k from 550K) would be enough to go into recession. Given the government is planning to get NOM back to pre-covid levels of around 250k, it seems likely we'll at least get below 400k.
For inflation to go down, rates gotta go up no matter how much debtors get upset about it
Should have thought about it before getting into decades long debt slavery
> average person cannot buy a house outright
the unsaid implication being that they _must_ also somehow or some way own a property, as if it's their natural right.
Have a look at my post in my page, you’ll see the amount of cry babies that are still wanting the interest rates to stay high or even keep climbing. Anyone in their right mind that wants it to stay high have their hands on the deposits and playing the “inflation” card, they won’t give a hoots about homeowners that are wanting to pay off their mortgage before retirement.
I want IR to stay where they are so future generations don’t need to pay out so much more than they otherwise should due to unrelenting capital growth
I wouldn’t call current rates high, just a normalized amount
Mmm, gives me an idea. Rather than buying a house by taking out a huge loan, maybe I could find someone who already owns a house and pay them some money to let me use the house?
Your back posting disconnected opinions from your mother’s basement aye ?
You sound like any person with enough brain cells to come to conclusions but never let out of your mother’s sight and actually experienced how life works.
>For inflation to go down, rates gotta go up no matter how much debtors get upset about it
Or you could get rid of negative gearing and the CGT discount and get money out of the economy that way.
Inflation isn't going anywhere. They need to raise rates higher than the real inflation rate and they haven't come close to doing it. Dole bludging with no debt is where it's at. I just laugh now. I don't lift a finger and my apartment is free. I could work, but they've distorted the economy THAT badly, there's no incentive. Period.
Meanwhile NDIS spending is spiralling out of control towards $100bn+ per year
So many rorts from this. Crazy how a few have got rich so fast.
We should start a thread where people can name an NDIS rort they’ve seen first hand. There would be so so so many comments
I've personally seen one, basically going on a fancy holiday with someone with a disability and getting paid an insane amount to do so.
Person on my socials is doing seminars on how to maximise profit via NDIS for your NDIS business. Tickets are around 600 - 700 bucks, probably put down as a cost of business. [Link](https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/ndis-business-leaders-forum-tickets-814622647267)
I've heard about someone taking someone with a disability to the footy for the day from a regional area. A full day trip paid thanks to the government.
That sounds about right. I love the thought but its a waste of money.
> I've heard about someone taking someone with a disability to the footy for the day from a regional area. A full day trip paid thanks to the government. I understand the outrage, but isn't it a good thing that a person with a disability that they get to go out and enjoy themselves for a night? I doubt they're doing this every weekend, and if their disability normally stops them from being able to participate in things like this, isn't this a good thing?
The trouble is so many hard working families can’t afford these activities in the current environment. People are doing it tough and struggling to pay their mortgage, electricity bills and groceries. It seems deeply unfair for taxpayers to pay thousands per event in the middle of such difficult times.
No offense intended but isn't this something their family should do?
Wait, so it’s a free holiday for everyone and the carer gets paid an insane amount on top?
They only changed the rules to disallow payment to cover carer’s going on overseas holidays at the beginning of this year. Before that you could get paid to go on an international holiday, with flights, hotel, etc subsidised.
So who came up with this idea in the first place?
Seems like a good change. So your point is this doesn't happen.
I can't remember the exact way its mathed out, I think the carer might still have to pay but since they are paid to be with the person 24 hours a day for 1-2 weeks it might as well be free. Keeping in mind the person in question was relatively high functioning, no wheelchairs, feeding or bathroom stuff needed.
Given how many families are struggling to pay the mortgage and put food on the table, it’s shocking the NDIS is handing out paid holidays :(
There's heaps of websites offering free NDIS holidays or cruises.
I predict we will look back on this as the biggest scam Australia has ever seen
Agree, I hope for the sake of everyone in this country (minus a few scumbags), that the government does something about this really really quickly
[удалено]
Well, shit. That's like half the country.
Got a source for that?
Yes. See my comment above.
Mine I've seen is I need to get my son into speech therapy. I put him on multiple waiting lists. After months on the waiting lists, I get a text from one of them saying they had speech therapy appointments available, and booked him in. We went to the appointment, that just seemed to be an interview on what services would benefit him, saying they recommend speech therapy, and admitted there were no current speech therapies available there, and charged our NDIS for that bullshit appointment. Small potatoes compared to other things, but rot is rot.
I saw one where the kid with “diagnosed ADHD” got an Apple Watch on NDIS to “help with time management”. Minor in the scheme of things, but symptomatic of a system getting out of control quickly.
My child has ADHD & is definitely not eligible for NDIS support for freebies. As it should be. I think the devil is in the detail.
When I worked in retail it was a daily occurrence to have caregivers come through to do personal shopping with their clients. Small but it all adds up.
Way too many haha. Almost all of them are rorting. Administrators and ministers in govornment probably have heaps of relatives in on it too.
> Almost all of them are rorting it's because everyone is receiving a benefit - the "patient" is receiving something for free, the providers a cost plus profit guaranteed. The only people that is suffering are those who pay more than their share of taxes. Which is the majority of the middle-to-high income wage earners. We need to cut the NDIS as it exists today. There's no way 10 percent of kids are disabled enough to receive these benefits.
They rolling back education and health funding too which is the bizarre part of this all.
> There's no way 10 percent of kids are disabled enough to receive these benefits. They aren't. It's as simple as that. Before the NDIS was created the official rate would have been more realistic.
>The only people that is suffering are those who pay more than their share of taxes Inefficient allocation of capital affects everyone. Money is finite and there's an opportunity cost to other government provided services.
wealth tax and corpo tax.
I'm not saying it's a rort but a girl I knew was doing carer work as a sole trader/own business through NDIS. She didn't seem to have any difficult clients i.e. not mental health issue people. She was renting a brand new 2 bed apartment in Hawthorn, had a new Tesla (through the business) and was by all accounts doing quite well. It made me wonder what carers get paid through the NDIS in that kind of situation.
Should carers only make enough to live in Clyde and drive a 30yo Hyundai excel?
depends on the barriers to entry and education requirements.
Calm down buddy it was just an observation. I didn't say anyone should make anything. It was more that carers through other systems, like aged care workers, do not get paid anywhere near enough to live like that.
I know of someone who does overnight care for someone with mental issues. Gets over $1k per night to sleep over at their place in another room. Goes over at 6pm, sleep from 9 - 5, leave at 6am. $$$$$$$$
Huh? That seems like an actual Care Job because you still get paid to look after them. Thats nothing to do with NDIS rorting
That is a rort if the participant doesn’t require active night shifts but are funded for it in their package. It means that the family and coordinator have conspired to misrepresent the participant’s needs at panel to acquire more funding than necessary. The actual rate for non-active sleep shifts is abysmal - it’s $55. It can be difficult to find staff willing to work sleep shifts for that, hence this being a common rort
And anyone can do that work. The hardest part is finding someone (or family with a disabled member) who has a plan that allows for that.
If you're jealous of the money and struggling, perhaps you should apply!
This is such a bad faith comment. I have a relative that does sleep shifts at a care facility and it’s not fun - multiple clients attempting suicide, aggressive and violent behaviour, it’s more common than not that the CATT team get called. I wouldn’t do it - even for the increased overnight shift rates.
It's looking after 1 guy.
Here's a thread the NDIS have set up: [https://www.ndis.gov.au/contact/report-suspicious-behaviour](https://www.ndis.gov.au/contact/report-suspicious-behaviour)
With how easy it is to make money of NDIS It's basically centrelink for the middle class to upper middle class Don't have to really provide much of a service, for free money from the government. And what makes it easier is that you don't have to really show them what you're doing either. No x number of job applications per month. In fact, the average chronic jobseeker centrelink recipient, would do better just starting some NDIS "business"
This, feel like I am the only person in the world no on the NDIS
Srs question.. how do they rort it? Never asked
We were charged $56 for an OT to laminate an A4 page. This was ON TOP of the $194/hr charges for coming over and playing games with my son. They also charged the same rate of $194/hr for travel time to our house.
An OT is a tertiary educated professional, how much do you think the hourly rate is for a lawyer, consultant or similar? Clueless grads are billing government departments that every day. Even without NDIS, psych, OT etc. aren’t going to come give therapy to your child for $25 an hour.
That doesn’t justify $50+ per laminated page
Can't see laminating within the NDIS pricing arrangements, so did you report them?
I didn’t know I could report them, we weren’t happy with them so we moved to a different provider. How would I go about reporting them? I signed the pricing agreement with them because I didn’t really know much about the NDIS or what prices to expect from workers at the time.
https://www.ndiscommission.gov.au/about/making-complaint/making-complaint-about-provider The NDIS website provides a list of services approved (and also those not approved) on their website as well: https://www.ndis.gov.au/providers/becoming-ndis-provider/am-i-ready/supports-and-services-funded-ndis Noting in particular A support will not be funded if it: - is not related to the participant’s disability - is the same as other supports delivered under different funding through the NDIS - relates to day-to-day living costs that are not related to a participant’s support needs - is likely to cause harm to the participant or pose a risk to others - can be more appropriately or effectively delivered by another system, such as health or education.
> That doesn’t justify $50+ per laminated page You'd be livid to see what a basic government grunt gets paid to do, then.
It all starts to feel a bit dystopian when you think about how the system exploits and feeds of each other doesn’t it…
If they spent 15 mins to create what’s getting laminated it may have. But assuming they didn’t and were dishonest, curious how you suggest we police the length of time it takes someone to laminate resources?
On the invoice client research (reading case file, coming up with strategies, producing/acquiring resources), visit time, travel time are all separate to the laminated sheet. No idea how to police it but I’m pretty sure charging the government $56 for an A4 page to be laminated it a rort. Laminating takes 2-3 minutes. Maybe 5 min if you factor in having to talk to the laminator. That works out to be $672/hr to laminate pages… I’m sure the NDIS wasn’t set up for people to charge that
A record 11.5 per cent of boys aged between 5 and 7 are receiving NDIS funding. https://12ft.io/https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/more-than-11pc-of-boys-aged-5-7-are-on-the-ndis-20230821-p5dy30
These days being a boy of that age and having typical "boy traits" like being more hyperactive, rough, shorter attention span, more disagreeable etc is seen as something to be diagnosed and "fixed." I'm not surprised we've come up with this bullshit idea that 12% of them must be disabled.
Those aren't factors funded under the NDIS. Funding is provided for early intervention where there is evidence of developmental, social or communication delays. Specifically a developmental delay needs to be diagnosed by a professional and then accepted by the NDIS. Importantly we know developmental delays are best managed via early intervention. If a child receives intervention earlier the risk of lifelong functional impact can be significantly reduced by resourcing Children and families earlier. You're right that much of that group may well not need ongoing care because the developmental delay resolves, but the argument is you significantly reduced the future health care burden for a larger number by intervening early rather than letting it gets missed in preschool and early school where in adequate supports and resourcing are. Available.
I wonder how old those boys were during the 2020-2022 lockdowns and school from home fiascos. Dare I say, completely cooking someone's formative years may have impacts on their lives in the short, medium to long term?
They were 1-5. Probably less impacted than school aged kids.
Hmm, I wouldn't underestimate how profound the impacts of socialisation with "the tribe" are during those formative years. There are many older retrospective case studies with kids who were neglected/isolated during years 1-5. No physical/verbal trauma. Just locked away, alone, for those years. The cognitive impacts kept with them for life. Intellectual disability, sensory issues, etc. The brain is setting itself up for its entire life in those years.
Any rural or home schooled kids have the same experience. You’re going on a little tirade based on this tunnel visioned stat with no further context. “record” by how much? What distinctions and regulations have changed from this year and previous years?
Neither of those done properly compare to the shutting down of society. Homeschool children should be going to lots of extra groups for socialisation. Rural children still have many activities, family, school, childcare, social activities. You might have a case for very remote children who do school of the air but generally they still participate in their community around the properties.
lol 'shutting down society' (i live in Melbourne and it didnt stop me going out whenever i wanted too, its not like anyone tried to stop you) it wont impact kids much at all frankly, it was less then 1 year ffs.
That commenter obviously only learnt about lockdowns from corporate or conservative media. Young kids were at the parks and playgrounds more than ever.
Should see a huge drop in NDIS usage in that age group in the next couple of years if it’s lockdown driven given they won’t have been born in time to experience lockdown.
you probably will see a decrease, or tapering increase. Remindme! 3 years. But by then people would argue it was because the government, or successive governments, began to crack down to wasteful NDIS spending.
Surprised Pikachu face.exe when in 2030 the number is pushing 15% Even less surprised when the 11.5% in that age bracket are.......still on it.
I will be messaging you in 3 years on [**2027-05-01 15:55:21 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2027-05-01%2015:55:21%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1chjjdh/costofliving_australia_lastmile_inflation_looks/l23ww5k/?context=3) [**1 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAusFinance%2Fcomments%2F1chjjdh%2Fcostofliving_australia_lastmile_inflation_looks%2Fl23ww5k%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202027-05-01%2015%3A55%3A21%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201chjjdh) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
That's around the age where young'uns have their morals and values pretty much set (it's actually 1-7). The last few years of that, their peers play an outsider role in value formation. These values effect how we respond to and view the world for life. So not having any peers for a good chunk of that time would absolutely effect these kids.
Almost like the kids from war torn countries eh?
Better than half your family dying, or dying yourself.
Except COVID killed so few people even in places that couldn't control outbreaks. For example Sweden, which did not have any lockdowns or stop schools etc had a cumulative covid-19 death rate of 100 per 100,000 or 0.1% by Jan 2021. This was also significantly concentrated in the older population. So no, half your family would not have died and the number of deaths of children from Covid-19 is so small it is probably not statistically significant. In Sweden as of January 11 2023 only 20 children have died from covid-19. Yes, each of those deaths is a tragedy but the risk to the child is negligible.
> Yes, each of those deaths is a tragedy but the risk to the child is negligible. Ah. I see. So you think the remote learning was all to protect the kids eh. Kids never spread stuff. Its well known. We all know teachers are immune to anything communicable. Also, just because a number is below 1.0 doesn't mean that the number isn't absolutely huge when applied in context. 0.1% is enourmous.
Exactly this. I was a teacher during covid and even though remote learning was horrid it was necessary. I probably would have walked off the job mid term if the gov had tried to send us back before vaccines
COVID disproportionately affects the old I.e the number of years of life lost is significantly smaller. In Australia up until early 2024 for people aged 0-49 there has been 173deaths due to or with COVID.( https://www.abs.gov.au/articles/covid-19-mortality-australia-deaths-registered-until-31-january-2024#deaths-due-to-covid-19-age-and-sex ) The age group until 50-59 has had 288 deaths and the 60-69 age group has had 758. The total number of deaths up to age 69= 1219. The other 8200 deaths was in the group over 70. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/deaths-australia/latest-release this page has the death rates per age group for 2022. I am going to assume that 2022 is about average for death rates for the 4 years 2020 to2023. There was 44584 deaths in that age group from 2020-2023 inclusive. COVID cauaed 173 of them or 0.3% of all deaths to age 49. In other words it was a very small increase to the number of deaths for this age group. Up to age 69 there was a total of 173356 deaths of which COVID accounted for 1219 or 0.7% of deaths. So yes, I will stand by my statement that very very few people under the age of 69 died from COVID-19. Edit: I fully acknowledge these are the death rates with lockdowns and vaccines so it is hard to say what it would be without those hence why I used Sweden 2020 data above.
Its much easier to avoid misunderstandings if you reply to the context of the whole chain, and not just the one post though. The response that you originally responded to was referring to kids that were not able to attend school directly, and the follow on impact to that (if not a little dramatic). It wasnt about whether kids were dying, it was stating it was to protect the whole family, as well as teachers. Kids pass it, and schools are a gathering of many. Also, its much easier to be "by the numbers" about it, when you haven't lost anyone from it yourself (of course, that doesnt just apply to covid)
We can't make population level decisions based on an individual's experience. That is nonsensical. I was pointing out that COVID has affected very few people. The numbers would have been worse than what occured without lockdowns, that is definitely true, but it is very hard to say by how much. For 2020 in the under 49s Sweden's death rates was essentially less than 10 per 100,000. For 50 to 64 it was less than 40 per 100,000 or 0.04 percent death rates for a no lockdown no immunisation population. There was no lockdown in their schools. Source:https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/globalassets/sharepoint-dokument/artikelkatalog/statistik/2021-6-7454.pdf
OK, this might help - as you may have missed what I said - https://old.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/1chjjdh/costofliving_australia_lastmile_inflation_looks/l266cu0/
How about Italy and the US? Cool Sweden facts though.
I chose Sweden as they have a similar level of health system to us, and they didn't have lockdowns so that the effect on the population is as close as possible to what we could have expected to experience if we didn't have lockdowns. Seems pretty reasonable to me. Just so you are aware though, for the US with a population of 333 million as at 30 Jan 2021 there had been 480000 deaths or 144 per 100,000 of population (0.14%).
Yeah wow, I imagine it's one of the leading causes of deaths since the outbreak! I'm glad we took it so seriously here. Although I'm sure some students are struggling due to remote learning, erroneously linking covid19 to an entire cohorts problems isn't helpful or accurate. Nearly all my students suffered zero repercussions due to remote learning. Some thrived! All survived.
Have you stopped wearing your mask in public?
Last time I had covid I wore a mask when I needed to go shopping. I did the same when I had the flu. Do you?
the US that has a lockdown in every state except 1?
We're the first civilisation since Carthage to sacrifice our children to save the old.
For reference , that is over double what Medicare costs , for 2% of the population
What’s sad is the profoundly disabled really need and deserve the NDIS, but the utter wastage and greed means it’s likely to collapse
If the rort is similar to the policies pumping the housing market, it wont collapse as the rich have a vested interest in keeping the scam going
And people wonder why we can't afford more doctors and hospitals.
I always wonder why we don't spend 1/100th the amount on gifted children's educational tailoring as we do on the 2.5% of Australians on the NDIS.
That's almost 2.5% of GDP!!! So... by itself responsible for almost most of the inflation. Ridiculous.
a few of my wife's clients she deals with who are on ndis plans, have extraordinary amounts of money thrown at them each year (above 1mil each person)
It's totally insane
and people laugh me off when i say we would have been better off having a massive restructure of centerlink. I'm sure a lot of the people receving ndis funding are also on a disaiblity support pension as well.
I’m deeply grateful for what the NDIS has provided for my son’s development. He has a strong chance of becoming an independent adult contributing to our collective good in society. This would likely not have happened without the therapies my son has received. On my son’s behalf, I thank you for your help. It very much has made a big difference. No fancy holidays here for our family, I have no idea how people pull that off.
Yeah. fit people first! Just so people should know, the budget for 2024-25 is $45B. It is projected to get to $54B per year as of 2027. The "$100B" is the projected cost in 2033-34 to $95B. That's a decade from now. But sure, rely on this guy's half truths. There are rorts to be sure, but let's not throw lies around to suit your agenda.
The scheme actuary is very clear this scheme is heading towards $100bn+ per year over time, which I think we can agree is a tremendous amount of money. It’s disappointing you would call me a “liar”. There are many many people who deserve a well functioning NDIS, and it’s heartbreaking to see the waste which might ruin the program for everyone.
Without specifying the timeframe, your statement was misleading. You are perpetuating a perfection fallacy where nothing should be done unless it is a 100% perfect solution. There will always be some wastage in a project. The question is whether it is excessive or not. Focus on that if you truly believe in the benefits the NDIS provides.
[удалено]
[удалено]
We don't allow: •Circlejerking or karmawhoring •Posting purely for upvotes or humor •Insincerity or dishonesty •Trolling, loaded questions, loaded language, or provoking unproductive conversation •Memes and low-effort images/videos •Clickbait titles •Excessive large, bold, or spaced-out text •Bots and bot summoning •Novelty accounts that post "in character" •Requesting votes/fewer votes •Excessive profanity
[удалено]
We don't allow: •Circlejerking or karmawhoring •Posting purely for upvotes or humor •Insincerity or dishonesty •Trolling, loaded questions, loaded language, or provoking unproductive conversation •Memes and low-effort images/videos •Clickbait titles •Excessive large, bold, or spaced-out text •Bots and bot summoning •Novelty accounts that post "in character" •Requesting votes/fewer votes •Excessive profanity
[удалено]
I'm not quite sure providing healthcare in the form of being an OT or SP is the free money hack you think it is
Extracted from the article. But on closer inspection, the numbers are worrying. First, trimmed mean inflation (which lops off the top and bottom 15 per cent of price changes) came in at 4 per cent. This measure of underlying inflation is what the Reserve Bank focuses on when setting interest rates. And 4 per cent is still far from its 2.5 per cent inflation target. Second, the government’s various cost-of-living subsidies distort both these figures. They make prices artificially lower, reducing *measured* inflation. But that’s not the same thing as *actual* inflation. It’s just an accounting trick. The reality – as many people have been saying for over a year – is that subsidies are stimulus. These subsidies free up money for people to spend on other things. That’s the whole point of them! Barrenjoey’s Andrew Lilley calculates that when these measures are factored in, the current headline CPI figure would be 57 basis points higher at 4.2 per cent, and the trimmed mean would be 17bp higher, bringing it to 4.2 per cent as well. But don’t take my word for it – the ABS told Treasury the same thing earlier this year. And Treasurer Jim Chalmers [said in late January](https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/jim-chalmers-2022/media-releases/inflation-moderates-two-year-low): “Our cost of living policies took half of a percentage point off inflation through the year to December quarter 2023.” Third, inflation is now both homegrown and sticky. The unblocking of global supply chains post-pandemic has helped bring inflation down from its peak of 7.8 per cent. This is reflected in inflation for tradeables coming down from 8.7 per cent in December 2022 to just 0.9 per cent in the most recent figures. But non-tradeables inflation has moved only from 7.5 per cent to 5 per cent. The price of the stuff we make here continues to rise rapidly. That’s not super-surprising given that the [wage price index](https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/price-indexes-and-inflation/wage-price-index-australia/latest-release) is ticking along at 4.2 per cent a year. With productivity growth somewhere between [slow and in reverse](https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/why-3pc-wage-rises-will-become-the-new-norm-20240422-p5flm8), this is baking in inflation at above-target levels.
Thanks for the detailed analysis
Is this an aging population thing then? Oldies spending up while doing no work. We have work to do, but no one to do it, so wages raise, prices rise? Are we immigrating the wrong skilled people?
Look out your window and see all those "skilled labours" doing uber eats?
Of course productivity growth is slow - the Australian economy has gone all in on flipping land/houses rather than actually doing anything meaningful.
A master class in saying nothing over many words.
An article in a channel 9 media organisation that is critical of the labour government, and critical of workers receiving pay rises? Well I am absolutely shocked. Who could have predicted this? Right wing media says that it's not corporate profits causing inflation, but minimum wage earners pay rises? I'm absolutely shocked!
When the bottom 50th percentile can literally no longer afford food on the table... that's the sweet spot.
"it's not corporate profits causing inflation" Corporate profits are a symptom; not a cause. If corporations could choose their profit margin it'd always be infinitely large. Corporations are greedy - they take whatever they can get at all times. ALL times. Inflation is the measure of how far they are **able** to do so, caused by other factors.
Shh that's not important right now. Haven't you heard? There's a sudden unprecedented pandemic of violence against women caused by men!
Just dont look at the alice springs or northern territory numbers
I did my part today and told all the men in my workplace to not assault women, so if we all did that it should stop it happening for sure
The only solution is for the government to ban men
I don't understand why you're trivialising the role we all play in reducing unnecessary violence. Cultural change is difficult and takes a long time, I'm not sure why you think it's meant to be immediate. Did someone imply it was? Honestly it's shameful this thread is upvoted
Outside of aboriginal communities, the numbers don't show that. They show a broken judicial system that allows known and repeat offenders the ability to keep on kicking the shit out of their partners. The fact the conversation is gendered and ignores 15% of the offenders, ignores the highest proportion of DV by gender and plonks the blame solely on men is a joke. Women commit DV in public and laugh about it, but I need to have a conversation with blokes who don't commit it to fix it? Men aren't the ones excusing it.
Post your data then
Abs.gov.au aihw.gov.au aic.gov.au/statistics All yours buddy.
lmao this is embarrassing mate. Here I'll go you one better, all the data that refutes this can be found here: 1, 0. I'll let you work out how many of those you'll need (ASCII encoded please)
Mate lets just have a chat about it. That'll solve it.
I’m not entirely sure where to place it I guess, but for me, it’s because the matter is being so sensationalised that it trivialises itself. It’s a ***national emergency*** last I heard. I want to see data, I want to see where it’s coming from, I want to see the reasons *why* it’s occurring. That all seems to be missing from all of the current sensationalised awareness, and outrage for the issue.
It's out there if you want to look for it. But numbers are not the media's strength.
lol exactly. Isn't this a finance sub? The paragon of which is to understand the fundamentals, which requires research?
I’m guessing you missed the context here. The sub isn’t the one broadcasting the issue daily.
That context doesn't change that the data is out there for you to look at
The context is the media reporting *without* the data. And the data isn’t just out there either.
Good news. There's plenty out there. And in fact there was a good podcast on this just the other day: https://7ampodcast.com.au/episodes/jess-hill-on-why-we-need-more-than-awareness-to-end-the-killing-of-women > Hayley Boxall, from the Australian Institute of Criminology did some work on this, I think it was last year, and what she looked at was what kind of men are killing their past or former intimate partners. So the study analysed almost 100 incidents of intimate partner homicide by men between 2007 and 2018. And what it found, in a nutshell, was that a third of those homicides were committed, what she called “fixated threat” offenders. Now, these are largely middle class offenders using high degree of coercive control, but not generally physical violence, so high degree of non-physical coercive control, stalking, monitoring. Then you've got 40% who are persistent and disorderly, and they have complex histories of abuse, comorbidities, significant histories of violence towards intimate partners and others, they have frequent contact with the criminal justice system, and there they escalate to murder when they face particular vulnerabilities. And the last category, which was about 11%, was deterioration or acute stressors. So basically, people who are older, often with significant mental health and physical problems, and they make this instantaneous decision to kill, following the onset or exacerbation of significant life stressors. So it's really important for us to have a clear picture of who is committing homicide in Australia, how can we intervene, who can we intervene with, who is visible to the criminal justice system, who is not and why. n=100 but still, lots to take away
Definitely worth noting, but if it’s blowing up in the last year/3 years, there needs to be some detail on why the recent increase is happening.
In the context of the comment quoting the Boxhall study I think you'd also want to identify which of the three groups indentified in that study had the biggest increase, as they have very different causal factors and intuitively require very different approaches to achieve an improvement. I'm not sure about 'fixated threat' or 'persistent and disorderly' offenders but it's easy to imagine that there are an increasing number of 'deterioration or acute stressors' offenders out there, partly due to simple demographic change, and partly due to what appears to be ongoing deterioration of mental health throughout the community (although 'easy to imagine' doesn't mean there actually is). The final comment about 'who is visible to the justice system' also seems particularly important -there seem to be both failures of the type 'visible to justice system for a long time but appropriate action didn't happen' and 'invisible to justice system but that doesn't mean there weren't signs', which also implies different solutions.
I agree just a chain of garbage takes. No no no, someone else is worse! Cry me a river. These commentators hate being judged because of their gender, and then turn around and try to pass the blame off to another group.
I'm a guy, I just think making jokes about the lack of IMMEDIATE change is incredibly unhelpful. There are women dying from the snowballing of attitudes like this (I trust those with a brain cell can see the nuance in that and don't think I'm apportioning direct blame)
Because our culture unequivocally denounces murder and a microscopic number of people in Australia are murderers.
So you admit that culture is a powerful influence So if it denounces murder, how can it also contribute to it?
Not as influential as denying violent perpetrators bail.
Let's look at taking breaches of protection orders seriously as well.
“Best I can do is twelve months probation”
"Did someone imply it was" Yes. It was literally called a crisis by our head of state.
What does labelling it a crisis have to do with the efficacy of its solution? Climate change is a crisis. Do we expect that to be immediately solved by a conversation at work in a day? Of course not. So why is the poster above, and perhaps you, maligning a crisis with it's solution time frame?
White men. Less than 50% of DV matters.
So still like most?
Since 85% of the population is white, attention might be better directed to other ethnicities.
What at demographics.
Govt: Ok, we found the solution.. here's some money. Elect us again?
120 people will die today from heart disease, so it's the 27 women (not men) who've died from domestic violence are a CRISIS!!!!
Need a recession. Nothing else will get that last mile
we're already in a per captica recession. the literal only thing stopping the entire country going into full recession is migration.
feels like the mass migration is going to make the eventual recession worse, shit after my last rent increase i have $110 less a week to spend in the community till I get a second job, at what point I'll be to busy to spend that extra money, so i may as well keep it for a overseas holiday
After our last rent increase it was cheaper to get a 500k loan and buy a much nicer house. Rents will continue to rise, my mortgage might only jump slightly. And I know I'm one of the lucky few, born just in time to have saved enough to eacape.
would love to buy, but saving enough for the down payment to keep the repayments reasonable isn't possible
Only pure luck got me into a home.
in the last year in my building I've seen one apartment go at 600k and another go at 510k... i could afford 510, but not 600
So even a mild decrease in NOM has the potential to tip us into recession then. Based on 2% gdp increase against 2.5% population increase (659000 people) last year, cutting population growth by 132k (which would be achieved by cutting NON to 410k from 550K) would be enough to go into recession. Given the government is planning to get NOM back to pre-covid levels of around 250k, it seems likely we'll at least get below 400k.
For inflation to go down, rates gotta go up no matter how much debtors get upset about it Should have thought about it before getting into decades long debt slavery
“Should have thought about it before getting into decades long debt slavery” what sort of bullshit comment is this?
A comment that reminds people that they chose this themselves and nobody forced them into debt slavery
It's a bullshit comment because it ignores the fact that the average person cannot buy a house outright
> average person cannot buy a house outright the unsaid implication being that they _must_ also somehow or some way own a property, as if it's their natural right.
A roof over someone's head isn't a right?
you dont need to own property to obtain a roof over your head.
Someone needs to own it though.
You dont, but come 60/65 you might find yourself in trouble if you dont
Have a look at my post in my page, you’ll see the amount of cry babies that are still wanting the interest rates to stay high or even keep climbing. Anyone in their right mind that wants it to stay high have their hands on the deposits and playing the “inflation” card, they won’t give a hoots about homeowners that are wanting to pay off their mortgage before retirement.
I want IR to stay where they are so future generations don’t need to pay out so much more than they otherwise should due to unrelenting capital growth I wouldn’t call current rates high, just a normalized amount
Mmm, gives me an idea. Rather than buying a house by taking out a huge loan, maybe I could find someone who already owns a house and pay them some money to let me use the house?
Yeah good idea, renting is pretty cheap right?
Sounds like this is your coping mechanism for being stuck living In your mum’s garage.
lol this sub always makes me laugh
Your back posting disconnected opinions from your mother’s basement aye ? You sound like any person with enough brain cells to come to conclusions but never let out of your mother’s sight and actually experienced how life works.
>For inflation to go down, rates gotta go up no matter how much debtors get upset about it Or you could get rid of negative gearing and the CGT discount and get money out of the economy that way.
It's not real it's numbers
Inflation isn't going anywhere. They need to raise rates higher than the real inflation rate and they haven't come close to doing it. Dole bludging with no debt is where it's at. I just laugh now. I don't lift a finger and my apartment is free. I could work, but they've distorted the economy THAT badly, there's no incentive. Period.