Public Service women of insufficient calibre?

DrKoresh said :

chewy14 said :

Why don’t you post a link then Dr Koresh? Couldn’t be because ‘judging’ someone isn’t found anywhere in the definition, could it?

And seeing as you don’t know the meaning of ‘bigot’, i’m hardly surprised that you don’t know the meaning of ‘racism’ either.

“Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, and intolerance on the basis of a person’s race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, language, socioeconomic status, or other status.”-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

There, it sums up your feelings on the people ” [you] pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.”, if you don’t understand what words like ‘prejudices’ mean then maybe you should stop talking as if you’ve got a degree in English Lit instead of just an internet connection and a semi-competent grasp of the English languge.

So what you’re saying is you couldn’t link the dictionary definition which you claimed you had? Because you’re wrong.

And even then, can you explain how my first comment would even come close to ‘bigotry’ under your ridiculous Wikipedia (bahahahaha) post?
Where was the hatred, contempt or intolerance?

Keep digging, you’re heading into Julia Gillard ‘misogyny’ territory.

IrishPete said :

Is that solider in the photo wearing make up, and is his hair tied back in a pony tail?

What is the world coming to?

IP

Obviously you are not familiar with the conditions of service in the Swedish army (note that this photo is of a US soldier). Anything goes.
Disclaimer: I’m a Finn and we hate the Swedes…

Masquara said :

neanderthalsis said :

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t the existing APS maternity leave entitlements are pretty much what the Abbott scheme is anyway?

Yep – a Canberra public servant on $150,000 a year gets a generous maternity leave period of several months on FULL PAY. A fact conveniently ignored by the kneejerkers on this thread!

It’s not their knees they’re jerking…

Is that solider in the photo wearing make up, and is his hair tied back in a pony tail?

What is the world coming to?

IP

So what if the husband took the leave, and he earns more than the wife? Which ‘wage’ would the scheme pay?

Personally I think they are going to get themselves into a big tangle if they don’t go with a fixed rate.

chewy14 said :

Why don’t you post a link then Dr Koresh? Couldn’t be because ‘judging’ someone isn’t found anywhere in the definition, could it?

And seeing as you don’t know the meaning of ‘bigot’, i’m hardly surprised that you don’t know the meaning of ‘racism’ either.

“Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with hatred, contempt, and intolerance on the basis of a person’s race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, religion, language, socioeconomic status, or other status.”-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

There, it sums up your feelings on the people ” [you] pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.”, if you don’t understand what words like ‘prejudices’ mean then maybe you should stop talking as if you’ve got a degree in English Lit instead of just an internet connection and a semi-competent grasp of the English languge.

DrKoresh said :

I’m still laughing at the idea that white people in Australia can experience racism. By the way, I double-checked the definition of ‘bigot’ and it does in fact extend to cover judging people by socio-economic status so I guess you’re the one who needs to brush-up on their pocket Macquarie, chewy.

I very much doubt that the victims of the infamous Sydney gang rapes would laugh with you on that one… Neither would a mate of mine who was attacked because of his skin colour while walking through Redfern… Or a friend of mine at uni who tried to get a waitressing job at a Canberra restaurant, and was told that they were really after an “Asian-looking” girl…

So while I agree that racism in this country tends to be more directed at non-whites, your scoffing attitude is a deliberate distortion of a complex reality. Or maybe you are simply pig-ignorant. Either way, you are the one who brought race into this particular debate, so maybe you are actually more part of the problem than you’d care to admit.

DrKoresh said :

I’m still laughing at the idea that white people in Australia can experience racism.

When I moved to Australia, on my first day of high school here in Canberra, I was attacked by a group of Aboriginal boys and men (approx 16-21yo). They picked me out of a group of students sitting at a Manuka bus stop and attempted to rob me, going on about how I owed them money because of my skin colour. I was repeatedly punched in the head while they called me things like “white faggot c*nt”, and told me I wasn’t welcome in their school.

My parents and I met with the school principal to discuss the incident, as most of the Aboriginal kids involved were fellow students at my school. The principal informed us that little would be done by the school because the students involved were indigenous and the matter was therefor “culturally sensitive” in nature. My parents suggested getting the police involved. The principal felt that any action taken would probably just inflame the issue. The principal explained that Aborigines in the area occassionally targeted Anglo and Asian students for muggings and bashings, and advised me to avoid Manuka after school.

DrKoresh, do you feel what I experienced qualifies as racism?

DrKoresh said :

I’m still laughing at the idea that white people in Australia can experience racism. By the way, I double-checked the definition of ‘bigot’ and it does in fact extend to cover judging people by socio-economic status so I guess you’re the one who needs to brush-up on their pocket Macquarie, chewy.

Why don’t you post a link then Dr Koresh? Couldn’t be because ‘judging’ someone isn’t found anywhere in the definition, could it?

And seeing as you don’t know the meaning of ‘bigot’, i’m hardly surprised that you don’t know the meaning of ‘racism’ either.

LSWCHP said :

OK JB, I have to ask the question. The pic for this post is (as far as I can tell) an American female soldier wearing body armour while servicing a Browning .50 cal heavy machine gun. What’s the relevance of the pic to the story of APS female staff potentially not being included in Mr Abbott’s new parental leave scheme? I’m trying to make the connection, but it’s just not happenin’ for me.

JB is presumably making a visual pun on the word “calibre”. As puns go, it’s … well, it’s not actually funny, but it does exist.

damien haas said :

There is certainly a subset of commenters on RA that will criticise anything Tony Abbot says. If he said 1 + 1 = 2 they would attack it. It is amusing observing the mental gymnastics that underly the cognitive dissonance.

to be fair every policy Abbott has released has been worthy of being criticised. this one because it doesn’t achieve what it’s meant too -it’s time out of the workforce that effects career opportunities and the choices women make when choosing families over work – and it also takes away the incentive/ability for businesses have to use paid maternity leave as a perk to attract and retain talented females.

cutting the public service numbers… Australia has a small public service for developed countries, most are already struggling for numbers and cutting work programs.

nbn – all the reasons -it’s been discredited already for all the reasons. It’s not cheaper. the best arguments against the current one is are it’s cheaper and my internet is for now… cheaper has been discredited best of coalition’s plan vs worse case scenario. and people have upgraded their internet in the last 8 years. both parties have said fttn is going to happen is how we get there.

direct action – all the discredited

I’m still laughing at the idea that white people in Australia can experience racism. By the way, I double-checked the definition of ‘bigot’ and it does in fact extend to cover judging people by socio-economic status so I guess you’re the one who needs to brush-up on their pocket Macquarie, chewy.

OK JB, I have to ask the question. The pic for this post is (as far as I can tell) an American female soldier wearing body armour while servicing a Browning .50 cal heavy machine gun. What’s the relevance of the pic to the story of APS female staff potentially not being included in Mr Abbott’s new parental leave scheme? I’m trying to make the connection, but it’s just not happenin’ for me.

neanderthalsis said :

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t the existing APS maternity leave entitlements are pretty much what the Abbott scheme is anyway?

Yep – a Canberra public servant on $150,000 a year gets a generous maternity leave period of several months on FULL PAY. A fact conveniently ignored by the kneejerkers on this thread!

damien haas said :

There is certainly a subset of commenters on RA that will criticise anything Tony Abbot says. If he said 1 + 1 = 2 they would attack it. It is amusing observing the mental gymnastics that underly the cognitive dissonance.

+1.
If this was an ALP/Greens policy many of the same people would be here singing its praises, although they would quite honestly deny this to themselves. Their hatred is entirely tribal, like hating Collingwood or Manly, the difference being that they’ve convinced themselves they’re looking at issues rationally.

There is certainly a subset of commenters on RA that will criticise anything Tony Abbot says. If he said 1 + 1 = 2 they would attack it. It is amusing observing the mental gymnastics that underly the cognitive dissonance.

Hockey has been trumpeting the End of the Age of Entitlement, and lately it’s been sounding like they might even mean middle class family based welfare. Except for Abbott’s pet scheme to reward rich working women for having children.

Which, if you look at it, is basically eugenics.

dtc said :

Really?

The criticism of Abbott’s plan is that it gives high income earners much greater payments than low income earners.

Now, I you will quite easily find that a disproportionate number of females earning a high income in Australia are white. Same as you will find for males.

You will also find that people on high incomes are more able to afford to have time off to have kids and thus have less of a need to be subsidised by the govt (or business).

Hence the people who are favoured by this scheme – in comparison to the existing schemes – are white and rich. Firstly because fewer non white people are earning high incomes, and secondly because people who are already well off are being given more money when they dont really need it; and social policy should be to provide money to those who do need it.

And as for foreign university students – when they actually stay in Australia then perhaps you have a point. But most of them are here just for the degree. Which is fine but it makes your comment a bit irrelevant.

I’d like to see $0 paid to parents for leave, baby bonus etc. In my opinion, if you can’t afford them, don’t have kids! But if we’re going to insist on Government-funded PPL, why should a parent who has a higher earning capacity because they studied and earnt a well-paid job be punished for doing so? As it stands, the PPL plan pays people relative to their lost earnings. It seems as fair an option as any other to me.

I see where you’re coming from. I’m just not sure it still applies today. I know I struggle to find a single white dentist, or doctor. Accountants and other financial planners are also rarely white, at least when I bother to pay attention. 20 years ago, even 10 years ago I’d probably agree with you hands down, but today, I’m not so sure. If there are statistics to prove me wrong, I’ll cop to that, but right now I’m working off observations and have developed a picture from that.

DrKoresh said :

chewy14 said :

DrKoresh said :

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

Tony Abbotts scheme is ridiculous in the extreme but I just can’t let your statement lie.

People who choose to have children over a career are better suited to raising children?

Yes, ill remember that the next time I pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.

Ps. Love the casual racism at the end of your comment too.

So you’re bigoted against welfare-recipients, good to hear.

And poor little whitey, I hope my casual racism didn’t hurt your feelings, I know it’s something you must face everyday in every walk of life.

Hint: bigot doesn’t mean what you think it does.

And thanks for admitting you’re a racist. It’s good to know.

Ps, Abbotts scheme will benefit more white people in Australia because *shock horror* most people in this country are white. It’s like saying a scheme working with prison inmates unfairly benefits indigenous Australians because a higher proportion (to their overall population) are in jail.

Note that I still think its a shocking scheme and a massive waste of money.

dtc said :

Baggy said :

Find me a single statement which said that Abbott’s plan is looking out for rich, white Australians. Just one.

I recall seeing statistics recently on the nation’s universities which indicated that a significant proportion of students are International students (which I’ll try dig out), and given the ethnic diversity of the country I’d also expect to see that ‘whitey’ students would by no means be a majority.?

Really?

The criticism of Abbott’s plan is that it gives high income earners much greater payments than low income earners.

Now, I you will quite easily find that a disproportionate number of females earning a high income in Australia are white. Same as you will find for males.

You will also find that people on high incomes are more able to afford to have time off to have kids and thus have less of a need to be subsidised by the govt (or business).

Hence the people who are favoured by this scheme – in comparison to the existing schemes – are white and rich. Firstly because fewer non white people are earning high incomes, and secondly because people who are already well off are being given more money when they dont really need it; and social policy should be to provide money to those who do need it.

And as for foreign university students – when they actually stay in Australia then perhaps you have a point. But most of them are here just for the degree. Which is fine but it makes your comment a bit irrelevant.

What s/he said.

Baggy said :

Find me a single statement which said that Abbott’s plan is looking out for rich, white Australians. Just one.

I recall seeing statistics recently on the nation’s universities which indicated that a significant proportion of students are International students (which I’ll try dig out), and given the ethnic diversity of the country I’d also expect to see that ‘whitey’ students would by no means be a majority.?

Really?

The criticism of Abbott’s plan is that it gives high income earners much greater payments than low income earners.

Now, I you will quite easily find that a disproportionate number of females earning a high income in Australia are white. Same as you will find for males.

You will also find that people on high incomes are more able to afford to have time off to have kids and thus have less of a need to be subsidised by the govt (or business).

Hence the people who are favoured by this scheme – in comparison to the existing schemes – are white and rich. Firstly because fewer non white people are earning high incomes, and secondly because people who are already well off are being given more money when they dont really need it; and social policy should be to provide money to those who do need it.

And as for foreign university students – when they actually stay in Australia then perhaps you have a point. But most of them are here just for the degree. Which is fine but it makes your comment a bit irrelevant.

neanderthalsis said :

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t the existing APS maternity leave entitlements are pretty much what the Abbott scheme is anyway?

This is what I was thinking too. perhaps stopping two bites at the cherry?

Im sick to death of the sexism debate in politics.

We have have a billion dollar childcare industry that has been set up and subsidised by the government to ensure that if women want to work (have their career), and not have the kids being looked after by the dad instead of themselves, they can.

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t the existing APS maternity leave entitlements are pretty much what the Abbott scheme is anyway?

DrKoresh said :

chewy14 said :

DrKoresh said :

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

Tony Abbotts scheme is ridiculous in the extreme but I just can’t let your statement lie.

People who choose to have children over a career are better suited to raising children?

Yes, ill remember that the next time I pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.

Ps. Love the casual racism at the end of your comment too.

So you’re bigoted against welfare-recipients, good to hear.

And poor little whitey, I hope my casual racism didn’t hurt your feelings, I know it’s something you must face everyday in every walk of life.

Find me a single statement which said that Abbott’s plan is looking out for rich, white Australians. Just one.

I recall seeing statistics recently on the nation’s universities which indicated that a significant proportion of students are International students (which I’ll try dig out), and given the ethnic diversity of the country I’d also expect to see that ‘whitey’ students would by no means be a majority.

Also, isn’t racism bad, regardless of who is saying it? Or are you one who feels that only ‘white’ people can be racist, and never the victims?

Sorry, released I replied to the wrong person.

chewy14 said :

DrKoresh said :

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

Tony Abbotts scheme is ridiculous in the extreme but I just can’t let your statement lie.

People who choose to have children over a career are better suited to raising children?

Yes, ill remember that the next time I pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.

Ps. Love the casual racism at the end of your comment too.

There was no casual racism at the end of my comment. Good at reading into things that aren’t there based on your own prejudices obviously.

Here’s Abbott’s actual quote:

“We do not want educated women, at the higher degree level, to deny them a career. If we want women of that calibre to have families – and we should – well we’ve got to give them a fair dinkum chance to do so and that’s what this scheme of paid parental leave is all about.”

So once again you miss the point. It’s not about encouraging only highly educated, successful women to have children. Every working woman having a child benefits from this scheme, even someone in a minimum wage gets the payment for 6 weeks longer, but the majority will be women starting out in their careers perhaps on 40-80K salary and will be much better off. Most women on 150K are well past child bearing age anyway.

What Abbott was saying is that we don’t want to lose (as many) women from the work force who have gone through a tertiary education to obtain a particular set of skills that the country needs, when those women decide it’s time for a family. If they are going to be severely financially impacted or have difficulty resuming where they left off, they might either put off having children or end up not returning to the workforce.

If the woman returns to the job, long term she’s erased any burden on the taxpayer from her more generous scheme and actually increased the nation’s productivity. Win-win.

I find this whole politics of envy, where Labor women are essentially saying “I’d rather get less myself than see someone else get more” childish and frankly, counter to their best interests.

The debate about the levy and other funding is another matter and worth having, but getting hung up on “calibre” is typical leftist distraction, nitpicking and envy.

chewy14 said :

DrKoresh said :

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

Tony Abbotts scheme is ridiculous in the extreme but I just can’t let your statement lie.

People who choose to have children over a career are better suited to raising children?

Yes, ill remember that the next time I pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.

Ps. Love the casual racism at the end of your comment too.

So you’re bigoted against welfare-recipients, good to hear. And poor little whitey, I hope my casual racism didn’t hurt your feelings, I know it’s something you must face everyday in every walk of life.

DrKoresh said :

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

Tony Abbotts scheme is ridiculous in the extreme but I just can’t let your statement lie.

People who choose to have children over a career are better suited to raising children?

Yes, ill remember that the next time I pass the Centrelink office or walk through a shopping centre on a workday.

Ps. Love the casual racism at the end of your comment too.

DrKoresh said :

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

Interesting. You drew both income level and ethnicity from “calibre”? He mentioned only education.

By “high income” you mean of course, higher than minimum wage.

Standard Tory public service bashing. Nothing to see here. Move along.

God he’s a bigoted turd. Why does income indicate calibre? Not to start a flame war but wouldn’t you think that women who chose to have kids instead of focussing on their careers would be better suited to raising kids than a CEO with a business degree?

Oh well, at least it’s good to know he’ll be looking out for rich, white Australians, they really need a break.

I think the key phrase in that release is “members of the Coalition” – presumably those, such as Alex Hawke, who are concerned about the scheme as put forward by Abbott and who, having realised that their leader is determined to see it implemented, are looking for options to contain the costs. The AFR piece, and a similar one in The Australian do not, on my reading, indicate that Abbott is having a change of heart.

Putting aside, for the moment, the inconvenient fact that Labor has consistently attacked and ridiculed Abbott’s proposed parental leave scheme, are we to assume, in light of this release, that they would now like to see it go ahead, with full coverage in the public sector? If so, for the APS and other Budget-funded elements of the Commonwealth public sector, perhaps they could fund it by yet another levy/efficiency divided on the running costs of departments and agencies – or maybe not. I think they might be better concentrating their efforts on the scare campaign over the Coalition’s IR policy.