With the world getting smaller as the Internet has connected us all around the globe, there have been challenges issued over social media. Some of them with good intentions like the ice bucket challenge to raise awareness of ALS (although I'm more inclined to just donate money than douse myself with ice cubes); some of them transcending dingbattery in their stupidity, such as eating Tide pods (eat a capsule of laundry detergent, and you get what you deserve). In a similar vein was the challenge that saw teenagers inhaling an unrolled condom up a nostril and pulling out via the back of the throat (perhaps your parents should have used a condom and prevented the conception of such utter imbecilic jackasses). But I think I would like to issue a challenge, and it's directed to our MSM, and that is: Stop Punching Down on Welfare Recipients Challenge. This is to be followed by the next challenge: Investigate Who Actually Benefits From The Cashless Welfare Card Challenge (I'm guessing, hmmmm, Indue?).
Who's with me on this? What's got me thinking about these challenges is the sickening glut of welfare bashing stories that have saturated the news lately. I only blogged the other day about the cuntiness in which Channel 7's Sunrise engaged by having their news presenter Natalie Barr use the term 'dole bludgers', followed up by a half-arsed apology the next day at a time when nobody would have been watching.
It's not just Channel 7. Channel 9 have been at it, too, with their in-depth reports about tactics devised by those issued with the card that will enable them to obtain alcohol. Well, colour me appalled: how dare an adult who is not a criminal find a way to purchase an item that is perfectly legal? (If you're too dense to catch on, I'm being sarcastic there). The reporter was some youngish dude called Rob Morrison, and seriously, are the journalists who do these stories PROUD of them? Is this the legacy of Woodward and Bernstein?
Channel 9 followed up with a story about how Centrelink are using technology to ensure those on Newstart are where they're meant to be at times of arranged interviews. Yes, people should attend interviews with their job search providers - nobody is disputing this - but the tone of the article was just beyond offensive, and got me wondering is the next step tattooing the wrists and making them wear appropriately-logoed clothing, so everybody knows they are on Newstart? Maybe these grubs in the media would like the recipients of the benefit to walk through the streets, ringing a bell, and yelling: 'Unclean! Unclean!', thus giving the other members of society a chance to cross the streets and get away, lest they come into contact with welfare-germs. The real clunker in this article was the Minister for Government Services, Stuart Robert MP, giving his two cents. Uh, yeah. I know, right? (Hey, Stuart, how's that home internet usage you wrongly claimed from the taxpayer working out for you? Here's a challenge for you: go suck on your skidmarked underpants).
So, yeah, MSM. How about taking up this challenge? Tell us who really benefits from this draconian bullshit being peddled about. Is it just a coincidence these stories have all been surfacing like a horror movie monster from a pool of toxic sludge at the same time there have been calls for the Newstart allowance to be raised? And after you've told us who benefits, tell us the detrimental effects of being forced onto the card, not just for the users, but for people who can no longer sell their wares because they are not Woolworths or Coles etc. I have a whole list of reasons why cashless welfare totally felches diarrhoetic camels, but I will save it for another post. In the meantime, I have a book to promote!
No comments:
Post a Comment