Another week, another Essential Research coronavirus poll — this one focusing on attitudes to China, which have notably soured. As related by The Guardian, respondents were asked if they had a favourable or unfavourable view of China’s influences on Australian life, which produced a net rating of minus 30% on trade, compared with plus 1% last August, and a net rating of minus 40% for Chinese business operating in Australia, down from minus 21%. There were also scores of minus 26% for defence, minus 36% for politics and minus 9% for culture. Conversely, the United States scored net positive scores, albeit that these were quite a lot bigger for defence (plus 29%), business (plus 15%) and trade (plus 14%) than politics (plus 2%) and culture (plus 7%).
Asked which relationship would be more beneficial to strengthen, 42% favoured the US and 18% China, compared with 38% and 28% last August. Respondents had two bob each way on trade in that 53% thought Australia “needs to do all it can to avoid a trade war with China”, with 17% opposed, but 48% felt Australia should impose retaliatory tariffs, with 22% opposed. The poll found “more than half” believe China’s trade sanctions against Australia were motivated by the government’s call for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19.
The poll continued its weekly suite of questions on coronavirus, recording no change on the government’s handling of the crisis, which was rated positively by 73% and negatively by 11%. Levels of concern little changed on last week (79% either very or quite concerned, down one, and 21% either not at all or not that concerned, up one). A divide appears to be opening on restrictions, with higher responses for both lifting them as soon as possible (up five to 14%) and holding off (up two to 27%). The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1087; a full report should be published later today.
Note that below this post is a dedicated thread for the Eden-Monaro by-election, which you are encouraged to use if you have something specific to say on that subject.
UPDATE: Full report here.
Scout @ #331 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 12:52 pm
We have given up. The final straw was Centrelink kindly advising us that we could raid our superannuation instead – they helpfully pointed out that if both myself and our partner did so, we would have more cash than we would get from the JobKeeper/JobSeeker payment anyway.
I couldn’t think of a rebuttal to that argument. At least, not a polite one.
And no doubt Sabra sits back down with a contented smile on her face.
Jaeger
Smart operators like Scomo never give away the important details. 😆
@MichaelWestBiz tweets
Less #JobMaker than #BigBusinessMaker really. Gives employers choice to invest in automation, AI or jobs
Player One
That was a shocking suggestion to you.
lizzie
She is really over the finance industry. She is retraining as a human rights lawyer. It will take her a few years, and the jobs do not pay that well, but she feels that she will get a lot more satisfaction out of it.
I understand now why the Sabra toothed tiger became extinct.
Ryan StruykVerified account @ryanstruyk
Reported US coronavirus cases:
Feb. 25: 57 cases
Mar. 25: 65,273 cases
Apr. 25: 938,154 cases
May 25: 1, 706, 226 cases
Reported US coronavirus deaths on date:
Feb. 25: 0 deaths
Mar. 25: 938 deaths
Apr. 25: 53,755 deaths
May 25: 99, 805 deaths
Douglas and Milko
She’s in finance? And they admire Morrison? What a deluded world we live in!
Re Player One’s circumstance. I understood that, as a temporary measure during the coronavirus crisis, someone who is unemployed could have a partner earning up to $3,000 per fortnight (ie, twice Jobkeeper) and still receive at least some of the Jobseeker payment. (Normally, Jobseeker cuts out if your partner is earning around $1k per fortnight or more).
This should all be quite straightforward, so I assume there must be some other factor at play: eg P1’s partner has some other significant source of income (from investments or a superannuation pension) and/or substantial assets, in which case they were never going to be eligible for Jobseeker anyway.
lizzie @ #356 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:13 pm
Yes, we were a bit stunned by that one. But I believe they were trying to be helpful 🙁
P1
Wow! That is nasty. I wonder how many other people who turn up to get support are told this.
@GrogsGamut tweets
Morrison: “if you don’t look after the growth in your economy, then you can’t guarantee any of the things you’ve talked about”
Just a reminder *2019* was the worst year for growth since the 1990s recession https://twitter.com/GrogsGamut/status/1265120083925327874/photo/1
meher baba @ #361 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:18 pm
Nope. Or at least, not so simple.
If you want to understand the full irony of the situation, I believe that if I had not applied for JobKeeper, we would instead both have qualified for two JobSeeker payments.
Morrison, who makes decisions off the cuff and without consultation, has now decided that consultation (sic) during C-19 got him some cred, so he’s pretending that’s how he’s “going forward”. But in his heart all the decisions are already made.
Bluebottle @ #337 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 12:57 pm
Well he’s certainly not listening to the doctors before he decides to do it. Just pull the plug and away we go.
lizzie
And the CEO loves Trump.
She is in charge of the office COVID-19 policy writing and implementation. I listen to her ventilate over coffee when she comes home from work. Even quoting Kerry chant, the NSW CMO’s advice was not acceptable. I presume Berejiklian is seen as too far left by the Trump loving branch of the Coalition.
Training people for what employers want. Exploiting workers. MasterChef amongst others springs to mind.
@political_alert tweets
ACTU Secretary Sally McManus will address media on the JobMaker announcement and Scott Morrison’s National Press Club address, 2:30PM, Sydney #auspol
And right on cue, will come ….
Douglas and Milko
Loves Trump? Aaaargh! No decent Australian should do that.
@lenoretaylor tweets
I thought I could fill out the jobkeeper form in a day. Optimism is always a mistake | Jane Gilmore https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/26/i-thought-i-could-fill-out-the-jobkeeper-form-in-a-day-optimism-is-always-a-mistake?CMP=share_btn_tw
If she works in finance and her colleagues admire Morrison then she either works with a group of Liberals or they are simply endorsing his stimulus measures which is fair enough because judging the measures simply on economics they have been good.
Morrison has a very cruel mouth (female assessment).
… consensus and accord
Thanks P1, the whole system sounds like it has more holes in it than a colander.
It is hard to work out if the government is incompetent or competent but sneaky.
A waffle-ed recovery … (comment on the TGA live blog)
“I’ve given this long and careful thought, and it has to be medical experiments for the lot of you.”
I’m not all that impressed by the questions. Perhaps I’m just bored.
guytaur @ #373 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:27 pm
Ha! Read that story, and then consider how we would have managed, given that we have no mobile reception, and our landline phone was burned out 5 MONTHS AGO AND HAS NOT BEEN FIXED YET 🙁
And BB has the gall for criticizing us for using an accountant!
PvO
Will you consider taking a pay cut?
SM
No. I’ll just continue to do a good job.
Your accountant should have recommended Job Seeker.
I’m more productively listening to a Tony Bourke webinar on the Arts industry and COVID-19.
Has Scrott been asked about his push to open schools ASAP ?
.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2020/may/26/coronavirus-australia-live-news-morrison-skills-productivity-nsw-sa-vic-qld-stimulus-latest-updates
It’s all very predictable – and I’m not buying what Scotty from Marketing is selling.
Let’s now observe how the neolibs in the Labor party embrace this…
You really are thick Guytaur.
P1’s not ashamed of being unemployed. She’s been broadcasting the fact to this blog, wailing that despite having a perfect application and an impeccable moral and financial case, and consulting with her accountant and her local MP, she’s been refused everything: bushfire relief, JobKeeper and JobSeeker.
Last we heard, Centrelink were “sending her a letter” presumably explaining why she, her application and its 14 supporting documents were all refused. But she already knows why: they are “trying to break her”.
It’s more likely to be that her case is missing that “certain something” which Centrelink needs to know, but which P1 has forgotten, otherwise omitted, or cannot bring herself to tell them.
It’s no skin off Centrelink’s nose. They don’t care either way. Maybe at a high level the DO try to make it hard, as a matter of policy, to successfully apply, but at the relatively low level of an assessor, they have rules and tick boxes. Obviously one of them has not been followed to the fullest degree (or had not, as of last week).
The omissions are usually tax return irregularities (as in missing tax returns for either the applicant or his/her partner), or asset irregularities: either something not fully disclosed, or not (in their mind) properly accounted for, or correctly valued (and in some cases hidden).
They are not in the business of paying out dole money (or anything else) if the applicant has, again in their view, sufficient assets to tide them over without resorting to the public purse. Any such assets must be depleted down to a certain threshold level before benefits become payable.
Centrelink does not offer counsellors or financial advisors who help applicants fill out their forms, at least not beyond the barest technical or procedural level. An applicant’s forms are their own responsibility to fill out. They must present those applications as a result of their own efforts, not as the results of coaching from a friendly Centrelink officer. If a form turned out to be wrong or even fraudulent (and I am not imputing this to P1) then such a Centrelink officer would be implicated in that fraud and could find themselves in a hornets’ nest of trouble.
The forms are all very clear in Centrelink’s mind. They assume this to be the case with the minds of applicants, who are assumed to have trawled through the Centrelink web site for ALL the rules pertaining to their application, and to have read and understood them to a professional degree (or to have employed a professional to do so).
I think this is where most of the trouble comes from. People think any old fudge will do, and they fill the forms out with this idea in mind. You pretty quickly find out how wrong an approach this is. Centrelink’s computers remember everything you put in those forms, unfortunately sometimes forever, or at least for long after those particularsmay remain relevant. I gave the example of ancient nearly 20 year-old assets reports that I didn’t know had to be deleted by me. 20 years later those “assets” (long since disposed of) were still sitting there, accruing compound interest. No-one at Centrelink told me about them until I asked a series of very specific questions. It had been my responsibility to manage my own assets and report them even though I was not receiving any benefits, and only had 20 years before before giving up on Centrelink in exasperation at all the required reporting (I’m not saying dealing with them is easy, by the way).
If Centrelink aren’t paying benefits you have to play their game. Moaning about them “trying to break you” gets you absolutely nowhere. But you first have to ask the right question.
How’s Scrooter going?
Got ’em hanging on his every word?
Fulvio Sammut @ #383 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:36 pm
They did. But we can’t both get it.
And there we go. Right on cue.
Fulvio Sammut @ #383 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:36 pm
Seems like they should have recommended:
1. Incorporate as a Pty Ltd
2. Make the partner a director/shareholder
3. JobKeeper x2
Some private schools that took Scotty from DeathWorks early return bribe might learn to regret it.
Player One @ #389 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:41 pm
Oops! Misread this – I thought you said JobKeeper. No, they gave us the correct advice at the time. We thought so too, and it was also the advice of the government, the ATO and Centrelink themselves – i.e. to apply for both and let them sort it out.
Centrelink?
While the rules, the regulations, the programs, and the turgid waffle might vary there is only one Coalition rule you need to understand:
It despises poor leaners with a passion.
Crony capitalist rich leaners are a whole ‘nother thing.
a r @ #391 Tuesday, May 26th, 2020 – 1:42 pm
Yes, we know that now. But it is too late.
Good to see the government aren’t disappointing me – totally screwing up the economic recovery.
I must have misread your post at 1.21 pm where you said if you hadn’t applied for Jobkeeper you would both have been eligible for Jobseeker. But never mind.
Said no builder ever.
BB
You really are thick. Its you shaming someone for being unemployed. Argue the case without using employment status or lack of it as a problem in and of itself.
I did not enter the argument. I just asked you to stop using unemployment status as a weapon to shame someone to win an argument.
I did so without aiming it at you personally. I pointed out its a common failing on the blog.
Your failure to listen but instead jump to your own defence says more about you than me. Yes that means accepting someone can be proud to be unemployed. After all the reality is there are more people than jobs.
D7M
Once again, you miss my point entirely and just make stuff up. Do you even read my posts. If you do you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension and again interpret things through your blinkered prism.