Controlled Income Management is making headlines again.

WHY WE OPPOSE INCOME MANAGEMENT (courtesy Eva Cox): - It starts with the wrong assumptions, that the spending of income recipients is the problem. - It can undermine recipients’ capacities to make their own choices. - It costs a lot per person to administer, which could be better spent on other services. - It reduces the focus on external problems - such as job seekers greatly outnumbering jobs and employers' prejudices affecting work prospects. - It blames the most vulnerable and reinforces their lack of self-worth and hostile public views, both social determinants of ill health. [P] We have seen lately a push for controlled income management for all the wrong reasons. Again it's just a conditioning of the public that this is a good thing. He're are some more reasons why CIM is so bad: Reality check If 728 500 people are unemployed (ABS stats for June) and they become income managed (on the very generous and rough estimate of $500 per fortnight) then that will mean the government gets to say where $9 470 500 000 gets spent per year. According to Centrelink website this does not cover - local markets (Farmers, etc) - Repair businesses (car, etc) - Taxi services - Small businesses (Speciality shops) - Independent shops (not part of a huge super chain, mum and dad cornr stores, take-aways, pharmacies, bike shops,) - Anybody selling items on ebay - Anybody selling personal items (garage sales, etc) - Any donation drives - Charity shops (Salvo's, St Vinnies) - Pet shops - Kids school tuck shops Etc, etc, etc..........so how safe does your job feel now? You may not be a pet shop owner, but the pet shop owner maybe your customer, or may have employed your kid. Don't believe the media propaganda or government BS, not everyone can get a job, and not everyone uses drugs, gambles or are alcoholics. See for yourself!