Community Selection
The government proposition is that locations are selected based on significant support shown from within the communities themselves. This willingness for support combined with high levels of welfare dependency, co-existing with drug and alcohol abuse, creates an environment in which the government feels obligated to intervene. This is the government’s position anyway.
In reality, the communities facing the greatest problems will be further disadvantaged through the introduction of increased government control, over resident’s already limited financial resources. The government intends this program to be beneficial to the majority of participants and their communities. They envision the end consequence to reduce overall
…show more content…
Andrew Forrest strongly recommended Australia should expand income management policy. This recommendation came from a man who is far removed from any form of poverty. This man has little right to speak on behalf of people residing within some of Australia’s most disadvantaged communities. Not everyone has made a fortune through selfishly plundering the land, metals, and minerals of Australia’s traditional landowners. For an individual to suggest that those he has contributed stealing from, (i.e.) the Aboriginal people, should lose more is both laughable and ludicrous. This man obviously does not adequately understand the negative situation facing many individuals living in these communities. It is white privilege in its most vile …show more content…
An evaluation commissioned by the government could not find any considerable evidence of the Basics Card program attaining the desired result. This is despite the $410 million price tag. There was no evidence of changes in spending patterns, no evidence of an overall improvement in financial security, and no evidence of improvement in participant’s well-being. Therefore, the program did not maximize utility as intended.
Still, the government illogically promotes this approach under the guise of Utilitarianism. A report released by the human service minister Alan Tudge, noted several positive health and social outcomes for participants of the program. The report found Forty-five percent of the users surveyed stated they had improved in saving money. Twenty-three percent said it had made their lives better, and Forty percent said they could now care for their children at a higher standard. This evidence asserts the programs final consequence outweighed any harm caused. This is a utilitarian
He also assumes that they should be participated in economic cooperation, resource development and the sharing of knowledge and technologies, like they assisted non-Aboriginal people in the past time. (James Tully pg.53) Obviously, Aboriginal people get a chance to participate in the society and to get respect and rights to exert their ability. Therefore, Aboriginal are able to promote the economic development. It is sufficiently show equality between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in economic aspect. On the other hand, Tully’s states that Aboriginal people want to get power back from the government, they more likely to govern themselves and desire to delegate several of their rights to the political area. (James Tully pg.53) I will argue that it is valid to repatriate legal and political powers to Aboriginal people. Because when they self-govern accord with their own tradition and laws, it will create stabilize social order which avoid misconduct in our society. Furthermore, it offers Aboriginal people fair chance to speak in public that maintain their interest and profit. Most importantly, it recalls and emphasizes mutual respect is a factor to balance citizens between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal. So that while Aboriginal people express their voice to society, it gain
Australia’s resources otherwise known as factors of production – natural resources, labour, capital and enterprise, are relatively scarce, resulting in the economic problem of relative scarcity as we cannot satisfy all our needs and wants in Australia as they are unlimited. Collective and individual wants are
There are, however, some negatives to this act as well. Some voters speculate that instituting this bill will create a large scale “chain migration”. They feel that this act is only a “magnet” for the famil...
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
...rial covered in the unit Aboriginal People that I have been studying at the University of Notre Dame Fremantle, Aboriginal people have had a long history of being subjected to dispossession and discriminatory acts that has been keep quite for too long. By standing together we are far more likely to achieve long lasting positive outcomes and a better future for all Australians.
“In about half of the Dominion, the aboriginal rights of Indians have arguably been extinguished by treaty” (Sanders, 13). The traditions and culture of Aboriginals are vanishing at a quick pace, and along it is their wealth. If the Canadian Government restore Native rights over resource development once again, Aboriginals would be able to gain back wealth and help with the poverty in their societies. “An influential lobby group with close ties to the federal Conservatives is recommending that Ottawa ditch the Indian Act and give First Nations more control over their land in order to end aboriginal poverty once and for all” (End First). This recommendation would increase the income within Native communities, helping them jump out of
The power structure between aboriginal and non-aboriginal people always plays some role to impede a kind of equal dialogue between them. Non-aboriginal people on average are more affluent than aboriginals. Also, the social infrastructures in some off-reserve major metropolitan cities are much more mature than on-reserve areas. The inequality between aboriginals and non-aboriginals makes non-aboriginal policy makers be inclined to bring their own sense of superiority to the analysis of aboriginal issues, which could likely lead to policies with biases and prejudices. Perhaps an effective conversation between aboriginal and government can lead to a better outcome because aboriginals’ own voice would be heard. In this essay, I will demonstrate why, when compared with Flanagan’s assimilationist proposal, Cairns’ concept of “citizen plus” is more persuasive as an effective approach to aboriginal policy. Firstly, I would outline the debate between Thomas Flanagan and Alan Cairns on aboriginal policy. A brief compare and contrast between their opinions will be made. Secondly, with some other academic sources in my mind, I would state the reasons why I stand aside with Cairns more than with Flanagan. Some advisable
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus of legislation in the past w...
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
It is clear that many steps were taken to achieve the same rights and freedoms as the rest of Australia for the Aborigines especially since 1945. Major steps forward and setbacks included the Day of Mourning, the Aboriginal Protection Act, the Child Welfare Act, the ‘Freedom Ride’, the 1962 Electoral Act and the 1967 Referendum, the tent ‘Aboriginal Embassy’, the protest at Wave Hill, Frank Hardy’s project to find the ‘real Australia’, Prime Minister Gough Whitlam giving back 300 000 square kilometers of land, the Mabo decision in 1982, the Native Title Act, John Howard’s plan in 1996, and Kevin Rudd’s apology speech. Overall, there has been a long struggle for reconciliation. Indigenous Australians now have the same rights as other Australians, but social and economic equality are still to be improved.
Examining the case with the Utilitarian mindset, we consider the overall positivity of the action vs the positivity of the alternative. In this case, what is the measure
This paper will be predominantly focusing on public housing within Ontario. Not only will it look at the basics of Ontario but examine more directly on Regent Park within Toronto. It will discuss what public housing is and the explanation for why it exists, the government housing programs that are present with regards to public housing and the results of the government programs. The Purpose of this essay is to argue that the problem of public housing will never
In conclusion, after looking at the objections and considering every point of the utilitarian methodology, it is safe to say that the arguments for it are not very strong. “[Utilitarianism] results from the proceeding considerations that there is in reality nothing desired except happiness” (Mill, 115). However, it is hard to even define happiness making the approach that much more difficult to follow. All in all, the main reasons to reject utilitarianism are as follows: utilitarianism is not always feasible, it only takes into account end goals, conflicts with an individual’s integrity, and is incompatible with justice. For these reasons, individuals should enthuse utilitarians to reject the idea that all actions are right as long as it is for the greater good.
A Utilitarian is a person that believes, if an action produces more good than harm, then that action is morally correct. Shkreli believes that if he raises the price Daraprim, Turing Pharmaceuticals will raise more profitable, and therefore is able to spend more money on research to help develop more drugs down the road. There are however, two types of Utilitarianism. There is Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Act Utilitarianism believes that any action that produces more good than harm, it is the moral thing to do. While Rule Utilitarianism believes that any action that does not breaking the law and produces more good than harm, is the moral thing to do.
Utilitarianism is defined to be “the view that right actions are those that result in the most beneficial balance of good over bad consequences for everyone involved” (Vaughn 64). In other words, for a utilitarian,