Scott Morrison on Sunday turned folksy to present the upside of the $60 billion JobKeeper forecasting snafu.
Disiplin ilmiah, gaya jurnalistik
Artikel-artikel mengenai JobKeeper
Menampilkan 61 - 78 dari 78 artikel
The federal treasury has massively revised the the estimated cost of the JobKeeper program.
Are the Australian government’s successive changes to JobKeeper specifically designed to exclude universities? And if so, why?
New funding aims to fend off a wave of mental ill-health in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. We don’t know how severe that wave will be, but we do know financial hardship is a huge risk factor.
Hundreds of casual academics have lost work in the COVID-19 crisis. They make up the majority of the teaching workforce at universities but they don’t quality for any government assistance.
Every one of Australia’s coronavirus support payments is due to end by the end of October. It’ll leave a gaping hole.
Women have suffered much more than men. Many who were employed in March have withdrawn from the labour force and so aren’t counted as unemployed.
We are going to need some sort of wage subsidy well beyond six months. The best kind of subsidy would be portable.
There’s a lot the treasurer could do, but there’s an argument for leaving things as they are.
Jobkeeper is far from perfect and open to abuse. On the face of it, it supports 6.6 million wages to save 1 million jobs.
Scott Morrison and Josh Frydenberg have done well with support packages so far. But more might be needed to save the country from the worst of the economic fallout from the crisis.
Arguments for Australian culture focus on what it should say to demonstrate its worth - rather than the government’s capacity to listen. Our history of conservative cultural leadership show they can.
We’re all in this pandemic together. But we’re currently leaving it to a small proportion of the community to shoulder most of the economic pain. It’s an approach that’s compounding social and intergenerational…
Increases in unemployment result in a decrease in apprentice numbers, as well as employers taking on fewer new apprentices. Australia can’t lose the workforce we might need for our recovery efforts.
The legislation before parliament over-compensates some and under-compensates others, but should leave us better off on the other side.
The legislation before parliament discriminates against employers who take on temporary migrants, impoverishes Australian residents and will hold back the fight against coronavirus.
Many temporary residents will be excluded from coronavirus support. In this open letter to the prime minister, 43 leading Australian experts on social policy argue this is in no-one’s interests.
About one million casual workers will miss out, simply because they haven’t been with their latest employer for more than 12 months.
Kontributor teratas
-
Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
-
Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University
-
Program Director, Economic Policy, Grattan Institute
-
Professor of Economics, The University of Melbourne
-
Visiting Fellow, Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University
-
Chief executive officer, Grattan Institute
-
Professorial Fellow and Co-Director, HILDA Survey, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne
-
Director, Mitchell Institute, Victoria University
-
Senior Associate, Grattan Institute
-
Professor, School of Economics, The University of Queensland
-
Professor of Creative Arts, Griffith University
-
Peter Whiteford adalah Sahabat The Conversation.
Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University
-
Associate Professor and Principal Fellow (Hon), School of Culture and Communication, The University of Melbourne
-
Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National University
-
Analyst, Grattan Institute
