2. ## Re: The You Tube and Media Thread

Bwahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

4. ## Re: The You Tube and Media Thread

DanDare said
For those interested, here is a good article on the whole Centrelink Debt Recover problem.

Part of the crackdown – a part repeatedly trumpeted by the government as a success – was to use “data matching” to identify “cheats”. If someone received a Centrelink payment, the income they reported would be cross-checked automatically with the Australian Tax Office; if there was a discrepancy, a debt would be created representing the alleged “overpayment”, and a letter sent to the recipient.
The “errors” are very simple to understand:

If you earn over a set threshold in a fortnight, your benefit is reduced. Earn enough, and the benefit should be zero;
The time unit is, however, a fortnight, but the Australian Tax Office doesn't care about fortnights, only years;
Centrelink's developers divided the ATO earnings data by 26 because they were told to write the software that way;
When “yearly / 26” yielded an amount over the benefit threshold, a debt was created and recipients could only change this by challenging the calculation, with records to back them up, as much as six years back.
So in short hand, if you worked for a period of time, and then went onto welfare, and the amount that you earned when divided by 26 was over the threshold, then the debt recovery system believes that you shouldn't have been paid the welfare.

5. I ran the numbers back of the envelope style and based on new start of $264 per week, or$13,728 per year and the government stating it will reclaim $4.5b going back six years, I estimate that government believes it has the right to claw back 327,797 years worth of new start paid to people. ($4.5b/\$13,728)

Given that the unemployment has rarely dipped below 600k since 2010, we can state that there has been 3,600,000 years worth of people unemployed since 2010. (600,000 * 6 years)

Combining these 2 figures we can see that the government reckons 9.1% of all new start recipients received it in error (327,797/3,600,000) The actual numbers would probably be higher as not all unemployed are eligible for new start.

Now if this buggy system branches put into other pensions and family tax benefits then the equation would change. Either way it is an ideological shit show and it scares me because data mining is a valid way to identify anomalies to investigate. Key word: INVESTIGATE. Which is how I have used data mining professionally in the past and it works well. This is the dark side of this.

6. ## Re: The You Tube and Media Thread

The new start claw back is bad for several reasons:
1) The formula assumes periods of unemployment benefit are erased by amounts earned outside the unemployment time.
2) The government is using an automatic system rather than double checking and investigating before acting. That means they have created a form of automatic con on people who are already facing difficulties.
3) The actual likely amount to regain for real fraud cases is likely to be miniscule compared with so many other things the government could deal with, such as corporate tax evasion.
4) The action is probably intended to make people afraid to claim in the first place.

8. ## Re: The You Tube and Media Thread

DanDare said
The new start claw back is bad for several reasons:
1) The formula assumes periods of unemployment benefit are erased by amounts earned outside the unemployment time.
2) The government is using an automatic system rather than double checking and investigating before acting. That means they have created a form of automatic con on people who are already facing difficulties.
3) The actual likely amount to regain for real fraud cases is likely to be miniscule compared with so many other things the government could deal with, such as corporate tax evasion.
4) The action is probably intended to make people afraid to claim in the first place.
All pretty much correct.

10. ## Re: The You Tube and Media Thread

There's also this.

Star Wars a la The Dam Busters
Last edited by Loki; 15th January 2017 at 03:28 PM.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•