Even though the conservatives will deny it, the earlier Howard government ensured welfare became an entitlement, not only for the underprivileged, but for rich individuals. Corporations were given Workchoices where the government supplemented low wages. Howard bribed and porkbarrelled the electorate to ensure he won elections. The greedy as well as the needy have held their hands out for years on the premise that regardless of whether you're rich or poor, everyone should receive equal handouts. It didn't matter whether you lived in a humpy and ate baked beans or in a seaside mansion and ate lobster.Super Nova wrote:I started left wing and have moved to the right the more I learn about how western economies work and how the socialist agenda has eroded the security of us all. I think there is nothing wrong with the principles of a welfare element to the state however it is clear to me that the grand waste of moneys over the last 40 years and the debt ratios of most western economies is going to blow up soon and then those of use who worked our entire lives to have a little money and assets plus our pensions/super will be the losers.
Pensions and super for the average worker aren't doing that well here either.
economic management is the heart of good government. Offering bribes to the poor of the community to get elected is hurting our very way of life and will result in the end of democracy as we know it.
Prior to the Howard government's bribes, the Hawke/Keating government were very stringent with welfare. They had inspectors, which the Howard government removed. They checked up on all social welfare recipients to ensure they weren't cheating the system. Once this stopped - welfare almost doubled under Howard's conservative government. Means testing was eliminated.
If they were balanced attacks - then I'd agree.I expect polarised views on the matter and as you are declared a lefty I would expect the right to attack you. In return you can defend or attack back.
You have a conservative government over there too. How long have they been in power - 3 years? They're not managing well regardless of their pre-election boasting?Here in England/Uk is the real case in point. It has more debt per capita than any western country and this is well above Greece. It is going to go down the tubes. The root cause is the welfare state. The costs have blown up so much and no political will correct it because the left will vote them out next term When the interest rates start to rise world wide I expect a complete implosion of many western systems. Be thankful you have a conservative government now control spending because this will be one of Australia's saving graces.
It's not surprising, but our new conservative government is going to indebt us even further. Within a few short weeks they want to escalate our debt by 70% - debt being a huge problem they constantly referred to when they were in opposition. It was a crime; it was bad economic management; it was unplanned and lax spending etc. The conservatives were going to pay down our debt and produce a surplus within 3 years. That was their promise. They lied.
Labor tried to reduce welfare while they were in office, but the opposition was overwhelming. They managed to slip in a few reductions. We need a lot more, but not in essential Federal services, which is about to happen again now.
Under Labor's Hawke/Keating government - welfare was extremely difficult to get, so most people didn't bother with it. Government services were good though and that's how it should have stayed. Childcare and health services, particularly for working families were excellent, but that all deteriorated under the Howard government when he privatised so many agencies. When the GFC hit - most of these private organisations went down the drain leaving attrocious debts. The Rudd/Gillard government tried to re-establish them, but they weren't given enough time.
Today there is no moderate balance of government in a modern democracy. Both major parties switch roles when it suits them.
