Luke Slattery Equality

INTRODUCTION

Luke Slattery’s article, Equality movement gains support in unlikely places, highlights the mounting concern about rising economic inequality within our society. Changeable human behaviour makes the issue of solving inequality not only very complex, but practically impossible. Through the analysis of both socially democratic and neoliberal systems, and of Australia’s current economic capabilities, I have determined that Slattery’s suggestion of adopting social democracy for the Australian system, despite being beneficial in increasing equality, is simply not feasible.

PARAGRAPH 1

Slattery’s is only one voice suggesting that rising inequality needs to be addressed sooner rather than later. George Sher’s “Equality for Inegalitarians”

British sociologist Herbert Spencer adds some social Darwinism by arguing that “free market economies constitute the most civilized form of human competition in which the ‘fittest’ will naturally rise to the top”. This school of thinking believes that inequality is needed to create incentives to drive the performance of companies and individuals. An important element of this trickle down effect involves income tax cuts for the rich. It is argued that cutting income tax for the rich will benefit everyone, not just high income-earners. The trickle down effect explains that if that if higher-income earners get an increase in disposable income, they will thus increase their spending, creating additional demand in the economy. On the other hand, increased profits for firms may be reinvested into expanding output. According to political analyst Thomas Woods, increasing the size of government along Nordic Model lines is not the solution to the recent growth in inequality rates across the OECD. Imposing more government control over the economy, particularly those with large bureaucracies and oppressive laws, will have a detrimental effect on economic growth and cause poverty to increase. Governments should make it much easier for businesses to create jobs by getting rid

He does not stand alone in suggesting that Australia should look to the Nordic Model in order to find a practical solution to this problem. If it could be brought in within the current revenue generation structures, it might be feasible. However, while factors of the Nordic model, such as higher taxes in return for better social services, are highly admirable, adopting the system in Australia is impeded by major cultural and political factors. Deeply entrenched within Australian values, is the underlying belief that Australians are entitled to significant levels of government support. The culture of entitlement that exists in Australian society is, in the long term, potentially highly detrimental. According to the Australian, Australian-born chairman of US manufacturing giant Dow Chemical, Andrew Liveris, has warned that “Australia faces the challenge of an entitlement society and that the country has lost its way a little amid tense political in-fighting and growing spending on social reforms”. Australians expect governments to do more with their money, but they are unwilling to pay higher tax? The unwillingness of the Australian population to pay higher taxes if it means helping those who aren’t helping themselves means that