Senator Andrew Bartlett
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
 
Workers vs Shirkers

I wrote here about the "shirker" usurping the old role of the "bludger" as the star player in the Government's lexicon of the undeserving. Today's Daily Telegraph couldn't make it any clearer. Its headline "Workers 1 Shirkers 0" pits 'them' against 'us' in the most basic possible way.

Amazingly this story says that Treasurer Peter Costello has "emerged as a working class hero" as a result of the Budget. I don't subscribe to old-style Marxist class rhetoric, but to redefine the 'working class' as the highest income earners while the disabled and sole parents are discounted is revisionism at its worst.

I prefer this assessment by Ross Gittins in the Sydney Morning Herald:

It's a rich man's delusion that able-bodied welfare beneficiaries are happy living on a pittance and sitting around watching day-time television for the rest of their lives. Would you fancy it? There may be some, but not many.
Similarly, it's a delusion that if you cut their benefits by up to $40 a week and force them to hunt for jobs they'll all soon be gainfully employed. Most of those who can work already are. Half of those on the sole parent payment have jobs (because you can still get a part payment with earnings of up to $46,000 a year), and most beneficiaries are unskilled, not skilled.

posted by Andrew Bartlett @ Wednesday, May 11, 2005 Permalink
|


<< Home