Let me tell you how it will be
Recently, I had a conversation with a friend about the nature of public debate in this country. The starting point for me was that I often feel like I am at far-left odds with the country. My evidence for this point of view was the 2001 and 2004 Federal elections, where lefty ideals (welcoming refugees, free healthcare for the elderly, support for public schooling, saving the trees etc) were trumped by arguments about economic and national security.
I argued that we were so far beyond the idea of a treaty for Indigenous communities or engagement on work/family balance for single mothers that it would take five years to peg things back to a social justice framework, assuming we could ever get there.
My friend H. looked at me sadly. “I just don’t think we’re that mean,” he said. “You know, as a country”.
If we’re not that mean, then why is it that personal labels, which were once worn with pride, are now a dog-whistle for instant credibility loss? I still call myself a feminist, but I know many women who don’t. One woman I met recently told me that she wouldn’t use the word feminist in her workplace, “for fear of losing all credibility”. Another person I know refuses to engage on issues of importance for women because he believes that men have, for too long, dominated discussions surrounding women’s rights. While this may be the case (thousands of years of patriarchy tend to back him up there), what he fails to recognise is that his lack of contribution to the debate is one less feminist voice – that his silence implies approval of the ill-treatment of women.
This is also the problem with the way the debate is framed here with regards to the use of taxes, and who deserves to benefit from prosperity.
What irked me was that the government’s announcement of major tax cuts allegedly aimed at increasing the workforce participation failed to acknowledge that their current “incentives” package aimed at keeping (some) women at home with their kids, may be having an adverse effect on labour market participation. The baby-bonus policy, whether it meant to or not, drove a wedge between mothers who work outside the home and those who don’t.
The other by-product of this debate, in concert with WorkChoices, was that the emerging cultural practice of shared-parenting regardless of gender roles, was diminished as fundamental rights were either stripped away or perceived to be stripped away from families seeking to balance work and family life (or just get a day off when the kids are sick). This is not 1950. More and more blokes want to spend time with their kids - and a shared parenting model which allows them to do so should be part of our workplace culture if that is what people want.
Lin Hatfield-Dodds, the awesome President of ACOSS, observed last night that, when asked if they would like more money put into services, people invariably say yes. I know that I would forego a tax cut, even though I will personally benefit greatly from the Coalition’s so-called “tax relief” I would rather that money go to some one who needs it far more than me. The working poor – nurses, school support officers, aged care workers, teachers, for example. And if not those people, in whom we entrust our most vulnerable citizens, then how about infrastructure?
For many people working part-time, the cost associated with increasing their workload is only marginally (excuse the pun) about the tax system. For some, working part time is a lifestyle choice which is aimed at reducing their need to use OTHER government services (like the health care system, for example). Working part time can give people all kinds of opportunities to contribute to their community in other ways - volunteering, for example.
For others, working part-time is a choice they make in order to further their education, and they can no longer afford to study full time without bringing in an additional wage. For others still, it is the cost and availability of childcare which limits their workforce participation.
None of these things are solved by a tax cut, but all of them could have been reduced with targeted government spending on key services already provided by government.
I elect a government to spend my money on the services the country most needs, and to maintain a level of service which I myself cannot provide.
I don't elect a government to give it back in a cynical vote-winning exercise.
My name is Gigglewick.
I am a feminist.
My vote is not for sale.
I argued that we were so far beyond the idea of a treaty for Indigenous communities or engagement on work/family balance for single mothers that it would take five years to peg things back to a social justice framework, assuming we could ever get there.
My friend H. looked at me sadly. “I just don’t think we’re that mean,” he said. “You know, as a country”.
If we’re not that mean, then why is it that personal labels, which were once worn with pride, are now a dog-whistle for instant credibility loss? I still call myself a feminist, but I know many women who don’t. One woman I met recently told me that she wouldn’t use the word feminist in her workplace, “for fear of losing all credibility”. Another person I know refuses to engage on issues of importance for women because he believes that men have, for too long, dominated discussions surrounding women’s rights. While this may be the case (thousands of years of patriarchy tend to back him up there), what he fails to recognise is that his lack of contribution to the debate is one less feminist voice – that his silence implies approval of the ill-treatment of women.
This is also the problem with the way the debate is framed here with regards to the use of taxes, and who deserves to benefit from prosperity.
What irked me was that the government’s announcement of major tax cuts allegedly aimed at increasing the workforce participation failed to acknowledge that their current “incentives” package aimed at keeping (some) women at home with their kids, may be having an adverse effect on labour market participation. The baby-bonus policy, whether it meant to or not, drove a wedge between mothers who work outside the home and those who don’t.
The other by-product of this debate, in concert with WorkChoices, was that the emerging cultural practice of shared-parenting regardless of gender roles, was diminished as fundamental rights were either stripped away or perceived to be stripped away from families seeking to balance work and family life (or just get a day off when the kids are sick). This is not 1950. More and more blokes want to spend time with their kids - and a shared parenting model which allows them to do so should be part of our workplace culture if that is what people want.
Lin Hatfield-Dodds, the awesome President of ACOSS, observed last night that, when asked if they would like more money put into services, people invariably say yes. I know that I would forego a tax cut, even though I will personally benefit greatly from the Coalition’s so-called “tax relief” I would rather that money go to some one who needs it far more than me. The working poor – nurses, school support officers, aged care workers, teachers, for example. And if not those people, in whom we entrust our most vulnerable citizens, then how about infrastructure?
For many people working part-time, the cost associated with increasing their workload is only marginally (excuse the pun) about the tax system. For some, working part time is a lifestyle choice which is aimed at reducing their need to use OTHER government services (like the health care system, for example). Working part time can give people all kinds of opportunities to contribute to their community in other ways - volunteering, for example.
For others, working part-time is a choice they make in order to further their education, and they can no longer afford to study full time without bringing in an additional wage. For others still, it is the cost and availability of childcare which limits their workforce participation.
None of these things are solved by a tax cut, but all of them could have been reduced with targeted government spending on key services already provided by government.
I elect a government to spend my money on the services the country most needs, and to maintain a level of service which I myself cannot provide.
I don't elect a government to give it back in a cynical vote-winning exercise.
My name is Gigglewick.
I am a feminist.
My vote is not for sale.
posted by gigglewick at
1:37 pm
15 Comments:
Hear hear! Thankfully not yet being a citizen or permanently resident means that I don't have to vote so I won't have to wrestle with my conscience for all of 5 seconds before pronouncing that the only party I think I could consider voting for without feeling like I needed a shower with bleach afterwards would be the Greens.
Tax cuts before an election are sooo obvious, but I fear we now live in a world which is more concerned about 'what's in it for me' rather than using a vote as an opportunity to look at providing for the greater good of society. Its not just Australia that's like this you can see it everywhere (the UK is a prime example). Society has become selfish and as far as tax is concerned you only have to look at Bono to see a fine example of a hypocrite - here is someone who bangs on about Africa whilst removing his assets from Ireland because he'd be taxed. Ah tax isn't that what is used to address issues such as healthcare, poverty and inadequate education?
My fear is that even if Howard goes then Rudd won't present much of a change, look at how toothless their policy on reforming Work Choices is.
Personally I find both the Liberals and the ALP detestable but the joy of the two party system means I'm going to end up with one of them so I may just be living with my fingers in my ears for the next six weeks.
BF,
Last election I know there were some campaigns where there were FREQUENT calls from punters asking candidates to calculate the personal benefit of promises to them.
That, in my opinion, is suckful.
Do you get to vote in UK elections still?
Don't believe so although I may look into it closer to the time. One thing that Australia does have which we still don't in Blighty is proportional representation so anything other than a vote for Labour or Conservative is in effect wasted. Hardly a surprise that turnouts for elections are diving to the 30% mark.
well said gigglewick. i too am a feminist, and i too would rather see the enormous budget surplus invested in public services, not further tax cuts.
... but then, as you point out, many commentators from the other side of the spectrum would simply retort with 'you lefties would say that, wouldn't you?'. it seems many academics have been stymied by the very same, illogical response to all their hard work.
monica dux's article in the age yesterday, about 30 something lefties (herself included) tut-tutting about howard without backing a viable alternative (because rudd isn't really an 'alternative' to howard), depressed me.
yes, i am a card-carrying, badge-wearing leftie, and yes, i probably have a group of 'latte-sipping' (as the pejorative goes) friends who all feel the same way, and yes, all my views seem to run counter to those of the average aussie...
but that doesn't mean i don't have a valid, considered, detailed argument for every one of those views and am happy to discuss and defend them until i am blue in the face!
a small disclaimer: an 'enormous budget surplus' is, in my book, not a tribute to the government, but an indictment of it for caring more about figures than services. a true measure of its 'performance' is how divided our society is, and how many people are struggling IN SPITE of tax cuts and a thriving economy and yada yada. economics are hoodoo to the marginalised and disenfranchised.
I second the 'hear hear's. I read this last night and was impressed that you were writing about some of what I had been thinking about and talking about just that day. (But, you put it better than me.)
Someone was saying they had been thinking of voting Labor. But then they had thought to have a look at how things will affect them personally as they have been doing well under Howard. I, however, feel that we are voting for what's best for our country, and this includes all people and this includes the long term. We're in a boom and in a growth period and need to improve infrastructure to support this. We also need more skilled workers. Surely Labor is best for these kinds of things, and for taking care of the people who are missing out. (Although they are, unfortunately, far from perfect.)
Personally speaking, I would be fine continuing with the Libs as far as I can tell, but that's not what it's all about.
Anyway, Gigglewick, I applaud ye!
*applause*
*standing ovation*
*balloons and streamers and that tinsely glittery stuff*
All of the above. Great post. I'm glad we're all on the same page, I just wish the rest of the country could see it this way. But there is an election just around the corner, so, you know, just maybe?
Your name is Gigglewick.
You are awesome.
Ditto.
Whatever happened to caring about the welfare of our society, instead of this obsession the country has with growth?
As for those tax cuts ... Why is it that I've put my daughter's name at 12 different childcare centres A YEAR AGO, while still pregnant, and still none of them have a vacancy for my daughter? Mr Howard, you can have my extra 30 bucks a week in tax cuts. Just make our childcare system work properly.
Susanna,
I found Monica Dux's article depressing, because there's actually QUITE A BIT OF POLICY around if people care to read it...i wish people would engage more on what their vote actually means, but at the moment with busy lives and politics WAY down the agenda, most people are happy to make their decisions about the future of the country based on sound-bites alone (good company here notwithstanding).
Further I disagree that Kevin Rudd is not an alternative to Howard. While I doubt he's on the "it's gough time, motherf-ckers" as has been espoused by some readers of RYWHM, I do think he's a bucketload more progressive. And the ALP is the only progressive party currently in a position to take government.
I don't doubt that people will have frustrations should the ALP win, as I am sure I will...but I don't think this is a reason to vote conservative (which seems to be the underlying point of the argument made frequently by lefties).
Eleanor,
Let's not assume I put it better than you - and I look forward to reading your post if you do decide to write it.
Thank you. I am choking on those tinselly things...but they are shiny and brightening my day!!
Blakkat,
I guess we'll know pretty soon.
INC,
Thank you.
Rambling Mumma,
Welcome. I share your frustration re childcare availability, affordability and the whole shebang. This was supposed to be a goddamn barbecue stopper, I don't know what happened to it. It's not just the care availability either - I would happily pay $75/day if I thought that the extra funds were being passed on to childcare workers so that the could earn a living goddamn wage.
Sorry....get a bit of a tantrum on where these things are concerned.
Gigglewick - agreed, and well put. I have been railing against the divisive arguments from leftie friends that say 'don't vote ALP, it won't be any different'. It's incredibly frustrating to have to combat this sort of thinking, and it's like the republican referendum all over again.
Apart from all the policy differences (ratifying Kyoto, reversing Workchoices), one thing really stood out for me recently: Rudd speaks Mandarin and respects other cultures - Howard is a xenophobe who alienates Mandarin (and other foreign-language) speakers at every opportunity. Vive la difference!
Ummm, you didn't happen to get a long comment from me on another post did you? Or did it just disappear again?
I can sum it up in three simple words:
I HATE HOWARD
We expect that sort of bollocks from the Libs. But I'm feeling mighty betrayed by Labor at the moment. Kevin said on Tuesday or Wednesday that he wasn't going to play tit for tat, dollar for dollar, etc. with Howard.
Yerroight Kevin. You left out a few billion and tried to pretend you gave an arse about people on low incomes in an attempt to win back Little Johnnie's Battlers. When your wife's a bloody multi-millionaire.
No matter who's offering it, tax cuts are as much use on tits on a bull, but they'd still manage to push up inflation and then interest rates, knocking home ownership out of the reach of even more people, pushing up rents and putting more people into housing stress or onto the streets.
But putting that $34 billion (which probably came from us through the stinking GST in the first place, I might add) back into boring things like hospitals, dental services, education at all levels, mental health services, caring for the disabled and lowering childcare costs wouldn't do that. And it might just help a few people.
Grr. Fucking pollies - they can't even work out what to do with a pork barrel when they've got one! We need to get rid of the Libs because he, Abbott and Costello are first-class c*nts, but I'm not convinced that ol' Kev's going to be any better.
/rantiness
Can I bow at your feet now? Amen, Gigglewick.
I'm also glad you addressed that working part time can be a lifestyle choice. I'm very sick of the mother I nanny getting rubbish for working part time - when all she wants is a break!
Susanna,
Thanks. And yes.
Leilani,
But I'll bet you can go into a hell of a lot more detail than that (blogger comment eating notwithstanding).
Redcap,
But putting that $34 billion (which probably came from us through the stinking GST in the first place, I might add) back into boring things like hospitals, dental services, education at all levels, mental health services, caring for the disabled and lowering childcare costs wouldn't do that. And it might just help a few people
Right on.
Rosanna,
Thank you. I worked part time for the entirety of Grizzle's life until just recently, and it certainly worked for me, but we were able to choose that scenario....lots of people don't have anything like "choice" in their lives....
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home