Skip to Content

Instrukcja korzystania z Biblioteki

Serwisy:

Ukryty Internet | Wyszukiwarki specjalistyczne tekstów i źródeł naukowych | Translatory online | Encyklopedie i słowniki online

Translator:

Kosmos
Astronomia Astrofizyka
Inne

Kultura
Sztuka dawna i współczesna, muzea i kolekcje

Metoda
Metodologia nauk, Matematyka, Filozofia, Miary i wagi, Pomiary

Materia
Substancje, reakcje, energia
Fizyka, chemia i inżynieria materiałowa

Człowiek
Antropologia kulturowa Socjologia Psychologia Zdrowie i medycyna

Wizje
Przewidywania Kosmologia Religie Ideologia Polityka

Ziemia
Geologia, geofizyka, geochemia, środowisko przyrodnicze

Życie
Biologia, biologia molekularna i genetyka

Cyberprzestrzeń
Technologia cyberprzestrzeni, cyberkultura, media i komunikacja

Działalność
Wiadomości | Gospodarka, biznes, zarządzanie, ekonomia

Technologie
Budownictwo, energetyka, transport, wytwarzanie, technologie informacyjne

Why Can't We Have a Simple Welfare System?

By Don Arthur. For more than half a century, policy experts have been putting forward plans to simplify the income-support system. Some of the more radical plans, such as a negative income tax, would replace our current system of allowances and pensions with a single unconditional payment paid on the basis of need. The simplifiers see reform as a technical problem: an effort to balance the goals of poverty alleviation, maintenance of work incentives and affordability. A simpler system would achieve this aim. Much of the complexity in Australia's current system stems from two features: separate payment types for recipients who are expected to work and those who are not; and for those who are expected to work, measures designed to deter long-term dependence on income support and enforce participation. These features resist simplification because much of the rationale for them is political rather than technical. Even if where it is economically inefficient, policymakers are reluctant to abandon a system that distinguishes between "deserving" and "undeserving" recipients and treats the two groups differently.

Australian Review of Public Affairs 2014/09/21 - 14:13 Czytaj