incentivation
Hmmmmm....
Well the election has well and truly past us, and with it, I assumed so too, would the empty rhetoric and soundbites that Rudd and Swan endlessly gorged the media with throughout the campaign.
Ah but, to no avail..
The continual use of the 'working family' in respect of those being 'hit hard' by the rising costs of living, sufferng financial stress and requiring government assistance is the one which really gets me riled up.
Every concern raised is a concern of 'working families'. A brushstroke term generally applied, when ultimately not all 'working families' are affected equally by the challenges faced, with some not affected at all.
At the end of the day, what is a working family? I assume he's not talking about those who reside in Department of Housing and live off the government tip. Nor would he be referring to those single parents who work two jobs to provide mere sustainance, they're not a 'family' as such are they? Is he referring to the standard nuclear family? Or is it any household that consists of two or more people, residing with some close or personal relationship. I assume these people are still able to classify themselves as 'family' in the general meaning of the word.
Aside from the first category of individuals mentioned, which families don't work? Whether the collective earnings of the family be $500,000 or $50,000, the mantra of 'working families' applies equally. They each work, earn income and consume. Or do some careers and income brackets fall out of the requirements of a family that 'works'? Do they just earn without effort?
There is no delineation in the phrase between class, income or relative social position. But I think that is the strength of the phrase politically. It does not delineate, discriminate or create class envy. It is all encompassing and provides an [apparently] inclusive approach to government and policy, albeit in a superficial manner.
What of those who are not in families but are struggling to cope with the same pressures of living? Every day, I see an extremely large group of our society who live in squalor, struggle to make ends meet and generally these people live alone; the elderly, the mentally ill, the disabled and those struggling to cope with drug dependence. We have this focus on the plight of the family and these groups of individuals struggle moreso than any other in society.
What are your thoughts on the definition of the 'working family' and its application. Is there a better term that is more appropriate? Do we have too much of a focus on family to the detriment of those who struggle outside of this narrow classification?
Ah but, to no avail..
The continual use of the 'working family' in respect of those being 'hit hard' by the rising costs of living, sufferng financial stress and requiring government assistance is the one which really gets me riled up.
Every concern raised is a concern of 'working families'. A brushstroke term generally applied, when ultimately not all 'working families' are affected equally by the challenges faced, with some not affected at all.
At the end of the day, what is a working family? I assume he's not talking about those who reside in Department of Housing and live off the government tip. Nor would he be referring to those single parents who work two jobs to provide mere sustainance, they're not a 'family' as such are they? Is he referring to the standard nuclear family? Or is it any household that consists of two or more people, residing with some close or personal relationship. I assume these people are still able to classify themselves as 'family' in the general meaning of the word.
Aside from the first category of individuals mentioned, which families don't work? Whether the collective earnings of the family be $500,000 or $50,000, the mantra of 'working families' applies equally. They each work, earn income and consume. Or do some careers and income brackets fall out of the requirements of a family that 'works'? Do they just earn without effort?
There is no delineation in the phrase between class, income or relative social position. But I think that is the strength of the phrase politically. It does not delineate, discriminate or create class envy. It is all encompassing and provides an [apparently] inclusive approach to government and policy, albeit in a superficial manner.
What of those who are not in families but are struggling to cope with the same pressures of living? Every day, I see an extremely large group of our society who live in squalor, struggle to make ends meet and generally these people live alone; the elderly, the mentally ill, the disabled and those struggling to cope with drug dependence. We have this focus on the plight of the family and these groups of individuals struggle moreso than any other in society.
What are your thoughts on the definition of the 'working family' and its application. Is there a better term that is more appropriate? Do we have too much of a focus on family to the detriment of those who struggle outside of this narrow classification?
