I have a problem with Unemployment. I have a problem with the thought that willing and able people can't find work. And I have a problem that the community have to support people that are not actively seeking work and are not contributing to society.

But the unemployment does happen. And it benefits no one. So while I believe we need to financially support those that cannot find work, we should provide no incentive to those who choose not to work. In practice, this kind of thinking demands new policy initiatives. Sp this is what I propose; a two-tier welfare system.

The first tier would apply to everyone regardless; coupons for the essentials of life. Food, water and accommodation, plus free public transportation. And of course, everyone should be able to access universal free healthcare. And everyone wanting to learn should be able to learn and obtain the skills necessary to contribute and earn a fair standard of living. An Australia like this would truly provide a safety net for all.

But I believe the discretionary spending of the individual should not be at the cost of the taxpayer. I'm happy to give 30% plus of my income to the government, but pissed whenever I hear about welfare fraud or being spent on alcohol, cigarettes or gambling. We are smart enough to come up with a system that doesn't allow these things. The second-tier of support should also be extended to every one; the government should offer an unlimited number of jobs on the minimum wage (less an allowance for benefit accrued from the first tier) to the unemployed. I'll elaborate on this idea at some other time.

<img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fhWshc9xBXQ/UfPeQU5n9qI/AAAAAAAAAXc/cqmoYMe2_zg/s1600/equilibrium_stability.jpg" width="225" height="203" class="alignnone" />

The remedy to these ills are straightforward:
1) Through constitutional amendment, require that not only the budget, but actual spending, must be balanced throughout the economic cycle.
2) Ensure that Government welfare always ensures that people who contribute directly to broader society are better off than those that don't. 
3) Resist new legislation and regulation that reduce our individual freedoms.

The political discourse on government spending should revolve around just two questions:
1) As a community, do we believe the level of taxation is correct?
2) What proportion of the budget should be allocated to the different competing interests of the community?

As a community we have to consider how big the pie should be, and how it should be divided up holistically. If we listen to and accept each request for a slice, we very quickly find that is gone - and the only way to keep the remaining stakeholders happy is to borrow pie from someone else.

<blockquote>We are all better off in a society where
everyone is <em>expected</em> to contribute.</blockquote>