Australia's Welfare Approach Case Study

Essay

Question 1
Given what you know about Australia’s welfare approach, would you say it is closer to Sweden’s or America’s or different altogether? Give reasons or evidence to support your answer.

Australia’s first approach to welfare was in 1901. Sweden’s designed its own welfare system around the great depression period. America’s welfare policy started in the 1935. In order for welfare to exist, the host government needs money and to obtain such, the government taxes its residents, non-residents and businesses on different taxation schemes and redistributes it to the community. Such redistributions are in forms of childcare benefits, healthcare, housing and much more.

In Australia, there are 4 wage thresholds and the highest
income tax is 45%. Sweden has 3 wage thresholds and the highest income tax is 59.17%. America, on the otherhand, has various taxation schemes ranging from single parent, married and married - separated but with an average of 35%. Taxation example, if person A annual income were $2,000,000. In Australia, A would be taxed $900,000. In Sweden, A would be taxed $1,179,000 and in America A would be taxed $800,000. The statistics surprisingly supports the fact that the lower the countries taxation is the more inequality among its people in terms of assets, believe it or not 30% of the worlds millionaires are from America and Australia takes up 1.7% and Sweden is no where near.

Australia’s welfare approach is altogether different from America’s and Sweden’s welfare design. In Australia, welfare is targeted towards the poor. Such as Australia’s welfare system, supports it people who need unemployment assistance, social assistance, housing benefits, family benefits and childcare for pre-school children. An example, an individual Australian or Australian family needs to show signs of needs in the particular or various categories to be eligible to receive such benefits from the government. For instance, eligibility for Childcare benefits (CCB) childcare for pre-school children is only single parent or both parents whom are not working, studying, looking for work.
Once approved, the parent or single parent eligibility is then also determined by their income, assets and the number of children.
The results are then tabulated for minimum or maximum childcare benefit rate for the applicant, which allows for up to 50 hours a week of childcare services. In Sweden, childcare is free for all its citizens, parents or single parents who are working or unemployed are able to choose either private institutions or public childcare centers for their children and the government or state pays. In America, citizens have to fork out of their own pocket for childcare services, if one wants to receive social welfare payment for childcare, the parents or single parents has to show signs of financial needs.

Statistically Australia gives 12 times more benefits to the poor in the lowest quartile as compared to the rich in the highest quartile. Compared to Sweden benefits are most likely to be similarly equal amoung the citizens. America on the other hand, is excessively different and inequality is huge, poor people do not receive as much benefits from the government and have to rely on non-profit organization for benefit
support.

Healthcare benefit’s is also another indicator to show that welfare in Australia, American and Sweden is directed differently from each other. In Australia, healthcare is supported by the government or if an individual takes up private insurance, which would cover hospitalization, medication and commodities. For poor people who cannot afford private health insurance in Australia, they rely on the government’s healthcare benefits. Citizens have to patronize public or private benefit registered hospitals and which the application process sometimes takes a while till you get your surgery. In America, an individual or family has to fend for oneself relying on private insurance and if they do not have private insurance, some families would be in financial difficulties after a family member has suffered from a hospitalization. Sweden’s approach to healthcare is different from Australia and America’s. A Swedish citizen could choose both private or public hospitals and specialists to be treated by at the expense of the government. In statistical data from Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) , Sweden has a low inequality rate and low health problems, Australia is average amoung OECD countries and America is rated high inequality and has the worse health problems.

In conclusion, Australia’s welfare approach altogether is different from Sweden’s or America’s.
As seen in childcare benefits, Australia favours the poor where one has to go through an eligibility test, whereas Sweden is equal to all it citizens and America has to rely on one’s self being. For healthcare, Australia again supports the poor and the rich might have to rely on insurance, Sweden’s healthcare is open to all it citizens and favours their wishes to seek private or public treatment and the government pays for and America most citizens have to have private insurance to stand a chance in the community. In Addition, the inequality of income and income taxation in the country affects its own welfare system. This could be partly affiliated to the country’s culture where it develops individual personalities and ethics of how a person lives or should live, thus, electing a government that supports their way of thinking/life and ultimately the government has to meets it’s citizens needs to be re-elected. Thus, welfare in countries vary because of the culture in the
country.

References
Income taxations in Australia, America & Sweden www.taxrates.cc Australia welfare 2008 www.oecd.org/dataoecd/9/27/44411991.pdf Millionaires by country
http://global-economy.suite101.com/article.cfm/millionaire_wealth_statistics_by_country