SH> what politician in this country (especially the feds)
SH> has the guts to do what's necessary???

BM> They will respond to public pressure.

Yep.

BM> In the 1970s economic matters received nowhere like the public
BM> scrutiny they do now.

Yep, for one very simple reason, things were working a lot better then
on the economic front, unemployment etc. The public never bothers too
much when things are working. Corse they did get a tad nervous at some
of the stuff Gough got up to, or more accurately the spectacle |-)

BM> I think we will see similar trends in public awareness of
BM> the burden of government spending and demands to fix it.

Dunno. You can argue that its very much the hip pocket nerve
that affects them, and they have had what look like pretty
substantial cuts on the income tax side. They mostly didnt notice
that that was just giving them back what bracket creep took off them.

I'm not convinced that they mostly do actually want small government
again, they are far far too ready to demand the guvmint do something
on almost everything that grabs their attention. Say womens refuges
etc. Or child care for working parents. And if that can be free for
them personally, they are all for that. In fact come close to demanding
it as a right most of them. And bitch and moan about attempts to do
cost recovery, particularly on the tertiary education fees.

BM> Crunch time comes early next century when the baby boomers
BM> will be retiring and needing more and more medical services.

Thats a myth actually. A surprisingly low percentage of the elderly
are actually in institutional care, its only 5%. They really are
surprisingly independent, and huge numbers of them are financially
self sufficient too. I cant see that getting worse, in fact it may
well continue to get considerably better.

BM> There was a useful graph in one of the week-end papers that
BM> showed transfer payments (ie govt welfare) rising from 8% of
BM> household disposable income in the 1970s to over 18% today.

Yes, but that was largely a result of moving away from poverty for those
on welfare, particularly those on the aged pension and the much higher
level of support for single parents with kids, partly a result of the
much higher marriage breakup rate with state welfare payments to the one
with the kids instead of them being supported by the partner who left.
Its also just an inevitable consequence of the much higher unemployment
levels, peaking over the 10% levels, quite unheard of in the early 70s.

Most of which just cant happen all over again in say the next 25 years,
and with substantial forced provision for your own old age and stopping
people double dipping on retirement income to a much greater extent.
And you also will start to see a bigger dropoff in the number of kids
supported on welfare too assuming they dont go for very high immigration
rates again.

BM> One government spokesman justified this by saying we were among
BM> the lowest in the OECD, which misses the point - all OECD countries
BM> are in mess re welfare payments and "middle class entitlements".

The point tho is that we just moved to adequate welfare particularly
with the elderly without financial resources. Cant see we will ever
return to the old style again.

As far as the middle class entitlements are concerned, I have real
doubts that the electorate can ever be convinced that they arent the
way to go. Largely because they are so easy to promise in an election
campaign like the last one and the alternative government have to
match the offer or sink their chances. Its always been a very severe
weakness of a democracy, pork barrelling will be ever with us unless
the economy is so completely rooted that the voters will accept
extreme measures. And I cant see that happening any time soon again.

--- PQWK202