Search

Labor's small target strategy and its acceptance of conservative fiscal priorities has left many progressives frustrated. Reflecting on the history of Labor governments since the period of liberalisation, this outcome [...]

"Welfare for Markets: A Global History of Basic Income" by Anton Jäger and Daniel Zamora Vargas is a sociological and intellectual history of the basic income concept. The authors argue that the basic income debate reflects a failure of progressive imagination and a shift towards market models within progressive thought. They trace the evolution of basic income from earlier republican traditions of universal provision to its current focus on money and consumption. The book explores the role of key thinkers such as Milton Friedman and the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN) in shaping the basic income discourse. While the book provides a rich intellectual history, its political claims may be less convincing, as it overlooks other perspectives and strategies associated with basic income. Nonetheless, it offers an important contribution to the understanding of basic income and the growing popularity of cash payments. [Extracted from the article]

Movements for racial and Indigenous justice are targeting rapidly expanding budget allocations for prisons and police. In Australia, Indigenous Communities are seeking to redirect public money from the criminal justice system to Indigenous-controlled services and infrastructure through 'justice reinvestment'. This article explores the possibilities and tensions of justice reinvestment as a strategy for exercising Indigenous self-determination in a marketised policy landscape. Focusing on the case of Just Reinvest NSW and the Maranguka initiative in Bourke, we compare justice reinvestment to neoliberal ideas of social investment, exemplified by social impact bonds (SIBs). We identify three tools of marketisation in SIBs – liability budgeting, pricing evidence, and devolution to non-state providers – and analyse how these are being engaged, and contested, by Indigenous Communities through justice reinvestment. While incomplete, we discuss how Indigenous-run justice reinvestment initiatives are creatively using these tools against the settler-colonial, carceral state to claim fiscal resources, develop bureaucratic capacity, and institute territorial governance. We argue that justice reinvestment demonstrates the potential to repurpose the tools of marketisation to create alternative 'hybrid' spaces of governance that contest both the state and the market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The financialization of households complicates how we compare housing systems and welfare states. This article explores the shifting relationships between wealth inequality, welfare states and household risk, focussing on the roles of housing and mortgage markets. We show national regimes of capitalism continue to shape experiences of risk, but increasingly through asset-based welfare mechanisms, centred on housing ownership, that are inadequately captured in existing comparative literature. Using OECD data, our argument is developed in two steps. First, we demonstrate that national patterns of wealth inequality do not follow classical welfare state categories, but mean wealth levels do, suggesting a distinct structural relationship. Second, we connect wealth inequality to the risks of housing ownership and household debt, focussing on house price falls in the United States, Italy and Denmark following the 2007–2008 financial crisis. We find mortgage default rates reflect welfare state categories rather than measures of financial risk, revealing an emerging 'hybrid' role of social insurance in supporting household liquidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International debates about the comparative institutional structures of welfare states have focused on social expenditure and the inclusiveness of social policy. However, these debates have not accounted for the significant rise of fiscal welfare and, in particular, social tax expenditures (STEs) in our understanding of welfare regimes. The growth of STEs has been particularly significant in Australia. While there has been recognition that STEs contribute to a second tier of welfare provision in some policy domains, there has been no systematic attempt to account for them within the institutional structure of the Australian welfare state. In this article, we chart the rise of STEs, the reasons for their growth in the Australian political economy and conceive of them as forming a second institutional layer of a dual welfare state. We conclude by suggesting that this analysis has broader implications for other, particularly liberal, welfare regimes. doi: 10.1017/S0047279410000267

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2009.00637.x Byline: Ian Marsh (*), Ben Spies-Butcher ([dagger]) Keywords: innovation; public policy; human services Abstract: Principal-agent theory alerts principals to their problematic relationship with agents. The former are encouraged to take deliberate action to counter asymmetries in knowledge, moral hazard etc. To avoid this, principals should determine outcomes and contracts and incentives should be designed to achieve them. This approach has influenced the form of purchaser-provider arrangements, including the Job Network. This article reviews impacts, which include incentives for gaming and increased transaction costs. Another survey highlighted the extent to which innovation in the disability employment sector had depended on collaboration, which competition would end. The article then sketches an alternative pragmatic or experimental approach, which assumes that the centre can never establish outcomes that are other than provisional and corrigible. Program design needs to be built around this fundamental fact. Learning not 'carrots and sticks' is the appropriate form of relationship. The article explores the feasibility of this approach in a Job Network context. Author Affiliation: (*)Australian Innovation Research Centre, University of Tasmania ([dagger])Macquarie University

Retirement incomes and aged care have both received considerable policy attention in Australia over the last three decades, but as in other countries, the two financing systems have remained largely separate in policy and practice. The problem is located at the intersection of wider policy debates about shifts from public to private welfare and concerns over intergenerational equity. This paper aims to integrate these related debates by incorporating aged care into the "pillars" framework used to understand retirement incomes. We propose an Aged Care Superannuation Levy applied to superannuation fund earnings, winding back the large and growing public tax concessions that support this pillar of private defined contribution pensions in Australia's retirement income system. This revenue would create a social insurance pillar for aged care to stand alongside the four other pillars of retirement incomes that interact variously with aged care financing. Interest in a social insurance pillar of aged care financing is renewed in the light of the Royal Commission into quality and safety of aged care that reported in February 2021. As the Royal Commission recommendations on financing were divided and not taken up in government policy, the way remains opens for further consideration of the alternative approach proposed here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Workfare is an exemplar of neoliberal welfare reform generating precarity. In response, critics have sought to advance a politics of universalism, through either a return to social democracy or the embrace of a universal basic income. Yet, these responses invoke different understandings of universalism. This paper explores the politics of universalism in the context of neoliberal reform to benefit systems. Using Australia as a case study, it applies a variegated understanding of neoliberalism to identify two distinct reform trajectories for family payments and unemployment benefits. While appearing to follow a common template of liberalization, in practice each trajectory fostered distinct social outcomes and political dynamics. I argue the more inclusive restructuring of family benefits reflected the influence of social movement pressure intersecting with an increasingly pro-competition and technocratic state, producing new, hybrid, patterns of universal social provision similar to forms of basic income. However, in reflecting on these political dynamics I highlight how the mobilization of universalism is contingent on existing welfare institutions, suggesting dangers in applying these lessons more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Income-contingent loans are increasingly used by governments around the world to finance the costs of higher education. We use the case of income-contingent loans to explore how states are bringing the architecture of financial markets inside the state, disrupting conventional understandings of marketisation that are linked to concepts of commodification. We argue that income-contingent loans are hybrid policy instruments that combine elements of a state-instituted tax and a market-negotiated debt. We understand this hybrid construction in terms of the actors and mechanisms characteristic of what Polanyi identified in patterns of 'redistribution' and 'exchange'. We then follow the contested mutations of income-contingent loans in Australia, England and the United States along three axes of hybridity that produce a variegated landscape of higher education finance: determining debt, charging interest and enforcing repayment. Our analysis reveals how, as processes of marketisation internalise financial ways of calculating and organising, states are blurring the boundaries between debts and taxes, redirecting political contestation over commodification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economists typically argue population ageing generates fiscal pressures by restricting the tax base while increasing demands for social spending. Alongside other economic pressures associated with neoliberalism, this dynamic contributes to a politics of 'enduring austerity' that limits governments' fiscal discretion. The politics of population ageing reflects modelling techniques, such as generational accounting (GA), which, anticipating future deficits, create demands for policy action today to address projected intergenerational inequalities. Taking Australia as a case study, this paper explores the politics of GA in public budgetary processes. While existing critiques reject GA by arguing it relies on 'apocalyptic' or unreliable demography, we focus on a different kind of contestation, which applies the techniques and even the categories of GA to frame different problems and promote different solutions. We identify three sites of partisan contest that refocus fiscal modelling: including the tax side of the budget equation; comparing the cost of public provision to public subsidies for private programmes; and including the costs of environmental damage. At each site, the future-orientated logic of GA is mobilised to contest the policy implications of austerity. This complicates analysis that financialisation and neoliberalism necessarily 'de-politicise' policy by removing state discretion. Instead, we identify an increasingly important, if technocratic, form of political contestation that offers the possibility to promote more egalitarian responses to population ageing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Income-contingent loans (ICLs) are becoming widely adopted across higher education sectors internationally, and increasingly proposed for other policy domains. This article explores why this policy form has gained such wide popularity in the context of fiscal austerity and greater financialisation of social policy. It argues ICLs act as a policy hybrid, combining elements of a tax and a loan. The article traces the development of ICLs in their original and most developed context, Australia’s university sector. We connect the development of ICLs to changes in modes of state accounting associated with the application of private sector accounting techniques. These changes reflect financialisation inside the state, producing contradictory political dynamics. Drawing on Streeck’s conception of a shift from the ‘tax state’ to the ‘debt state’, we argue the hybrid construction of ICLs creates political tendencies in both directions, facilitating greater state discretion while also implementing market discipline. Alongside these contradictory state imperatives we highlight continued partisanship, pointing to new and ongoing forms of distributive politics. To the extent that accounting technologies allow the state to act as a special kind of creditor, we ask whether financialisation may also involve the emergence of an ‘asset state’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]