'I am talking about the top tier first'

what you are appear to be talking about Squeers is the politics of envy. You know that under every Government in the world the top 'tier' never have and never will pay their fair share tax. In saying that Australia is far more equitable then the vast majority of nations. Usually people on good incomes from Government just want to protect their slice of the pie when opposing any form of economic necessities. That is why we are going to end up like Greece with massive youth unemployment while civil servants continue to live very comfortably via the tax payer. Interesting enough the huge increase in teachers salaries over the ten years have not produced any better results ( in fact the opposite). Oh well I suppose because the very rich avoid tax means I can join the other economic vandals and allow future generations to pay.

"Hospital queues were slashed and patients given a guarantee of treatment within time either in a public hospital, or paid by the state in a private one. "

Sorry my family actually work in a hospital and have to confirm appointments for those on waiting lists. Its a full time job and they are handed pages and pages of appointments and there are thousands upon thousands of people on those waiting lists. They have not been minimised, just a bit of nice media for LNP.

" Public housing waiting lists were cut by a third. "

Public housing waiting lists have been minimised because the LNP cut who can be eligible to apply for housing , leaving thousands of people unable to apply for necessary housing and living in destitue conditions or trying to bunk with family/friends.

This is why they were thrown out; a very cocky and arrogant government who doesn't lead a society of people but believes they are leading an economy instead.

Poirot,

' I noted many "lefties" immediately ditch any political bias and jump straight in to defend Credlin on a gender basis. '

I would say more of an attack on the Emperor Murdoch. Any excuse. A true test would be if, say Tony abbot proposed for and fought for a paid parental leave scheme as generous as Sweden's.

The PPL scheme would have been lauded by the left if it came from a Labor government. Money given to women (and men... and non cis-gender people averse to micro-aggression who don't live in a vacuum) earning 150k (a very small minority of women) would not have soured the deal. It would have made us more like Sweden, that leftie nirvana. But because it came from Mr Rabbit, they had to look the gift horse in the mouth, and fight against policy in tune with their stated belief system. ie Everything is better in Sweden.

It's all so tiresome this left/right rubbish. I used to be more 'left' but I can empathize with GY's opinion of them. Maybe I changed but I think the left are getting more and more shrill. They are just as nasty in their character assassinations of their enemies but somehow still pretend to be more enlightened and 'progressive'.

The right, to me, make no allusions to the high ground, its all tough inner parent stuff, take no prisoners sh1t on the poor and needy and do it with a smile, but the left appeal to this altruistic wholesome tree hugging ideal all the while spitting venom and hating on.

Squeers, you would find a lot more high income earners would happily pay more tax if one, the tax wasn't wasted so much, two, they got rewarded for their efforts, because as it stands the more you earn, the less you get at the end and, a little appreciation from the hand out brigade wouldn't go astray either because while 7 out of 10 rely on the 3 at the top for their support, very few appreciate it.

The very least welfare recipients could do, and that's about 80% of us, is be appreciative that we have people and corporations willing to take risks in this country because one, we are out pricing ourselves, and two, if you do do well the tall poppy brigade is quickly on your case.

As a former high income earner myself, I used to be inspired by wealthy hard workers, not jealous of them as so many today are.

So if you are one of the 80 odd % who get a subsidy when you use a service, just remember somebody else ( not the government) picked up the tab.

Yeah, Houellie, I have to partially disagree with you there.

Leftie women are notorious for ditching their leanings and defending women - merely because they're women - especially if, in an obvious partnership, the woman is singled out while the man is left unassailed.

For my part, I think Credlin is up to her armpits in the shambles that has unfolded. I think she should be booted as well as Abbott - and I said so in response to all the women (and men) defending Credlin on twitter. Their favourite line is that the buck stops with Abbott, though technically true, we all know who was calling the shots big time in the PMO.

(I'm sure they were targeting Murdoch as well though)

BTW, Niki Savva has dumped major league on Abbott in today's Australian.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/time-running-out-for-damaged-pm/story-fnahw9xv-1227208245189?login=1

(seems to be paywalled now - but was available this morning)

It's good to see your name pop up, Houellebecq, but rather than your signature wit, you seem so world-weary and bored with it all--like Eugene Onegin--complacency masquerading as wisdom, I'm afraid. Though I know you're not talking about me : )

rehctub,
you have it all wrong I'm afraid. Why should those on welfare be grateful for crumbs, which are meanly and resentfully spilled in any case?

It is those in a position to condescend who should be grateful for their place at the high table, and generous towards those less well off. We do not live in a meritocracy; and even to the extent that we do, there are twice as many candidates for plumb positions than there are vacancies in the workplace.
Nor am I calling for extravagant welfare, only for a minimum standard to be maintained.
I am sure we're all grateful to live in a prosperous country with a welfare safety net (inches from the ground), but we also have our dignity; everything is relative; it's not particularly generous and we need not humble ourselves before our 'betters'.

Anyway your opening premise simply isn't true for many high income earners; they are persuaded rather that those on welfare are there by design, constitute a drag on the economy, and need to be punished. That's neoliberalism in a nutshell.

However, I must off to work.