Thanks, Tristan. I look forward to your next article.

You wrote: "Superannuation gave workers something in return - but discriianted against women, casuals and the low paid...

"And there is the danger that it might see the Aged Pension marginalised in the future... Those dependent upon it may suffer austerity - as the better off (with sizable superannuation investments) - resent the responsibility of helping the less-well-off..."

It was copied from the privatisation of retirement income in Chile as part of the neo-liberal program that Hawke, Keating, Carr, Iemma, Costa, Bracks, Brumby, Beattie, Bligh, Kennett, Greiner, Howard, Costello et al all worship, that was first implemented in 1973 under the guns of General Pinochet's military dictatorship. ("Australia's Neo-liberal Path" by Kenneth Davidson, p3, Dissent Magazine number 23, Autumn/Summer 2007)

I have no idea why the Labor Party feels proud of this supposed 'reform'. It was implemented it the most incompetent way imaginable, allowing fund managers and salespersons to help themselves to our money. Because it was done as they were casualising many of the jobs, many find there retirement funds in a large numbers of different funds all incurring large management fees.

Friends;

Just writing to let you all know that my next article should be up on OLO by Wednesday this week.

The title I'm running with (although it might be changed) is:

"liberal compromise and the struggle for social justice"

And the blurb:

"Exploring the dynamic between liberal democratic consensus and the struggle for justice - through civil disobedience, popular mobilisation, political democracy..."

Hope to hear from you all in the discussion...

most sincerely

Tristan

ristan ""Exploring the dynamic between liberal democratic consensus and the struggle for justice - through civil disobedience, popular mobilisation, political democracy..."

ah I can barely stop from yawning in anticipation.

Although, the civil disobedience bit has promise, maybe rent a few heavies to intervene between the "civilly disobedient" and our softies in blue. For some reason those revolting revolutionaries do not seem to learn from their poor communication skills that the real world would be happy to see them sporting "black and blue" but barred from accessing the medical and other services which real tax payers finance.

A good society would be one where the product of social labour was controlled by real producers, not parasites who merely own most of the wealth created by the working class. Bottomline: the workers produce the social wealth and taxes are part of this wealth, taxes which run the capitalist State.

Col - if you really view liberal and democratic rights with contempt - I have to wonder why you bother at all. To understand our rights is one important means to retaining them. I suggest you think twice before being so cynical next time... And before judging people - try putting yourself in their shoes first. (if indeed you can)

Tristan “Col - if you really view liberal and democratic rights with contempt”

I value “liberal and democratic rights” but what you are preaching is not liberal-democracy. It is socialist despotism, dressed up to be almost palatable through the liberal use of sentimentality.

“try putting yourself in their shoes first. (if indeed you can)”

I have always observed the uncouth leftie swill have great difficulty in imagining themselves in the shoes of others, you might claim it is because they have none of their own (shoes that is), I would claim they are just thick.

And I am not judging people, any more than your comment judges me.

Ultimately, whatever the swill pursue it will be in vain, they lack the tenacity to see things through to a conclusion,
That is why I prefer to leave people to manage their own lives, the ambitious and the indolent each to their own.
It is why I choose to mix with those who are moving forward, driven by their own energy, ambition, aspirations and motivations, rather than mixing with those who look, enviously from the sidelines, as them with the get-up-and-go, got up and went.

Socialist mediocrity is never a goal, except for those who are less than mediocre.