This thread is a split off from HERE. The off topic debate centered on the difference between US system of government and society and the Australian and English versions I will post the relevant post in the second post here because it is rather a long quote For starters a definition of social Justice Social Justice (as opposed to legal justice) is This form of "Justice" comes not from a legal definition but from a principle based ethical viewpoint The 4 principles in principle based ethics are Autonomy Beneficence Non-maleficence Justice Justice in this sense is defined as: It is a principle that is responsible for things like the NHS in England, Medicare in Australia and even the provision of a lawyer for people charged with crimes when they cant afford one (in the US and Australia, among a lot of other countries)
Could be. See my thread on Australia vs the US. We believe the purpose of government is to secure the individual rights of man. Yes. The Americans with Disabilities act was passed by the first president Bush. I don't support it, though. While it's fine for the government to encourage those things, it's not right to force businesses to spend money on extensive renovations. One man's disability should not give him the right to another man's wallet. Yes. And Muslim immigrants in certain parts of the country are causing a problem by refusing to provide services to such people. I don't think so. At least not as part of the government. We do have things like a Commissioner of Baseball. But he is funded privately and selected by the owners of the various teams. Congress will occasionally hold hearing on steroid use or some other tempest in a teapot issue, but nothing ever comes of it. Sounds like the closest thing would be the Surgeon General. He'll issue statements about obesity, puts labels warning of the dangers of smoking on cigarette packs, etc. It is not the role of government to "care for the people". That's a quite paternalistic/statist viewpoint. The role of government is to be a neutral party, to provide order, and to defend the shores. I don't think so. I think such policies are racist in and of themselves. Companie, universities, etc should not even gather data on race, sex, whatever. Each individual should be judged on his own merits, not on the color of his skin or whatever. Again, I'd say the ethical thing to do is to ignore race, sex, whatever. Of course we help each other. We simply prefer that help be offered voluntarily by individuals, churches, etc. George W Bush tried to impliment just this sort of reform to our bankrupt social security system. The Democrats used a campaign of demagoguery and fear to kill it.
Im actually shocked to say the least. There is something i actually agree with Bush on, i have to say that is very rare (i wonder which Bush it was). We dont see it as paternalistic for the goverment to provide services, actually the only time i have ever even SEEN that enter a policy debate was in the Aborigional Intervention of the previous goverment because they were forcing things like compulery regulation of wealfare on them without consolting the Aborigional comunities. Its only paternalistic to FORCE services on people. If the counciles pay for a sports field thats not paternalistic. If the states put money into a local football club so that they dont have to relie on pokie revinue thats not paternalistic. Its about providing health and WELBEING For instance in the SA's Health Review it recomended a whole of goverment aproch to health. It found that things like social housing, sports, social interaction and forfilment were relivent to health especially MENTAL health. The goverment also pays for the ABC where TV shows and Sports ect which wouldnt have a commertial following are able to be shown. The ABC's motto is from "birth to death" providing shows that might interest a small segment of the community like the ballet. As for Universities, it is important for them to be able to educate based on tallent your right. For instance should a brillant kid from a remote comunity or a semileterate kid from a ritch family have a spot in a medical degree? We belive that the inteligent kid from the bush should have the spot. So what are the impediments to him taking that place, well maybe he wasnt able to get to school so he might not have as high a basic marks, well that can be delt with either through ajusting the marks for things that arnt essential for the course or by alowing him to take a bridging course to pick up what he missed. Money, well the HECS system pays for all his fees untill he starts earning more than a set wage and then he will just pay a slightly higher tax rate to pay his portion of the education costs back. Location well we can fix that by providing him with housing at university. This is the job of a social justice expert. To find, impediments to engagement and to reducing those blocks This is everywhere from workplaces to schools to social activities. If you have the ability you should be able to do ANYTHING without regard for disabilies or impediments. This sort of atitude makes a sociaty closer together and more willing to help one another. For instance i cant IMAGIN anything like Katrina happerning here, especially when you compare the result of Katrina to the Cyclone that hit Queensland. We are such a large sparsly populated country that most people couldnt surive without some of these service. For instance the RFDS, this is a medical service that flys out to remote comunities to provide anything from GP services to Emergency. This saves 100's to 1000's of lives every year but couldnt run without goverment money. Flood relife couldnt be surplied without the use of the army to the exstent that it is. Most of our elections are fought of social issues like health, education, the enviroment, water, ect It is easier and cheeper for the goverment to provide these services than private industry or comunitie groups. which means there is an economic benifit to this as well. Basically its better to prevent someone from sinking into depression by helping them early and engaging them in social groups than to treat them after a suicide atempt.
Not true in the US. For instance, my neighborhood was recently "annexed" into a large town. Prior to being part of the town, our neighborhood association contracted with various private companies for everything from plowing snow to garbage pickup. Now that we're part of a town and paying more than double the taxes we were before, you'd think our garbage pickup, at least, would be free. Nope. Not only is it not free, we now have to pay a fee to the town for our garbage pickup that's more than double what we paid before! And the city uses the same company we used before for the garbage pickup! Not only that, our streets are no longer getting plowed. Our neighborhood association has had to go back to paying a private company on our own because the city service is so poor. In short, government sucks. You can't count on it to do anything but take your money.
then it sounds like what you need is less beocrasy and more services, not less services. See for example there was a libaterian party running at the last election. They didnt even come CLOSE to winning a seat. No matter WHICH side of politics your on in Australia if you dont provide services you wont WIN. You just need to hold the politisons to account. You have WAY to many elected officals for my view and not enough academics in high offices. Apart from the state and federal parliments and the local councils (oh and garbage is collected by the councils BTW, thats what our rates fund, and local roads) there arnt any elected officals. All our judges are apointed by parliment, the procicuters and the DPP are hired and fired internally and by the justice department although he has a great deal of seperation from the goverment. The best way i can describe police promotion is like the US millarty, the commisioner has worked his way up the ranks ect. About the only thing that came from the US when they were designing our country was the Senate (we dont have lords here so our senate is based on yours). Apart from that we have MUCH more in common than with England than the US. As long as the US citizans dont WANT there goverment to provide services they wont, BUT if you FORCE that on them they will start to do it. Trust me its better to live in a country where i can drive to the nearest hospital and asked for my medicare card rather than "do i have insurance" same when i go to a specialist, or a GP or an optomitrist. I invite you to come and live here for a year and see the difference, you might like it
