Neoliberal Frontiers and Economic Insecurity: Is Basic Income a Solution?

Australia and New Zealand have similarities and differences in regard to their cultural, social, and economic makeup. Both countries share a colonial past, dispossession of the indigenous populations, and common features regarding the model of social protection that developed during the nineteenth and twentieth century. In comparative welfare state studies the two countries are often grouped together, along with the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, in what some scholars refer to as a “liberal welfare state” model. This welfare state model describes the strong preference for market-based solutions in meeting social needs (commodification), a residual safety net, and a punitive approach to poverty (Esping-Andersen, 2000; Grover & Piggott, 2013). Other scholars have suggested that the characterization of Australia and New Zealand as liberal welfare states downplays some unique characteristics and that it is more accurate to talk about Australia and New Zealand as having developed a “wage earner’s welfare state” (Castles, 1984). The notion of a wage earner’s welfare state emphasizes the central role given to high minimum wages in redistribution, a generous social wage, and a robust system of industrial rights. These aspects were supported by the substantial use of protective tariffs to bolster wage levels in manufacturing, urban service, and a strong concern with the regulation of labor supply through controlled migration (Castles, 1994).