I am overwhelmingly disappointed by the sense of entitlement I see in my home country of Australia. My hometown of Melbourne has been voted “the most liveable city” three years in a row, and Australia has been voted the most liveable country on the Global Liveability Ranking and Report 2013.
Yet, my compatriots have become greedy and unappreciative. We have a low crime rate and can afford universal health and education. If all Australians spread out, we would still have three square kilometres per person. And yet, we do not want refugees to settle on our shores. [break]
orangeparents.org
By the time you read this, Australia will have voted for a new PM. According to opinion polls, an ex-boxer, ex-priest, a conservative who thinks Australia’s middle class are suffering and deserve welfare, will win. Tony Abbot believes Australia cannot afford to give as much aid as it currently gives to Nepal and other low-income countries, he thinks men deserve more than women–and are even entitled to non-consensual sex, he thinks abortions are the easy option and women should not be entitled to them, and he thinks marriage is a privilege for only certain citizens. The idea that some citizens are allowed certain rights and this gives them the right to deny other citizens those same rights disappoints me.
I also see a growing sense of entitlement in Nepal. I arrived in Kathmandu in January 2009 amid much hope of Nepal changing into a new and inclusive society. What I see now is that only some people are hopeful for Nepal’s future, and only some people are considered entitled to full citizenship. Realizing how entrenched the centuries old networks are, most have swallowed the bitter pill. Instead of doing something to change the situation, instead of exercising their responsibility as citizens, many people are choosing to take what they can. Society cannot blame its leaders for showing self-interest when individuals who make up the society do the same.
The status quo is stubborn and hard to break. Those who benefit from the existing status quo do not see the hand of the state. They are the ones who should be paying more taxes so that the poor can get more government services, but they don’t. They avoid paying taxes and justify this on the grounds that you cannot trust the state to distribute tax allocated resources equitably. In reality, these people do not need the state in the same way that poor people do. Poor people need the state to grant them citizenship, allocate their pensions and to provide them health care, substandard though it may be.
Wealthier people can buy citizenship and health care, and do not even need pensions to meet their basic needs. The better networked will never have to wait in line. Just like the traffic, people in Nepal negotiate to have their needs met on an individual basis.
If you are not big or well networked, then you rely upon the state to have your needs met. Those who benefit from the current status quo feel it is their right to continue to be able to walk into a hospital and demand treatment immediately. They will call their biggest and most powerful friend or family member to put pressure on whoever they can, to get the treatment they feel they are entitled to. It is not that they are not entitled to health treatment, let’s face it, I would do the same if I was sick and had power, but simply that everyone should be entitled to health services. The only way this can happen is if people pay more taxes.
The top rate of tax in Nepal is 25 percent, which is low by international standards. As few as 350,000 Nepalis are believed to be paying income tax. Income tax revenues only constitute 20 percent of total tax revenue, and at 2.9 percent of GDP. Nepal’s income taxes are below the five percent of GDP average for low income countries, according to an International Monetary Fund report. The total contribution of taxes to the national GDP is only 12 percent, which limits social spending.
Someone told me that there are four key families who should contribute considerable tax revenues to the government, but they are too well-networked to have to bother. They probably think they are entitled to not pay taxes due to their heritage. If they don’t trust the state to allocate tax revenue equitably or responsibly, then they should set up their own hospitals and education facilities that are free for the poor. And I mean really free, no favors and no bribes attached.
Nepal was less intense, more friendly, and the people more trusting in 2009. Now people seem suspicious and more self interested. If everyone could stop demanding their rights and start to understand that they have responsibilities as citizens, as employers, as employees, as representatives of the people, as bureaucrats, as advantaged castes, as global citizens, etc, then your country and mine might become a society for all. We have a common humanity, after all.
The author is a PhD
candidate in Social Protection from Deakin University, Australia
kristie.drucza@yahoo.com.au
Related story
Euro 2020 final: England can finally end 55 years of misery
