此篇原文來自 The Guardian，由 Warwick Smith 撰寫，相當契合台灣當今情勢，尤其是社經政策的路線選擇部分，因此摘錄幾段，並做重點翻譯。

Are we witnessing the emergence of the United States of Australia?

Australia can have its cake and eat it too, because a healthy and materially secure population will repay enormous economic dividends. Instead, we're going further down the US path

中文摘錄：

澳洲的社會與經濟政策在過去 40 年間，大抵走在一條平衡於美國的自由市場與個人主義以及歐陸國家的社會民主主義之間的路線。得利於此，澳洲擁有有效的社會安全網、免費的全民健保（但不包含牙齒與牙床）與相對而言較高水準的公共教育。

這樣中間的路線，被視為一個良好的平衡。具有人性，但對納稅人的負擔不大。勞工政府與聯合政府引領國家在光譜間移動，大抵維持在固定的範圍內。

不過，這樣的狀態即將改觀。今年的聯合政府預算，將打破此平衡，帶領澳洲大步走向美國模式。

在美國，絕大多數的失業者沒有失業福利。美國的公共教育成果在已開發國家中是極為落後的，全民健保亦是相當有限制且昂貴的。

然而，美國的模式相較幾個歐洲對手而言，卻創造了相對較高的經濟成長。不過，在經濟上的成功，是建立在大多數的美國人實質薪資與物質生活水準長達 40 年的低或零成長。他們相較於歐洲人而言，工時較長、資遣費較低、加班費較低與較少的失業救濟服務。換句話說，美國模式僅對金字塔的頂層有益，而對整體有害。

如果，美國仍然是個充滿機會的國家，那這樣的情況也許是可以接受的。不幸的是，對美國人來說，兩代間的收入相關性，是斯堪地那維亞國家（挪威、瑞典與芬蘭）的兩倍。也就是說，一個出生自貧窮人家的小孩，在美國有兩倍高的機率繼續保持貧窮。這個結果在教育與健康也是一致的。

我們是一個相對較低稅負與公共負債的國家。我們知道，倘若我們重視機會的均等與長期的經濟繁榮，那麼投資在最高等級的公共教育與健保體系是極具重要性的。健康的、受過良好教育的並享有物質安全的國民，將會在中長期的未來，帶來巨大的經濟利益。

假如你我都認為民生是重要的，那斯堪地那維亞模式將是最好的選擇。我們可以也必須把更多的資源投注在提供年輕人最佳的機會及支持弱勢者擁有最好的生活品質，而不論他們是誰或來自哪裡。這意味著最高等級公共教育與全民健保，還有對基本生活水準的保證。如果這些不是我們的目標，那我們的經濟成長到底為了什麼？

English quote:

The 2014 coalition federal budget was aimed at dramatically upsetting this balance, taking several very large steps towards the US model.

Currently the majority of unemployed Americans get no unemployment benefits. Their public school outcomes are amongst the worst in the developed world and their public healthcare is extremely limited and particularly expensive for the mediocre outcomes achieved.

However, their system has resulted in relatively high levels of economic growth when compared to most of their European counterparts. In other words, basically everything about the US system is worse for all but those at the top of the economic pyramid.

Perhaps even that would be OK if the US was the land of opportunity as it’s often claimed. Unfortunately even that’s not the case. In the US, the link between sons and fathers income is twice as strong as it is for Scandinavian countries.

Which of the direction we want to take is a critical question but it is not one that we are answering with our eyes open.

We know that investment in a first rate public education and health system is critical if we value equality of opportunity and long term economic prosperity.

If we consider the wellbeing of all Australians to be important then the Scandinavian model is the clear winner. We can and should increase the proportion of GDP taken in tax and use it to provide the best opportunities to our young people and the best quality of life we can to society’s vulnerable, regardless of where or to whom they were born. This means first class universal education and healthcare and the guarantee of a decent standard of living. If these are not our aims then what is the point of economic progress?