The Influence Of Income Distribution In Australia

In April 2014 the rate of unemployment was at 5.8% and in February 2015 it was measured at 6.3%. Figure 1.3 shows the unemployment rate of Australia and Korea over the last year. We can see that Koreas unemployment rate is much more erratic than Australia’s. Korea has had rapid increases followed by rapid decreases whereas Australia has had mild increases followed by mild decreases. Overall we can see that Australia’s unemployment rate is slowly rising, Korea on the other hand, the unemployment rate is unpredictable and though it has spiked to 3.8% in February 2015, it may drop just as quick the next month.

This report will show an overview of the current state of the Australian economy and its management by the Federal government through examining economic indicators such as economic growth (GDP), unemployment, inflation and trade.

An increase or decrease in the unemployment rate can have a multiple effects on the Australian economy, both beneficial as well detrimental to the economic conditions and the societal outlook.

Analyse the economic and social costs and benefits of inequality in distribution of income in Australia.

Income and wealth distribution: comparing the differences in levels of income and wealth between different social groups help measure inequalities in society. The income is a regular flow of money earned by someone working or from someone’s benefits, pension or their savings. Wealth is defined on property, shares or other belongings that could be sold to make an income. This is very hard to measure accurately and to

In Australia there is a consensus that think that the unemployed don’t want to work and are not willing to find work; this claiming that they are lazy and conning the government for benefits (if they receive them). However, not all unemployed actually enjoy being without a job to survive and struggle with not having enough job opportunities, not being able to work due to lack of qualifications and not willing to take a job that will lead them to deficit (Csoba, 2010). Looking at it from a conflict theorist’s point of view it is people who have the money and the power that generate these limitations that unemployed members of society face. For

One measure that has been used to measure income distribution in Australia is provided by the income shares going to groups of people at different points in the income distribution. In 2011-12, 10.4% of total equivalised disposable household income went to the people in the low-income group and 39.5% went to the high income group which relates to 20% of the population.

This reveals that a relatively small proportion of households have high net worth and a large portion of households have low net worth, concluding with the simple statement that: The distribution of wealth is more unequal in Australia than the distribution of income.

Income inequality is defined as “Income inequality is the extent to which income is distributed unevenly in a country. It is an important indicator of equity in an economy, and has implications for other social outcomes such as crime and life satisfaction(Conference Board)." Therefore income inequality can also be defined as the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, rather than an equal distribution of prosperity among citizens. In Canada, the unequal distribution of wealth has increased over the past twenty years. Though compared to the United States, Canada is in a much better position with greater social mobility. The fact remains that compared to

The highest earning fifth of U.S. families earned 59.1% of all income, while the richest earned 88.9% of all wealth. A big gap between the rich and poor is often associated with low social mobility, which contradicts the American ideal of equal opportunity. Levels of income inequality are higher than they have been in almost a century, the top one percent has a share of the national income of over 20 percent (Wilhelm). There are a variety of factors that influence income inequality, a few of which will be discussed in this paper. Rising income inequality is caused by differences in life expectancy, rapidly increases in the incomes of the top 5 percent, social trends, and shifts in the global economy.

The recent Guardian newspaper’s investigation published on March 2016 studying the disposable income growth of generations also points out the Australian exception. Using LIS data, The Guardian’s journalists show Australia to be the only country in which individuals aged between 25 and 29 have experienced income gains between 1980 and 2015. Australia’s economic performance have also scarcely equaled in developed countries, boasting a decreasing unemployment rate of 5.5% in July 2016 only 1.5% higher than the 2008 record low of 4% (ABS).

Not only does income inequality appear in Indonesia, Adelaide is also experiencing inequality pay gaps. Statistics shows South Australia has quite high levels of inequality in wealth across Australia, with the ratio of 5.5. In Adelaide, household income is distributed to $878 per week. The level of income is considered high in South Australia compared to Jakarta, where Indonesians are earning as little as 233, 740 rupiah per month which is less than $24. Statistics agency data released information that 30 million Indonesians are classified as poor, whereas only 13.9% or 2.9 million Australians are living below the poverty

Income inequality in Australia is a growing phenomenon. While Australia remains one of the wealthiest nations in the world and has seen income growth across all strata of society, income inequality has also risen in tandem (Greenville, Poke & Rogers, 2013, pp. 4-5). The Gini coefficient for Australia, an indicator of national income distribution where 0 represents perfect equality and 1 representing complete inequality, has gone up from 0.35 in 1988-89 to 0.41 in 2009-10 (Greenville, Poke & Rogers, 2013, p. 7). The Australia Institute (Richardson & Denniss, 2014, pp. 2, 8) cites the failure of minimum wage to keep up with average earnings in lower class Australians and significant increases in top incomes have led to an accumulation of wealth at the top. However in

Aside from unhealthy diet, physical inactivity and substance use are also parts of unhealthy lives in aboriginal Australians that predominantly leading to increased disease burden (Péloquin, Doering, Alley & Rebar, 2017). In 2012-2013, only 38% of Aboriginal adults in urban area had sufficient physical activity that met the health guideline recommendation (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2014). Factors that impact physical activity include colonisation and low socio-economic status caused by colonisation among aboriginal Australians (Macniven et al., 2016). As mentioned previously, aboriginal Australians lived in hunter-gatherer lifestyles that required them to have sufficient physical activity, nevertheless, with the process of colonisation and urbanisation, most aboriginal people are grown in urban area where the traditional activity of hunting and gathering are disrupted (Nelson, Abbott & Macdonald,

In the past quarter the unemployment rate in South Australia has remained steady at 5.6% (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2009) but this figure is volatile and may increase next month. The youth unemployment rate, however, in South Australia remains at 21.9% with the Western and Northern suburbs having significantly higher