Except that the tone and content of your post is at odds with...

Except that the tone and content of your post is at odds with the facts.

Australia ranks very well on a global context in terms of income inequality, with its Gini Coefficient of 0.33 being barely changed over the past 30 years [*] and being in the bottom half (close to the bottom quartile, in fact) of 140 countries, as evaluated by the World Bank and reported in The Guardian.





A 2015 report by the Allianz Group presented the top 10 nations, ranked by Gini Coefficient, as follows:



Australia is clearly way off those sorts of asymmetrical levels.


[*] Actually, the Gini Coefficient for Australia was very stable around 0.30 to 0.31, until the major asset re-pricing that occurred over the past 10 years due to the near-unprecedented low cost of capital, globally, due to highly accommodative monetary policy.

Which means that, because of a structural upwards step-change in asset pricing those who were savers and investors were lucky enough to end up being in a better wealth position today than those who did not save and invest.


So, to summarise, according the facts:

1. Australia is a very egalitarian society, compared to most other countries.

2. Income and wealth distribution in Australia has been remarkably stable over the long-term, and the slight uptick in the past decade or so in Australia's Gini coefficient has been predominatly due to extraneous factors in capital markets.

..