jiplug
So far as my skills are concerned, I started as an industrial chemist and ended up as a programmer. I wrote in 5 languages and used 4 operating systems. I have worked on greenfield sites, and did everything from factory supervision to driving fork-lifts to TA work.

I have also done cleaning work, and I have emptied the bins in offices and I know just how much junk food office workers eat. I have also cleaned the staff toilets in a number of schools, and I have seen the notes that teachers attach to the toilet walls.

Australia may have a new economy shortly.

"the state of the mathematical sciences and related quantitative disciplines in Australia has deteriorated to a dangerous level, and continues to deteriorate."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/equation-for-maths-warns-of-disaster/story-e6frgcjx-1225838873328

We will just have to bring in more immigrants from other countries to increase our skills, and sell more real estate.

Grim,

There is no real inconsistency between my data and yours, except that yours are less up-to-date. The ABS survey data for 2002 gave a similar median income to the one you cite. There is also a nice time series of mean and median incomes here – not so hard to find, though the median numbers are updated less often than the averages.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/6310.0Aug%202008?OpenDocument

The gap between median and mean incomes is not necessarily a predictor of income inequality. For example, if the pay of the lowest-paid 25% of workers was cut by half, the average wage would fall but the median would be unaffected, so the gap between the two would narrow, even though income inequality was worse.

"The gap between median and mean incomes is not necessarily a predictor of income inequality. For example, if the pay of the lowest-paid 25% of workers was cut by half, the average wage would fall but the median would be unaffected, so the gap between the two would narrow, even though income inequality was worse."

From what I remember about economics, one of the best measures a of inequality in a country was the Gini coefficient. Basically, it demonstrated that in a "perfectly equal" country, the lowest 10% of paid workers would earn 10% of the countries total income, the bottom 20%, 20% of the total income etc etc. When this is graphed with %pop vs %total income a straight line should result. Any deviation from this line represents inequality. Thus in a highly inequitable country the lowest paid 10% of workers may only account for 1% of total income, and the bottom 20% may account for 5% of total income etc, resulting in a curve dropping below the straight line. Countries are often ranked by their Gini coefficient ro measure inequality.

Ozzie
I agree, the Gini coefficient is one of several measures of inequality regularly used by economists and social scientists. The ratio of mean to median earnings is not.

Grim
Conspiracy theories aside, I suspect the reason why the median wage is only calculated every year or two while the average is estimated quarterly is that the averages are a heck of a lot quicker and easier to calculate. You only need to know the total wage bill and number of employees, and adding in new information is simple. For the median, you need to know and rank individual wage rates.