“All political parties engage in criticism of their opponents”.

Easy. Don't take any notice of politicians badmouthing each other. It's not their job. Their job is to talk about Australia and what they are doing for the country: not minding the business of their opponents. It's up to electors to make decisions about politicians.

That well known political animal Joe Hockey, when part of Abbott`s team, always said that the task of the opposition was to oppose.
What a welcome change it would be if the task of the opposition was to present itself, and work towards, being a good alternative government.
No such luck I`m afraid.

This country has been transformed from an egalitarian dream of the 50’s, into a globalist dog-fest, where the first prize is the eating of your neighbour on the scramble to the top.

Eleven million of its inhabitants are the desperado rental class, which constitutes the largest proportion of the dogs breakfast, AKA rent slaves: bordered by the ever increasing overextended mortgagor class, making up another eleven million of its dyspepsiad inhabitants.
(Figures from census: numbers living in rental accommodation, and numbers living in owner occupier accommodation).

When viewed through the lens of reality, a very small proportion of its inhabitants own anything of worth. Most own between nothing and a debt to the mortgagee for a lifetime: Debt slaves or rent slaves, take your pick.

This article is nonsense.

Household consumption expenditure has not declined. Between 1977-78 and 2024-25 it increased from $61 billion to $1,441 billion. Allowing for inflation and population growth, in real per capita terms (in 2023-24 prices) it increased from $24,764 to $50,870, or 105%.

The share of household consumption in GDP is meaningless as a measure of economic performance or household welfare. Other components of GDP can increase their relative share for reasons that have no impact on people’s welfare or may even be beneficial. The largest single contributor to the decline in household consumption as a share of GDP(E) was the relative increase in general government consumption. This may or may not be good for households, but it is hardly something that can be blamed on so-called “neoliberalism”.

Drawing a straight trend line through GDP growth over several decades suggests a consistent long-term deceleration in growth. But that is not what happened. During the first three decades of Australia’s economic liberalisation, real GDP growth was strong, averaging well over 3% a year in the 1980s, 1990s and much of the 2000s. It was only after governments lost their zeal for economic reform, epitomised by Rudd’s reversal of WorkChoices, that our growth rates began to slide.

The growth in part-time employment over the period is primarily due to the rising proportion of women in the workforce. Women are more likely than men to prefer part-time work.

Australia needs more and bolder economic reforms, not zombie neo-Keynesianism.

diver dan,
Good assessment however, why stop there ?

Just Leftist muscle flexing !

Hi DD,

"This country has been transformed from an egalitarian dream of the 50’s"

The only section of the Australian population than had moved into the sphere of an "egalitarian" society to some extent in the 1950's, were white working class Anglo males. The new found dream of egalitarianism did not extend to women, the openly gay, Non-Anglo migrants and Aboriginals. The reasons for this shift can be traced back to white males making post war gains in education, leading to economic freedom through income growth, with such things as increased home ownership. There was the beginnings of a clearer understanding of the world in general through the medium of television, and international travel which broadened peoples horizons. There was a rapid growth in egalitarianism in Australia during the 1960's and it has been on going ever since. I believe many in society, who once would have been denied equality, have been able to exert themselves as social equals by overcoming the prejudices that existed from past generations. There is still more to overcome, but through progressive change, we are (hopefully) becoming a better egalitarian society.

p/s Not if Pauline Hanson, and other prejudiced nark's have their way.

Paul1405,
There's some undeniable $hit in your post ! It's not the content, it's the intend in the gist to support your ulterior agenda. How many of those who didn't take up the opportunities offered didn't do so because of inbuilt racism & dislike of responsibility ?

Hi Indy,

"How many of those who didn't take up the opportunities offered didn't do so because of inbuilt racism & dislike of responsibility?"

I'm not sure what you are saying there, "opportunities offered", its the lack of opportunity through prejudice that denies people. I say there existed such prejudice in the 1950's Australian society, just as it does today. What might surprise you is I'm not in favour of positive discrimination, such as setting quotas, what I do support is equal opportunity for all.