As a recent addittion to the disability pension, I concurr with this article. 2005 was a horror year for low income families, as well as those of us who struggle to live on pensions.

Your ABS cost analyist of rising cost explains that for our class of the population we have been pushed further and further behind, and your belief that the CPI should be extended to cover more than 64% of the population could surely not be argued against by any reasonable, rational person.

Now that Workchoices [no choice] legislation has been introduced the number set to join our ranks could be enormous. It seems while India and China continue to prosper, Australians of our class continue to slide into a third world situation to balance the prosperity of those nations.

By international standards Australia is seen as a wealthy country, how can that be if ABS figures show 1.7 Million families from a population of 20 million people are struggling to put or keep a roof over their head paying between 30-60% of their imcome on this and other essentials.

Perhaps the time has arrived to either increase wages, or provide more Government services to this sector, Health, Education and Roads would be a good start for a Government who is sitting on a tax take $11.5 Billion more than the services they provide.

Shonga.
I totally agree with all you say. As another on the Disability Pension I find it increasingly difficult to make the money go round.

I do not live an expensive lifestyle, but $8-9 a kilo for mince, $7-8 a kilo for cheese, $15 a kilo for cheap steak, $8 for a bag of spuds. I know that prices of the things I buy are going up faster that the CPI.

Why is the CPI only measured in capital cities? Surely transport costs are the biggest factor in regional Australia.

Ah well another instance of our Govt. fudging statistics to let us know that the economy is doing well. Like being employed if you do 1 hours work per week.

Its sausages for dinner again at a mere $4.80 a kilo. I have dozens of ways to cook them.

The sad, uncomfortable truth is that Australia is living well beyond its means, and that there has to be a considerable cut in the average standard of living. This will be beyond the ability of Government to correct. I was amazed by the cries in Sydney when petrol reached $1.45 a few months ago, when some said "the government must do something about this!". When oil gets to $200 a barrel, which could happen this year, and petrol goes to $2.50 a litre, people are just going to have to cut down travelling. This will accentuate the gap between rich and poor, as the internationally competitive part of the economy will see their income maintained, or they will leave.

Yes, Julie, the great divide between the haves and the have nots is certainly an issue of concern. Welfare recipients and now the working poor are becoming very real issues within our social conscience. Working to achieve a lifestyle, for many people, is becoming little more than working to survive. Those requiring assistance are more prevalent, and the social consequences are becoming obvious. I have no problem with those that achieve wealth consistent with the effort and risk that they take. To tear them down does little to elevate those that genuinely struggle, so what is the answer? It would take a mind far greater than mine to find a solution however it is a remedy that will not be dispensed by any one person or government.
Perhaps people need to have a close look at the way they consume and want. The demand for products grows and accordingly the prices follow. It doesn’t take Einstein long to work out that the ones that can’t keep up fall behind while the inertia of the markets spirals ever upward, exacerbating the problem. Every evening the financial reports issue forecasts or results of market growth. Growth must come at a cost, mustn’t it? Ultimately, perpetual growth, like motion, must be unsustainable.
I am no analyst so much of this is just thinking out loud. I welcome any criticism.

Plerdsus

You are right and wrong. Some parts of Australia are living well beyond their means. The buy now pay later ads we see on TV are just the tip of the iceberg. There has to be a cut in some standards of living but people on pensions are sure not average.

The Howard Govt. directly caused new house prices to increase by $30,000 by imposing GST and the first home buyers grant. This has increased the cost of buying a home by $60 per week. This increase has flowed through to all house prices. As house prices increased people used this increased equity to either buy a “rental” property or to buy consumer goods.

On the Sunshine Coast where I live, the hospitality industry is having difficulty finding staff because they cannot afford to rent in the area and there is little public transport.

To say we are going to have to cut down traveling misses the main problem with high fuel costs. Due to the destruction of our rail freight infrastructure all goods travel by road, courier companies like TNT and Toll have already imposed fuel levy’s on their invoices, so have airlines. So business and eventually consumers pay these additional charges.

Business is already leaving Australia; the latest is the Kraft biscuit factory relocating to China. Or call centers in India. Have you tried to buy clothes or shoes not made in China?

As a “poor” person I don’t travel much anyway, I own a VY Commodore which I paid for from my superannuation (Early payout due to disability), I also own my house so I do not have a mortgage and I am better off than many. But I still only have $80 per week after paying all my bills to live on.

It is obscene that some spend more than this on a bottle of wine. We have many examples from history where revolutions have occurred due to similar problems. This is happening now and our government should realise it. But of course income redistribution is an anathema to our rulers

Perhaps “poor” needs to be defined. Poor is often subjective. Steve Madden, you could not be considered poor – yet you classify yourself as such. In your case it appears you are poor only relative to someone who is better off. True poverty is an absence of money, chattels and any means of subsistence.

There are also those who consider themselves below the bread line, yet live beyond their means. For example their pension would cover food, shelter and clothing however luxuries are added to the list such as cigarettes, alcohol, the internet, a computer, etc. Perhaps some of these are now considered essentials and as such more people see themselves as poor.

Julie, I agree people in the lower income brackets and those on the true poverty line have been disadvantaged by increases in food, rentals and fares without similar rises in income. I also acknowledge there are those who truly struggle – they do not own a car, they have no luxuries such as a computer, the internet, or even a telephone connection. They purchase clothes at the local op shop and after rent, food, medication, fares, bills etc, have nothing left. However, how many people can truly claim to be in this latter category? Is it only these people who line up for hampers at Christmas? Unfortunately it is not. Many who line up could have managed their money however lack the discipline or the skills required to do so. I am not suggesting it is easy to manage on a low income – I am well aware that it is not. I have seen people juggle and struggle, but still manage. But many (not all) who fail to make ends meet do so at their own hand; and will continue to do so regardless of increases in current pension or unemployment benefits.

It also needs to be considered that part of the increase in assistance that has been witnessed by St Vincent de Paul and other societies could well be attributed to the “spend now, worry later” trend currently seen in all levels of society