Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

10% of nation have 45% of wealth

Joined
5 August 2004
Posts
1,996
Reactions
0
Found an article in the News today that is worth a read...

'10pc of nation have 45pc of wealth'

By Shane Wright
16jun05

JUST 10 per cent of Australians have 45 per cent of the nation's wealth.

A report by the Melbourne Institute into the way wealth is carved up across the country has found a small number of people have the lions share of the nation's property, bank accounts – even cars.

Forty-five per cent of the nation's wealth is held by the wealthiest 10 per cent of the population. Thirty-one per cent of Australian wealth is in the hands of the richest 5 per cent.

The least wealthy 10 per cent are so poor they actually have a median debt of $6000.

The wealthiest 10 per cent have a net worth of about $1.8 million each.

A typical household has assets of about $270,000, and a net worth of $218,000.

A research associate with the institute, Gary Marks, said although the spread of wealth was not entirely unexpected, it was surprising there was such inequality when it came to wealth.

"Wealth is much more unequally distributed than household income," he said.

The wealthiest 10 per cent of Australians have a fair bit of the country.

They account for 38 per cent of total property, 40 per cent of total superannuation, 61 per cent of equity investments, 80 per cent of business ownership, 39 per cent of what's in the nation's bank accounts – and even 26 per cent of the value of Australian vehicles.

Australian wealth is heavily tied up in bricks and mortar.

Of the median $1.8 million wealth of the wealthiest 10 per cent, $770,000 of it is in property.

A typical household, by contrast, has about $200,000 in property plus another $27,300 in superannuation.

The report found a few pointers to what makes a wealthy household.

The single biggest factor appears to be a person's country of birth. The report found a household headed by an Australian-born male, aged about 55, was much more likely to be wealthy than any other.

Households headed by someone with a university degree were about 35 per cent wealthier than the norm. Households headed by someone who failed to finish year 12 were substantially less wealthy.

People who are married, or at least in a de facto relationship, are also more wealthy than singles.

As most parents would understand, children actually reduce a couple's overall wealth levels.

The least wealthy families were sole parents.

"Lone parents, nearly all women, were both the least wealthiest and the least well off," it found.

The institute found there is some connection between social habits and wealth.

Smokers are less wealthy, drinkers – except those who drink to excess – are wealthier, while exercise seemed to make no difference.

Another one of the authors, Bruce Headey, said wealth was heavily skewed towards the older members of a community.

The median wealth of people aged between 55 and 65 was $444,000. For those aged between 18 and 24, it was just $8,000.

"Wealth is not closely linked to a persons socioeconomic background," he said.

But there is one striking similarity between the poorest and wealthiest families – all of us have credit-card debts.

The richest 10 per cent of the population accounts for 9 per cent of total credit-card debt. The poorest 10 per cent account for the same proportion.
 
I actually thought a smaller percentage of the population would own more of Australia's wealth.

Just goes to show you that Australia is probably one of the more equitable of the world's first world nations. I know the figure for the USA shows a larger proportion of wealth concentrated in fewer hands.

But surely the history of western civilisation has taught us that things have always been this way and probably will be forever... and that in spite of this apparent economic inequity, as individuals we are probably better off materially now than we ever have been at any other point in history, irrespective of social class.
 
The poorest 10 per cent account for the same proportion.
Which ofcourse means for nett asset of $-6000 on average they hold 100s% more debt than their wealthier counterparts----one of the tragic circumstances facing those who have little or no disposable income.

Personally I feel its lack of education to ALL people with rgard to personal wealth creation.
ITS JUST NOT THERE!!
Take a look at seminars from the Housing gurus,or the Trading mentors,or the Black box pedlers--FULL---everyone of them the demand is massive.

Some are excellent---- many are purely money making exercises for the host.

The industry (financial) is SOOOOOO regulated in many respects,that when someone who helps out through personal experience,like myself and a few others here (Some members) squeal like stuck pigs----not licienced---not licienced.Yet Im yet to see practical wealth creative advice on any site given freely by a licienced advisor!!!---snippets yes---stuff you can forge a future in NO! ((I have a low opinion of most advisors---purely because most that i know have little or NO practical knowledge and preach either industry rehetoric---for self gain as thats all they can offer (Super fund XY or Z) or theory which if they practiced it would soon learn that the real world takes no notice of theory!) I'm yet to see creative income creation advice from anyone other than those who are actively involved in it themselves---licienced or otherwise!)).Creative Tax advice is a totally different matter and should not be confused.

Yet under regulated in other respects when clearly there is NO value in advice given and even worse----down right dangerous,particularly when the participants cant recognise DANGEROUS.

But in the end it does boil down to one thing (I have found).
Those that I know at both ends of the scale are divided by the following.

(1) The ability to FIRST recognise an opportunity.
(2) The ability to then understand how evaluate that opportunity.

Finally the one single most apparent difference ( Ive known many in both groups who can get to (1) perhaps 60% of people and about 20% of them get to (2) but VERY FEW get to )

(3) Taking advantage and implementing methods to reap the benifits presented by the opportunities as they arise.

Few people are doer's---most as can be seen are procrastinators.

YES even single mothers!!!
 
It would be interesting to see if the ratio was the same for cashflow as well as assets - in the article above, a lot of equity in non-cash producing assets places someone higher than an investor who is possibly generating a higher return on less total equity.
 
I wonder how much worse this situation is now a days?

Maybe we are slowly playing catch up with third World nations where 99pc of wealth is controlled by the 1pc?

We will get there at this rate!!

What does Australia mean again?
 
If Howie get's in agan our nation will be poorer...LABOUR WILL RECTIFY THIS BY SNUBBING THE u.s.a. POWER BROKERS IF THEY HAVE ANY SENSE.....tHE u.s .IS DOOMED TO BE A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY...BUY GOLD MY FRIENDS AND A BIT OF SILVER......AND RIDE THE WAVE OF CORRUPTION TILL 2010 WHEN IT'S REVEALED IN RISING SEAS AND HIDDEN POWER....LOT'S OF PATENTS GOT BOUGHT OUT THAT WOULD HAVE SAVED US FROM WARMING THE PLANET.....BUT WATER POWERED CARS ARE NOT IN THE GAME YET.....
 
Top