| The inequity in the distribution
of wealth in Australia is yet another
indicator of Australia's lack of
egalitarianism. In 1995, 20% of the Australian
population owned 72.2% of Australia's
wealth with the top 50% owning 92.1% (Raskall, 1998: 287).
Such a significant skew in the distribution
of wealth indicates that, at least in terms of economics,
there is an established class system
in Australia. McGregor (1988) argues that Australian
society can be categorised into three levels: the Upper,
Middle and Working classes. In addition, it has been shown
that most Australians continue to remain in the
class into which they were born (McGregor, 1988: 156) despite
arguments about the ease of social mobility
in Australian society (Fitzpatrick,
1994). The issue of class and its inherent inequity,
however, is further compounded by factors such as race
and gender within and across these class
divisions. |
Because only a few people have most of the money and power in
Australia, I conclude that it is not an equal society. Society
has an Upper, Middle and Lower class
and I think that most people when they are born into one class,
end up staying in that class for
their whole lives. When all three classes
are looked at more closely, other things such as the differences
between the sexes and people's racial backgrounds also add to the
unequal nature of Australian society.
|
