| 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. |
