Economic Analysis
Economic Analysis examines Australia's $19 trillion in national wealth, the structural inequality that concentrates it, the enormous costs of reactive systems (justice, homelessness, emergency health), and the cost-benefit case for prevention-based resource allocation through OMXUS. The analysis demonstrates that redirecting even a fraction of current punitive spending toward prevention produces dramatically better outcomes at lower cost.
Australia's Wealth
Australia is one of the wealthiest nations in the world by every measure:
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Total national wealth | ~$19 trillion AUD | Australian Bureau of Statistics[1] |
| GDP (2024) | ~$2.7 trillion AUD | ABS |
| Median household wealth | ~$580,000 AUD | ABS Survey of Income and Housing |
| Mean household wealth | ~$1.1 million AUD | ABS |
| Superannuation assets | ~$3.9 trillion AUD | APRA |
| Residential property value | ~$10.7 trillion AUD | ABS |
| Population | ~27 million | ABS |
Australia's wealth per capita is among the highest globally -- consistently ranked in the top five by Credit Suisse's Global Wealth Report.[2]
The Inequality Problem
Despite this wealth, Australia has significant and growing inequality:
The Gini Coefficient
The Gini coefficient measures income inequality on a scale from 0 (perfect equality) to 1 (perfect inequality). Australia's Gini coefficient for disposable income is approximately 0.33 -- higher than the OECD average of 0.31, and significantly higher than Nordic countries (0.26-0.28).[3]
For wealth (as opposed to income), the picture is far worse. The Gini coefficient for wealth in Australia is approximately 0.65 -- meaning wealth is roughly twice as unequally distributed as income.
Wealth Distribution
| Quintile | Share of Total Wealth | Average Wealth per Household |
|---|---|---|
| Top 20% | 63% of all wealth | ~$3.5 million |
| Second 20% | 21% | ~$1.15 million |
| Third 20% | 12% | ~$660,000 |
| Fourth 20% | 4% | ~$220,000 |
| Bottom 20% | Less than 1% | ~$36,000[4] |
The top 20% of Australian households hold 63 times the wealth of the bottom 20%.
Poverty Amid Plenty
- 1 in 8 Australians (3.3 million people) live below the poverty line
- 1 in 6 children (over 760,000) live in poverty[5]
- 122,000+ people are homeless on any given night
- Australia has $19 trillion in wealth and 1 in 6 kids in poverty. The math does not fail. The system does.
The Cost of Reactive Systems
Australia spends enormous sums on systems that react to problems rather than preventing them:
Justice System: $32 Billion Per Year
| Component | Annual Cost (AUD) | Key Metric |
|---|---|---|
| Police services | ~$14.5 billion | 72,000+ police officers |
| Courts and judicial | ~$3.2 billion | 700,000+ cases per year |
| Corrections (prisons) | ~$6.8 billion | ~42,000 prisoners[6] |
| Community corrections | ~$1.3 billion | 75,000+ people on orders |
| Legal aid and services | ~$2.1 billion | Chronically underfunded |
| Juvenile justice | ~$1.1 billion | Disproportionately Indigenous |
| Other justice services | ~$3.0 billion | Various |
| Total | ~$32 billion | System that produces 45% recidivism |
The cost per prisoner per day is approximately $400 AUD -- or $146,000 per year. This system produces a 45% recidivism rate, meaning nearly half of all prisoners will return to prison. We are spending $146,000 per year per person on a system that fails nearly half the time.[7]
Homelessness: $25,000-$50,000 Per Person Per Year
The cost of homelessness is not just the direct cost of emergency services:
| Cost Category | Per Homeless Person Per Year | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Emergency department visits | $8,000-$15,000 | 4-5x higher than housed population |
| Hospitalisation | $10,000-$20,000 | Longer stays, more acute presentations |
| Mental health crisis services | $5,000-$10,000 | Untreated conditions escalate |
| Police and justice contact | $5,000-$12,000 | Criminalisation of homelessness |
| Temporary accommodation | $3,000-$8,000 | Shelters, crisis housing |
| Total per person | $25,000-$50,000+ | vs ~$15,000/year for supportive housing[8] |
Housing First programs -- providing stable housing without preconditions -- consistently demonstrate that it is cheaper to house people than to leave them homeless. Every dollar spent on supportive housing saves $1.50-$2.50 in emergency services, hospitalisations, and justice system costs.
Child Protection: $12+ Billion Per Year
- Child protection investigations: ~$4.5 billion
- Out-of-home care: ~$6 billion (for ~46,000 children)
- Related services: ~$2 billion
- Cost per child in out-of-home care: ~$130,000/year
Indigenous children are 10 times more likely to be in out-of-home care than non-Indigenous children -- a continuation of removal policies that echoes the Stolen Generations.[9]
Mental Health: $15+ Billion Per Year
- Direct healthcare costs: ~$10 billion
- Lost productivity: ~$12 billion
- Disability support: ~$3 billion
- Most mental health conditions are treatable and many are preventable through addressing social determinants
Cost-Benefit: Prevention vs Punishment
The economic case for prevention is overwhelming:
| Intervention | Cost | Return on Investment | Timeframe |
|---|---|---|---|
| Early childhood education (0-5) | $8,000-$15,000/child/year | $4-$17 returned per $1 invested[10] | 20-40 years |
| Housing First | $15,000/person/year | $1.50-$2.50 saved per $1 spent | Immediate |
| Needle and syringe programs | $240 million total (AU) | $27 returned per $1 invested | 10 years |
| Community mental health | $5,000-$10,000/person/year | $2-$5 saved per $1 spent | 1-5 years |
| Drug treatment (vs incarceration) | $5,000-$15,000/person/year | $4-$7 saved per $1 spent | 1-3 years |
| Family support programs | $3,000-$8,000/family/year | $3-$6 saved per $1 spent | 5-15 years |
| Prison | $146,000/person/year | 45% recidivism (net negative return) | Ongoing failure |
James Heckman's Nobel Prize-winning research demonstrated that every dollar invested in quality early childhood programs for disadvantaged children returns $4-$17 through reduced crime, higher earnings, better health, and reduced welfare dependence.[11]
The $19 Trillion Solution
A National Reset
Australia holds approximately $19 trillion in national wealth. By leveraging a fraction of this wealth through OMXUS governance, a restructuring becomes possible:
| Allocation | Amount | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Debt Eradication | $786.815 billion | Clear all federal and state debts instantly |
| Government Prepayment | $5.29 trillion | Fund all government operations for 5 years (~$1.05T annually) |
| Citizen Allocation | $12.92 trillion | Direct redistribution to all Australians |
Universal Redistribution
Adults (20 and over) -- Total package: $416,000:
- 25% ($104,000): Income-producing assets such as business shares or ownership
- 25% ($104,000): Housing security allocation
- 50%: Weekly income of $800 for five years as universal basic income
Youth (Under 20) -- Total package: $416,000:
- 25% ($104,000): Family-controlled business and housing assets
- $400 weekly direct payments
- 50% ($208,000): Trust reserved for future access (housing, education, or business)
Immediate Societal Impact
- Zero National Debt -- All outstanding public financial obligations cleared
- Five-Year Government Security -- Public services operate without financial strain
- Universal Income -- Every adult receives guaranteed income, housing, and business equity
- Work by Choice -- Employment becomes centred around passion rather than survival
- Reduced Crime -- Economic stability removes motives for desperation-driven harm
Root Cause Economics
"Scarcity is a design variable, not a natural law."
Where basic needs are precarious:
- Stress loads rise -- producing the health outcomes documented in Health Research
- Short-termism prevails -- people cannot plan when they cannot eat
- Systems default to control and punishment -- because desperate people are harder to govern
- Crime becomes rational -- when legal pathways to survival are blocked
The $19 Trillion Solution converts national wealth into steady, auditable flows that lower baseline risk -- so people can act from stability rather than desperation.
This is not charity. It is risk engineering at societal scale.
Connection to Crime Elimination
When basic needs are met and financial security is guaranteed, the conditions that produce most crime disappear:
| Crime Category | % of Total Crime | Root Cause | Prevention Mechanism |
|---|---|---|---|
| Property crime | ~60% | Economic need | Universal economic security |
| Drug-related crime | ~15-20% | Prohibition + addiction | Decriminalization + treatment |
| Fraud and financial crime | ~10% | Economic pressure | Reduced financial desperation |
| Violence (domestic) | ~5-8% | Stress, substance abuse, learned patterns | Environmental design, support services |
| Violence (other) | ~3-5% | Various (often economic/substance-related) | Multi-factor prevention |
| Remaining | ~2-5% | Complex individual factors | Empathy-based community response |
The Three Pillars of Crime Elimination
1. Addressing Scarcity-Based Crime
Economic security eliminates the root cause of the majority of crime. When everyone has housing, income, and assets, theft, property crime, and fraud become irrational.
2. Drug-Related Crime Resolution
Full legalisation and regulation eliminates black markets and associated violence. The Swiss model demonstrates 82% crime reduction among participants.
3. Meeting Emotional Needs
With basic security established, society can focus on:
- Time for family connection and community building
- Resources for mental health and personal development
- Opportunity for meaningful work and contribution
- Space for creativity and self-expression
- Structured empathy development
International Comparisons
| Country | Gini (Income) | Social Spending (% GDP) | Incarceration Rate (per 100k) | Homicide Rate (per 100k) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Norway | 0.26 | 25.3% | 54 | 0.5 |
| Denmark | 0.28 | 28.3% | 72 | 0.8 |
| Finland | 0.27 | 28.7% | 51 | 1.2 |
| Australia | 0.33 | 17.8% | 170 | 0.9 |
| United Kingdom | 0.35 | 20.6% | 130 | 1.2 |
| United States | 0.39 | 18.7% | 531 | 6.3[12] |
The pattern is consistent: nations with lower inequality, higher social spending, and stronger prevention systems have lower crime, better health, higher trust, and greater wellbeing. The evidence base for this is extensive and reviewed comprehensively in Wilkinson and Pickett's The Spirit Level.[13]
OMXUS Implementation
OMXUS implements economic restructuring through:
- Direct democratic control over resource allocation -- communities decide spending priorities through proximity-weighted voting
- Bitcoin-anchored transparency -- every dollar is tracked on an immutable ledger
- Prevention-first budgeting -- constitutional requirement to fund prevention before punishment
- Universal economic security -- guaranteed income, housing, and assets as system defaults
- Continuous evaluation -- real-time outcome data drives resource reallocation
See Also
- Crime Prevention Research
- Justice as Prevention
- Companion Acts
- Principles
- Health Research
- Drug Policy Reform
- Direct Democracy
- Main Page
References
- ↑ Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2024). Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product. ABS Cat. No. 5206.0.
- ↑ Credit Suisse Research Institute. (2023). Global Wealth Report 2023. Credit Suisse.
- ↑ Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2024). Income Inequality (Indicator). OECD Data.
- ↑ Australian Council of Social Service. (2023). Inequality in Australia 2023. ACOSS/UNSW Sydney.
- ↑ Australian Council of Social Service. (2023). Poverty in Australia 2023. ACOSS/UNSW Sydney.
- ↑ Productivity Commission. (2024). Report on Government Services 2024: Justice. Australian Government.
- ↑ Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2023). The Health of Australia's Prisoners 2022. AIHW.
- ↑ Flatau, P., et al. (2008). The Cost-Effectiveness of Homelessness Programs. Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute.
- ↑ Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2024). Child Protection Australia 2023-24. AIHW.
- ↑ Heckman, J. J. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 312(5782), 1900-1902.
- ↑ Heckman, J. J., Moon, S. H., Pinto, R., Savelyev, P. A., & Yavitz, A. (2010). The rate of return to the HighScope Perry Preschool Program. Journal of Public Economics, 94(1-2), 114-128.
- ↑ World Bank. (2024). World Development Indicators. The World Bank Group.
- ↑ Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The Spirit Level: Why More Equal Societies Almost Always Do Better. Allen Lane.