Economy

It’s disturbing surveying the front pages of so many Australian papers since the re-election of Donald Trump in the United States, given how many headlines seem to be attempting to normalise the MAGA ethos … Consistent with the global business reaction to Trump, reflected in last month’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum, the fascination is with his announcements, not with their deliverability or consequences.

Housing is a wickedly complex policy area made even more challenging by the division of relevant powers across the federal and state divide … That said, however, it is a sad fact that few federal administrations since the 1990s have even attempted to address Australia’s housing policy challenges in any comprehensive way.

Chalmers has taken it to the opposition by demonstrating the dramatic budget and inflation turnarounds achieved ... while delivering significant cost-of-living relief in a non-inflationary way.

It’s likely that financial markets will be the final arbiter of the Trump presidency. As the reality of unfolding economic numbers fails to match his promises, amid the constant disruption and uncertainty of his administration, financial markets will react, most likely with significant pressure on stocks, interest rates and exchange rates.

The Future Fund is Australia’s version of a sovereign wealth fund. Established in 2006 from the proceeds of Telstra’s sale and boosted by budget surpluses, it represents our national savings. Why then should Australians be content to see it support the damaging industries of tobacco, pokies and weapons manufacturers, and fossil fuels?… Why shouldn’t the government make Australia’s Future Fund a genuine sovereign wealth fund, to ensure the benefits of our resource developments and budget discipline are realised for all Australians?

The Albanese government may tout its solid economic achievements but it must remember what decided the election in the United States: the disconnect between the data and the lived experience of most Americans.

Surely this should be considered a national catastrophe. How can this be, in a country as wealthy as Australia – a globally significant food exporter? How is it that our governments can get their priorities so wrong as to actually leave so many so far behind?

The problem with the Productivity Commission’s latest report on early childhood education is that a fundamental misjudgement has been made, and then compounded with layers and layers of analysis.

An important reason why Australia has fallen short of its potential to be the ‘clever country’, as many have aspired to over the years, such as prime minister Bob Hawke in the 1980s, is a shortage of research funding. Successive governments have happily cut or restrained this funding over many years, and it has also been difficult to interest the private sector – business, charities or high-net-worth individuals – in donating to research, let alone providing sustained funding.

The hard-headed assessment of one of Anthony Albanese’s closest allies is that Peter Dutton is the best thing Labor has going for it at the next election. Not because the unpopular Liberal leader cannot win, but rather because he can. This creates the circumstances for the election to become not a referendum on the performance of the government but rather a choice between Anthony Albanese’s Labor Party and Peter Dutton’s Coalition.