Australia by numbers - Page 2
From Griffith REVIEW Edition 8: People like Us
© Copyright Griffith University & the author.
Written by David Dale
THE BUREAU WENT TO A LOT OF TROUBLE TO COUNT HOMELESS PEOPLE in the 2001 Census, working with welfare agencies and street patrols, and ended up with an estimate of 99,900, who included 14,200 "sleeping rough (in improvised dwellings or tents, or in streets, parks, cars or derelict buildings)"; 14,300 in refuges or shelters; 48,600 who were "staying with another household and had no usual residence"; and 22,900 living in boarding houses. The bureau also found that 22,900 people in caravan parks (16 per cent of caravan-sleepers on the night) had no employed people in their households and did not own their caravans.
At the other end of the spectrum are people who live alone in three– or four-bedroom houses. There are 800,000 people in this situation and they tend to be elderly and female. The bureau reports that half of all homes in Australia have three bedrooms and another quarter have four or more bedrooms, but the average household size is 2.5.
The 2001 Census found that "nearly a fifth (18 per cent) of three-bedroom dwellings had only one person living in them; more than a third (38 per cent) had only two persons".
The national growth industries are loneliness and childlessness. While 9 per cent of the population lives alone, 38 per cent of people over 18 are without a partner.
When we do get together, we're wicked. Some 70 per cent of recently married people lived in sin first (up from 30 per cent in the 1980s). In the 2001 census, 12 per cent of attached couples described themselves as "de factos" (up from 6 per cent in the 1986 census).
If we marry, we do it later: a man is most likely to be 31 when he marries, while a woman is 29 – three years older than average newlyweds a decade ago. There are 105,000 marriages a year. In the mid-1980s, there were 113,000 marriages a year. There are 55,000 divorces a year, up from 40,000 in the mid-'80s.
We're also putting off our duty to continue the species. Half the women who gave birth in 2004 were over 31.
Those baby boosters Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull had a flash of hope last year at the announcement that the 251,200 children born in 2003 was an increase of 200 on the figure for 2002, but the bureau said this was just a "faint second echo" of the baby boom that happened in the 1950s (and again in the 1970s).
The bureau predicted that by 2011, the most common family type in Australia would be couples without children, which is "related to both the ageing of the population, with baby boomers becoming ‘empty nesters', and to declining fertility among younger couples".
We're not hypochondriacs. The bureau's health surveys consistently show 25 per cent of Australians saying they are in "excellent" health and 16 per cent saying they are in "fair" or "poor" health. Cross-indexing with other factors, the bureau finds that people in fair to poor health are "much less likely to have a non-school qualification ... more likely to have been the victim of an assault or break-in ... and they were more likely to have income in the lowest 20 per cent of all incomes".
If you want to know what's wrong with Australians, the bureau found the most common disorders were long-sightedness (28 per cent of adults), short-sightedness (26 per cent), back problems (27 per cent), arthritis (18 per cent) and asthma (11 per cent).
We're all getting richer but the rich are doing it more quickly. A survey conducted in 2003 showed that "in real terms, the average equivalised disposable household income" of Australians was $510 a week – which was 2 per cent higher than in 2001 and 15 per cent higher than in 1995.
TABLE 2
Among Australia's 7.5 million households
Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics
BUT THAT IS ANOTHER OF THOSE DREADED AVERAGES THAT DON'T REVEAL MUCH. In fact, the variation is huge. A more useful way to say it is that half the population lives in a household with a disposable income below $448 a week, while 10 per cent of households make less than $218 a week and 10 per cent make more than $870 a week.
Everyone is earning more, but some more than others: "Over the period from 1994-95," says the bureau, "there was a 12 per cent increase in the real mean income of low-income people, 14 per cent for middle-income people and 16 per cent for high-income people."
The group with the highest income is couples under 35 without children – they average $765 a week, while households containing one parent with dependent children average $352 a week. Clearly we should all become DINKs.
Another get-rich-quick scheme is to move to Canberra: its mean household income is 26 per cent above the national figure, which "reflects in part the younger age profile of the ACT", says the bureau. Tasmania's mean income is 15 per cent below the national figure.
There's also a considerable country-city disparity: "At the national level, mean incomes in the capital cities were 20 per cent above those in the balance of state, and in each state, the capital city mean incomes were above those in the balance of state. The largest difference recorded was for NSW where the capital-city income was 31 per cent above the mean income across the rest of the state." Sydney's the boom town.
We cling to the myth of Australia as a land of sun-bronzed outback pioneers but 80 per cent of us live within 50 kilometres of the ocean and 70 per cent live in cities with populations above 100,000. It's easy to see why: the bureau reports that the 15 per cent of Australians who live in remote areas are more likely than city people to be in poor health, unemployed, without post-school qualifications, unemployed and in the lowest fifth of incomes. One consolation: they are less likely to be the victims of crime.
NORMALLY THE BUREAU DOESN'T DABBLE IN ATTITUDES, but in 2002, as part of a national health survey, it slipped in a fundamental question: are you happy? People in 18,000 households were asked to describe how they felt about their lives, using one of the following terms: "delighted", "pleased", "mostly satisfied", "mixed", "mostly dissatisfied", "unhappy", "terrible".
Conclusion: when it comes to being happy, we are. Overall, 12 per cent of Australian adults were delighted, 30.6 per cent were pleased with themselves, and 33.2 per cent were mostly satisfied, while only 1.3 per cent felt terrible. Apparently, 6 million of us are going round with smiles on our faces and most of the rest aren't complaining.
The bureau correlated the core question with a bunch of other measures to deconstruct the components of The Good Life. The happiest Australians are people who hit their targets. Asked if they had accomplished the tasks they set out to do in the past four weeks, 85 per cent thought they had. Among people who had achieved what they planned, 47 per cent were delighted or pleased with their lives, and only 1.5 per cent felt unhappy or terrible. Among people who had accomplished less than they desired, only 16.4 per cent were delighted or pleased, while 12.9 per cent were feeling unhappy or terrible.
Booze helps. Among people who averaged three standard drinks a day, 49.7 per cent were delighted or pleased and only 2.2 per cent felt terrible or unhappy. Among people who never drink, only 37 per cent were delighted or pleased with their lives and 5.9 per cent felt unhappy or terrible. The happiest drinkers are in a category the ABS calls "risky" rather than "moderate", which suggests that many Australians are balancing short-term cheer against long-term damage.
Smokers are unhappy, but it's not clear what's cause and what's effect. Only 36.4 per cent of smokers were delighted or pleased, while 42.4 per cent of ex-smokers and 45.7 per cent of those who have never smoked were in that state of bliss.
A geographical breakdown suggested Sydney is the happiest kingdom of them all. In the big smoke, 14.4 per cent of people were delighted with their lives and only 0.9 per cent felt terrible, compared with 11.4 per cent delighted and 2.1 per cent terrible in outback NSW, and 11.4 per cent and 1.1 per cent in Melbourne.
Among people who had gained no extra qualifications after school, 38.5 per cent were delighted or pleased with their lives, while people who had some tertiary training scored 46.8 per cent.
In relationships, the most miserable were separated people (9.8 per cent felt unhappy or terrible and only 23.1 per cent were delighted or pleased) while the cheeriest were the marrieds (2.2 per cent unhappy or terrible and 45.4 per cent delighted or pleased). But the never-marrieds were happier than the divorced.
And baby boomers aren't as smug as we thought. People aged 40 to 64 were less happy than those 18 to 39 (38.3 per cent of boomers were delighted or pleased, compared with 49.2 per cent of gen-Xers).
People who do lots of exercise every week were blissful – 58.5 per cent delighted or pleased, and only 1.7 per cent feeling terrible or unhappy. The obese were uncomfortable – 37.5 per cent delighted or pleased and 4.3 per cent feeling terrible or unhappy.
Clearly, we still think we're the lucky country. ♦