I’ve said many times that Anthony Albanese and many within his government display a remarkable lack of self-awareness. Increasingly, however, I’m coming to the conclusion that many Australians suffer from the same problem.
We complain about the symptoms while refusing to acknowledge the causes. We demand outcomes while making choices that undermine them. We want someone else to solve problems that, in many cases, are partly of our own making.
Australians complain about supermarket “price gouging”, yet despite multiple inquiries and extensive public debate, no conclusive evidence of widespread unlawful price gouging has emerged. That does not mean prices have not risen sharply or that households are not under pressure, but the issue is often presented in a far more simplistic way than the evidence supports. At the same time, consumers relentlessly chase the lowest possible prices and increasingly support global retailers such as Aldi and Amazon. We complain about the consequences of competition while rewarding it with our wallets. And many Australians overlook that they also benefit from the share value growth of Australian-owned companies like Woolworths and Coles through their superannuation. The same is not true for foreign-based giants such as Amazon and Aldi.
We lament the loss of Australian manufacturing and the departure of car makers, but many of the same people opposed the subsidies required to keep them here and chose imported vehicles when it came time to buy a car. We wanted a local industry, but not at a cost we were willing to bear.
We criticise businesses for offshoring jobs while ignoring the reality that employers face substantial cost-of-operation pressures alongside household cost-of-living pressures. Rising wages, increasing regulation, higher energy costs, compliance burdens and global competition all affect business viability. Labour costs extend well beyond base wages, including superannuation, leave entitlements, parental leave, long service leave, training obligations and other workplace requirements. Many of these protections are important and justified, but they are not cost-free. When companies close or move operations offshore, we often react with outrage while refusing to acknowledge the pressures that contributed to those decisions. One suggestion that governments should publicly name and shame executives is, in my view, a deeply misguided approach that risks inflaming tensions rather than addressing underlying issues.
We complain about governments being overly socialist or interventionist while simultaneously supporting political figures whose own instincts can at times lean towards authoritarianism. The contradiction often goes unnoticed.
We complain about immigration, and there are legitimate arguments that current levels may be too high, while often overlooking Australia’s demographic reality. Birth rates have been declining for decades and are now well below replacement levels. Without either significantly higher fertility rates or sustained skilled migration, Australia faces an ageing population, labour shortages, and increasing pressure on public finances. The result is that, in the absence of adequate workforce growth, the tax burden is likely to fall more heavily on a shrinking share of working-age taxpayers.
Housing provides perhaps the clearest example of our contradictions. Australians complain that housing is unaffordable, yet many continue to expect the quarter-acre dream: a large detached home, multiple bathrooms, two cars in the garage and access to modern amenities. We want lower house prices, but we resist higher-density developments near where we live. We want governments to spend more, taxes to be lower and services to improve simultaneously.
At the same time, expectations continue to rise. Demands increase for more benefits, entitlements, protections and workplace flexibility, while resistance to any associated trade-offs remains strong. Yet every demand carries a cost.
When businesses can no longer absorb rising costs, increasing regulation, expanding obligations and competitive pressures, they reduce investment, cut staff, relocate or close. We then complain about the consequences.
We criticise governments for actions or inaction while often overlooking the fact that governments derive their authority from voters. Too often, the electorate is cavalier at the ballot box, or does not fully engage with how policy choices translate into outcomes. People vote on personality and short-term promises rather than on whether proposals are realistic, affordable or sustainable. Politics is treated as a contest of slogans rather than a serious exercise in trade-offs and consequences.
None of this is to excuse government failure. Governments frequently contribute to, worsen, or fail to address these problems. But a mature society should also be capable of self-reflection.
Perhaps it is time for Australians to stop asking only what governments and businesses are doing wrong, and start asking whether some of our own expectations are realistic, and, more importantly, what role we play in shaping the outcomes we criticise.
Because sooner or later, reality sends the bill.
