In the Land Down Under, Sydney:
Promise Fulfilled?
Edward J. Dodson
PART 2 of 3
SYDNEY TODAY: REFLECTION OF AUSTRALIA'S WHOLE?
By the late 1970s nearly 80 percent of all Australian households were
owner-occupied, 15 percent more than in the United States. One reason
is that since 1945 housing has been highly subsidized and has remained
a major policy concern on the national policy agenda. Nearly 85
percent of the nation's 16.5 million people live in the port cities.
Sydney (with the largest population at over 3 million) has undergone
substantial expansion and redevelopment during the postwar period. The
challenge has been to create employment for this growing population
and to continue to provide decent, affordable housing for a new
generation of Australians and a continuing flow of immigrants.
Sydney began as a port and continues to serve as a primary center of
international (and interstate) commerce and trade. A large portion of
the oldest section of Sydney was demolished in the 1920s in order to
construct the city's only bridge across Sydney Harbor, where the
city's internationally recognizable $100 million Opera House was built
in 1973. Much restoration of the
Old Quarter has taken place, giving new life to this part of
the Sydney, attracting tourists, shoppers and others to the area. The
process of gentrification spread east from the Old Quarter into the
working-class neighborhood Woolloomooloo (the Loo),
originally inhabited by Italian and Maltese fishermen. In the late
1970s developers and residents battled over the area. Tenement houses
and their lower-income renters were gradually forced out by rising
rents until a government commission intervened with heavily subsidized
housing.
To the west of the 'Loo is 40-acre Hyde Park, the Royal Botanic
Gardens and other public space stretching north to the port area. The
city's business and shopping district fills the voids and is served by
a subway system that enters from the southern and eastern suburbs and
loops through the urban core. Yet, with its miles of sandy beaches and
semi-tropical climate, the acknowledged avocation of many Sydney
residents is the pursuit of pleasure. To the more industrious among
the Australians, this has been a rather troublesome characteristic of
their countrymen and a frequent complaint when discussions ensue of
Australia's competitiveness in global markets. Asked why she had sent
her son to New York to work, the wife of a wealthy Sydney publisher
exclaimed, "I don't want him to catch the terrible Australian
disease of 'This'll do, mate.'"
A criticism levied directly on Sydney, related to the informality of
its population and culture, is its lack of a strong intellectual
community. Political scientist David Kemp of Monash University
(Victoria), goes as far as to suggest that Australians as a whole have
"a low awareness of democratic values," The average citizen
tends to view government as inept and bureaucratic but an essential
agent in providing basic necessities to all citizens. Fully
one-quarter of all Australians are employed in local, state or federal
government. Moreover, domestic industries have until very recently
remained protected from outside competition by high tariffs, quotas,
direct subsidies and other forms of preferential treatment.
As long as exports continued to bring in foreign reserves and
generate the tax revenue required to support Australia's bloated
welfare state, there was little reason for anyone to listen to calls
for reform. While in the United States and Britain, Reagonomics and
Thatcherism ushered in an era of privatization and lower marginal tax
rates, Australians were not interested -- provoking U.S. supply-sider
Alan Reynolds to write in a Wall Street Journal article: "The
Australian government's idea of tax reform is simply to tax every sort
of useful activity at 49%." Until 1986, this was exactly the
case. Despite a worsening economy, rising unemployment and high
inflation, little progress was made in opening the Australian economy
to competitive forces.
A great speculative boom period had occurred in Sydney during the
early 1970s. The financial services sector had provided the fuel to
developers, and the market responded to the free availability of
financing. Competition for building sites pushed land prices up by 28%
in 1972 and 34% in 1973. In no time at all speculative land hoarding
swallowed up an estimated one-half of all developable land in suburban
Sydney. Global stagflation (i.e., the inflationary recession) followed
OPEC's price rises in the mid-1970s and hit Australia hard. The
failure of some very large Australian banks occurred. Some $2 billion
in loans had to be written off as land prices collapsed and the value
of collateral disappeared overnight. The rest of the 1970s and 1980s
became a long period of social and economic adjustment that threatened
Australia with becoming what its Labour finance minister in 1986
called "a banana republic."
The Labour government of Robert Hawke came to power in 1983 and moved
cautiously for three years. Hawke inherited a foreign debt that
equaled 30% of the nation's output in goods and services. Slowly, he
and finance minister Paul Keating pushed through budget cuts and
reductions in protectionist tariffs. Along with a balanced budget, the
Labour government moved to make foreign investment more attractive by
proposing a reduction in the tax on corporate profits from 49% to 39%.
Slowly, tentatively, they moved to introduce some of the same
supply-side measures pushed for by conservatives. Somewhat remarkably,
Australia's government adopted a spend what you earn fiscal policy.
CONCLUSIONS
By whatever standards one chooses, the citizens of Sydney (and
Australia overall) are well off when compared to those in virtually
every other society. They have good housing, adequate food and access
to quality medical care and education. Their society is less troubled
by ethnic and racial tension than most (although the socio-economic
status of the Aboriginal groups and the establishment of large Asian
minority groups present continuing challenges to the commitment to
maintain and expand Australia's social democracy. Even discounting the
vast interior as marginally inhabitable, the population density of
Australia is comparatively low and the amount of livable and usable
open space plentiful. Per capita wealth is among the highest in the
world.
As shown above, the Australian government has for a long period been
very interventionist (i.e., more democratic socialist than social
democratic) and its income tax structure has on the surface appeared
to be highly redistributive unless one looks closely at the extensive
exemptions granted and government-sanctioned monopolies endorsed.
Australians who have inherited the reform program of the single-taxers
can take some satisfaction from the fact that both state and the
central governments continue to exempt improvements from property
taxes. To the extent that the tax on land values collects the annual
rental value of titleholdings, the effect of this tax is
distributive to all Australians because such values are
societally rather than individually created. The holding of vast
estates in both landed and produced property has in Australia also
been discouraged by very heavy death duties. Both Liberal and Labour
activists have looked upon these tax policies as progressive and as
having contributed to creating a society that has effectively
protected a participatory environment of both wealth ownership and
political power. These are the positives, but this balance -- so
dependent upon protectionism -- is now being seriously challenged.
As has become true throughout the world, the globalization of
manufacturing capacity, the ease with which technical knowledge is
transferred, and the use of electronics in our financial markets have
weakened the ability of domestic governments to control the economic
circumstances of their own country. Australian producers are being
squeezed out of external markets by lower cost and more efficient
competitors. The new drive for productivity and competitiveness has
the potential for dramatically altering the way Australians live and
work. Thus far, Australian consumers have accepted high prices on
goods and high taxes in return for full employment and broadly
available public services. Immigration (20% of today's Australians are
foreign-born) has brought people with different cultural histories who
have lived under much harsher socio-political arrangements. The
immigrants have displayed a willingness to work longer hours at less
pay and are competing with Australians of European heritage for
employment and business opportunities. The fact that nearly one-third
of the new Australians are of Asian origin may have serious social
consequences in terms of ethnic relations.
Despite the above challenges to the status quo, Australians continue
to live in one of the most politically stable and economically
advantaged societies in the world. Their government is moving
cautiously toward a more open and competitively structured economy,
tempered by the realization that consumption rather than production
has motivated Australian work patterns over the last forty years.
Until recently, global prices for Australian minerals, for wool and
other agricultural products were sufficiently high to give producers
an acceptable return on investment while absorbing the high costs of
labor and government. The collapse in global prices has already
thinned profits; the slow dismantling of the tariff system will expose
these same producers to competition in their own domestic markets. As
part of the government's program to balance the budget and discourage
imports, the Australian dollar was devalued in 1986; as expected, the
cost of living rose but Australian exports became cheaper for foreign
purchasers. By the first quarter of 1989, the exchange value of
Australia's currency had significantly recovered against the U.S,
dollar and Japanese yen, placing the new Liberal government in a
position of having to make some hard policy decisions.
For the near term, the Australians continue to have the advantages
that accrue to a society blessed by a small, well-educated population
more than adequately endowed with natural resources. Although the land
taxes have not been sufficiently high to discourage land speculation
-- so that housing prices continue to climb -- the widespread existing
homeownership and continued government subsidies protect a high
standard of well-being to most families. Housing-related expenses
actually fall over time for families whose mortgage debt is repaid at
a fixed rate of interest. This is because inflation erodes the
purchasing power of the money being repaid, while nominal wages
increase apace with inflation. Key to the longer term stability,
however, is whether Australia's government can maintain its extensive
social welfare agenda under conditions of rising global competition.
Tax policy is an important ingredient in this scenario, and the basic
question is whether government in dismantling its heavy taxation of
production will look to its natural tax base (i.e., the rental value
of titleholdings and other forms of economic licenses) to balance the
budget. British economist and journalist Fred Harrison, a tireless
advocate of the single-tax program, summarizes the recent Australian
experience this way:
A progressive increase in the land tax would have
transformed modern Australian history, and strengthened her against
the storms that engulfed the industrial economies of the free world
in the 1970s. The existence of speculation in the continental
economy has been interpreted as proof of the ineffectiveness of the
land tax per se, but all that this demonstrates is that the
authorities had failed to pitch the tax at a deterrent level and to
administer it intelligently.
Higher land tax revenue would have permitted a reduction in taxes
on wages and capital, These,in turn, would have stimulated
consumption and investment, raising domestic living standacds well
above their present levels. Even so, Australia would have felt a
degree of economic discomfort due to her heavy dependence on exports
of primary goods, but this would have been a relatively mild
set-back to the vigorous process of sustained growth. She would have
been well-placed to shift the pattern of investment in favour of
extending the domestic manufacturing sector, thereby displacing some
of the imports and ensuring a healthy balance of payments from
international trade. And the higher level of disposable incomes
would have provided a larger domestic market for manufactures,
thereby reducing Australia's dependence on foreign trade.
As it was, Australia went through the protracted recession of the
1970s and '80s, and only when she applies her tax consistently on the
market values of land, and at a uniform and deterrent rate, will she
achieve the level of prosperity that is on offer on the bountiful
continent.
And so, Australia --- a land of great promise that has already
achieved a commendable degree of equality of opportunity -- is poised
for a future that will contain either greater opportunity and economic
growth or stagnation under the weight of rising land costs at home and
reduced competitiveness abroad. Politics, as it has throughout
history, will largely dictate the economics of who gets what.
PART
3 * Return
to PART 1
|