This guest blog was written by our Trustee Dianne Danquah as part of Trustees Week, which celebrates the contributions of volunteers like Dianne. Even before joining in June, Dianne made huge contributions through being a youth advocate. I became a trustee at the Equality Trust earlier this year because I believe everyone deserves to live […]
Matteo Crosignani, Thomas Eisenbach, and Fulvia Fringuellotti
As in previous years, we provide in this post an update on the vulnerability of the U.S. banking system based on four analytical models that capture different aspects of this vulnerability. We use data through 2025:Q2 for our analysis, and also discuss how the vulnerability measures have changed since our last update one year ago.
Polling also found only 3% of Australians think making a profit should be a primary purpose of universities – however more than half believe that it currently is a primary purpose.
Meanwhile, fewer than half of Australians believe educating students is currently a primary purpose of universities, despite 80% thinking it should be.
Key findings:
Three out of four Australians (77%) think university degrees should cost $10,000 or less per year.
About three in five Australians (58%) think university degrees should cost $5,000 or less per year.
Less than one in 20 (3%) of Australians think that making a profit should be a primary purpose of universities, yet more than half (54%) believe that it currently is a primary purpose.
Four in five (80%) Australians think that educating students should be a primary purpose of universities, yet 44% believe it is currently a primary purpose of universities.
“University fees are totally out of step with community expectations. Despite about three in five Australians believing degrees should cost $5,000 or less a year, most university degrees are more expensive than this. Highly popular degrees such as arts, commerce, and law now cost about $17,000 per year,” said Jack Thrower, Senior Economist at The Australia Institute.
“High university fees are leading to mounting student debts, which are taking ever longer to pay off.
What’s On around Naarm/Melbourne & Regional Victoria: Nov 3-9, 2025 With thanks to the dedicated activists at Friends of the Earth Melbourne! . . . See also these Palestine events listings from around the country: 9954
The Statement on Monetary Policy sets out the Bank's assessment of current economic
conditions, both domestic and international, along with the outlook for Australian inflation and output growth.
A number of boxes on topics of special interest are also published. The Statement is issued four times a year.
It also shows the RBA cares more about inflation than jobs.
“Unsurprisingly the Reserve Bank has chosen to keep rates steady at 3.6% This reflects that yet again the RBA care more about inflation than maintaining full employment,” said Greg Jericho, Chief Economist at The Australia Institute.
“In the past month unemployment continued its steady rise to 4.5%, while the inflation had a surprisingly sharp increase due mostly to the end of state-based energy rebates.
“In response the RBA has shown it is less worried about ongoing rising unemployment than reacting to a surprising blip in inflation.
“The most recent household spending figures released yesterday showed households are slowing their spending and shifting towards spending on necessities.
“In order to keep unemployment from rising further that RBA must care as much about the full employment part of its dual mandate as it does inflation.”
This guest blog was written by our Trustees Yamini Cinamon Nair and Tom Allanson (Co-Chairs of the Board), and Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson (Co-founders and Patrons) as part of Trustees Week. This week is intended to celebrate the huge contributions our trustees make to the Equality Trust – so we started by asking them […]
The polling follows reporting of the Albanese Government’s Federal Labor Business Forum, where corporations pay up to $110,000 for privileged access to Government Ministers. Government ministers are also keeping details of the meetings secret by blocking access to ministerial diaries. The Liberal and National parties engage in similar activities, though their own business forums.
Key findings:
Three in five Australians (63%) think that cash-for-access payments constitute corrupt conduct. Only 12% do not.
Most Australians think cash-for-access constitutes corrupt conduct, regardless of voting intention.
Four in five Australians (82%) agree that paying for exclusive access to politicians gives corporations and special interests unfair political influence.
An overwhelming majority of Australians (78%) agree that politicians should refuse to participate in events where participants with a vested interest in government policies have paid for exclusive access.
“Politicians could improve public faith in democracy by ruling out taking money in a way that most Australians view as corrupt,” said Mark Ogge, Principal Advisor at The Australia Institute.
“It’s clear that cash-for-access payments completely fail the pub test.
Since the late 2010s, there has been a major revival of interest in the luminous work of cultural theorist Stuart Hall. This is manifest, for example, in the book series Stuart Hall: Selected Writings, published by Duke University Press, and in the work of units such as the Stuart Hall Foundation and the Stuart Hall Archive Project.
On this episode of After America, Dr Emma Shortis joins Angus Blackman to discuss some new Australia Institute polling, which shows that Australians are less than convinced that we “share values” with Trump’s America. Emma is then joined by Dr Frank Yuan and Allan Behm to discuss Trump’s meeting with Xi and the chaos whirling around the president.
The first part of this discussion was recorded on Friday 31st October. The second part was recorded on Monday 3rd November.
Dead Centre: How political pragmatism is killing us by Richard Denniss is available now via Australia Institute Press.
Guest: Allan Behm, Special Advisor in International Affairs, the Australia Institute
Guest: Dr Frank Yuan, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The Australia Institute // @yuan-frank
Host: Emma Shortis, Director, International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @emmashortis
Host: Angus Blackman, Executive Producer, the Australia Institute // @AngusRB
Great power competition now hinges on technological dominance. While the U.S. may master the machines of progress, we are faltering in securing the power that makes them run, a deficiency that our greatest competitor is beginning to weaponize against us.
Lithium exemplifies this dynamic. Beyond its well-known use in electric vehicles, lithium’s strategic value lies in securing the energy-intensive infrastructure that powers broader technological competition. Data centers—the backbone of artificial intelligence and cloud computing—increasingly rely on lithium-ion batteries, which China subjected to export controls last month. This is not an abstraction: lithium is more than a commodity—it has become a foundational national security asset.
Westpac has today announced a full-year profit of $10 billion before tax for the financial year ending on 30 September, 2025.
Westpac is one of Australia’s “big four” banks, which together control 72% of all loans to Australian residents.
By market capitalisation, Westpac ranks as Australia’s fifth largest listed company and third largest bank. Westpac alone holds 19% of all loans and 21% of all housing loans in the country.
Australia Institute research shows the big four banks make $213,480 profit over the 30-year life of an average size mortgage for a first-home buyer.
“Australia Institute figures don’t even include the extra profit banks make on any other savings or credit card accounts, transaction fees, kickbacks on insurance they sell your or the ridiculous prices they charge to get a bank cheque,” said Richard Denniss, co-CEO of The Australia Institute.
“The lack of competition among the big banks has come at the cost of home owners, and their massive profits from home loans far exceeds the level of risk the banks undertake.
“The Albanese Government has huge majority in Parliament, and huge opportunity to help take the burden off the people who need help the most.
“A small super profits tax, raising just over $1.7 billion in 2024-25, was imposed by the Coalition Government back in 2017 – that has clearly done little to dent the profits, or the market share of the big bank.
Virtual Convo! On Monday, November 3 at 7PM ET, Lee Vinsel, Cory Doctorow, and I will be jamming in a livestream about Cory's new book Enshittification. I love this book and I love that I'll get to brain jam with two people I adore. So please join us on the livestream here!
Cornell Talks. I have two talks at Cornell coming up if you happen to be in Ithaca:
From public good to corporate enterprise: The financialisation of universities- (Part I) John H Howard In recent months, Australian universities have been increasingly scrutinized over…
The heart of mainstream economics Jim Byrne You need assumptions to build useful economic models – but those assumptions should not influence the results. I…
When ‘sustainable’ fashion backfires on the environment Erez Yerushalmi and Krishnendu Saha The circular economy – the idea of “reduce, reuse and recycle” – has…
Key policies for the energy transition Mark Diesendorf The federal government has released its 2035 greenhouse gas emissions target. However, more important than the target…
Failures in privatised care starkly illustrate the inevitable failure of neoliberalism Geoff Davies The failures of privatised child care and aged care have starkly illustrated…
Are business schools priming students for a world that no longer exists? Carla Liuzzo and Mimi Tsai Endless economic expansion isn’t sustainable. Scientists are telling…
The Road Not Taken Lars Syll Had the whole discipline catastrophically misunderstood Keynes’ deeply revolutionary ideas? We heterodox economists, who have chosen the road less…
Press conferences at Parliament House, our 2025 Revenue Summit, Senate Committee hearings and several media interviews, October was a busy month for The Australia Institute.
The hidden cost of rate hikes Darren Quinn When the Reserve Bank of Australia raises interest rates, it’s presented as a necessary, technical adjustment to…
Open Letter to Ministers of Finance, Central Bank Governors, Governors and Alternate Governors of the World Bank Group and International Monetary Fund, and Leaders of…
Financial markets cannot punish a sovereign government. Here’s why Steven Hail, Stephanie Kelton and Darren Quinn What the UK Mini-Budget Really Proved “You’ve got to…
The American Mind’s ‘Editorial Roundtable’ podcast is a weekly conversation with Ryan Williams, Spencer Klavan, and Mike Sabo devoted to uncovering the ideas and principles that drive American political life. Stream here or download from your favorite podcast host.
The expectation among seasoned D.C. professionals was that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would quickly fade in his tenure as Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). He was too idealistic, his ideas were too fringe, and the gulf between his base and Trump’s was too vast to bridge. And anyway, the vast sprawling bureaucracy of HHS—which housed 82,500 career bureaucrats when Kennedy assumed the role—would swallow him up.
But Kennedy had something that the Washington consensus failed to take into account, something that the bureaucracy didn’t have: a popular movement and a level of backing from the president that has surprised political observers.
It’s easy to forget that Kennedy pulled in millions of votes as an independent presidential candidate before throwing his support behind Trump in August 2024, a move that likely shifted the outcome of the election in key swing states. His messaging about chronic disease and corporate capture resonated across traditional political lines. But Kennedy did not just bring votes: he brought an energetic grassroots network that spanned the whole country. His rallies drew crowds that dwarfed those of other third-party candidates, feeling less like political gatherings and more like a great social movement.
On this episode of Dollars & Sense, Greg and Elinor discuss the “shock” inflation figures, what energy subsidies have to do with the larger-than-expected increase, and why the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) is suing Microsoft.
Despite the demoralization and destruction produced by Israel’s two-year-long genocidal campaign on the Palestinians, Israel potentially finds itself at its weakest point in its short history.
In his new book, Israel on the Brink, renowned Israeli historian Ilan Pappé makes the case that Israel’s current path forward is unsustainable. With a combination of domestic, political, military and international pressures, Israel will continue to destabilize.
A self-processed former “punk” using her position in Parliament to criticise the Prime Minister for wearing a Joy Division T-shirt is stupid-stupid, even for Auspol, which long ago shifted the bar from low to subterranean.
To borrow from Shakespeare, it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Given the nation is being forced into having a conversation about a boomer wearing a band T-shirt, let’s take a little bit more of a look at it shall we?
The T-shirt depicts the album cover of Unknown Pleasures, which – in turn – features a graphic of radio waves from a pulsar. In other words, a signal from an object of extreme density spinning away deep in the void. A perfect metaphor for this “debate”.
Physics tells us that empty vessels make the most noise, which is another perfect analogy for Sussan Ley and the modern Liberal Party. Ley’s desperate need for relevancy, underscored by her office sending her 90-second statement around the press gallery to ensure coverage, perhaps disproves the notion that nothing can be truly empty.
Ley’s “argument” was that by wearing a Joy Division t-shirt, Anthony Albanese risked upsetting Australia’s Jewish community, given the origins of the band’s name come from a 1950s book that told the story of sex slaves kept by the Nazis, who referred to them as the “joy division”.
Late one night in May 1973, New Jersey trooper James Harper stopped a speeding white Pontiac LeMans for a broken taillight. Sundiata Acoli was driving the car. In the back was Zayd Malik Shakur, the minister of information for the Harlem Black Panther Party. In the passenger seat was 26-year-old Joanne Chesimard, wanted by the FBI for armed bank robbery and by the New York police in connection with the slayings of two policemen and a hand‐grenade attack on a police car. Six months before, she and two men stole $1,800 in bingo money from a church safe. When Monsignor John Powis let them in, Chesimard put a gun to his head until he opened the safe, and they told him, “We usually just blow the heads off White men.”
Noticing a “discrepancy” in the driver’s identification, Trooper Harper asked Acoli to exit the vehicle. Meanwhile, State Trooper Werner Foerster, who had arrived as backup, reached into the car and pulled out a semi-automatic pistol magazine. Harper ordered the car’s nervous occupants to keep their hands on their laps. Chesimard suddenly raised a pistol and shot Harper in the shoulder; he fired back into the car, hitting Zayd Shakur. Acoli attacked Foerster, seized his pistol, shot him in the head, and jumped back into the car. He sped off down the turnpike with the injured Chesimard and dead Zayd. They were soon apprehended.
This article is read by Eunice Wong, a Juilliard-trained actor, featured on Audible’s list of Best Women Narrators. Her work is on the annual Best Audiobooks lists of the New York Times, Audible, AudioFile, & Library Journal. www.eunicewong.actor
On this episode of Follow the Money, Rod Campbell and Ebony Bennett discuss the lack of political will to properly protect the natural environment, a proposal for a 25% gas export tax to replace the Petroleum Resources Rent Tax, and new research showing that Adani cost Queenslanders hundreds of millions of dollars by selling coal at mates’ rates.
Strong environment laws stop new coal and gas. You can sign our petition calling on the Australian Government to genuinely strengthen Australia’s environment laws.
Guest: Rod Campbell, Research Director, the Australia Institute // @rodcampbell
Host: Ebony Bennett, Deputy Director, the Australia Institute // @ebonybennett
The federal government has signaled a massive new investment in Canada’s defence capacity — an overdue step toward securing the strength of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). This investment includes the rapid approval of major projects to modernize aging CAF infrastructure, like barracks and garages on Canadian Forces bases (CFBs), with increased spending to design, build, and maintain new facilities. Ahead of the fall budget, however, the government needs to ensure that this investment delivers real value and security for Canadians by ending its reliance on private contractors at the Department of National Defence (DND), and to reinvest instead in rebuilding the public service capacity.
Civilian defence workers are essential for the military readiness of the CAF. They maintain infrastructure, feed and support troops, provide emergency services, and ensure bases run safely and efficiently. Yet, these vital jobs have been steadily contracted out in recent years to private, for-profit firms. This has meant profiteering at the expense of Canada’s security, and a hollowed-out DND whose budget is spent on corporate contracts rather than personnel.
As a bottom line, the workers who deliver public services should be public servants.
