AFR Rich List offers a scorecard of Australian inequality

Professor Carl Rhodes writes that the Rich List does not reveal a country of unlimited opportunity for anyone willing to “get a shot” but a system that concentrates wealth and narrows pathways to economic security.

1984 was the year when global neoliberal economic reforms began in full swing. in the UK, Margaret Thatcher He confronted the miners to break the union’s power. in the United States, Ronald Reagan drastic tax cuts and deregulation.

International Monetary Fund in the developing world (IMF) And World Bank implemented structural adjustment programs that forced governments to privatize, liberalize, open markets, and cut public spending.

The direction of global economic policy was clear. Markets took precedence over states, capital over labor. But neoliberalism has never been merely an economic project; It was a cultural event. It has reshaped the way we think about success, justice, and who deserves to get ahead.

It was at this moment that one of the most enduring cultural artifacts of neoliberalism in Australia emerged. in 1984 Weekly Business Review published the first BRW Rich ListRanking of the country’s 200 richest people and their families. Rebranded as Financial Review Rich List In 2017, it remains a fixture of national life, setting the conditions for public understanding and appreciation of wealth.

Is it rich who deserves it?

The formula hasn’t changed in more than four decades, but the risks have. The recently released 2026 edition shows the total wealth of the 200 richest $707 billion.

The increase in wealth at the top is astounding. Adjusted for inflation, Total wealth of those on the 1984 list It was just under $25 billion. Personal fortune of mining magnate, Australia’s richest person Gina Rinehartnow it is more than one and a half times that figure.

But the Rich List does more than catalog riches and chronicle the fate of those who benefit from gross inequality. It serves to legitimize excessive wealth as both deserved and desirable.

Story reported by AFR It is one of meritocracy. Wealth emerges as a reward for perseverance, hard work, talent and risk-taking. The moral of this story is that those at the top deserve their rightful place, while those at the bottom don’t.

These values ​​were summarized by business journalists James Thomson And Anthony Macdonald on Australian Financial Review Chanticleer podcastreferring to the list as: “The single largest project in Australian journalism”.

Anthony said:

“These are people who are out there doing things, and to me that’s what the Rich List is all about.”

James, former editor of The Rich List, responded:

“Yes, it’s a great decision… We have a 17-year-old son at home and he’s wondering what he should do with his life. The rich list is kind of saying, go try something.”

This is the story contemporary Australia tells itself. Everyone “can have a crack” and anyone can achieve it if they try hard enough.

Opportunity closing

The truth is that more and more people are falling behind.

In the decades since the inception of the Rich List, Australia has undergone profound transformation. There has been a transition from a wage-based, relatively egalitarian economy to one in which wealth is both unequally distributed and increasingly determined by asset ownership.

The result is very striking. top 10% The 57 percent of people ranked by wealth now own about 57 percent of all wealth, compared to just over 5 percent held by the bottom 40 percent.

The paths to economic security have narrowed for most working Australians. Wage growth has stagnated. Secure employment has become less certain. And hostingWhat was once the cornerstone of middle-class life is now becoming unattainable.

Particularly for young Australians, the idea of ​​building wealth through property is increasingly becoming a privilege granted to those who already own or inherit assets.

Scoreboard for a broken system

What the Rich List presents as a celebration of individual success is in fact the result of structural changes consolidated through decades of neoliberal policy reform. The same policy settings have made it difficult for others to advance.

The Rich List both conceals growing economic inequality and provides a moral justification for it. As a harbinger of individual wealth, it invites admiration for extreme wealth while drawing attention away from the unjust economic system that produces it.

In doing so, it fulfills an important ideological function. He maintains the belief that Australia is a meritocracy where success is available to all and inequality reflects only differences in effort and ability.

The evidence shows just the opposite. Instead of reducing inequality, opportunities are becoming more unequal. Access to wealth is increasingly determined by what you have, not what you do.

The Rich List does not reveal a country with limitless opportunities for anyone who wants to “get a shot.” It tells a different story of a system that concentrates wealth and narrows pathways to economic security.

This is the scoreboard of a system that continually closes down the opportunities it claims to celebrate.

Carl Rhodes is Professor of Business and Society at the University of Technology Sydney. Wrote several books On the relationship between liberal democracy and contemporary capitalism. You can follow him on X/Twitter @ProfCarlRhodes.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.