Rate of poverty by gender of household reference person (% of all people)
This graph shows the rate of poverty according to the gender of the household reference person by household type.
It shows that the rate of poverty in sole parent families where the main earner is female is 37% using the 50% median income poverty line, and 50% using the 60% median income poverty line. This is over twice that of sole parent families where the main earner is male (at 18% using the 50% median income poverty line and 21% using the 60% median income poverty line). It also shows that couple-with-children households where the main earner is female have a rate of poverty far higher than those in which the main earner is male (16% female and 10% male according to the 50% median income poverty line; and 21% female and 16% male according to the 60% median income poverty line).
The graph shows that the differences in poverty rates among households with male and female main earners are not as stark for households without children as for those with children.
Maria
I spent 6 months in hospital last year and resigned my job as if and when I can return to work is uncertain. I suffer chronic pain and am no longer able to drive. Nor is it safe for me to take public transport. And you certainly can’t afford taxis. My medical problems are numerous but I’ve been told I don’t qualify for disability... Every shopping day is stressful. No haircuts. I have to buy expensive shoes because of nerve damage. I can’t get to see the specialist I need to because the wait list is a year and I can’t afford to go private. I’m thankful for what I have but it’s so hard for us both. The depression and anxiety I feel is worse knowing that I have nothing to fall back on if things go wrong again. I rely on the kindness of friends. Our [life] shouldn’t be this tough. And I know there are many more with stories as bad or worse than mine. *Name has been changed. Photo representative only, copyright Austockphoto
Pat
I was homeless at 15. Youth Allowance meant that I didn’t starve to death, but it did mean that on top of the challenge of finishing high school while essentially couch
surfing and moving 11 times in my senior years, I was hungry. I didn’t get any help to manage the allowance I received and I would often run out of food well before my
next payment and drink water to try and fill up enough just to get to sleep. It also meant that I entered adulthood with a terrible credit history, as the allowance I had
didn’t stretch to cover electricity, rent and other bills. I spent hours each month in distressing phone calls begging for extensions from power companies etc. It just didn’t
stretch that far. It was time I could have been studying like my peers and doing better at school and university. *Name has been changed. Photo representative only, from Bruce Dixon on Unsplash.
Eileen
After years of mental and financial abuse, I finally got the strength to leave my marriage. I knew things were going to be tough, but I never dreamed of the horrible situations the last 6 years would bring to me. Initially I was homeless for 10 months, just couch surfing with friends and family, but managing to keep my job. I was able to secure a townhouse for my teenage daughter and I to live in for 3 years, using my child support and rent assistance... I had a total mental breakdown, and was couch surfing once again. At this time I was apparently on high priority emergency housing with public housing. Trouble is, during the time you are “supposedly” on emergency housing, usually your mental state is in no state to be able to gather all the paperwork [required]... I am now on $570.00 a fortnight, I pay $400 a fortnight on rent [in a private rental] which leaves $170 a fortnight to exist on (you definitely don’t live on it). I am 56, have never been on any government benefits until I left an abusive marriage, and I can’t see how anything is going to change for me too much. *name has been changed. Photo representative only, from Unsplash
Release of new research on poverty in Australia
21 February 2020: Today the ACOSS/UNSW Poverty and Inequality Partnership released the first of our reports for 2020 - Poverty in Australia 2020: Part 1, Overview. The report paints a picture of poverty in Australia showing that over three million people, including three quarters of a million children, are living in poverty. Download the report at: http://bit.ly/PovertyOverview
Housing costs of lowest 20% compared with middle 20%, among people aged <65 and 65+ (in $2017-18 per week)
This graph shows trends in average weekly housing costs for people of different ages in the lowest and middle 20% of households by income (adjusted for family size).
Note that these amounts are adjusted downwards for household size, so they are much lower than average housing costs – for example – for a family of four people. It shows that housing costs grew strongly from 2005-06 to 2017-18, especially among the lowest 20% of working-age households by income. From 2005-06 to 2017-18, average housing costs for the lowest 20% of working-age households (under 65 years) grew more than twice as fast as those of the middle 20% (by 42% compared 15%). Among the lowest 20% of working age households, average housing costs rose from $103pw to $146pw. Average housing costs for the middle 20% rose from $166pw to $191pw. Possible contributing factors for this disparity include higher rent increases for low-income households of working age and rapid growth in the share of renters among that group. Among people under 65 years, the proportion renting their homes privately rose from 21% in 2005-06 to 29% in 2017-18. In contrast, among older people average housing costs for the middle 20% grew more than twice as fast as those of the lowest 20% (75% compared with 32%), but this was from a much lower base so had less impact on poverty rates (on average older people have much lower housing costs). Among the lowest 20% of older people, average housing costs grew from $47pw to $62pw, compared with a rise from $36pw to $63pw for the middle 20%. A possible contributing factor to the large increase in housing costs for older middle income-earners was a decline in the share of outright home-owners among that group.
Comparison of poverty lines with pension and Newstart payments for singles and couples without children (in $2017-18 per annum)
Social security policies clearly have an impact on poverty, for better or for worse. Because most major income support payments are below the poverty line, in order to escape poverty people need to supplement or replace them with private income from other sources.
This graph compares trends in maximum pension and Newstart Allowance rates and poverty lines from 1999-00 to 2017-2018.
It shows that while Newstart Allowance for singles was consistently well below the poverty line, it was above the line for couples up until 2004. This reflects an historical legacy: unlike payments for singles, unemployment payments for couples were tied to the pension rate until 1998.
In contrast, pension rates for both singles and couples have closely tracked poverty lines. One reason for this is that pensions are indexed in line with both movements in prices and wages (whichever is larger).
The impact of the $32pw increase in the single pension rate in 2009 is clearly visible, lifting that payment close to the poverty line in 2010. It rose above the poverty line in 2014, then fell back towards it in 2018.
The couple pension rate was above the poverty line up to 2006, fell below it from 2006 to 2012, then rose slightly above it up to 2018.
