Adam Creighton, chief economist at the Institute of Public Affairs, said the Labor government’s federal budget is terrible for young Australians [1, 2].
The critique highlights a growing divide between generations, suggesting that fiscal policies may leave younger citizens with a heavier financial burden than their predecessors.
Creighton said that taxes are increasing across various sectors, but these increases are unable to keep pace with the government's spending [1, 2]. He said this gap between revenue and expenditure is the primary driver of intergenerational issues in the current economic climate.
"Far from being a good budget for young people, this is a terrible budget for young people," Creighton said [1, 2].
The economist said that the budget's structure creates a systemic disadvantage for the youth. By allowing spending to outpace revenue while simultaneously raising taxes, the government is effectively shifting economic pressure onto those who will inherit the long-term debt, a move Creighton said creates real intergenerational inequality [1, 2].
"Taxes are just going up all over the place; even then, it can’t keep pace with spending. I mean, that’s the real intergenerational issue," Creighton said [1, 2].
The Institute of Public Affairs focuses on the long-term impact of these federal budget decisions on the Australian economy and the social contract between age groups. The concern centers on whether the current fiscal trajectory provides sustainable growth or merely temporary relief at the expense of future taxpayers [1, 2].
“Far from being a good budget for young people, this is a terrible budget for young people.”
This critique reflects a broader ideological conflict regarding fiscal responsibility and social equity. If spending consistently exceeds revenue growth, the resulting debt and higher tax burdens may limit the ability of younger generations to build wealth, potentially stagnating social mobility in Australia.





