The latest quarterly CPI figures showed that inflation is falling dramatically and in line with that of other major economies such as the USA and Canada. This, Chief Economist, Greg Jericho writes means we have a prime opportunity to lock in the current level of low unemployment.

Through the past year of the Reserve Bank raising interest rates, the main justification has been that the economy needs to be slowed in order to bring down demand pressures on inflation.

What the latest figures reinforce however is that the major pressures have come from the supply side. Australia’s inflation is essentially following the same path as other nations. This is because inflation is slowing largely due to reduced world prices of commodities rather than any response to increasing interest rates.

Indeed the largest driver of inflation in the June quarter was rental prices, which will have been in part due to investors raising their prices to deal with higher mortgage payments.

In the past year, unemployment has remained at 3.5% while inflation has gone from 6.7% up to 8.4% and now down to 5.4% (using the monthly measures). The belief that we needed to raise unemployment to 4.5% in order to stop inflation from accelerating is a cruel approach that treats inflation in the wrong way.

Fortunately, in spite of the RBA’s best efforts, unemployment has not yet risen. This presents Australia with a genuine chance to lock in historically low unemployment as the norm.

Rather than pursuing higher unemployment in order to reduce inflation the RBA and the government should be pursuing policies that keep unemployment low while also reducing inflationary pressure. This can mean a price cap on essential items such as rents and energy, introducing windfall-profits taxes, and increased public housing investment to reduce housing price surges.

Interest rates are not the only way to tackle inflation and in an environment where profits are been driven by supply-side issues and profits they are one of the worst ways.

Full employment needs to be the target, not a mythical “non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment” that largely justifies higher unemployment and more ho0usyheold living in poverty.

The Screen Actor’s Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists strike launched last week against Hollywood studios has brought large attention because of the celebrities involved. But as Chief Economist, Greg Jericho, notes in his Guardian Australia column, there are lessons for Australian workers as well.

For the past 40 years there have been consistent efforts in Australia and other English speaking countries to reduce to power and role of unions in industrial relations. And while we are often told that there are reasons such as a need for greater flexibility to ensure increased productivity, the reality is there has been no evidence that any of the changes to IR laws have produced anything like the productivity that was promised.

The past decade has seen as much “flexibility” and reduced power for unions as any business group could (and did) desire, and yet productivity levels have plummeted.

The problem, as the SAG-AFTRA strike makes clear, the reason governments and business groups have agitated against unions and the ability to conduct industrial action is not because of concerns about productivity, but because unions garner better wages for their members and faster wage growth.

The past decade shows that as the number of days lost to industrial action have fallen, so too has wage growth.

The Hollywood strike might notionally be about payment for film and productions on streaming services and concerns about AI, but as SAG-AFTRA president Fran Drescher made clear, it is truly about workers demanding respect, and to be honoured for their contribution.

Australian workers should learn from the strike and see that unity and union membership delivers benefits – and we know this is true, because employers will do anything they can to prevents it happening.

Despite rising interest rates, the latest figures from the Bureau of Statistics show that Australia’s house prices rebounded in the March quarter of this year. Policy director Greg Jericho writes in his Guardian Australia column that since the beginning of the pandemic property prices around Australia have risen 26% while at the same time average household disposable income has increased just 8%.

This disparity has massive consequences for affordability. Had for example the median property price in Sydney risen in line with household incomes since June 2020, instead of being $1.15m it would be $954,000 – a $196,000 difference.

Underlying the strength of the market even in the face of rising interest rates is the fact that Australia’s tax system is biased towards property investors.

The most recent taxation statistics covering 2020-21 showed for the first time the number of investors recording property net profits was greater than those recording a loss. Such a situation only occurred because of the record low interest rates at the time. We know that the past 12 months will have seen a large spike in the number of people negative gearing their properties and thus not surprisingly housing remains an attractive investment not in spite of rising interest rates, but because of rising interest rates.

There is rarely a debate in Australia that generates more heat than housing. The causes of housing unaffordability and the solutions to it are varied and often get bogged down in power plays and political scaremongering. But as policy director Greg Jericho notes, building more homes is a pretty obvious solution, and more public housing needs to be at the forefront.

The NSW Productivity Commission this week released a report into housing in NSW that recommended “Building more homes where people want to live.” To this end it suggested raising average apartment heights in suburbs close to the CBD, allowing more development near transport hubs and encouraging townhouses and other medium-density development.

All of this is worthy. And if combined with the reform of the negative gearing and the capital gains discount will do much good.

But the report noted that “New South Wales experienced a 45% surge in priority applicant households on the social housing register, with 6,519 priority social housing applicants waiting for assistance as at 30 June 2022”. And yet it did not mention public housing or any social housing solutions at all.

In the past public housing was a much greater share of Australia’s housing market.

In 1983 14 public housing building approvals were made for every 100 private sector ones. Now it’s 1.7:100.

The level of new housing per head of population has fallen and it is thus little wonder that house prices have risen beyond the means of many.

We need more housing and we desperately need more public housing.

In the 2019 election campaign, the ALP pledged 250,000 new houses over 10 years. That has now become 30,000 over 5 years under the proposed Housing Fund. It is time for more ambition from the government and more housing for low and middle income earners.