Australia ranked 61/63 countries for entrepreneurship

We were once described as the "lucky country" which was used to encapsulate advantages Australia benefited from naturally, like distance from problems elsewhere in the world, great weather and natural resources. The origin of that label was a 1964 book The Lucky Country by Donald Horne where the author points out that:

Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise.

Horne observed that Australia "showed less enterprise than almost any other prosperous industrial society."

When I invented the phrase in 1964 to describe Australia, I said: 'Australia is a lucky country run by second rate people who share its luck.' I didn't mean that it had a lot of material resources … I had in mind the idea of Australia as a British derived society whose prosperity in the great age of manufacturing came from the luck of its historical origins … In the lucky style we have never 'earned' our democracy. We simply went along with some British habits.

These quotes hopefully show the underlying Australian attitude through a 1964 lens. All these criticisms are roughly speaking true, though the quality issue is not one of them. Australians can achieve high levels of quality and precision when needed, but it depends on what's 'needed'.

The book The Australian Ugliness by Robin Boyd from 1960, also describes a difficulty in Australians performing economic tasks like Art that are not strictly speaking useful or tasks which have risks outside the normal business mode.

Most Australians decline to recognize the patronage in the British and American attitude in such enterprises as Vogue Australia or the Holden car, and do not wish to be reminded of the facts that their country is still known abroad as an artistic and intellectual desert, and that they themselves would never be taken seriously without their denying to some extent their Australian upbringing and background, and that highly talented Australians in any of the non-useful fields of art or science have to face a dramatic decision early in their careers. They can stay here in easy-going comfort with their talent and their frustrations both working at half pressure, or they may wrench themselves from their own country in order to develop themselves.

The necessity to leave Australia to achieve "full pressure" artistic or talented work, is the most important part of his criticism.

Passionate, heart felt, anger and fear driven action you can see in the Americas, does not result in economic activity over here in the same way. Passion and "whims" are more likely to guide an Aussie into the desert, loose and lost in impotent landscape that cannot form a feedback loop to success.

There are no Great Plains to manifest destiny across. From day one of the First Fleet landing in Australia, creating a survivable colony was a hard won enterprise where getting the basics like agriculture and resources in place was filled with setback and difficultly every step of the way. The interior land may be full of mineral resources, but sustainable living areas are far fewer than needed to support flights of fancy. So we stick to rivers and lakes on the coast. A naturalistic instinct for sticking to peaceful relationships and useful business has stuck in the heart.

The kind of passionate, determined, self-motivated desire for risk taking you see in the USA for nearly any idea you can dream up, is difficult to pull off in Australia. You can't burn relationships here at the cost of a fanciful dream. You can't demand everybody serve your passion in an instant. The economy in Aus is setup to keep the useful businesses going. High-energy, fast-paced startups that need some novel and specific item delivered yesterday, or thousands of man-hours of overtime demanded in the moment to solve a novel problem, is going to struggle badly. The government's stability, centralization and influence over the culture, causes an attitude of wait-and-validate to novel problems and otherwise sticking to tried and true conventions.

The USA has a massive advantage in startups over the rest of the world, it can run them like an economic war. Australian startups are more frequently nurtured into existence, if at all, and have a more narrow window of actionable appeal to locals.

If you want to innovate you have to go overseas, as can be seen with the international Aussie successes and all the local small startups that make it big when bought out by American companies or move operations overseas. If you want to re-implement a tried and true idea into a solid and safe business, you do it in Australia.

Many retired and near retired are selling up their houses and taking to the road permanently in caravans and finding that as long as they are careful their costs are vastly reduced and as long as they don't travel too far and burn too much fuel. This option obviously has limitations and is dependent upon health and the ability to fund the equipment required, however for many it's a way of spending a healthy retirement whilst also feeling like they are achieving something. The added bonus is that these people are spending time and money in more remote areas, providing much needed income to local businesses. Remote area councils, understanding the need are providing places for these Grey nomads to free camp at little or no cost. Facilities may be provided, but most of the travellers carry everything they need with them, just needing somewhere to park.

There is currently a movement amongst younger people towards "Van Life". Unlike their older brethren they are not normally running around in caravans, but tend towards self contained vans or small busses. They are taking up a nomadic lifestyle moving between jobs as they become available, many servicing the needs of the Grey Nomads. In a very pragmatic way, this is a way of moving "homeless living out of a car" into a lifestyle choice.

I can well imagine how a young employed person or couple, faced with oppressive housing costs could decide to live in a small van in the city, moving around each day or two and with a bit of stealth living from their vehicle.

This is what is happening now, and at the moment, it's not causing too many problems and in fact with regard to the Grey Nomads is helping to move money into remote areas.

So what does the future hold...

We're going to see more and more people, young and old being forced to hit the road, we're going to see an increase in a nomadic workforce, we're going to see the facilities (free camps) provided in remote areas become more stressed as more and more people use them, resulting in calls to shut them down. Now we have a bunch of people on the road with limited funds and no legal place to spend the night.

So what is needed?

Younger people need a roof over their heads. they need somewhere to store their goods and cook their meals. They want safety and some degree of comfort. They want flexibility of being able to move accommodation easily as and when jobs or life requires. The need access public transport and services so that they can get and keep their jobs.

They don't need 5 star accommodation.

At the moment the options for a young person are: Live with their parents, Life with their friends in a shared house, Live in a rented room with somebody else, Rent a unit, Rent a house, live out the back of their car/van as described above.

Most of these are starting to be, or are already not affordable (or even accessible) to young people unless they are very lucky or earning a high wage.

Given that the traditional 4 bedroom brick veneer on a 1/4 acre block is not even a pipe dream for most younger people what are the other options.

Seems to me that there is a lot of inner city office space that is currently massively under occupied. In most cases these spaces are designed to be easily remodelled and could be turned into suitable accommodation. You do need to be concerned about not turning these places into ghettos, but with a little thought I think you could provide accommodation that can be occupied on a short or long term with minimal difficulty. Done right, with a AirB&B type setup you could do it in such a way as to reduce the administrative costs.

Once you have that sorted, start looking at the nomads living a Van Life. You just need some space, maybe install some toilets/showers pay a resident to keep the place clean and charge a small rental for somewhere for people to park their caravan, car or van.

I'm sure this is not anywhere as simple as I make out, you have to deal with zoning laws, tenancy laws, insurance and compliance, but all you need is to get some example sites approved by council and a desire to have them succeed.

What is really needed is an understanding that they don't need to extract every $$ possible from their tenants, working with them to ensure that they feel respected and that they will respect the space they are living in.