4 ms·

The headline is somewhat silly. Australia already has an extensive public housing program [0]. This suggests that we already agree that everyone should have she

by roenxi 2y ago

The headline is somewhat silly. Australia already has an extensive public housing program [0]. This suggests that we already agree that everyone should have shelter. Otherwise, why do we have a public housing program? Declaring something to be a human right doesn't magically make it easier to implement complex policy. And we don't need a book on the topic, someone needs to put a pdf up on the internet of a proposed policy change. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Australia

smcleod 2y ago
Migrants aren't the issue. People owning more than one house to make profit off renting out properties is a huge portion of the problem. The for-profit housing sector in Australia (and New Zealand) is absolutely disgusting and I don't think it'll change as the people with the power are also the people with the houses. Don't even get me started on the rigged and frankly corrupt banking sector. No human being should be able to make recurring profit from the need to put a basic roof over your head.
- parineum 2y ago
  > No human being should be able to make recurring profit from the need to put a basic roof over your head. I know a significant number of people who prefer renting because of the onerousness of ownership. Who is going to rent to them if they can't profit from it?
  - tossandthrow 2y ago
    This comment does take quite a number of steps to reach a conclusions. Parent said that nobody should be able to profit, this will not eliminate the rental market. You can still own housing and rent it out and take a rent that covers your cost (including the work you need to do in order to rent it out). This is already well established. Public housing also does not run on prayers and good intentions - and yet they manage to pay salary to contractors and run the administrative burden. The only cost there is associated with public housing is the opportunity cost which is indeed something the parent commenter argues should never be a concern in areas regarding core human needs - like shelter.
    - SgtBastard 2y ago
      So if someone inherits a fully paid off house, they are only allowed to rent it for a fraction of the rent allowed for the mortgaged, identical property next door? If a landlord wins the lottery, are they forced to lower the rent if they pay down their mortgage? Public housing runs because the people administrating it have no disincentives to making poor decisions because ultimately it’s the tax payer who pays. All this guarantees is a two-tier system. Owners and basic rental properties available.
      - tossandthrow 2y ago
        > So if someone inherits a fully paid off house, they are only allowed to rent it for a fraction of the rent allowed for the mortgaged, identical property next door? Idk, what do you think is fair? In most rent controlled systems there is a per sqm pre-allowed rent. If you take out a mortgage that you can not service a mortgage with this rent-level, then you are at fault. On the contrary, if you don't have a mortgage, then you can pay yourself a higher salary for maintaining your rental unit. However, if you "win the lottery" and get a house for free, don't you have the moral obligation to not maximize your rental income? You really don't need all this money (this discussion, btw, also goes into the nature of inheritance tax, where one could argue that a fair society should tax you in a way that forces you to take out a mortgage on the house you inherit - after all, you did not work for it) The core of this is to what extend housing should be a part of a free market. IMHO, there is plenty of opportunity right now - just move a out of the big cities and you get housing thrown at you. I do see an insistence on wanting to live in a few select cities followed by complaints that it is expensive.
        SgtBastard 2y ago
        > In most rent controlled systems there is a per sqm pre-allowed rent. Those markets are frequently characterised by poorly maintained rental stock. >Don’t you have a moral obligation No.
        SgtBastard 2y ago
        > In most rent controlled systems there is a per sqm pre-allowed rent. Those markets are frequently characterised by poorly maintained rental stock. >Don’t you have a moral obligation No.
  - djrobstep 2y ago
    You’ve never heard of public housing?
    - parineum 2y ago
      Sure, but imagine how that would have to work. What percentage of housing is publicly owned? Can I buy publicly owned housing? For what price? If I want to sell my house, how much can I sell it for? How do they price housing? If there an area if the country that's a great place to live but it's all full if renters and owners, how do I move there if I get a job there? Look at how hard it is for people to get into rent controlled places in NYC. If I'm born into an are with very little employment opportunity, it seems like my chances for upward mobility are extremely hampered.
- averageRoyalty 2y ago
  Should a human be able to make a recurring profit from providing you with water, electricity or food? I agree with you in principle, but I don't see a path out.
  - smcleod 2y ago
    I don't believe so for the basic fundamentals required to live (water, electricity, _basic_ food requirements if under a certain income bracket likewise with basic internet).
  - cen4 2y ago
    People have done it at city scales. See Singapore. Govt is the biggest landlord there (but the reason they did it was not because they cared about human rights or anything, but as a part of "infra" development to draw in foreign investment and MNCs and their employees to set up shop in Singapore). It has worked out quite well on both fronts. Vienna, Austria is also constantly used as an example - https://www.visitingvienna.com/culture/social-housing/ https://www.visitingvienna.com/culture/social-housing/
- Khaine 2y ago
  Put simply this is wrong. Migration is the issue. We are building less houses than people coming here! This is forcing up house prices, even though with interest rates going up house prices should fall.
paranoidrobot 2y ago
Public housing in Australia is vastly under-resourced. It's been deprived for resources for decades, and made only worse by self-serving decisions made by those in power. In NSW public housing land that was established a generation or two ago has been sold off to private developers. At most there's been lip service about some low percentage of "affordable housing" being made available in the new development, but often not enforced. The public housing stock is being depleted because of funding for repairs and renovations being cut short or eliminated entirely. There's a huge number of properties which are not able to be occupied because of roofs leaking, mould, and more. Meanwhile, private housing is getting more and more expensive in large part by investors buying up and renting out property for top dollar. As for a policy change: Let multiple problems solve each other. We have a shortage of skilled trades. We have unemployment issues. We have a whole lot of properties that need to be maintained and renovated. Lets employ skilled tradespeople to teach and train new generations using public housing as the training ground. Renovate, rebuild if necessary existing properties. Build new homes and communities.
- Khaine 2y ago
  Do you know why it's under resourced? My dad used to be a manager in public housing: 1) Government housing needs to accommodate disabled people so it costs a lot more to build. They outsource the building of it to contractors. They get screwed over by these contractors since no public servant has the guts to hold contractors to account 2) The Minister wants to support some noble thing a charity is doing in this space, so the Government give land/houses to charities to manage public housing. These charities are poor at managing it until they give up and sell it off. This reduces the public housing stock. 3) A small number of tenants do significant damage to their public house. They then have to get re-housed as the government is liable if they hurt themself due to an unsafe living environment (that they caused). This costs significant amounts to fix (which again is done by contractors who's crew the government over). 4) Anyone with a sob story (refugee, whatever) demands they need a house that has a bedroom for each member of their large family. If they are given a smaller house they complain to the minister until they get moved to a new larger house. This means that housing stock that was built in the past won't meet these demands and new larger houses are needed, again taking away money from being able to mass build cheap houses increasing housing stock to meet the demand of those who need housing. 5) People who can afford renting privately hide income to get cheap housing from the government. Public housing tenants who do need public housing do the same to basically avoid paying a reasonable rental amount. My grandparents had public housing. They treated it as their own home. They respected what had been given to them. Social housing as a concept is fucked because the social contract has been fucked. In my mind anyone who destroys or significantly damages public housing as a tenant should be banned from ever getting public housing.
djrobstep 2y ago
Are you actually living in Australia? Because nobody here would describe it as having an extensive public housing program. Your own source says that public housing is a small percentage of housing and is at a 40 year low.
hresvelgr 2y ago
The only thing complicated is the interests of people who treat real estate as financial instruments. I think a very good start would be to remove negative gearing and provide subsidy to single home owners on a mortgage to soften the blow from resultant plummeting property value.
- lmpdev 2y ago
  I agree negative gearing needs to go and capital gains taxes returned to pre-Howard levels
lmpdev 2y ago
Australia has very little public housing I encourage you to actually read your source

by roenxi 2y ago

smcleod 2y ago

Migrants aren't the issue. People owning more than one house to make profit off renting out properties is a huge portion of the problem. The for-profit housing sector in Australia (and New Zealand) is absolutely disgusting and I don't think it'll change as the people with the power are also the people with the houses. Don't even get me started on the rigged and frankly corrupt banking sector. No human being should be able to make recurring profit from the need to put a basic roof over your head.

parineum 2y ago
> No human being should be able to make recurring profit from the need to put a basic roof over your head. I know a significant number of people who prefer renting because of the onerousness of ownership. Who is going to rent to them if they can't profit from it?
- tossandthrow 2y ago
  This comment does take quite a number of steps to reach a conclusions. Parent said that nobody should be able to profit, this will not eliminate the rental market. You can still own housing and rent it out and take a rent that covers your cost (including the work you need to do in order to rent it out). This is already well established. Public housing also does not run on prayers and good intentions - and yet they manage to pay salary to contractors and run the administrative burden. The only cost there is associated with public housing is the opportunity cost which is indeed something the parent commenter argues should never be a concern in areas regarding core human needs - like shelter.
  - SgtBastard 2y ago
    So if someone inherits a fully paid off house, they are only allowed to rent it for a fraction of the rent allowed for the mortgaged, identical property next door? If a landlord wins the lottery, are they forced to lower the rent if they pay down their mortgage? Public housing runs because the people administrating it have no disincentives to making poor decisions because ultimately it’s the tax payer who pays. All this guarantees is a two-tier system. Owners and basic rental properties available.
    - tossandthrow 2y ago
      > So if someone inherits a fully paid off house, they are only allowed to rent it for a fraction of the rent allowed for the mortgaged, identical property next door? Idk, what do you think is fair? In most rent controlled systems there is a per sqm pre-allowed rent. If you take out a mortgage that you can not service a mortgage with this rent-level, then you are at fault. On the contrary, if you don't have a mortgage, then you can pay yourself a higher salary for maintaining your rental unit. However, if you "win the lottery" and get a house for free, don't you have the moral obligation to not maximize your rental income? You really don't need all this money (this discussion, btw, also goes into the nature of inheritance tax, where one could argue that a fair society should tax you in a way that forces you to take out a mortgage on the house you inherit - after all, you did not work for it) The core of this is to what extend housing should be a part of a free market. IMHO, there is plenty of opportunity right now - just move a out of the big cities and you get housing thrown at you. I do see an insistence on wanting to live in a few select cities followed by complaints that it is expensive.
      - SgtBastard 2y ago
        > In most rent controlled systems there is a per sqm pre-allowed rent. Those markets are frequently characterised by poorly maintained rental stock. >Don’t you have a moral obligation No.
      - SgtBastard 2y ago
        > In most rent controlled systems there is a per sqm pre-allowed rent. Those markets are frequently characterised by poorly maintained rental stock. >Don’t you have a moral obligation No.
- djrobstep 2y ago
  You’ve never heard of public housing?
  - parineum 2y ago
    Sure, but imagine how that would have to work. What percentage of housing is publicly owned? Can I buy publicly owned housing? For what price? If I want to sell my house, how much can I sell it for? How do they price housing? If there an area if the country that's a great place to live but it's all full if renters and owners, how do I move there if I get a job there? Look at how hard it is for people to get into rent controlled places in NYC. If I'm born into an are with very little employment opportunity, it seems like my chances for upward mobility are extremely hampered.
averageRoyalty 2y ago
Should a human be able to make a recurring profit from providing you with water, electricity or food? I agree with you in principle, but I don't see a path out.
- smcleod 2y ago
  I don't believe so for the basic fundamentals required to live (water, electricity, _basic_ food requirements if under a certain income bracket likewise with basic internet).
- cen4 2y ago
  People have done it at city scales. See Singapore. Govt is the biggest landlord there (but the reason they did it was not because they cared about human rights or anything, but as a part of "infra" development to draw in foreign investment and MNCs and their employees to set up shop in Singapore). It has worked out quite well on both fronts. Vienna, Austria is also constantly used as an example - https://www.visitingvienna.com/culture/social-housing/ https://www.visitingvienna.com/culture/social-housing/
Khaine 2y ago
Put simply this is wrong. Migration is the issue. We are building less houses than people coming here! This is forcing up house prices, even though with interest rates going up house prices should fall.

paranoidrobot 2y ago

Public housing in Australia is vastly under-resourced. It's been deprived for resources for decades, and made only worse by self-serving decisions made by those in power. In NSW public housing land that was established a generation or two ago has been sold off to private developers. At most there's been lip service about some low percentage of "affordable housing" being made available in the new development, but often not enforced. The public housing stock is being depleted because of funding for repairs and renovations being cut short or eliminated entirely. There's a huge number of properties which are not able to be occupied because of roofs leaking, mould, and more. Meanwhile, private housing is getting more and more expensive in large part by investors buying up and renting out property for top dollar. As for a policy change: Let multiple problems solve each other. We have a shortage of skilled trades. We have unemployment issues. We have a whole lot of properties that need to be maintained and renovated. Lets employ skilled tradespeople to teach and train new generations using public housing as the training ground. Renovate, rebuild if necessary existing properties. Build new homes and communities.

Khaine 2y ago
Do you know why it's under resourced? My dad used to be a manager in public housing: 1) Government housing needs to accommodate disabled people so it costs a lot more to build. They outsource the building of it to contractors. They get screwed over by these contractors since no public servant has the guts to hold contractors to account 2) The Minister wants to support some noble thing a charity is doing in this space, so the Government give land/houses to charities to manage public housing. These charities are poor at managing it until they give up and sell it off. This reduces the public housing stock. 3) A small number of tenants do significant damage to their public house. They then have to get re-housed as the government is liable if they hurt themself due to an unsafe living environment (that they caused). This costs significant amounts to fix (which again is done by contractors who's crew the government over). 4) Anyone with a sob story (refugee, whatever) demands they need a house that has a bedroom for each member of their large family. If they are given a smaller house they complain to the minister until they get moved to a new larger house. This means that housing stock that was built in the past won't meet these demands and new larger houses are needed, again taking away money from being able to mass build cheap houses increasing housing stock to meet the demand of those who need housing. 5) People who can afford renting privately hide income to get cheap housing from the government. Public housing tenants who do need public housing do the same to basically avoid paying a reasonable rental amount. My grandparents had public housing. They treated it as their own home. They respected what had been given to them. Social housing as a concept is fucked because the social contract has been fucked. In my mind anyone who destroys or significantly damages public housing as a tenant should be banned from ever getting public housing.

djrobstep 2y ago

Are you actually living in Australia? Because nobody here would describe it as having an extensive public housing program. Your own source says that public housing is a small percentage of housing and is at a 40 year low.

hresvelgr 2y ago

The only thing complicated is the interests of people who treat real estate as financial instruments. I think a very good start would be to remove negative gearing and provide subsidy to single home owners on a mortgage to soften the blow from resultant plummeting property value.

lmpdev 2y ago
I agree negative gearing needs to go and capital gains taxes returned to pre-Howard levels

lmpdev 2y ago

Australia has very little public housing I encourage you to actually read your source