Good article.

I am staggered by the lack of urgency about housing. I see it as a national disgrace given that such costs will be the main financial burden most face.

to myself, it appears obvious that more public housing is needed, yet anything to do with that term 'public' now appears a dirty word.

It appears that govts, probably not wishing to do anything that affect housing prices which may affect stamp duty collection, would rather offer bandaid solutions.

Such an issue can only be resolved by a coordinated approach across a number of policy domains, and an acceptance that someone else may lose out rather than the minority of battlers at the bottom, less important to winnig elections.

Snake:

Exactly. I have silenced such as you describe by brute force. I now have a 150m silence zone around my accommodation. Actually, the drug dealers are moving out.. progressively. One must “Target and Team tag “ to win this one! (and avoid Police of course, or I’ll be locked up)!

Chris Lewis:
I have a thread buried back a bit on the “Forum” with generally good comment

All that happened is that many people expressed opinions on public housing that the author disliked. He could have articulately explained why they are wrong. Instead, he simply dismissed their concerns as shallow understanding. Name-calling in the place of reasoned debate is the problem and this article does nothing to help.

Public housing is totally immoral.

Even this bloke, who makes his living touting for it, admits that many, in private rental, or purchase, are struggling to keep their head's above water. Regardless of this strain on many people, he wants to hit them with extra costs to house those who won't make the effort.

I really don't care if they have given up, or never made the effort in the first place, public housing "want to bee's" are perfectly happy to put more strain on everyone else, to get a free ride. They even think they have a "right" to be housed by others effort.

Every public housing unit should be sold, to reduce the ongoing drain on those struggling to do for themselves. The tenants should be told to get off their backsides, grown far too soft, sitting on the backs of others.

Hasbeen

I don't think public housing provides a free ride. such housing will normally be less than desirable than the rest; less room and so on.

Maybe you can tell me why such a consideration was important to both sides of politics in the past and not today.

Do we really want to society where the have nots are neglected as a burden on the rest, and because they may long be a minority.

If we are to look at making private housing, we also need more debate rather than simply allowing more of the current madness to rule the day where investors rule the day.

clearly, housing is a difficult issue and the answer may be a further blurring of the public and private realms, but I will never accept the argument that those at the bottom should not get a free ride.

If we think about it, many get a free ride. My mate ( a liberal voter) inherited over a million dollars (only child), he bought a mansion (its value has gove up $300,000 in less than 2 years), and he works part time and gets the full FTB A and B.

Come on hasbeen, we need ideas that can make a difference without blaming the less fortunate who will always need a helping hand.

Totally disagree Chris.

Even if you could, [& you didn't] make a case for housing assistance for any body, rent assistance, diminishing yearly over a few years, to promote self reliance, should be the only choice. Such assistance should have a sunset clause, so we only help those who are prepared to help themselves sooner or later.

I used to supply stuff to the public housing organisations in 3 states. I found it disgusting that they all could organise to pay over $600,000 for the same house than any private dill could buy for $350,000. This alone is reason enough to disband all such bureaucracies.

I also became involved in supplying their maintenance departments, or contractors with parts, & replacement components for often willfully damaged gear.

I was amazed to learn that almost half of the tenants in Qld for example, call for the department to replace any blown light bulb. With the traveling time involved, it could cost us, the taxpayer up to $130 [15 years ago] to change just one bulb. We should not be helping people with this cavalier attitude to other peoples money.

If you think this is a reasonable expenditure of our taxes, I have to say, you have more money than sense.