But working one's guts out to repay the debt on one's McMansion is the point of human existence. Isn't it?

+ the Jeep!

Or doesn't the author trust Big Bank propaganda?

no debt, cashed up here, not that I earn anything from the cash :) I watch with interest developments over the coming 10 years.

The size of the debt levels is staggering... Steve Keen has been banging on about this for some time :)but people have given up listening and prefer to take on more debt.

The younger ones have trouble coming to terms with money, it's used and abused. There lies a difference.
Live today for tomorrow may not happen. Household economics such as cookery and monetary management was once taught in schools. There lies another difference.
Parents never had child care, they had the time to teach kids the skills of life. Another difference.
The explosion of housing costs happened when the two working parents became the norm. They found they could buy twice the size house, with all the trimmings, and banks very eager to supply the gigantic mortgages, that would keep both workers engaged for decades.

<<the public is distracted from the true threat: the unrestrained private spending spree that further enhance the power, profit and authority of the horde of private monopolists, usurers, speculators, rent seekers, free riders, financial robber barons, control frauds and indolent rich.>>

...Love that tune!

579,
Agreed. One income per family, over a designated amount; there'd be plenty of jobs to go around and private sector spending would have to be cut.
The problem though in my book is not the spending, but the economy that demands it. Economic growth has to be maintained, even if it's just a bubble

Debt alarmism has been around for decades. I agree Australia's houseold debt is high by international standards and compared to longer-term historical levels. A correction may be on the way, and it will be unpleasant for some. But the authors do appear to have cherry picked their data somewhat to magnify the issue.

For example, in Australia household debt is more commonly expressed as a percentage of household disposable income, not GDP, because this more accurately reflects ability to pay. The debt/disposable income ratio also showed a marked rise up to the mid 2000s, but it peaked in 2007 and has been fairly flat since then. The difference in the two measures is due to household income rising faster than GDP since the GFC.

Furthermore, as interest rates have fallen, debt becomes easier to service. Even though debt levels are high, interest paid as a percentage of household income has fallen quite markedly in recent years, from a peak of 13.3% in 2008 to 8.9% in 2014.

Both points are illustrated here:

http://www.rba.gov.au/chart-pack/household-sector.html

The authors also misrepresent trends in savings, especially here:

“As household debt has boomed exponentially over the last two decades, the savings of the household sector has plunged.”

That is not what the chart in the article actually shows. The household savings ratio fell fairly consistently from its peak in 1974 to bottom out at less than 0 briefly in 2003-04. It began to rise sharply from 2006 – before the GFC – to peak in 2011 but has since tailed off a bit. The latest trend estimate of 9.4% in September 2014 is significantly higher than its level 20 years earlier, of 5.7%.

Something is very wrong when near record private household debt is misrepresented as wealth!

And what happens to the holders of these massive mortgages, when one or both working partners lose employment; and at the critical age of around 40 something, when younger replacements are invariably preferred!?

I supposed one could insure their incomes?
But what happens when the insurance is all used up before any replacement work or job becomes available?

And the way insurance and rates have risen, even where real values have fallen, how can the mortgage payments be managed?

And of course there just has to be a couple of beamers in the two car garage, and the tin lids must be sent to private expensive schools!?

Now if one of the beamers could be turned into a couple of 50CC scooters, the commute wouldn't take as long, or cost as much.
And if the other could be traded down to a very fuel efficient reliable SW, the other needs, shopping trolley, getting the kids to school, would likely be a little easier; if one weren't also servicing multiple car payments; or renting the latest in white goods or big screen TV's!?

And I'd even be prepared to trade out of the MacMansion, (fools paradise) for something much more affordable, while the values remain as inflated!
A situation which also affects affordability, for up to 40% of of the working population!

Debt is not real wealth, although those looking on and seeing the misleading symbols of wealth, or unaffordable debt funded consumption, might be forgiven for thinking it is?

There are schemes, (that the banks will never ever inform you about) which involve significant but still financially manageable salary sacrifice, for paying out the mortgage in just 3-5 years?

And while that can seem something of a slog, well worth it when the inevitable contraction and or interest rate rises kick in!
Rhrosty.