The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A crisis in housing affordability > Comments

A crisis in housing affordability : Comments

By Andrew Bartlett, published 28/8/2006

Intellectually and morally bankrupt buck-passing has continued for years, while housing affordability has grown steadily worse.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 22
  7. 23
  8. 24
  9. Page 25
  10. 26
  11. 27
  12. 28
  13. All
daggett, it puzzles me that you are unable to see that this is heading nowhere, and that you are simply repeating the non-statements you made earlier.

I have already made it clear that your assertion that "[t]he reason for using France as a comparator should be obvious, and in any case is explained in Chapter 1 of the thesis" does not wash with me.

a) it is far from obvious, as I have pointed out on numerous occasions.

b) it is not explained in chapter 1, or indeed anywhere, in Ms Newman's thesis. Further, you have had any number of opportunities to point out what this explanation consists of, and are for some reason unwilling to do so.

You also fail to justify or support with evidence your other dramatic claims:

"Clearly this country's housing policies have not worked in recent years as we now have the world's least affordable housing"

It may indeed be your personal opinion, which is fine, but surely you can only welcome an opportunity to add some substance to such a wide-ranging - and significant - claim?

You go on to assert, somewhat aggressively:

"You have already demonstrated amply that your mind is completely closed on this issue and you are not interested in considering any evidence which conflicts with your current views"

It probably hasn't occurred to you, but the only reason I am still asking these questions is because my mind is not closed on the subject, but instead is waiting upon you to provide some support for your many assertions.

I can't keep on giving you these opportunities to present your evidence, there are only so many hours in a day, and days in a year.
Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 24 October 2006 2:11:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles,

Yet again, I have shown your tediously repeated claim, that I have not provided an answer to your question "Why France?", is a lie.

Whether or not my answers 'wash' with you or whether or not you understand or accept them is not germane to my point about the intellectual dishonesty that you have engaged in from the outset of your participation in this debate.

Even a moron should be able to understand that if one country (i.e. France or any one of a number of the other of the above-mentioned European countries) has managed to keep decent housing affordable to all of its citizens whilst Australia has failed to do the same, then that fact should be very relevant to any inquiry into housing affordability in Australia.

If, to the contrary, you still maintain that it is not worthwhile to look outside of Australia to see how other countries, such as France provide their citizens with housing, that's fine, but a lot of other people do, and I don't see what right you have to demand of me that I spend any more time than I already have explaining what is obvious and clear to me and to most other participants in this forum.

Pericles wrote: "I can't keep on giving you these opportunities to present your evidence, there are only so many hours in a day, and days in a year."

That's an enormous relief to me. Please don't trouble yourself any more on my account in giving me these 'opportunities'. I, for one, would be enormously grateful.
Posted by daggett, Wednesday, 25 October 2006 2:19:50 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Your wish is my command, daggett.

I shall let the matter of the unsubstantiated comparisons in Ms Newman's thesis rest, and give you the opportunity to move on to more important topics.

However, just for form's sake I should point out that your calling my complaint that the "why France" question went unanswered "a lie", is itself false. As anybody who troubles to read the thread (which is, I suggest, limited to the two of us) can easily see.

It surely is not difficult to select the paragraphs that make this point from the thesis, and finally put my mind to rest. The fact that you did not, suggests that you cannot.

'Bye for now.
Posted by Pericles, Wednesday, 25 October 2006 7:11:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles wrote: "I shall let the matter of the unsubstantiated comparisons in Ms Newman's thesis rest, ...".

Again, Sheila Newman's submission to the Housing Affordability Inquiry shows that France and other European countries have been able to keep the price of housing affordable to all their citizens, whilst Australia has failed to do the same.

How is that 'unsubstantiated'?

Pericles wrote: "I should point out that your calling my complaint that the "why France" question went unanswered "a lie", is itself false."

Your 'question' was answered many times and has been answered again here, so you have lied and lied repeatedly on this matter.

Other disingenuous debating ploys employed by you include:

1. Untrue allegations that that the conclusions in Newman's submission and thesis were not substantiated (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#54974)

2. A slur against Sheila Newman: "it was a prolonged boondoggle on other people's money".

3. Later that slur was turned around 180 degrees where you attempted attempt to mock Sheila Newman for her supposed folly in spending her own money on a project pronounced by yourself to have been a waste of time: "If, ... , Ms Newman was not paid for her endeavours, the question is even more important. So what was the rationale? Inquiring minds would dearly like to know."

4. Aspersions against Newman's writing style (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#55054).

5. Slurs against the examiners of Newman's thesis: "... (her examiners) clearly didn't spend a great deal of time working out whether it made any sense. Quite possibly they were impressed by the sheer quantity of the references, and the fact that some were in a foreign language." (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#55430)

Nowhere have you you paid Sheila Newman the courtesy of discussing the ideas contained in the documents you claim to have read.

Pericles wrote: "Your wish is my command, daggett.".

Let's hope you remain true to your word and take your trolling elsewhere, preferably well away from any discussions which involve people who acknowledge that there is something seriously wrong with Australia's housing market and who care enough to want to do something to fix it.
Posted by daggett, Thursday, 26 October 2006 1:41:16 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
daggett, your logic continues to astound me.

>>Sheila Newman's submission to the Housing Affordability Inquiry shows that France and other European countries have been able to keep the price of housing affordable to all their citizens, whilst Australia has failed to do the same. How is that 'unsubstantiated'?<<

You introduce the conclusion as proof of the assumption, a form of conceit known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

To be able to agree or disagree with the conclusion requires both a common understanding of what "affordable" means, and a clear statement of the common ground that the countries share, that enables them to be validly compared.

There has to be some sound basis of commonality, otherwise the conclusion cannot be related to the arguments. Why do you resist this obvious fact?

Nowhere have you, or anybody else, been able to point to a valid reason why France was selected as the basis for comparison. Unless and until you do this, the comparison remains as unrelated as today's weather patterns in Paris and Sydney. There may be rain in both cities, or sun in one and rain in the other, but there is no plausible connection except that they are both countries that exist on this planet.

I will admit that I was at fault in assuming that - because of the lack of obvious connection - France had been chosen for its congeniality as a tourist destination. Once you explained that the thesis had not been funded in any way, I retracted my suggestion that it had been a boondoggle out of politeness to Ms Newman.

However, I stand by my assertions as to the lazy writing style - that sentence on wealth being moulded like clay is still my favourite.

>>Nowhere have you you paid Sheila Newman the courtesy of discussing the ideas contained in the documents you claim to have read.<<

Oh, I read it daggett, believe me I read it. And if there had been any ideas of any substance to discuss, I would have infinitely preferred to have done so.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 26 October 2006 10:13:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles,

Of course I knew that your promise to end your trolling on this thread was just too good to be true.

Let's recount the substance of your objection to Sheila Newman's submission an Masters thesis (downloadable from http://www.candobetter.org/sheila). You claim that because:

1. "(France) has 60 million people in a land mass of half a million square kilometers, we have 20 million in 7.6 million square kilometers.",

2. Paris is different from Sydney, and

3. That France suffered from destruction in the war whilst Australia did not (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#55141)

... nothing of interest to people who wish to solve the housing affordability crisis can be learnt by examining how France managed to keep housing affordable to all its citizens whilst Australia did not.

(If that is not your position, then please don't feel constrained not to state what it is.)

In regard to population size and land mass, I hold that the differences are not so great when considering arable land mass. Whilst such a view can be regarded as subjective, it is no less subjective than your own.

However, it would almost certainly have not mattered which country Newman had chosen as other equally striking differences with nearly every other country on the planet could have been cited.

You acknowledged that many other countries have been able to keep housing more affordable than has Australia (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#54974). Yet, when I asked which country you would consider more suitable, you refused to do so : "... it is not up to me to make alternative suggestions." (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#58111)

Of course you are not obliged to put forward your own ideas and to take stances which you may then have to justify, but your refusal to nominate a more suitable 'comparator', makes it obvious that your objection to Sheila Newman's choice of France is as disingenuous as all of your other debating ploys.

Pericles wrote: "... if there had been any ideas of any substance (in the thesis) to discuss, I would have infinitely preferred to have done so."

No, you refuse to discuss the ideas because you have no answers to them.
Posted by daggett, Thursday, 26 October 2006 12:05:19 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 22
  7. 23
  8. 24
  9. Page 25
  10. 26
  11. 27
  12. 28
  13. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy