" or
we can spend it on giving politicians salary
increases, or spend it on the Commonwealth Games,
football stadiums, racing events, golf courses,
or royalty visits. "

or, in a country with a $1 trillion debt, we could just not spend it.

We could just not spend it?

Certainly.

We don't need having social security, Medicare,
highway maintenance, housing - building construction,
research, education, hospitals, schools, or employment.
In other words - goods and services? What about welfare
and defence? Moving right along.

By all means lets concentrate on more important things,
And allow a select few to pile it all away and live in comfort.

We're talking about an EXTRA $13 billion not the entire social welfare budget.

Get a grip.

You listed the things we shouldn't be spending it on and I broadly agree with that. Now you're listing the things you like to see the government spend money on, and I sorta agree with that.

But it seems you've decided the government should spend money where you want and not spend it on things you disapprove of. Perhaps we need a Voice for Foxy. Put it in the constitution? <grin!>

In answer

Hi mhaze getting it wrong again, this might be news to you, obviously you are not aware that Australia has a very active private home building sector, serviced by private building contractors and developers, there are even "owner builders" out there constructing their own homes, along with housing provisions by both State and Federal governments. The Labor governments 'Housing Future Fund' is only one part of the overall web of house construction.

Hi Foxy, I have been confident for a couple of weeks, that a breakthrough on this issue was at hand. I'm fortunate to have a couple of friends who have a direct bearing on things like this that matter, and I am able to communicate my view to them. I was strongly in favour of Labor's initiative, although I would have liked to see more in it, it is what it is. The fact the Greens were able to secure an additional billion dollars for social and affordable housing, is great. The next move is more assistance for low income renters, particularly long term renters, those who have been years in the one rented property, that's what the Greens will be fighting for in the next round of negotiations.

Hi AC, I support sustainable immigration, not everyone who comes through the door is a burden on society, some bring with them much needed skills which makes them productive and valuable very quickly. I think people like Roberts are strongly influenced by their own prejudices, and because of that, take a simplistic view of complex problems. Its always a problem with the extreme, they see everything as either black or white, never any grey. Roberts like Hanson and their buddies in the Noalition are irrelevant on this issue, they simply hate battling Australians. End of story.

Dear Paul,

I'm excited by Labor's Housing Future Fund and I
am pleased that the Greens support it.

Much will be achieved before this year finishes.
Our PM is good at building bridges. He's a
good negotiator and will achieve much.

Yes Paul, I'm aware that there are lots of other groups who involved in constructing housing. My point, which if you look up you'll see going over your head, was that the government's 'contribution' to this effort to offset the woes of mindless immigration policies, is miniscule and not at all worthy of the breathless adoration emanating from the likes of you and your vulpine sidekick.

The scheme lasts for 25 years and as such its a drop in the ocean with money that the nation can ill afford being thrown at a problem in order to satisfy the screams of a segment of the left movement. Given that it is primarily going to be a subsidy to business to do what it was already doing, the likelihood of fraud is high. But efficacy is not its aim, is it.