Let’s not forget what the actual problem was. It was housing affordability plus the need to fix the increasing number of average wage earners people now being locked out of home ownership. Somehow this got translated into the only fix being new housing supply. This is only a fix if we can build new houses for entrants into home ownership that are affordable. It wasn’t the case before the budget and still isn’t. What the budget has highlighted is the new housing market was driven by the tax payer with tax payer money being funneled through the housing market into property investors pockets. This came with the side effect of pushing house prices up as more people cashed in on the tax payer fueled frenzy including everyone involved in the building and selling cycle. You want to find a leak them start turning taps off until something changes. We just had to withdraw tax payer funding and suddenly the housing market is all doom and gloom. There’s your cause. The houses haven’t actually changed, i.e. Albo did demand everyone demolishes a few bedrooms, he just cut tax payer funding to property investors who were locking out home ownership. Builders were going broke before and they still are. Now it’s more obvious the tax payer was propping them up. It is not sustainable and something had to change. Many ways to achieve the changes but I guess the intellectually challenged find it easier to attack Albo than get involved in the debate of what we need to do, and, if they have a better option, putting it forward.

This brings us back to the housing affordability issue. It doesn’t have to be solved by building new houses. We’re still hiding behind that. If it really was just a new housing shortage and they could be built affordably then Albos change should make little difference as all those people wanting to get out of renting and into houses would be driving the building. They’re not so ask yourself why. Why isn’t the demand keeping new build streaming along and building companies having no problems finding new customers and affordable costings? New houses cost too much so to fix the housing affordability problem, and, start giving all those average wage earners a chance, we need to start looking at all the wasted housing sitting empty or poorly utilized. Until recently you could make money out of housing by just owning the property and not renting it. The 400% increase in value over 20 years and CGT minimization schemes means an empty house was still got to make a nice amount of money without having to deal with the hassle of renters etc etc. Only poor property investors had to rent, especially if they needed to dip into tax payer funds (negative gearing). They had to deal with the inconvenience of someone causing wear and tear to their nice investment property.

So, instead of taking the low intellect path of just having a go at Albo because you have no actual useful input, start asking yourself if you think they’ve actually done enough to start fixing the housing affordability issue. Keeping in mind, especially if you care about anyone else, making housing more affordable has many good side effects including reducing the pressures that lead to things like DV. A desire to reduce DV should be enough to remove any tax payer support for property investment in the residential sector plus heavy taxes on anyone owning empty properties. The impact of a marital breakdown with the need to find separate living arrangements and split whatever capital exists in the family home is much more devasting in a housing affordability crisis. Brought to you by all those property investors who withdraw the equity in their portfolio to by a luxury car with minimal input from the taxman.