this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
45 points (92.5% liked)

Australia

3582 readers
78 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 18 points 11 months ago

Yes lol, almost every country has the resources and labor power to provide housing for every single citizen

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

lmfao at the arrow on the graph "the market did not do this"

You can practically feel the frustration of the author.

[–] TheBananaKing@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Gareth is a good bloke.

[–] TheBananaKing@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How about this: you can't use price signals to lower demand for something that's a basic need.

There was a push to end rent-bidding recently, but they said no of course we need rent bidding, how else are you meant to respond to rising demand, except by pricing poor people out of the market?

Yeah no. It's not OK to do that.

Luxury items, it's still mildly sociopathic if you think about it but fine, whatever.

But basic human needs don't go away if you make them too expensive, and it's fundamentally not OK to triage them by wealth.

Imagine if they implemented this as a solution for overcrowded emergency rooms. Okay people, wait times are getting pretty long, so we're charging you all $10,000 just to stay in the queue; pay up or go home. Yay, it's looking way emptier out there, we fixed healthcare.

There would be heads on spikes before the week was out.

Doing the same thing with shelter is just as fucking inappropriate.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Don't we actually do that with private health though? In a roundabout way.

"hey you can wait 6 months for a doctor/surgery or you can tithe to some millionaires and get seen by a parasitic sector draining resources from public health and driving up prices faster!"

[–] TheBananaKing@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Granted, but at least you can still rock up to the ER with your foot hanging off, and get seen without your bank balance being relevant.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Sort of. If you're not actively dying you can still expect to wait several hours with some panadol.

Idk when you last had to go to ER but when I had a broken toe that needed setting they didn't even have ice packs. The swelling from waiting about 6 hours made setting it a doozy, it's crooked and achy now :(

Shit is underfunded to all hell atm.

[–] TheBananaKing@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

That sucks, sorry to hear it.

I'm used to waiting many hours in my/family's experience with the places, though the time I dislocated my ankle and was compromising blood flow to my foot, they got on it immediately. Time-sensitive vs high-impact, I guess.

[–] stifle867@programming.dev 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Seeing as housing is already considered a human right (Article 25), tautologically the answer to the question is no.

[–] abhibeckert@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This. Housing is definitely a human right and it is generally provided in Australia.

Where it gets more complex is how much should housing cost and what quality of housing should people get for their money? For example can you afford a house to yourself, or do you need to live with other people and share the rent? Maybe even share a bedroom?

Australia doesn't have a shortage of housing, what we have is a shortage of affordable housing. As in, some people aren't able to pay for the houses that they want to live in and they aren't willing to live in the ones that they can afford.

Domestic violence is the leading cause of homelessness in Australia. Victims of that often do have a home but it's not a safe one, so they're actually better off on the street. With help, these victims can find a home (and help is available).

[–] Longmactoppedup@aussie.zone 7 points 11 months ago

If only there was some way the government could influence any of this.

[–] kowcop@aussie.zone 3 points 11 months ago

In my mind, the only way to fix the housing crisis is to implement policy which will effectively collapse the housing market, and that would be a suicidal move by any party so they just wont do it. Every day is some story of the Government's attempt to fix it, the latest was building 3,000 appartments next to the Metro at Macquarie Park. In what world does anyone think these things will be affordable when they are 30 mins from the city and a walk to the metro?

The only ways I can see to fix it is to grandfather capital gains tax discounts on investments and kill AirBNB

Also, while I like the notion of affordable housing, I don't think it is possible to build. Nothing is affordable these days. Affordable labour and materials don't really exist..

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

No?

We already fail to provide basic human rights to many Australians. Enshrining more wont magically make the government give a fuck about us.