Tuesday, March 29, 2011

No answer is no answer

Living in a high rent inner city 'hood for the past thirty years I can see that the price of housing in the area is out of reach of Australians on the minimum wage of around $30K. And I can see that some kind of fuss ought to be made about it. And I imagine an average family would welcome all the government grants for home buyers. And be grateful. But for a minority of us a permanent address will be always out of reach, and I can't help but think that government help should go to those least fortunate first.

There are always a couple of hundred people sleeping rough on any given night in my 'hood. A couple of hundred more are in emergency shelters, and a couple of hundred more are in short-term accommodation. Add those with the two hundred or so that are imprisoned or otherwise institutionalized, that makes it eight hundred or so people from my 'hood who have nowhere permanent to call home tonight.

Bridges, car and other parks, alleys, corner store doorways, and riverbanks in my 'hood have been the semi-permanent shelter for around eight hundred people since unofficial counts by social service organizations began some years ago. Those who do find refuge in motels, alleys, caravan parks, railway stations, cars, squats, sheds and beaches are more likely than any other Australians to come to the attention of police.

I have no answer for this, only questions. Why is the government still handing out taxpayer money to people buying homes in my 'hood? Apartments are selling for a million dollars, but if it is your first home, the government will subsidize the cost.

Naturally, thousands of new apartments are being built. There are hundreds in my street. And the next street. And the next. So what's the story? Why is the government subsidizing million dollar apartments in the inner city? When there are so many sleeping rough on the streets? I have no answers, only questions. But that's no answer.

5 comments:

  1. I agree, absolutely crazy! I don't have answers either, but I do know that people who don't have jobs and not paying taxes are seen as less important since they are not consumers, in the way that governments, retailers would like them to be. Seems you have to be seen to be contributing, otherwise you will not receive very much. Rather like, 'God helps those who help themselves'. And anyway, money isn't always the answer, many of these people would be drug users, people with mental health issues, kids who don't have parental support and could probably do with more day to day support and greater understanding from the general public than they currently get. Society creates problems and many fall through the cracks (a cliche perhaps, but true).

    ReplyDelete
  2. You must be glad your not one of those renting? Also, if the property costs over $7000,000 no subsidy will be provided, but even so, these grants SHOULD be means tested, every other government hand out is?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bed-sits in the bigger high rise development in my street start at $385,000. The million dollar apts sit on top of those.

    ReplyDelete
  4. People who can afford to buy them are at work most of the time and rest of the time eating out and socializing; they probably only need somewhere to lay their heads poor things! Did you know that they don't get a subsidy if they purchase for investment purposes. Most are probably hoping that they can charge a hefty rent and get some other poor bugger to pay off the apartment for them. Isn't that the way it goes - the wealthy getting wealthier off those less well off?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I came across quite a bit of comment about the policy and its affect on the price of housing. When I figure out what the subsidies mean - other than it they so wrong - I'll post something more meaningful.

    ReplyDelete