you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Yes and no. There are a lot of owner-occupiers in Australia now who on paper are Millionaires, and they like being Millionaires. They are not going to like it if/when that status is stripped from them.

If houses nationally suddenly dropped in value by 50%, even if people's mortgages were halved at the same time, I expect the change would still be met with hostility. It's the unspoken truth of housing affordability: far too many Australians are happy with the present housing prices. They're outnumbered by the rest of us, but they are a large enough voting block to decide any election.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Because the rest of us don't have houses and aren't set to lose half our net worth by such policy changes. So, we have a variety of election policies that we prioritise.

    When Labor propose making changes to the status quo, even with mild changes, they have historically lost the election.

    It might be different next time, but it'd be a huge political risk to propose changes again after previous rejections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Because they own the media. Or they are the ones the media wants to please.

    Seeing TV on the gym always make me wonder who the hell makes that content and who the hell is meant to consume it.

    Are all the viewers real estate agents, house owners paying for renovation or people on yatch trips? I don't see a single normal person on those shows.

  • source
  • parent