Polticians doing what they are best at, snouts in the trough. Millions in taxpayer funded advertising 'politicised' by governments, new research says By political reporter Matthew Doran Posted 8 hours ago https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10...ertising-politicised-grattan-report/101514186 The report found in the lead up to the 2019 election the government spent about $85 million on politicised campaigns.(AAP: Joel Carrett ) At least a quarter of the Commonwealth's yearly spend on taxpayer-funded advertising is highly political and biased towards the government of the day, according to new research. Key points: The report found a quarter of the government's spend on advertising was questionable It recommended an independent panel to check if ads comply with rules before campaigns begin The Grattan Institute wants tighter rules around taxpayer-funded advertising The Grattan Institute has analysed spending between 2008 and 2021 and found governments across the political spectrum have taken advantage of loose advertising rules, "weaponising" taxpayer funds for electoral gain. The report found nearly $50 million of the $200 million spent yearly by the federal government on advertising during the period was questionable. "Some advertising campaigns look politicised — this is because they include, for example, party slogans or colour schemes, commonly they spruik government achievements or policies, and they're often timed to run in the lead up to elections," the report author Anika Stobart said. "Nearly $50 million each year was spent on campaigns that that gave the government of the day a political advantage — which is about a quarter of the total annual spending by the federal government." The Institute said that over the last five years, the Australian federal government had spent $7 per person, per year on advertising — compared with the UK government's spend of $4.50 per person, and the Canadian Government's $2 per person. Anika Stobart says current rules to prevent politicisation of taxpayer funded advertising are not very effective.(ABC News: Barrie Pullen) Data from the Department of Finance and the AusTender website showed daily spending on federal government advertising spiked just before Australians were due to head to the polls, further underlining the concerns. "In the lead-up to the 2019 election, the federal government spent about $85 million of taxpayers' money on politicised campaigns," Ms Stobart said. "This is on par with the combined spend by political parties on TV, print and radio advertising over that same period. "The Opposition, minor parties and independents have no such opportunity to exploit public money for saturation coverage." Tighter rules recommended The Grattan Institute report recommended strict legislative requirements for taxpayer-funded advertising. "Most state governments, and also the federal government, have rules in place to prevent politicisation of taxpayer-funded advertising," Ms Stobart said. "But while they look good on paper, they're not very effective at stopping politicisation — particularly spruiking of government achievements." The report also recommended an independent panel be established to check whether advertising complied with the rules before any campaign began. "I think there's probably public outrage when we see government advertising that's being paid for by the public purse spruiking what the government is doing, even particularly when they're adding their party logo or the colour scheme to it," Ms Stobart said. "We see this all the time on our screens, for example promoting the next big transport project or promoting what the government is doing to reduce the cost of living. "We want to see advertising that is actually going to confer a real public benefit or encourage change in the community, or ask for specific action from members of the community."
Australian politicians, have plenty of money for pork barelling to hold onto power, no money for housing. Governments spend more on ads than Harvey Norman and Maccas Patrick DurkinBOSS Deputy editor Oct 9, 2022 https://www.afr.com/politics/federa...than-harvey-norman-and-maccas-20221009-p5boa9 Federal and state governments are spending almost $450 million a year on advertising campaigns – more than Harvey Norman, Woolworths, and McDonald’s – and the ads are increasingly flouting weak rules in the lead-up to elections, according to a new Grattan Institute report. The misuse of taxpayer-funded advertising campaigns is rife, the policy think tank warns, concluding that of the almost $200 million spent each year by the federal government on advertising, close to $50 million is spent on overtly politicised campaigns. The Morrison government’s “next step” campaign highlighted 260,000 more people in work than before the pandemic but was ultimately suspended with Labor claiming it was blatantly political. Image: YouTube The problem exists within political parties of both persuasions and is equally problematic at the state level. Among the 10 most expensive politicised federal campaigns in the past three years, half were approved by Labor governments and half Coalition governments. For dollars spent, the federal government is followed by the Victorian government, which spent $93 million on advertising campaigns over the past five years on average (inflation adjusted). NSW spent $76 million over the same period. Much of the debate was sparked after Treasury suspended a controversial $10 million ad blitz to promote the recovery from the pandemic and the Morrison government’s record on job creation. Big spending in the lead-up to the May federal election and upcoming Victorian and NSW state elections is yet to be disclosed. The third phase of the Morrison government’s $45 million Economic Recovery campaign was launched in March and was rolled out across television, radio, digital, social, outdoor billboards and press. Labor claimed the phase, “We’re taking the next step”, which highlighted 260,000 more people in work than before the COVID-19 pandemic, was blatant political advertising. The Grattan Institute is calling for an independent, expert panel to assess political advertising, backed by hefty financial penalties. The Morrison government’s “next step” campaign highlighted 260,000 more people in work than before the pandemic but was ultimately suspended with Labor claiming it was blatantly political. Image: YouTube “Weaponising taxpayer-funded advertising for political advantage wastes public money, undermines trust in politicians and democracy, and creates an uneven playing field in elections,” lead author and Grattan chief Danielle Wood said. “Sadly, our report shows that Australians cannot rely on the goodwill of ministers to prevent misuse of public money on politicised advertising. It’s time to ensure that taxpayer-funded advertising is solely for the benefit of the public, not politicians.” The report found that over the past 13 years about $630 million, or a quarter of all federal campaign advertising, was spent on campaigns that spruiked government achievements – and spending spiked on the eve of each federal election. In the lead-up to the 2019 federal election, the Coalition government spent about $85 million of taxpayers’ money on politicised advertising campaigns – on par with the combined spend by political parties on TV, print, and radio advertising. The report recommends tougher rules and tighter processes at federal and state levels to prevent governments from exploiting taxpayer-funded advertising. Government advertising campaigns should be allowed only where they are necessary to encourage specific actions or drive behaviour change, it says. Campaigns that promote government policies or programs, without a strong call to action, should be prohibited. An independent expert panel should assess all government advertising campaigns before they are launched and if the panel deems a campaign to be politicised, or otherwise not value for money, it should not run. These rules and processes should carry real penalties, the report says. If an auditor-general finds that an advertising campaign was approved by the minister without certification from the independent panel, or that the government changed the campaign after certification, the governing party should be liable to pay back the entire cost of the campaign, it says.
Here's some more pie in the sky advice...almost as useful as tits on a bull.... Opinion Almost half of Australia is financially stressed. Here’s one way to fix it By Paridhi Jain October 12, 2022 https://www.smh.com.au/money/planni...here-s-one-way-to-fix-it-20221011-p5bowq.html I remember there being so many tears. Back when I worked at the Cancer Council, I was on the phone all day talking to Australians who were experiencing serious financial stress as a result of cancer. At the end of each day, I’d often walk home feeling tonnes heavier than I had in the morning. I couldn’t help thinking about their stories. The impact of financial stress is both devastating and far-reaching. It affects every aspect of a person’s life, from their wellbeing, to their relationships, and career.Credit:iStock I learned quickly that the impact of financial stress is both devastating and far-reaching. It coloured every aspect of a person’s life, from their wellbeing, to their relationships, and career. So, it was sobering to learn that according to research by UNSW’s Centre of Social Impact almost one in two adults experience financial stress. That’s almost half of Australia. It’s not surprising, the last few years have felt like a movie that has a few too many plot twists just for drama’s sake. Except it’s no movie – it’s real life. But financial stress is a big problem – according to AMP’s 2022 Financial Wellness Report, it costs the economy over $66 billion a year, with financial stress negatively impacting employee productivity and absenteeism. So, what can we do about it? It’s a complex area, but having spent years helping people make huge progress on this front, I’ve noticed one major misconception people have about financial stress. The common misconception is that financial stress is simply the result of not having enough money. Therefore, if you had more money, you wouldn’t be stressed. This can be true for some, particularly low-income earners or those with very little in savings. Research conducted by the Centre of Social Impact found that financial wellness improved once respondents reported 1-2 months of savings. Imagine being asked to drive a car without ever having been taught how to drive. Sounds stressful, right? However, after talking to countless people about their finances over the years, I also know that you can earn well and have plenty of savings but still be financially stressed – data shows one in five employees earning over $100,000 per year also suffer from financial stress. This is because having or not having money is not the sole driver, with one of the key drivers of financial stress being financial capability, or not knowing how to properly manage money. This is confirmed by the Centre of Social Impact’s research, which found that financial literacy is an important factor in determining financial wellness but found that even basic financial literacy remains an issue for many Australians. Imagine being asked to drive a car without ever having been taught how to drive. Sounds stressful, right? Would a more expensive car help? No. That sounds even more stressful. This is the position so many people are in with their finances. They’re earning money but have no idea how to manage it. So, they’re essentially winging it, hoping that it all turns out okay, but secretly they’re always a little worried that they’re ‘doing it wrong’, or they ‘won’t have enough.’ Now, contrary to what you might be thinking, this is actually fantastic news. It means that you don’t need a bonus, a pay rise, or a side hustle to improve financial stress. You don’t need to go on a never-ending goose chase for more money. You can start reducing your financial stress just by increasing your financial capability. Learning how to better manage the money you are already earning will inevitably help you feel more confident and in control, and help you make better financial decisions. Of course, as you start making better financial decisions, you might also notice that your mental health isn’t the only thing that improves. Your bank account will start looking healthier too. It’s almost as though it literally pays to take care of your finances. Talk about a win-win.
National Rental Affordability Scheme's end prompting homelessness fears for single mother ABC Capricornia / By Tobi Loftus Posted 1 hours ago https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10...omelessness-nras-housing-queensland/101522128 Tannum Sands single mother Melanie Richardson fears she may end up homeless with her children.(ABC News: Katrina Beavan) Melanie Richardson's fear that she might end up living in a car with her two autistic children in central Queensland is never far from mind. Key points: The final properties subsidised by the federal NRAS program exit the scheme in 2026 The program launched in 2008 but was axed by the former Liberal government during 2014 Its ending comes as social housing applications and waitlists grow at an exponential rate The mother of two rents a home in the Gladstone suburb of Tannum Sands through the federal government's National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS), which provides subsidised rentals to people on lower incomes. The scheme was set up by the former federal Labor government in 2008, but axed by the former Liberal government in 2014, with the last subsidised properties set to exit the scheme in 2026. "We did find out that the NRAS program was ending not through our real estate agent, but through talking to neighbours," Ms Richardson said. In recent months, the three-bedroom duplex she rents through the scheme has increased from $200 a week to $280 a week. The home is set to exit the scheme next year, when it will then increase to full market value, which Ms Richardson said could be up to $430 a week. "Being on a carer's pension as my source of income, my rent is currently about 50 per cent of my income," the 41-year-old said. "So with travel to my children's paediatrician appointments and therapies, which can cost $400 a session, it's really, really tough … especially with cost-of-living increases. "Fruit and vegetables have become a luxury item." Ms Richardson added that social housing was not an alternative for her due to long waitlists. Housing applications triple Queensland Council of Social Services (QCOSS) chief executive officer Aimee McVeigh said the number of applications for social housing across central Queensland was "soaring", just weeks out from the state government's housing summit. QCOSS chief executive officer Aimee McVeigh plans to attend the state government's housing summit.(ABC News: Lucas Hill) She said the number of applications in Rockhampton doubled from 210 to 406 over the past five years, while in Gladstone they tripled from 136 to 383. QCOSS' analysis of Social Housing Register data revealed residents in the Gladstone region waited an average 19.1 months on social housing waitlists, while those in Rockhampton waited an average 17.9 months. "We are coming out of decades of under-investment into social and affordable housing," Ms McVeigh said. "We know that the rental market is particularly tight in Rockhampton; the vacancy rate is at about 0.3 per cent, which is extremely tight. "It basically means there are no affordable rentals available, so we're seeing people facing housing insecurity that are not even eligible for social housing." Government invests $2.9 billion A spokesperson for the Queensland Department of Communities, Housing and Digital Economy said it was investing $2.9 billion in social and affordable housing. "This will increase the social and affordable housing supply by almost 10,000 over the life of the Queensland Housing Strategy 2017–2027, including 7,400 new social and affordable homes over four years," the spokesperson said. "This investment will include commencing 2,765 social homes under our QuickStarts Qld program, including 121 new homes commenced in the central Queensland region by 30 June 2025, through a planned investment of $46.4 million, supporting more than 146 full-time equivalent jobs." The Queensland government says it is investing $2.9 billion in social and affordable housing.(ABC News: Liz Pickering) A community 'feeling bleak' With social housing waitlists ballooning, Ms Richardson says she cannot see a solution as the end of her NRAS subsidy nears. She said there was a "very real possibility" that her only option would to live in her car with her two kids and two pets. "I'm very fearful of that because I don't see any other alternative," Ms Richardson said. "We're really quite desperate for a solution … everyone here is feeling pretty bleak about the whole situation." The year's 'greatest challenge' Federal Housing Minister Julie Collins said housing insecurity was "one of the greatest social and economic challenges we face in 2022". Federal Housing Minister Julie Collins says the government is building 30,000 new social housing dwellings.(ABC News: Luke Bowden) But she said the government was expanding programs like the National Housing Infrastructure Facility, "making up to $575 million available to invest in social and affordable housing". "This will support the [Anthony] Albanese Labor government's commitment to build 30,000 new social and affordable housing properties through the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund," Ms Collins said. "I have twice convened meetings of state and territory housing ministers, as we work together to develop a new national housing and homelessness plan. "We will also continue to work collaboratively to introduce a national housing supply and affordability council, to ensure the Commonwealth plays a leadership role in increasing housing supply and improving housing affordability." The Queensland Department of Housing spokesperson said they were encouraging all NRAS approved owners to advise affected tenants as soon as possible about the future of their homes so they had sufficient time to plan. "The department's frontline Housing Service Centres can assist tenants exiting the NRAS to help secure alternative housing through a range of services including RentConnect and private rental market products such as bond loans," the spokesperson said.
Why Akshay was shocked to be evicted from share house By Kate Burke October 22, 2022 Key points Tenants across Sydney are being hard hit by the rental crisis, but international students are in a particularly vulnerable position, experts say. Increased demand for rentals has seen Sydney rents climb to record highs, and the vacancy rate fall to a record low. International students are more likely to be in informal tenancy arrangements and their limited local support networks and a lack of government assistance put them at risk. University student Akshay Gonpot never expected to be evicted from his Chippendale home just weeks after agreeing to a rent rise. He knew Sydney’s rental market was becoming increasingly expensive, but thought paying an additional $45 per week would be enough to satisfy his landlord. It was not. International student Akshay Gonpot’s rent rose by $45 per week. Less than three weeks later he was told to move out. Credit: Janie Barrett Within three weeks the 27-year-old international student and other tenants at his boarding house were given two weeks’ notice to vacate. And within three days, another tenant had put a deposit on his room that had gone from $295 per week to $430. “They gave us an eviction notice to 16 tenants without reason … when my friend asked why they said it was because they wanted new tenants as [they] thought [we] wouldn’t agree to pay the new rent,” he said. Some negotiated to stay, paying up to $90 per week more. Gonpot scrambled to find a new home, a $200 per week room in a Pendle Hill share house. It was a stressful process. Many homes were out of his budget, there was strong competition and he had to move further away, but was grateful to find somewhere. Gonpot’s situation is not unique amid Sydney’s rental crisis. Median house and unit rents are at record highs, Domain data shows, and the vacancy rate is a record low 1.1 per cent. International students are particularly vulnerable, experts say. They are more likely to be in informal tenancy arrangements in shared houses, shared rooms or unregistered boarding houses. Even those in expensive student accommodation can have fewer rights. Limited local support networks and a lack of government assistance put them at risk, alongside less awareness of rental rights, work restrictions limiting earning capacity and wage theft issues. The return of migrants and international students, which virtually halted when borders closed, has added to rental demand. Experts fear the situation could worsen as more students return. International students are particularly vulnerable in the rental crisis, experts say.Credit:Louise Kennerley More than 40,000 international students arrived in Australia in August, two in five of those in NSW, Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows, 26 per cent below the national intake pre-COVID in August 2019. It comes after a tough few years for international students. Many returned home during the pandemic, and those who stayed had less support than locals. Antona Bursa, international students officer for the UTS Students Association, said finding any apartment to rent close to universities, let alone an affordable one, was an increasing challenge, and called on universities to provide more support. “Students want to move back to the city, but because the rent is getting higher every couple of months … they have to move far away,” she said. “It’s getting very difficult and affecting them mentally and financially.” Tenants’ Union of NSW chief executive Leo Patterson Ross said international students face more tenancy disputes than locals. “Sometimes we even hear that landlords might take passports as a form of security which is completely unlawful, or people are told their visa will be put at risk if they don’t pay their rent,” he said. While some came from affluent homes, many worked to support themselves, and about a quarter were in a precarious financial situation, said professor Alan Morris, from the Institute for Public Policy and Governance at UTS. Finding an affordable rental close to universities is becoming an increasing challenge for students.Crediteter Rae A survey he conducted in late 2019 found a quarter of students were sharing bedrooms, and 3 per cent claimed to be hot bedding — sharing a bed with others on a roster. “About one in six students said they feared becoming homeless, which is obviously a huge issue and impacts directly on their academic work,” he said. While purpose-built student accommodation was a “huge business”, it was pricey and not the solution, Morris said. Subsidised student housing, as in other countries, would help, as would increasing rental supply, and ensuring international students were well-informed of their rights. Patterson Ross added: “The universities themselves and all levels of government should be working to make sure that if we’re going to ask people to come here … that we have housing available.” Sean Stimson, a solicitor for International Student Legal Service NSW, at Redfern Legal Centre, said more support from government and education providers was needed. He would like education providers “who profit significantly off the backs of the international students” to provide more affordable accommodation. Even if limited to semester one, it would give students the opportunity to settle in. There was an economic case for supporting international students, all three experts said, as they made a large financial contribution to universities and the state economy, and were important to addressing the nation’s skills shortage. Akshay has said goodbye to inner city living, and now rents a room in a Pendle Hill share house for $200 per week.Credit:Janie Barrett Gonpot sought advice from Redfern Legal Centre, but the eviction notice and multiple rent increases were allowed under boarding house regulations. He would like universities to provide more affordable accommodation, and to be eligible for student concession prices. “I feel like students are not very well protected in Australia, and like the government kind of doesn’t really care, they’re just using students like as cash cows.” “We even hear (stories) that landlords might take passports as a form of security which is completely unlawful.” Tenants Union of NSW chief executive Leo Patterson Peter Chesworth, acting chief executive for peak body Universities Australia, said he was aware of the difficulties international students could face finding accommodation, and encouraged students to discuss accommodation issues with their university, adding some universities guaranteed accommodation to first-year international students. “Ensuring all students have a good experience is a key concern for universities, which is why a comprehensive range of services and support systems are available,” he said in a statement.
More than half of NSW politicians own multiple properties By Tawar Razaghi October 26, 2022 https://www.smh.com.au/property/new...-own-multiple-properties-20221020-p5brc8.html one in five – or 21 per cent – of Australian households owned a residential property other than their home in 2019-20, Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows. The real estate interests of members of parliament were self-reported in the annual disclosure register for the past financial year. Roy Butler, the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers member for Barwon, owns the most properties. His dozen-strong portfolio is held mostly in NSW but two are in Queensland. Roy Butler, the state MP for Barwon, owns 12 properties. He was followed by Deputy Leader of the Nationals and Minister for Women, Regional Health and Mental Health Bronwyn Taylor, who declared an interest in 11 properties, nine of them commercial farms held by trusts in her husband’s name, the minister’s office clarified. The Liberal Member for Vaucluse Gabrielle Upton and the Liberal Member for Castle Hill Ray Williams declared six properties each, with Williams selling one during the reporting period. “A lot of people start with not much and work hard, which is how my situation came about. I think that’s a good thing,” Upton said. Sydney is facing a rental crisis with rents breaking records again, up 14 per cent in the past year to September, on Domain data. The rest of the state is not far behind, with house rents up 10.6 per cent in the same period in light of the pandemic’s tree-change phenomenon. While some experts have raised concerns about whether NSW parliament’s rate of property ownership is representative of the broader population, others say it is merely a symptom of a system that encourages high-income earners to invest in real estate. “In representative democracies, parliaments should be representative of the population. These figures reveal that NSW parliamentarians are far more likely to own multiple properties, to earn income from rentals, and they are far less likely to rent,” said Dr Richard Denniss, executive director of The Australian Institute. “This is a problem as politicians make laws around incentives to own rental properties and laws that protect tenants. They are less likely to understand the challenges faced by renters and first home buyers.” Sydney and regional areas are facing a chronic rental crisis.Crediteter Rae Denniss said tenant protections in Australia were particularly weak compared to other countries and many states, including NSW, continue to have no grounds evictions where landlords can kick tenants out for no reason. “This makes it very difficult for renters to gain any benefit from other rights they may have, like protections from unreasonable rental increases,” he said. Per Capita executive director Emma Dawson said high-income earning politicians cannot be blamed for investing their money rationally. “They way we have set incentives and tax concessions, once you’re earning a certain amount of money, the rational place to put it is in property,” Dawson said. “We’ve encouraged people to be landlords due to our taxes and regulatory environment. The problem is the market and the rules we’ve set up. “I wouldn’t chastise individual politicians for doing the rational thing of investing their excess money. But the fact is they preside over the rules that creates unequal access in the first place. “Is there a growing divide between the high proportion of people who rent for life and those in parliament? Yes. That divide is due to income and wealth. “We don’t tax wealth properly, and we don’t distribute wealth properly. The logical place to put it is in the property market and that’s the problem we’ve created.” Greens MP Jenny Leong, who has introduced a bill in state parliament to end no-grounds evictions to help protect renters, challenged her parliamentary colleagues to vote for the piece of legislation. ″I would urge them to vote in favour of stopping people being booted out of their rental property for no reason,” Leong said. “Successive governments have failed to put the security and interests of renters above those landlords. “It demonstrates how out of touch NSW parliament and decision makers are from people’s day-to-day struggles and their inability to pay their rent each week because of the rise of cost of living.”
Opinion The telling truth about the ‘bank of mum and dad’ Jessica Irvine Senior economics writer October 25, 2022 https://www.smh.com.au/business/the...-the-bank-of-mum-and-dad-20221024-p5bs8k.html Economic researchers have long taken an interest in the subject of “intergenerational earnings mobility”. That is, to what degree does a parent’s income determine their child’s future income? Turns out the apple can still fall quite far from the tree. IllustrationCredit Dionne Gain A definitive Australian paper in 2007 by economist turned Labor MP Andrew Leigh found a relatively elastic relationship between father-and son earnings. It also found this relationship had not significantly strengthened or weakened over the four-decade period examined and that Australia’s level of intergenerational mobility was about twice as in the United States. Australia: the land of the free? Perhaps. At the very least, it appears possible that, through education and hard work, one generation may live better than the last – at least from an income-generating perspective. More recently, however, inequality researchers have turned their minds more to the growing importance of intergenerational transfers of wealth. We know that wealth is already much more unequally distributed than incomes. And sadly, the ability for children to establish their wealth independent of their families does appear to be getting worse. Working hard at school to boost one’s future income earning capacity is one thing, but inheriting your parents’ wealth – or having it gifted to you by a parent still alive – is a much harder thing to come by. Unfortunately, when it comes to acquiring the largest source of wealth for most Australians – housing – it’s increasingly a family affair. That’s the conclusion of a research article published this month by economists Rachel Ong ViforJ and Christopher Phelps from Curtin University and William Clark from the California Centre for Population Research. Using data from the longest running longitudinal survey of Australian households, the Household, Income and Labor Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey, the researchers were able to isolate just over 8000 instances of survey respondents moving from non-home ownership to home ownership in any year. They then looked at the parental assistance received by these home buyers and the role it played in increasing their chances of making the transition, compared to someone else with the same characteristics (such as income and gender) who did not make the same leap on to the property ladder. Interestingly, they found only a small proportion, 4.5 per cent, of successful first home buyers received an outright cash transfer of more than $5000 from their parent around the time of their home purchase. A further 2.6 per cent did, however, benefit from an inheritance around that time. Perhaps the most surprising finding, however, is the extent to which parents are helping in non-cash in hand ways to shot put their children into home ownership. The best way to get into the housing market? Have wealthy parents.Credit Peter Rae While most first home buyers (74 per cent) lived in private rentals before their purchase, 13.4 per cent had been “co-residing” with parents. A further 4.5 per cent had been living rent-free in dwellings provided by family or friends (such as an investment property or holiday home). Nice work if you can get it. The remaining first home buyers had been either renting in public housing or living rent-free in homes provided by non-family members or friends. Such “in-kind” transfers from parents or family members to aspiring buyers were found by the researchers to play a critical role in helping them into the market. Perhaps unsurprisingly, living in a rent-free home led to a threefold increase in the chance of entering home ownership compared to someone in the private rental market trying to save a deposit. Also, perhaps unsurprisingly, living with higher socio-economic parents was also more beneficial than living with lower socio-economic parents – the latter perhaps requiring more financial help from children to cover household bills or being less able to cover other costs to boost a child’s first home deposit. If it’s home ownership you’re after, the best strategy, increasingly (and sadly) for aspiring buyers is clear: choose your parents wisely. “The positive relationship between parent and child ownership status has been well established,” the researchers found, while noting they did not have the data to analyse other sources of parental support, such as parents going “guarantor” on loans or making cash transfers later in the loan life to help pay it down. The truth is that the bank of mum and dad – estimated by some to now be the nation’s ninth-largest mortgage lender – is increasingly being forced to work in myriad important ways – for those lucky enough to have access to it, of course. This rising intergenerational transfer of wealth (between generations) is fuelling greater “intra-generation” (within generations) inequality of wealth. For the parents who help, it means channelling more of their financial resources – perhaps otherwise earmarked for retirement – into housing their kids. Necessary, perhaps, when governments have abandoned the field. “The results point to the growth in family welfare to meet housing needs,” the researchers find. “Relying on parents and other family and friends for one’s housing is thus around three times as common as relying on government-subsidised public housing.” Lower-income Australians, migrants, singles and high-school leavers were identified as the groups in society least likely to make the jump into stable home ownership. To help those without access to the bank of mum and dad, the researchers suggest “tax-free” savings accounts for accumulating home deposits, the expansion of credit availability for borrowers who lack parental support and greater targeting of financial education to young adults to help them with strategies to save for a home. “It is clear that without more direct attention to the paths of home ownership, the differences in home ownership across socio-economic backgrounds … are unlikely to decrease.” A disturbing truth, indeed.
I wonder if I was born a Rockefeller or Rothschild would my life have been different ?? The evangelicals I know worship right wing billionaires like they give a shit about =<$75,000 a year people.
Australian CPI figures just out and they continue to rise or exceed expectations. Australia's Central Bank the RBA is looking like a Deer in the Headlighs, too afraid to do the unpopular thing and lift Interest Rates, and the Market seems to know it. Australia is in trouble if this isn't tackled shortly.