For me, this topic is really about the standard of housing we Australians should accept for ourselves and our fellow citizens.
I have thought for some time now that ONE answer to the affordability issue is to lower the standards of housing.
Like cars and many other items we use and possess, the standard of housing has improved (and many would argue, rightly so) in Australia. While size isn't everything, the size of the average Australian home has roughly doubled since the 1950's, while the number of people per household has nearly halved...
Most Queenslander style homes constructed early in the 20th Century and before (and yes the style did evolve from what were basically tents) had only one or two bedrooms (verandahs were used as bedrooms)
I am always amazed at the number of fans kicked to the curb on council clean up days. The inference I draw is that residents are now enjoying air conditioning.
Cars without "Air, hook and fast glass" are still capable of getting one from A to B just as homes are capable of providing shelter without many of the luxuries to which we have grown accustomed.
Years ago (and probably during an economic downturn) someone had the idea of re-birthing HR Holdens as an affordable alternative to 80's vehicles.
Much of the turnover in cars is artificially generated like fashion and decor in housing. (The new model has a pink poofle valve and another 25 kinkers and if you drive to the beach girls in bikinis will admire it)
It's all relative- someone on the street would probably love a tent, a tent dweller a caravan and so one.
What are the minimum standards of housing we want for our people? And let's recognize that the higher these standards are the fewer dwellings can be provided, either by public or private investment in housing.
It's a complex issue that has a range of social and environmental (and other) dimensions. It's even further complicated by the fact that all our levels of government have a say in housing.
I have thought for some time now that ONE answer to the affordability issue is to lower the standards of housing.
Like cars and many other items we use and possess, the standard of housing has improved (and many would argue, rightly so) in Australia. While size isn't everything, the size of the average Australian home has roughly doubled since the 1950's, while the number of people per household has nearly halved...
Most Queenslander style homes constructed early in the 20th Century and before (and yes the style did evolve from what were basically tents) had only one or two bedrooms (verandahs were used as bedrooms)
I am always amazed at the number of fans kicked to the curb on council clean up days. The inference I draw is that residents are now enjoying air conditioning.
Cars without "Air, hook and fast glass" are still capable of getting one from A to B just as homes are capable of providing shelter without many of the luxuries to which we have grown accustomed.
Years ago (and probably during an economic downturn) someone had the idea of re-birthing HR Holdens as an affordable alternative to 80's vehicles.
Much of the turnover in cars is artificially generated like fashion and decor in housing. (The new model has a pink poofle valve and another 25 kinkers and if you drive to the beach girls in bikinis will admire it)
It's all relative- someone on the street would probably love a tent, a tent dweller a caravan and so one.
What are the minimum standards of housing we want for our people? And let's recognize that the higher these standards are the fewer dwellings can be provided, either by public or private investment in housing.
It's a complex issue that has a range of social and environmental (and other) dimensions. It's even further complicated by the fact that all our levels of government have a say in housing.
