My cousin has just bought a house in Newport (north of Sydney). I haven't asked her how much it cost, but next time I see her, I'll check to see how many arms & legs she still has.....
Alan Kohler isn't an idiot though. There is a link between net migration and house prices, but it's only one of many factors.
Unfortunately, any time someone floats the idea of reducing the unfair advantages that investors have over owner-occupiers (such as phasing out negative gearing), the "haves" start belly-aching and the policy is killed.
I know both those things and I normally respect Kohler. But he uses some very unfortunate phrasing in this article that gives way more credence to Hanson than he may have intended.
That is one of the key problems in the Australian housing market (amd more generally in politics when it comes to tax porposals) - but One Nation have no answers to it. None of their 'policies' will improve housing affordability, because it all just boils down to 'less immigration'. There are a number of parties that have way more credible policies, but they get neither the coverage nor the support that PHON are getting lately. Alan Kohler makes it sound like PHON are actually on to something, and that is an absolutely critical error.
It's worse than that, the Murdochracy starts ranting and the have-nots start belly-aching too.
In August 2024, I sold my mum's house in Belmont, victoria. It was an acknowledge knock down. $781,000. About 3 months ago, it was resold, after the demolition. Nice green grass block. They cut down a lovely 70 year old tree as well.
$881,000 for an empty block. Awesome part of town, mind you.
The guy that did the knockdown, probably earned nothing for his efforts.
There was buyers stamp duty (about $30,000). Real estate agent fees. Sellers stamp duty. Plus the cost to knock down the place, full of asbestos.
It's why I didn't want to do anything with it.
But, fuck me. $881,000 for a block of land. Plus another $400,000 - $500,000 for a building. Plus the 12 months to actually build on it.
I don't know how people can fund that.
$881,000 for an empty block. Awesome part of town, mind you.
The guy that did the knockdown, probably earned nothing for his efforts.
There was buyers stamp duty (about $30,000). Real estate agent fees. Sellers stamp duty. Plus the cost to knock down the place, full of asbestos.
It's why I didn't want to do anything with it.
But, fuck me. $881,000 for a block of land. Plus another $400,000 - $500,000 for a building. Plus the 12 months to actually build on it.
I don't know how people can fund that.
With debt, this is the reason so many get in to trouble every quarter percent rate rise. They can fund it because the banks are happy to lend the money whether they can afford it or not.
I'm fortunate, I haven't had a mortgage for years, when I did have one the interest rate was a lot higher but the house only cost me $126K in 1997. Renting would have probably been more expensive.
Because they've been convinced that their home is an investment, rather than a place to live.
Any attempt to fix house prices is going to hurt people with current mortgages, unless something is done to relieve that pain. If I've just paid A$1m for a house that is now worth A$750k, I feel like I've been cheated of A$250k (+interest) and so I feel it's in my interest to keep the price up, at least until I pay it off, and maybe sell it on.
On the other hand, if I take out a loan to buy a car, I accept that it will depreciate from the moment I drive it off the lot. If I buy it, then there's a sale the next week, I might feel cheated, but it's a known risk. I know I'm not going to get full sticker price when I sell it on, and I accept that I lose some money in the transaction, in return for having a car I can drive around.
We've been told for decades now that Property always appreciates. Real Estate will always increase in value. This is, and always has been, a lie. True, they're not making more land, but a change in the economy, a natural disaster, or even a change in how we build housing, could cause the bottom to drop out of the property market at any time. But while, maybe, a natural disaster might be accepted in some form, any deliberate action by a sitting government to force property prices down will be seen as an attack on the middle-class. Even if it is clearly targeted at high end investors.
Sorry to say, a $500k build isn't really a thing these days. Even the cheapest OTP mass-built econobox will be pushing north of 6 or 700k.
Still processing how completely disgusting the actions of NSW Police were Sunday Monday. 
Last edited:
Still processing how completely disgusting the actions of NSW Police were Sunday.
And how disgusting Minns' justifications are. Governments regularly stick up for the police and deny brutality, they are invariably, ultimately proved wrong.
Yeah the grandmother with fractured vertabrae from being ridden to the ground is completely normal....
Its extra disgusting since this is normally what you hope for a Labor government to come in and fix, except its them..
Cue the ranting and raving about attacking "regular Australians" with the proposed changes to taxing super accounts with large balances.
Of course the ranting and raving will come. Because hypothetically everyone might have a $3m super balance one day, so by definition such taxation changes are unfair towards all of us.
I'll add the /s just in case.
I'll add the /s just in case.
Oh absolutely. I simply lament the lessening of the gap between the two evils.
Maybe I just hallucinated the gap being wider at all.
Th Libs continue to probe the depths of self-immolation. The exact kind of fuckwit/political stance that destroyed them at the election now being touted as a reason to double down on the stupid, and get that filthy, unworthy female away from the wheel.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02...om-frontbench-sussan-ley-leadership/106332492
The LNP is miso creeps all the way down.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02...om-frontbench-sussan-ley-leadership/106332492
The LNP is miso creeps all the way down.
"Great job, Angus!"
Actually, I misread what he was lining up for a second there. I thought "That's one word for anyone who supports him."
From the article on the ABC News site:
If Taylor thinks the problems with the Liberal party are merely a problem with leadership, he is in for a rude shock. The party is in desperate need of a complete policy overhaul. They still haven't released their own internal review into the 2025 election drubbing. Most are in denial about the current political environment, and are telling themselves that Labor's ascendency, the rise of the teal independents, and the attraction of One Nation are just a temporary anomaly that will soon be corrected when the usual two-party binary reasserts itself.
If Taylor thinks the problems with the Liberal party are merely a problem with leadership, he is in for a rude shock. The party is in desperate need of a complete policy overhaul. They still haven't released their own internal review into the 2025 election drubbing. Most are in denial about the current political environment, and are telling themselves that Labor's ascendency, the rise of the teal independents, and the attraction of One Nation are just a temporary anomaly that will soon be corrected when the usual two-party binary reasserts itself.
I would have thought Ley gets a bit of a reprieve after bringing the coalition back together. Looks like Taylor didn't even want to do the dirty work.
As remarked on my socials this morning, if Angus Taylor is the answer, the question was a real doozy.
As remarked on my socials this morning, if Angus Taylor is the answer, the question was a real doozy.
And we're off. Spill motion delivered to Ley.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...08af960c64f2e3#block-698cfa708f08af960c64f2e3
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...08af960c64f2e3#block-698cfa708f08af960c64f2e3
Schrodinger's coalition
It is both one party and two parties.
Depending on if you're looking at it or not.
It is both one party and two parties.
Depending on if you're looking at it or not.
Looks like the vote is taking place at 9am tomorrow (I assume that's Canberra time).
Other than pure misogyny I don't understand the rush to topple Ley as the leader. The coalition know that they aren't going to win back enough seats to win the election in 2028, so why not play the long game? Support Ley all the way through to the election and then have a leadership ballot afterwards. They get to make a big show about supporting women in politics to try and coax some votes out of the unsure (or at least stop hemorrhaging votes to Teal/Labor).
Instead this just feels like really bad political maneuvering. Doing things this way around is just going to cement them as the anti-women party in the minds of the entire electorate and possibly lose them more seats next time around.
What's the worst that can happen, Ley leads the party to an election win?
Instead this just feels like really bad political maneuvering. Doing things this way around is just going to cement them as the anti-women party in the minds of the entire electorate and possibly lose them more seats next time around.
What's the worst that can happen, Ley leads the party to an election win?
You're assuming logic and reason. The Liberal Party has been bereft of both since at least Abbott, and on the rare occasions where they had a leader that looked like they might bring either of those back even to a minor degree, that leader never lasted long.
That's Angus Young
I've been saying this, too. It's a dumb thing done dumbly. My sense is that these days everybody is hyper-attuned to their identity and if/how it is represented in parliament. They haven't offered a comprehensible public story about any of it, not the splits, not the spill. It can't be about any policy, right? Ley didn't even try to oppose any right wing extremism or return the coalition to the center.
James Paterson was quoted as follows today (emphasis mine):
I don't know where these people have been over the past decade, or what parallel universe they inhabit, but if Angus Taylor is the 'smartest policy brain' they can. muster, then they have a much bigger problem than they even realise.
In public life, smart people don't need a mate to stand up and assert they are a "brain". They humbly offer the product of their thought for judgement.
And again, "values". Stalin had clear, firm, values. It's meaningless by itself: what values? What published writing of Taylor's can we read to get an idea what values he holds to? What speeches are recognized as setting out a fresh set of values for the coalition? How do Taylor's values differ from Ley's? Courage: to do what? Being courageous is no good if you have bad intentions. And so on.
I find the moral and intellectual collapse of the coalition upsetting. I don't find relief in thinking them unelectable because, given the unwillingness of any sitting government to get to grips with our core problems, there's the real threat of an extreme opposition getting people to come around to their point of view.
Wow, that's quite a piece. In the absence of any substance, his business dealings probably give the best information about his values. I think my favorite bit was when his Facebook account commented on its own post:
Yeah there was a cascade dropping that one line on his SM accounts after he announced the spill.
I'd argue that goes back as far as Howard and Costello.
Sure, Howard was a canny, cunning operator but I don't believe he had a particularly notable intellect. Turnbull bucked the trend but it didn't last long.
Last edited:
Yeah Howard was a turd, a cunning turd but destroyed so much social program funding even as he got a free ride on the back of China's explosive growth in demand for our coal and ore at the time. Wasted it all, and wrecked a lot of what was good about our governance before then.
Last edited:
When Howard came to power, Australia was at a crossroads. It had become apparent that things couldn't go on as they had if we were going to meet our potential and stay out of trouble.
Howard was a skilled denialist and placater. And contemporary Australian culture handed him tools. It handed him pervasive cultural constructs like "a fair go". It sounds good, the idea that everyone in Australia should have opportunity and that Australia is an egalitarian nation. But in Howard's Australia it was turned on its head to mean that because Australia is egalitarian, all social programs working to prevent disadvantage could be dismantled and any growing threat to equality could be ignored.
I'm not sure if I'd go as far as Dr Ken Henry:
(But his analysis of inequality and the myth of egalitarianism in Australia is worth the read, as is this Guardian article.)
Australia as the land of the fair go. She'll be right. Relaxed and comfortable. Maybe Howard gave the electorate what they wanted to hear: a plausible excuse for inaction, indifference to the fate of the less fortunate, a way to put off hard thought about Australia's future and focus on personal wealth.
Last edited:
Every Liberal leader since Fraser has been worse than the previous, with an exception in Turnbull. That blip aside, they just keep getting worse.
Howard had no vision whatsoever. His future was the distant past.
Abbot only knew how to wreck, and was a catastrophe as PM. Couldn’t even get his budget through, aided by the world’s most inept treasurer.
Morrison was just straight up corrupt. A liar who neither held a hose nor led a nation. No vision beyond taking whatever he could get with both hands.
Dutton was Dutton, and I’ve got no worse insult of a human being than that.
Ley is laughably bad but now Taylor gives a contrast by being, simply put, a moron.
And Fraser gets no pass, but I had to start somewhere. At least he pushed for Vietnamese refugees to settle here, and rediscovered his soul after leaving office.
While I’m naturally more of a left wing supporter, I’d kind of like a competent opposition to keep them true.
Howard had no vision whatsoever. His future was the distant past.
Abbot only knew how to wreck, and was a catastrophe as PM. Couldn’t even get his budget through, aided by the world’s most inept treasurer.
Morrison was just straight up corrupt. A liar who neither held a hose nor led a nation. No vision beyond taking whatever he could get with both hands.
Dutton was Dutton, and I’ve got no worse insult of a human being than that.
Ley is laughably bad but now Taylor gives a contrast by being, simply put, a moron.
And Fraser gets no pass, but I had to start somewhere. At least he pushed for Vietnamese refugees to settle here, and rediscovered his soul after leaving office.
While I’m naturally more of a left wing supporter, I’d kind of like a competent opposition to keep them true.