• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
  • Policies
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Contact
  • Support
  • Join

Australian Family Party

Family Matters

  • Family Resilience
  • Family Economics
  • Family Technology
  • Free to Speak
  • Free to Believe
  • Free to Work

Housing Affordability

Remembering Frederick Douglass

15/03/2023 by Australian Family Party

Frederick-DouglassFrederick Douglass (1817–1895) is considered by many to be America’s greatest African American. Along with Booker T. Washington and Martin Luther King, these make up their top three.

Born into slavery, Douglass became a free man and rose through the ranks to eventually become the first African American to receive a vote for nomination for President of the United States. His final years were spent as Consul-General to the Republic of Haiti.

Following the American Civil War and the emancipation of America’s slaves, Douglass was asked, “What should be done for these (former) slaves?”

“Nothing!” he replied. “Leave us alone. By freeing us, you’ve done enough already.”

“If you leave us alone, we’ll work our way up. We will create pathways for others to follow.”

The value of getting one’s foot onto that first rung of the ladder cannot be overstated.

I mention this because a number of years ago an application was made to amend the Australian Fast Food Industry Award and dramatically increase the wages of junior employees.

It was unarguable that junior employees’ wages were very low at that time, but this had the significant benefit that many young people from lower socio-economic areas were able to get jobs and, to paraphrase Frederick Douglass, “work their way up”.

Appeals to reject the application fell on deaf ears and a substantial increase in the Award wage occurred.

This had the perverse effect that middle-class college students started applying for the jobs – and getting them. One franchise-owner said to me, “Why wouldn’t I employ the college kids? They’re smart, articulate, reliable, and their parents drop them off and pick them up in a BMW!

“The lower socio-economic kids may not have been as good, but hey, they were cheaper.”

No-one was sacked and replaced, but over time the poorer kids were replaced by the wealthier ones.

Let’s face it, some young people don’t have a lot going for them. They’re not well-connected, may come from dysfunctional families, may not have particularly high IQs, and may have other problems as well. The one thing they do have going for them, however, is their ability to compete with the more fortunate ones on price.

In short, they were prepared to work for less in order to get a start.

Not anymore. We have taken away from them that one last remaining labour market advantage they had over the rich kids.

This form of price-fixing is at the heart of labour market regulation. It’s called ‘centralised wage fixing’. It is putting the power to dictate to someone what they can and cannot work for – regardless of what they want – into the hands of people completely remote from the circumstances of those whose lives they are about to ruin.

When people, young people in particular, are excluded from full participation in community and working life, the social costs can be enormous – drug and alcohol abuse, crime, domestic violence, poor health, depression, frustration, boredom, bikie gang recruitment, civil disorder, teenage pregnancy, even suicide. This is what can happen when young people don’t have a job. They are locked out of the labour market at exactly the time they are biologically ready to enter into relationships, get married and start a family.

No-one is arguing against a welfare safety net, but we have to allow people to get a foot on that first rung of the ladder.

The current political battle is not between Left and Right, rich and poor. It’s between freedom and authoritarianism. It’s between those who, like Douglass, want to help people become self-reliant by removing barriers to entry to things such as jobs and housing, and those who see those without jobs and houses as political opportunities to get themselves elected. “It’s not your fault”, political opportunists say. “You are a victim. The system did this to you. That rich kid took your job. Those baby-boomer investors took your house. Vote for me and the government will look after you. I’ll remake that cruel and nasty free-market capitalist system.”

Not only is this economically stupid, it is morally reprehensible.

Thank you for your support.


Postscript: Last month we were advised of a cost increase in sending out our Newsletter. Can you help? Even in a small way? Every bit helps. If so, please go to our Support page here. Thank you so much.

 

 

Filed Under: Australia's economic future, Australian Character, Australian Politics, Culture Wars, Family Policy, Freedom, Housing Affordability, Social policy

Between Elections

01/09/2022 by Australian Family Party

parliament-house-between-electionsAs the late Texas politician Robert Strauss used to say, “You can fool some of the people all of the time – and they’re the ones you need to concentrate on”.

In politics, the golden rule is whatever result you see, that is what was intended.

Former Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson says, “We live in an age of astonishing disengagement by far too many good citizens in the life of our nation. I suspect that without compulsory voting we’d have up to half the electorate not bothering to vote at all.”

If we apply the golden rule to John Anderson’s observation, then citizens being disengaged from politics is exactly what is intended. Keep people in the dark. Do things that turn them off politics. Take parliament’s Question Time for example. Not only do our politicians behave appallingly, they take our money and our freedom and say they will act in our best interests. Instead, they act in their own interest and the interests of the rent-seeking cartels. No wonder people are disillusioned and disengaged.

This world is not a playground, it is a battleground. The troubling aspect, however, is the consistency of the forces on that battleground. Whether it’s Black Lives Matter, Roe v Wade (the US Supreme Court ruling on abortion), transgenderism, climate or Covid, the activists seem to all follow the same script – regardless of where they are in the world or how the issue affects them.

Most people are not into confrontation and opt out, leaving the world to be ‘ruled by those who show up’ as the old saying goes. The problem is that those who show up do not think like the ‘good citizens’ John Anderson has in mind.

The activists want everyone to be like them and embrace their views on everything from morality to marriage to matters of life and death – and everything in between. If you object, as US Bible teacher Chuck Swindoll puts it, “If you don’t shut up, we’ll shut you up”.

The world is polarised like never before. As we’ve said on our website previously, the (political) centre is disappearing. Public policy is becoming like a gym barbell with weights on each end and a long bar between them. People are either at one end of the political spectrum or the other.

Science was once similar to mathematics in that there was general agreement on the facts. Not anymore. ‘Follow the science’ is looking less like mathematics and more like economics, with one side of politics pushing its version of the science and the other side pushing theirs.

So, what is the answer?

As we have argued from the outset, ‘family, faith and freedom’ are the best bulwarks against division and authoritarianism. We must stand firm.

We need to be fierce advocates for the family as society’s key defender. Our Top 10 objectives are to STOP:

  1. The ‘tax and control’ agenda – including opposing digital identity legislation.
  2. Fearmongering – climate change is not a threat to life on earth and nor is Covid.
  3. The money-making racket that is renewable energy.
  4. The indoctrination of children through the education system.
  5. The undermining of faith-based schools and organisations.
  6. The mental health epidemic.
  7. Addictions to alcohol, gambling, drugs and pornography.
  8. The decline in home ownership and the associated rental nightmare.
  9. Social media harming the young.
  10. Bureaucrats running the country.

As the Greens have demonstrated over and over again, the way to get what you want is through political power. You get elected, you do deals to increase your Senate representation, and then when you have the balance of power – like they have now, you flex your muscles and get your way.

If you agree, please continue to support us – particularly between elections.

A basic $20 annual donation would cover our expenses. Please support us if you can here.

Thank you again.

Filed Under: Australia's economic future, Australian Character, Australian Politics, Covid, Family Policy, Family Resilience, Freedom, Housing Affordability, Social policy

The Veil of Ignorance

03/08/2022 by Australian Family Party

rawls-slaveryIn his fascinating book, A Theory of Justice, the American moral, legal and political philosopher John Rawls promotes an idea called the Veil of Ignorance.

When drawing up laws, says Rawls, lawmakers should imagine themselves standing behind a curtain or veil, ignorant of what position they themselves will occupy once the law has been passed. Rawls cites a number of examples of this idea, the second being housing which I will cover shortly.

The first example he gives is in relation to slavery. What sort of law would lawmakers write if they were unsure whether they themselves would be slave or slave owner once the curtain was lifted?

His second example of housing is as relevant today as it was in 1970 when he wrote his ground-breaking book.

This approach, he states, would create a more just society.

Let’s consider this in relation to housing.

Knowing what they know now, how would today’s baby-boomers write housing and planning laws if they did not know, once the veil was lifted, whether they would be young or old?

In the event they found themselves in the ‘young’ category, it is beyond doubt they would want low-cost, low-entry level rules to get into their first home – as happened for them 40 years earlier!

As we know, low-cost, low-entry housing is not what first homebuyers are faced with in 2022. Entry-level housing is not three times the median wage like it was for previous generations. It is seven … eight … nine … even ten times the median income.

Regrettably, today’s laws are written more in the mode of ‘I’m alright Jack, pull the ladder up’ rather than, ‘What if I’m a young person trying to get a foot on the employment ladder or trying to buy a first home, or having to pay off a student loan?’

As previously described on this site, Australia does not have, and has never had, a ‘housing’ affordability problem. It has a ‘land’ affordability problem. The actual cost of building a house in Australia has kept pace with inflation and is low by international standards. The price of land on which to the build the house, however, has skyrocketed.

Land is the problem.

By restricting the amount of land available, lawmakers have sent the price of entry-level housing through the roof. Lawmakers have used urban planning laws to restrict the amount of fringe land available and have then drip fed it to a land-starved housing industry.

The ‘scarcity’ that drives up land prices is wholly contrived – it has been a matter of political choice, not geographic reality. It is the product of restrictions imposed through planning regulation and zoning.

Some of the claims used by lawmakers to stop urban growth are that urban growth is not good for the environment, or that it prevents the loss of agricultural land, or that it saves water, or it leads to a reduction in motor vehicle use or it saves on infrastructure costs for government. Although all of these claims are either false and/or misleading, they have become accepted wisdom. Few have had the courage or the insight to challenge them.

One of those few is Patrick Troy.

In his 1996 book The Perils of Urban Consolidation, Patrick Troy, Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University, and a leading thinker on urban planning, squarely challenged the assumptions on which the urban densification principles are based. He pointed to flaws in the figures and arguments which have been used over and over again to support what is speciously called ‘smart growth’ arguing that these policies will produce ‘mean streets’, not ‘green streets’.

Until the 1970s, the development of new suburbs was largely left to the private sector. The many leafy, liveable suburbs like Netherby or Colonel Light Gardens south of Adelaide or Tea Tree Gully in the north-east with their large allotments and wide streets are an enduring testimony to what suburbs looked like before planning laws were introduced. Compare these old suburbs with the packed-like-sardines stuff foisted on young home-buyers today!

leafy-dense

In last week’s Newsletter, we discussed opening up Adelaide’s northern plains to provide access to housing, employment, supply chains and tourism opportunities for the new $100bn maritime defence project based at North Haven.

The northern Adelaide plains are more than three times the size of metropolitan Adelaide – a city of over a million people that has taken over 150 years to get to where it is today. There is enough land in Adelaide’s north to last for centuries.

northern-plains

To enable first home-buyers easy access to housing – on quarter acre (1,000 sq metre) blocks if they want to kick a ball around and/or grow a few vegies, fruit trees and chickens – for around $300,000 and to permanently fix the ‘land’ problem, ensuring future generations do not have to suffer a similar fate, we need to do five things:

  1. Where they have been applied, urban growth boundaries or zoning restrictions on the urban fringe must be removed. Residential development on the urban fringe needs to be made a ‘permitted use’.
  2. Compulsory ‘Master Plan’ communities need to be abolished. If large developers wish to initiate Master Planned Communities, that’s fine, but don’t make them compulsory. This will allow smaller developers back into the market.
  3. Allow the development of basic serviced allotments – ie, water, sewerage, electricity, stormwater, bitumen roads, street lighting and street signage. Additional services and amenities – such as lakes, entrance walls, childcare centres, bike trails, etc – can be optional extras if the developer wishes to provide them and the buyers are willing to pay for them.
  4. Privatise planning approvals. Any qualified Town Planner should be permitted to certify that a development application complies with a Local Government’s Development Plan.
  5. Abolish up-front infrastructure charges and so-called ‘developer contributions’ by Local or State Governments. All infrastructure services should be paid for through the rates system – ie, pay ‘as’ you use, not ‘before’ you use – like it was for the boomers! First home-buyers should not be singled out and forced to pay up-front for Local or State Government infrastructure expansion given that existing homeowners were not required to contribute when they bought in.

Thank you for support.

Filed Under: Australian Politics, Family Policy, Freedom, Housing Affordability, MATS Plan, Social policy, South Australia

Primary Sidebar

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

donatedonate

Bob Day AO, Federal Director Profile

Bob Day AO

Profile is here.

Subscribe to our Mailing list!

* indicates required



Recent Posts

  • Remembering Frederick Douglass
  • Remembering The Galatians Group
  • The Shrinking Forest ­– Part 5
  • The Shrinking Forest – Part 4
  • The Shrinking Forest – Part 3
  • The Shrinking Forest – Part 2
  • The Shrinking Forest – Part 1
  • New Year 2023
  • Abraham Lincoln
  • Postcard from Nepal
  • Stop Monkeying Around
  • Checkmate
  • Between Elections
  • The Veil of Ignorance

© 2023 The Australian Family Party
Privacy Policy
Contact Us