Comments on: First election policy

By: Building the regional housing revolution // Chris Berg

Building the regional housing revolution // Chris Berg — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:03:12 +0000

[...] Catallaxy, Sinclair Davidson points out that $200 million for 15,000 houses seems like an absolute bargain: “Her BER has been a [...]

By: Entropy

Entropy — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 12:07:39 +0000

The risk is that it just ends up in the developers’ pockets. If a person was serious about regional population growth, it avoid rent seeking behavior you would not introduce subsidies like this, especially ones that only apply to new developments. A more effective option would be zonal tax breaks. Permanent incentives. Or probably more appealing to social democrats, tax penalties for living in urban areas. In fact mix the two as linked ‘reforms’ and it would be a sneaky way of raising revenue

By: pedro

pedro — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:52:08 +0000

In SEQ the infrastructure charges for a residential block are already quite a bit higher than $15k per block, but obviously that would help.

The roads, sewer and water to my house were paid for with Council loans repaid through rates. I think people in new suburbs get a raw deal with infrastructure taxation (as do the poor saps who need a toll road for decent transport), so I think there is an argument for more of this type of policy.

By: Entropy

Entropy — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:43:36 +0000

Now look at that: Mrs entropy’s iPhone auto corrected gillard to violate. Then it tried filleted for gillrudd.

By: Entropy

Entropy — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:41:28 +0000

As boy on a bike observed, this is not about houses, although violate seems to have given that impression, but utilities (excluding the NBN I presume). $13,000 per house for sewerage is a bit ripe though.

By: Peter Patton

Peter Patton — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:23:31 +0000

Given each SIHIP house has cost about $1 million. And that’s humpies in the desert! Just imagine how much the government would have to spend to build 15,000 houses in urban areas!?

By: .

Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:37:38 +0000

$13k per house?

Try $672 million for ZERO houses built!

http://bovination.com/readArticle.jsp?articleID=1661838

By: Entropy

Entropy — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 08:37:07 +0000

More money down the drain then

By: Right Pulse » Blog Archive » Another Gillard Building Con

Right Pulse » Blog Archive » Another Gillard Building Con — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:25:29 +0000

[...] Files has a damning assessment of Gillard’s first election promise to pump $200 million into regional housing. In short, it [...]

By: boy on a bike

boy on a bike — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 06:54:29 +0000

“The Gillard Labor Government will invest $200 million to help build up to 15,000 more affordable homes in regional cities over three years and relieve pressure on our major capital cities, so that Australia can grow sustainably. This program will give participating councils new funding to invest in local infrastructure projects that support new housing developments, such as connecting roads, extensions to drains and sewerage pipes, and community infrastructure such as parks and community centres.”

In other words, it’s nothing to do with building houses at all. It’s about building roads and things in housing developments.

So why do they mention building housing at all? It’s about laying sewerage pipes and that sort of thing.

I guess the headline of “Julia to spend $200m to help Westies get rid of their shit” doesn’t roll off the tongue that nicely.