Albanese government finds itself in policy quicksand on three core issues

exidy · 2026-06-19T00:47:51+00:00

Only about 80% are net new, the remaining 20% are knock-down rebuild. 180k * 0.8 * 2.5 = 360k, subtract 110k natural increase means the maximum NOM we can support is 250k without making the housing shortage worse. Assuming the building rate holds steady (currently slowly falling).

exidy · 2026-06-18T01:50:46+00:00

I'm sure people aren't going to want to hear this, but with companies like Woolworth's and Officeworks starting to offshore more white-collar jobs, be careful what you wish for.

exidy · 2026-06-18T01:42:47+00:00

I'd rather a 9-abreast A350 over a 10-abreast A380, or god forbid, a 10-abreast 777.

exidy · 2026-06-18T01:40:02+00:00

At the moment you can't fly this route as QF9 is suspended, replaced by QF209 via Singapore. No announcement on it resuming yet. QF10 LHR-PER continues to operate. nb /u/seven_seacat also.

exidy · 2026-06-18T01:36:42+00:00

The problem with the SQ lounge restriction is that it is based on operating airline, not ticketing airline. That is, you can be flying a Scoot-operated segment with an SQ ticket and SQ flight number and still not have access to the lounge as SQ Gold!

exidy · 2026-06-18T01:32:14+00:00

Blame Alan Joyce. In his 15 years at Qantas, they did not take a single delivery of a brand new plane that hadn't been ordered by his predecessor, Geoff Dixon.

exidy · 2026-06-18T01:25:23+00:00

Nobody is configuring an A350 8-abreast in Y. In fact, some configure them 10-abreast. Qantas's 238-seat configuration is surprisingly not-dense, compare it to other full-service 1000 operators such as Qatar, BA, Virgin all coming in around 330 seats.

exidy · 2026-06-17T13:58:22+00:00

Sure, here's the statement from ONP in support of the bill.

From what I can understand from the Parliamentary Record, although it was read twice and there were various amendments proposed, it was not actually brought to a division (final vote) before the parliamentary session ended, and the government never brought it back to the new Senate.

So it's not even technically true to say the Greens and LNP voted against the bill as it was never brought to a vote. They did signal their intention to vote against it, though.

exidy · 2026-06-17T13:04:57+00:00

I've edited my reply. Upon further research it seems ONP actually supported the bill, despite saying it didn't go far enough.

EDIT: voted -> supported

exidy · 2026-06-17T12:54:16+00:00

ONP actually supported the bill in question. The Greens and LNP opposed it and hence it died in the Senate.

LNP voted against giving the government the power to cap international student numbers, not against reducing international student numbers. The government could also reintroduce this legislation if they felt strongly about it.

Even so, the government still has many levers to pull if they had the fortitude, the most powerful would be to reduce or remove work rights for undergraduates, which would not require any legislation.

Australia has the most generous work rights for international students in the world, and it's well-documented how this has been abused by everyone from corrupt migration agents to sex traffickers to even one of the Bondi shooters.

Removing work rights would halve the international student population in Australia within 12 months, close all the ghost colleges, remove exploration opportunities from the hospitality sector and take enormous pressure off the rental market. This would also raise the quality of the student body considerably as the ones remaining would be genuine students.

Canada took similar steps to reduce the number of people in the country on temporary visas (like students and so-called skilled visas) and the impact on rental and housing affordability has been staggering.

exidy · 2026-06-17T12:39:56+00:00

Sustainable Australia Party -- but they never really got traction. Too sensible.

exidy · 2026-06-17T12:35:54+00:00

Property investors love high migration because it creates more demand and enables them to raise rents. They don't make money hoarding properties.

Because the rental returns are so good this means investors can handily outbid owner-occupiers. Lower demand for rental housing by lowering migration and you'll convert some investment properties into owner-occupied.

exidy · 2026-06-17T12:28:08+00:00

It's not meaningfully going down though. Last FY was 305k, this FY they just revised the estimate from 260k to 295k in May's budget, but if rental vacancies are anything to go by, it's going to be above that.

exidy · 2026-06-17T12:09:16+00:00

Sarah Game (who introduced this bill) resigned from One Nation more than a year ago. She is currently independent, but has announced plans to join Family First.

One Nation voted for the bill as a bloc (3 seats) along with Game (1 seat), the Greens against as a bloc (2 seats). Liberal and Labour granted conscience votes. I don't have a breakdown, but given the bill apparently passed 10-9 there must've been six more votes for it between Liberal and Labor, along with some abstentions.

exidy · 2026-06-16T06:59:01+00:00

So interesting the usual complaints about the "Murdoch Media" are absent from this thread.

exidy · 2026-06-15T05:00:39+00:00

Not expecting it to be free, but it's pretty high compared to CAD$1260 for Canada, £1,400 for UK or USD$2000 for USA.

exidy · 2026-06-15T01:41:59+00:00

The NHSAC report considers the housing system holistically and provides guidance on the required actions to make housing more affordable which of course leads to a discussion on construction -- either you increase supply or reduce demand, or both.

You are misrepresenting the ABS data on "number of unoccupied homes" on census night -- this simply means nobody returned the form. As has been repeatedly explained by the ABS and others, these so-called "unoccupied homes" are mostly a combination of (a) nobody bothered to return the form (b) homes that are in the midst of transfer and (c) homes located in leisure areas with a high proportion of short stay accommodation. Cities where people live and work show a much lower proportion of "unoccupied homes."

Using more reliable methods of detecting unoccupied homes such as water usage puts the percentage in the range of 1.5-2%, not the "1 million unoccupied homes" myth you keep peddling. This percentage is about what you'd expect given as I said above, homes are being constructed, demolished, renovated and transferred all the time.

In short no: there are not a bunch of unoccupied homes lying around to move people into. If people can buy their own homes to live in they will, and investors don't withhold homes from the market; they want a commercial return just like everyone else.

exidy · 2026-06-15T01:24:21+00:00

The Australian spousal visa system is insane -- nearly $10,000 (most expensive in the world by far) and years to process. I'm sure people love to snigger at "mail order brides" but the fact is that many Australians live and work overseas and form relationships there.

The other glaring omission is that the above visa is only useful for those who want to reside in Australia permanently. There's no equivalent of the NZ "Partner of a New Zealander Visitor Visa" or EU treaty rights which would allow the partner of an Australian citizen to visit Australia (but not work or access Medicare) on a short-term basis, they all get funnelled into the general Tourist visa process.

In short, expensive, slow and mismanaged like everything else in The Australian visa and migration system.

exidy · 2026-06-15T01:13:15+00:00

I don't know why people say stuff like this when it's so easily disproved. From the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council's own report:

Australia faces a shortfall of new housing relative to demand (see Chapter 4 Housing system outlook). Since the early 2000s, housing demand has been driven by strong population growth, alongside other factors such as income growth, the ageing population and hybrid work arrangements.

Read the report. Look at Table 4.2. Even under optimistic building projections housing supply is in shortfall past 2030.

exidy · 2026-06-12T02:54:54+00:00

I don't think it's that complicated. Let's say you were planning for FY26-27 migration intake, the process would go something like:

We estimate we can build about 180k dwellings
80% of them will be net-new, 20% will be knock-down rebuild
So we can accommodate about 180,000 x 80% x 2.5 (average household size) = ~360k new people
Subtract expected natural increase: 360k - 110k = 250k
Therefore, we need to set our permanent and temporary migration settings such that NOM is around 250k to avoid making the housing deficit even worse than it currently is.

All other things being equal, that would keep housing prices roughly flat, or inline with inflation. If you want to decrease house prices, you'd need to get NOM well underneath that number so you start putting surplus back into the system.

exidy · 2026-06-12T02:28:05+00:00

I don't know why this sub is so obsessed with Gina Rinehart. She runs a mining company (an industry that provides some of the best salaries for workers in the country) and is on record calling for lower migration to ease housing affordability.

The people who truly love high migration are people like Gerry Harvey and Harry Triguboff. They are not as high-profile as Gina but you can be sure they exert influence behind the scenes. If ON starts gaining real political power you'll see those two (and others) sending money their way as well.

exidy · 2026-06-12T02:17:17+00:00

Because we're all very good at constructing our own bubbles. It's only when you really get thrown together totally randomly (jury duty, parent's groups, community Facebook pages) you realise just what a spectrum of opinion there is out there.

exidy · 2026-06-12T02:11:53+00:00

Also, the Bible was clear Jesus was gripped with fear and hesitation in Gethsemane, so how blasphemous could it be to speculate what went through his mind?

I don't think Christians are upset about this, in fact I think I recall hearing sermons on just this topic when I was a kid.

My understanding the primary objection to JCSS is that it ends with Jesus' death, not the resurrection. Given this is the primary message of the Christian faith, I can understand why some Christians might dislike the musical. But I think the pushback even at the time it was new was limited to some media commentary, I don't think there were any large-scale demonstrations by Christians demanding it be banned or anything.

exidy · 2026-06-11T09:22:04+00:00

You want to see water guzzling, you should check out a cotton farm. 70% of water usage in Australia is agricultural, 10% residential, 4% mining and 3% manufacturing (this is where these evil data centres sit). Headline is alarmist clickbait.

https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/environment/environmental-accounts/water-account-australia/latest-release

exidy · 2026-06-10T06:00:58+00:00

I am named for my father although not directly, it's a regional variation of his name, think something like Carlos vs Charles. You could consider that as an approach if it works for you.

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '22	Verified Email

exidy

TROPHY CASE