Was the housing crisis caused by the Howard government’s policies?
https://www.thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2024/09/16/howard-government-housing-crisisOpen linkView original on lemmy.worldSyndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.worldhttps://www.thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2024/09/16/howard-government-housing-crisisOpen linkView original on lemmy.world
6 replies
UMM NO ITS OBVIOUSLY LABOR BECAUSE REASONS PLUS THEY ARE IN POWER RIGHT NOW. -every tard lining up to felch the ranga
Some economic analysis that seems right. Great.
But what about a more philosophical approach? What does it mean to turn anything and everything into an investment market? Why do it at all and what are the basic trade offs and implications?
Turning our homes into a stock market on the face of it sounds outright dystopian to me. Stability, mobility, independence, basic welfare, private property incentives and even Australian nationalism against being bought out by foreigners. All of these values seem both to fly in the face of the idea of hot housing markets and to be obvious values worth caring about.
So what happened? Apart from corrupt politics, a good amount is boomer psychosis was at play I think … ‘all about “me” getting rich’.
I still find it hard to believe that a conversation or two didn’t happen about the fundamentals here!
Be careful when you blame the boomers. The majority of them are fucked too. Some of them were tricked, and many others were powerless.
It's a class war not an age war.
Fair! But to clarify, I’d happily say that “boomer” is a state of mind we’re all vulnerable too. I’m a millennial and openly describe as a boomer when I’m being such.
Which doesn’t counter your point or anything, I’m just explaining that I really wasn’t thinking about the specific demographic but the mentality that I saw at the time (and see today from non-boomers).
This has real, 'we have facts, and alternative facts' vibes. Or, IHRA definition attempting to redefine anti-Semitism, vibes.
I think it's better to find another term in drilling down on what you mean, instead of a post-hoc re-defining of an established term.
In this way, you communicate better what you mean, but having gone to the effort of finding/thinking of that description you'll also have come to understand the issue your considering better.
Peter Singer, in the last pages of Practical Ethics, compares an egoist point of view as opposed to an ethical point of view. Distinguishing the pair, he writes, Egoists will have long term planning, but their plans are in essence concerning their own interests. While an ethical point of view will attempt to take the position of an impartial spectator. In this way he demonstrates that both can be rational points of view to take, while the egoist view may still be lacking.
With this in mind, I think the word you're looking for is 'egoist'.
I think the Boomer generation will become known for living through a time that promoted and valued that egoism world view. Whether it's due to the, the relative prosperity and peace of the 'West' in their time, the after effects of the US civil rights era (the hippies grew up), the neoliberalism of Milton Friedman and James M Buchanan, or the associated degradation of State, Union, and Community power against private and monied persons.
This egoism point of view is apparent even in the common joke about the British middle class never being done renovating their kitchens. The critique being they cant identify a different and valuable use of their time and resources because their values framework stretches only to their own 'front door'. This is of course is a satire, not to be taken literally about any individual, but there seems a broad truth being highlighted.
Here's the passage, being out of the context of the rest of the text might have an issue that I don't see. If so, sorry, but the books worth a read, it challenges the readers notions about all kinds.
Yes. Next question