In the ghetto
The riots in Sydney are a great example of the problems caused by poor ghettoes. One of the best decisions of the Gallop Government was to bulldoze outdated council flats and replace them with housing built according to modern planning principles, including by putting Homeswest housing in upmarket areas. Naturally, the toffs complained about undeserving, dirty poor people moving in down the road. Fuck them.
Well there might be a bit of a tradeoff if the Carr govt decided to build public housing on the North Shore for some of these rioter’s families. Essentially you can afford fewer public houses for your buck, which of course does not lower public housing waiting lists. Nice for the lucky few tenants that win the public tatts here, but fuck the homeless eh Rob! Life’s pretty simple for educated leftys I guess.
Actually I think the riots in Sydney are an excellent example of the problems caused by years of heavy-handed policing. There are depressed public housing estates across the country which don’t riot, this is just what happens when a culture of ‘them’ and ‘us’ develops in a suburb. All the modern planning principles in the world won’t stop that.
Observa: get over yourself. Your precious North Shore is safe.
On the night the riots started, the cops could have gone in with a small group (2-4) and talked to the people, but instead they turned up with 12 cops and tried to forcefully move the gathering on. I don’t condone the rioting but the cops need to use some lighter methods.
Liam - your comments are spot on, I reckon.
Actually, the flow-on effects (in terms of access to public transport, health services and employment) will generally save the public money in the long term, which will free up more money for more housing.
Liam, that’s true, but decent planning will help prevent the “us v them” mentality developing in the first place.
The government makes a nice little return from releasing housing areas. Public housing should be considered as much a part of any community as parks. The cheap solution of putting them all far away in distant housing estates hasn’t worked so we have to invest more for a better outcome. Observa, let me soothe your left wing intellectual harrassed mind with some earthy folk wisdom “buy cheap, buy twice”.
liam, not my precious North Shore as I live in Glenelg SA. Smaller fish, smaller pond but the relativities are probably the same.
anthony, buy cheap, buy twice won’t work in the North Shore or Glenelg. A case of increased demand not being able to call up additional cheaper supply via economies of scale for the supplier. In fact if you think about the logical extension ie you buy every property that comes up for sale in the NS, you’ll succeed in driving up the prices to God knows where. Eco101
Generally speaking the advantages of not creating large ghettoes of public housing are well known and accepted by all of us.(Hugh Stretton is croweater too) If you wanted to follow his prescriptions for all his reasons, it is probably fair to say you wouldn’t start from where we are. In that sense I think Rob was really beating his Subiaco toffs over the head with the homeless and those on waiting lists. ie ‘Rob sure fucked them’. Public policymakers have no such luxury as they come to the problems as they find them, not some idealised starting point. Nevertheless you have to start somewhere if you are to gnaw away at the inherited ghettoes over the long term.
Now if their is a problem with the overall supply of public housing meeting demand, there would be an astronomical demand for Rob’s $50/wk Subiaco ones. Quest: In awarding these to a small elite of housing trust tenants how do you think they should be allocated? Should we allow the existing pool of qualifiers to bid competitively for them(ie a restricted auction), should we allocate them by ballot and if so for how long(lifetime?) or should we award them to the best tenants depending on a brownie points scheme that they can all earn and compete with each other for? Any thoughts here leftys?
I think I just fell asleep during that last comment.
How about allocating public housing on the basis of need, proximity to workplaces, schools and family?
How about if I end my sentences with epithets too, ya righty?
How about allocating public housing on the basis of need, proximity to workplaces, schools and family?
That’s what people who pay for their own houses do - which is why houses next to good schools or the CDB are more expensive than ones in, say, Mirrabooka.
If you take away the market forces, how then do you do with the problem of scarcity?
Most of the world agrees that price is the answer - you guys seem to be prefer rationing.
How about allocating public housing on the basis of need, proximity to workplaces, schools and family?
I take it liam you have this magical wand(organisational skills?) and bucket of cash(taxpayers money?) to fulfil this simplistic dream of yours? If you don’t then you might want to consider how best to get the voters of Subiaco, or the North Shore onside to help you get one. I would suggest fucking them off like Rob brags about, is not exactly the sensible way to go about it. True you can win the odd battle, but ultimately lose the war, although it is the people you may care about that ultimately pay the price for your revolutionary zeal .
Notice that in the unsubsidised market, the govt doesn’t tell people where and how to live. How could you treat the subsidised needy group in the same manner(ie with a degree of freedom of choice), at the same time providing incentives for those that strive hardest to improve their lot and in the process become good citizens. In other words you may have two families, say single mums with a couple of kids each in your ghetto at the moment. One always pays her rent on time, doesn’t drink or smoke, keeps the house neat and tidy, the kids off to school on time etc, while the other is the exact opposite. The next financially affordable(within budgetary constraints) unit becomes ready for occupation in Subiaco and????? Who, or rather by what process of selection do you place there and why, is the question I’m asking you to consider. Presumably we all know who Rob Corr wants to put there, but personally I think he’s fairly short sighted.
Perhaps we could do a bit of useful role playing here. You have to replace your Che Guevera T-Shirt for a suit and tie of the Housing trust policy-maker and attend a meeting of concerned resident Observas that what you are doing in our suburb of Subiaco with our taxes, should be supported. At the moment we are concerned that you just want to fuck us off with some drunken layabout like Rob does. Oh and quite alot of the ‘doctors wives ‘who normally vote Labor are seriously thinking of changing sides at the next election if you don’t satisfactorily explain what’s in it for them too.
oops
and attend a meeting of concerned resident Observas to convince us that what you are doing in our suburb
Not another fuckwit using the ‘Che Guevara’ t-shirt’ argument!
I would suggest fucking them off like Rob brags about
Please don’t put words in my mouth. These are new houses, we’re not talking about forcing anyone to leave. I meant fuck them and their snobbish attitude.
The houses being built in Subi are being designed for disability access, and their proximity to one of Perth’s major hospitals is one of the key reasons for building them. It’s a fair bet that people with certain medical/physical requirements will move to the head of the queue. It’s hardly rocket science.
Jesus observa, your comments really do put people to sleep.
Hi observa and all,
just thought I would clarify this - I am unsure of your socio-economic background, but to apply for department of housing rental, or rent-to-buy accomodation, you don’t have to be homeless -most aren’t, actually, just on a reasonably low income.
——————-
In fact, although anti-social tenant behaviour is featured quite prominently in the Perth media, the majority of d.h.w tenants aren’t recidivists, nor do they necessarily come from dysfunctional families, nor disenfranchised sections of the community.
This is not the impression given by some current affairs and news television programs, so it does not surprise me that people accept these false ideas that are portrayed in the mass media.
My district has the largest amount of ‘homeswest’ tenants in W.A.
I absolutely relate to Rob’s dislike of the media-portrayed reaction by Subi residents, but it is the commercial media that try to create conflict to sell low grade news.
I should also point out that the waiting list for the cental Perth area is 7 - 10 years, so those tenants will most likely appreciate that accomodation more than it warrants, and much more than their critics would be able to comprehend.
I hope that this helps to clear up any false impressions that may have been given via a desperate media in this small town.
bfn ab
Well done Observa, I think you’re the first person to ever suggest public housing in a neighbourhood will send prices skyrocketing. That’s the spirit.
excellent point, ab :)
I am still suffering from post-election haziness and laziness…but yeah…what you said! ;)
ab,
I’m probably one of Rob’s toffs.
I’m not particularly up with the situation with public housing in WA, but it sounds fairly similar to the SA Housing Trust and elsewhere . In SA there is a waiting list for SAHT accomodation(officially 2yrs but practically 7-8) for ‘low income earners’ as you say. As well we have inherited ghettoes like ‘The Parks’, up to very desirable sprinkling of homes/units in middle class suburbs. Demand always appears to outstrip the taxpayer’s ability/willingness to supply. This is doubly so for the more desirable homes. The fact that a few bad tenants can spoil it for the majority is a political problem as Rob points out. In that sense if taxpayers feel that a system of public housing is giving them bang for their buck, they are likely to be more forthcoming. Also beware of biting the hand that feeds.
My background in the buiding and construction game, means I come across the proportionately large criminal waste (albeit as you say by the recalcitrant few) of precious maintenance resources in the public housing sector. Public tenant neighbours don’t like such ferals next door to them, any more than Rob’s toffs and it’s imperatve the system should ensure neither have to tolerate them.
So let me cut to the chase here. IMO the best way to allocate these scarce resources is a managed market(MM), similar to the broader free market(FM). Now in the FM the first thing the renter decides is how much they can afford and then looks at what they can get for their buck. The seller, via their agent wants to know if the buyer will look after their investment well and pay up on time. The public sector should do likewise. Firstly grade its housing stock on desirability A(for the Subiacos) B…………to say F(McQuarie Fields and Parks) and grade tenants as being able to bid for the various grades depending on their history(care, timely rent,etc) Then they can bid for the available subsidised stock, depending on their preference. Notice that in the case of our Subiaco unit for $50/wk, our idealised single mum might be prepared to live there for $100/week, by going without the beer/smokes/plasma screens/etc preferences of some other less idealised mum. For this new Subiaco mum it’s more important to her that her kids grow up rubbing shoulders with the values of the toffs kids. Notice her values will fit in best with the toffs and they’ll appreciate how their taxes are being well spent. Also the extra $50 a week she is paying is available to shorten waiting lists all down this ladder of opportunity. What more could a smart lefty ask for?
anthony,
Technical point taken. I was assuming you tried to buy up all the North Shore and THEN turned it into a public housing estate. Of course if you were the political party that tried to relocate tenants of say the Block there by stealth then of course the point would be an academic one. You would cease to be a political party.
Those claiming to be too bored by Observa’s comments to read them would do well to exercise their very real option of not commenting on them. If, as I suspect, they are merely indulging in cheap shots because they don’t like what (s)he’s saying but aren’t intelligent enough to construct counter-arguments, they should also exercise their option of not commenting, on either this matter or any other.
Observa,
you are still supporting[somewhat facetiously I believe] the notion that low income earners namely ’single mothers’ are indulgent with the small amount of money they have, and, unless they are prepared to pay more than they can afford they should be pushed into rough areas.
That really is a bit short sighted as it will only compound the problems in those large dept of housing areas .
Also you cannot measure a person’s potential to have a positive influence over their living area - home/suburb etc, as there are external factors that come into play in that equation and more often than not the support services in the rougher areas are less efficient, like police and medical services.
shame shame shame.
William the Observa is definitely male, probably termed a WASP in the vernacular.
ab says:
“you are still supporting[somewhat facetiously I believe] the notion that low income earners namely ’single mothers’ are indulgent with the small amount of money they have, and, unless they are prepared to pay more than they can afford they should be pushed into rough areas.”
I support no such notion ab. To me low income earners like single mothers are not particularly more or less lazy, indolent or wasteful in their expenditure patterns than the more well off in the community. In fact I know a couple of mothers who have been in that position, one of which has educated a son through a private Lutheran College. True she did have assistance from the divorced father, but she also worked cleaning house and childminding for my wife and I among others, in order to enable this. (Interestingly enough both my children were educated publicly) As such, I do have a problem with a well meaning bureacratic welfare sector that appears to want treat them as you accuse me of. The use of SPB mothers here is purely for example. You could substitute other pensioners and beneficiaries or low income families as you wish.
Let me move on and provide a scenario for my MM system of public housing, now that it has hypothetically been in place these past 10 years. One of our single mums (Kim) has been living in a Class B unit in a middle class suburb this past 2yrs, paying $95/week rent to say Homewest. With her son at kindy, she buses across to a posh suburb a few suburbs away to clean homes a couple of days a week. She is coping reasonably well but has to mind the pennies and say no regularly to junior at the checkout like most mums. It’s Target for clothes and sometimes the Goodwill store, or the local 2nd hand markets. Four months ago her single mum friend and neighbour(Kath) moved away to a ClassA unit at Subiaco, after being on the small waiting list for a few months and putting her hand up to pay $125/week to Homewest for the privilege. Kath has spoken to Kim on the phone a few times inviting her over to see her new place and how well she’s doing. Now although Kim is a bit envious of where Kath is living she can’t for the life of her understand how Kath can manage the rent. Curiousity gets the better of her and in any case it will be a good day out with junior, so Saturday(when Kath says she’s free) it’s the bus to Subiaco for the day for the pair of them.
So its a happy get together at Kaths as the kids are settled down to play in the courtyard and Kath shows Kim around the place. Kim is all agog at the unit, but is mostly incredulous at the furniture and curtains, etc. How on earth can you posibly afford all this? says Kim pointing to the lounge suite that puts her own to shame. Well I look after children some mornings for the rich toffs around here. Can you believe it, one woman pays me $15/hr for 4 hours to mind her toddler so she can go shopping with her friends. Another plays tennis. But what about the lounge suite and the curtains and stuff? says Kim Well that’s the amazing thing says Kath, you wouldn’t believe what some women around here give away. The lounge suite and cutrtains came from a doctors wife I clean for, She was just having her whole place refurbished and she said she was going to send it to the Salvos, unless I knew anyone who wanted it. Whaddya reckon says Kath…….and Peter’s Nike shoes came from another mum. Can you believe her son only wore them once because they weren’t the right style?…..etc, etc……….
On the bus home after an illuminating day out, Kim knows she’s off to the Homewest office first thing Monday morning. As Kath has told her old MrsX who lost her husband a month ago is planning to move to a Class B single unit, closer to her daughter across town. As well another single mum a block away is marrying the self employed painter she met and they are planning to set up house together at his place.
On Monday morning Kim hardly bats an eyelid as the woman attending to her explains that to sign up for the Subiaco units when one becomes available in about 2 months, she will have to be prepared to pay the new rate of $130/week. Kim has already arranged with Kath to mind some children and do some cleaning for a plethora of ‘doctors wives’ that just can’t seem to get anyone to work these days. The lawnmower man she bumped into on the way out after leaving Kaths seemed awfully friendly too (nuanced ending here for Mary and Frederick fans ;) )
Oh and for those of you are deeply concerned that poor Kath and Kim described here could get out of their depth and stuff things up, can I suggest you reserve all your compassion for this single mum’s plight described here at http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12426369%5E2702,00.html
Link compliments of Slatts
My head is shaking Observa - I think maybe you are a lost cause, but maybe you just treat everybody across the board with social and political bias?[in the nicest possible way of course].
Well ab, you just may have to examine your own social and political bias here.
My hunch is that ab is showing some very typical snobberry of the left here, as well as a tendency to want to treat all Centrelink recipients as his own personal victim class. How dare well to do families like the Os take advantage of my personal victims is the ab stance. How dare they exploit my single mums in this demeaning and menial way. Well of course methinks abs slip is showing here, because to take that stance, of course he must demean the lifestyle of the single mum himself, when most of them see only too well, the importance of the very task they do.
Now let’s look at the two single mums that the Observa household exploited. Both had sons the same age as young MasterO and so the marginal cost of dropping off and picking up young O to kindy and then PS, was fairly low. As well caring for two young boys that could play together and entertain each other was a snack that allowed our single mums some time to attend their own household chores, as well as perhaps some personal time out from the entertainment demands of one. And you get paid for it. Now one of the mums had more of a preference for housework, while the other childcare, so the Os needs were shared accordingly.
What are these two mums doing today now that all the boys are 21? Well one owns her own home and works full time in an office, ordering materials and organising jobs for a number of building tradesmen. She began this part time as her son attended the well to do private Lutheran College nearby and went full time and off the SPB, which supported this choice for her son. She has the late model car and seems to afford things like new verandahs and patios out the back,etc The other mum on SPB carried on with housework while her son attended local public schools. She still rents and as the son reached 15, she took up a maths degree which avoided the need to search for employment. This would have almost guaranteed her a job teaching maths. She was achieving credits and distinctions until her last year when suddenly it all fell in a hole when the degree and a real job loomed large.(now, now no value judgements here) No car and she still rents while the son is earning big bucks in IT.
What was the exploitative Mrs O doing all this time I hear you ask? Well funnily enough she was doing some menial childminding for 20-25 junior primary kids most of the time, apart from an early stint bookkeeping part time for Mr Os biz. Can you imagine that? These two single mums willingly exploiting another, who of course was in turn being exploited by her students parents(you know doctors wives, single mums, teacher mums,etc,etc)
What sort of punishment Mr O deserves for turning a blind eye to all this exploitation over the years only God and ab knows. Presumably ab prefers the situation O hears about from SAHT tenants wailing on talkback, that they can’t get the powers that be to do anything about their feral neighbours next door. (If he doesn’t he still hasn’t offered us any scheme of his own here) Of course many do manage to lift themselves out of this situation against the odds. It’s just that the Observa believes we should facilitate and encourage the go-getters as much as possible. The more of them you can get closer to those who can afford to reward them the most for their labors, the better off they’ll be.
When I was a child I thought like a child. When I was at uni I thought like a red ragger. When I became an adult I learned that the bull has a perspective too. Mind you some of the things I learned at uni and seemed to fit my experience, certainly helped in this regard.
guess again.
so what do you do in your leisure time observa?
OK, I didn’t read any of that at all - but the story about redeveloping Redfern in today’s SMH seems to put the Carr government in a pretty bad light. Can you tell us a bit more about that?