Hi,
There are positives in both approaches.
Singapore had something that very few places can count on having.Lee Kuan Yew was arrogant and authoritarian.
But , he was incredibly intelligent, a true patriot who saw his role as producing his ''model ''country.
And to a large extent he was successful. I'm a big fan, but cannot think of anyone else like him.
He also got to produce his housing model from a substantially blank canvas.
I'm not sure that you can do the same thing trying to transform a city like Sydney.
However , the attitude to public housing design and integration goes anywhere.
The main reasons I had public housing at the top of my list was as follows
1. it protects the vulnerable
2. it puts a brake on rents and thru that capital appreciation
3. it decreases the sense that housing is just a commodity , it is something that society should be supplying to its citizens
Now, my next 3 points, have at their core a distinct libertarian streak.
They are aimed at freeing up the market, increasing mobility, turnover and optimizing usage .
Crazy, look up the number of vacant bedrooms in Australia each night.
Point 5 is obvious .
Only build early and well.
Note: I have no problem with negative gearing, if the capital gains are treated more like income than they are.
cheers
- Forums
- Economics
- Can we just simply build more houses / units to slow down the house price madness !!!
Hi,There are positives in both approaches.Singapore had...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 110 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
GML
Gateway Mining sells WA Eastern Montague gold project to Brightstar for $14M – half of that in shares
DVP
Commodity house Trafigura funds Develop Global's copper-zinc Woodlawn play with offtake deal in place