To be ignorant of the current state of housing and rental in Australia, one needs to have been living under a rock for the past 25 years; yet, under Sisyphus’ rock is exactly where many Australians find themselves with skyrocketing rents and unaffordable homes and the economic and social toll it inflicts upon society.
The wallets of landlords and politicians get larger while simultaneously crushing the home-owning hopes of the working class, young professionals, and families who have more than 1.5 children.
This crisis results in children growing up in instability, moving to multiple schools and houses a year as their family struggles to find a home in which to live. The elderly get evicted from their lifelong rentals. Car parks, parks, and roadsides fill with the unsightly tents of those who must live but have no house or flat in which to live creating an unpleasant and detestable site in Australia’s major and minor cities.
These are undoubtedly desperate times.
When there are desperate times there must be a radical, efficient solution that will not burden the wealthy or force a politician to work one more minute than he or she wants, while keeping in mind the housing marking and those invested in it.
Just as there are multiple ways to end hunger, there are more ways to solve the housing and rental crisis problem in Australia, and globally, for that matter, as I hear the UK is in a similar can of worms.
The programs or schemes need to be rapid, efficient, and radical. Therefore, this modest housing proposal is three-pronged in its suggestions.
First, Australia must implement the global first ‘Housing Liberation Scheme’ where houses and flats are liberated from those who no longer need the domicile or can no longer care for it. The resident will, of course, be re homed as the government sees fit.
Second, Australia must institute a ‘Quantum Landlord Residence Plan’ where owners of multiple residential properties must reside simultaneously in all their owned properties: integral and living limbs and digits will suffice if the owner cannot present his or her full person.
Third, and most radically, Australia must initiate the ‘Humane Housing Recycling Scheme’. This is when, according to the State, a person of certain housing statuses (homeless, extreme rental stress) has reached the end of their usefulness to Australia, they are recycled into something more useful for the country. Specifically, those destitute selected for this honourable opportunity will be recycled into eco-friendly building materials.
The benefits of this modest tridential housing proposal are many: homelessness will be effectively extinct, housing supply will increase, social improvements such as reducing the surplus population, crime reduction will occur, cheaper humane building materials will be made available, and finally, a net benefit (ethically applied of course) to Australia will be felt across all demographics in terms of social and financial wellbeing.
The obvious solutions are not adequate. Building more housing is too slow and expensive. How can anyone afford a house when a tradie nets a cool half-a-million a year?
Additionally, the addition of more supply will ruin the real estate speculation. Rent control seems unfair and places an unfair burden on property owners who merely want market value for their property. Zoning reforms will take too long and are too politically divisive, just ask any NIMBY. Closing the tap on immigration won’t solve it either as the real housing crisis is greed-based. Besides, besides who will clean the housing of the politicians, be our doctors, teach our children, or prepare our tapas if that tap is shut?
If this modest housing proposal seems extreme or scary and Australians are unwilling to apply these proposed solutions, then Australia should address the root cause of the housing and rental crisis.
Until then, this modest proposal offers a swift, efficient, and easily implemented solution to solving Australia’s current crisis.
Obviously satire. Yes, we have to keep pointing this out in 2025.
