>>117963
You're missing the point m8.
This discussion is about government policy, not housing affordability.
Boomers already have a huge amount of this country's wealth locked up in their hands.
Making it cheaper for them to buy houses is going to do a few things.
1. It doesn't increase housing supply, it increases demand, which will cause prices to increase. Basic economics: if you want prices to come down, you either increase supply or decrease demand. This policy does neither.
2. It's intended to make it easier for boomers to 'downsize', thereby opening up larger properties for sale. But with demand generally increasing and their mania for capital gains, their old properties are going to stay high in price.
3. By moving to a smaller home, the boomers will be directly competing with people looking for smaller, cheaper homes… like first home buyers… who DON'T get a $15,000 break on price.
It's a bullshit policy. Boomers selling larger homes should make more than enough back through capital gains to pay for stamp duty. Instead, they're going to sell their big homes for a filthy profit, get a $15,000 break, and squeeze first home buyers out of the market. From an economic point of view, the policy is pure fucking insanity. Not only will it not work, it's actually going to have the opposite effect to what's intended.
Yes, there are people out there who bought a house on a quarter acre in Marrickville for $28,000 in 1985 who are now being offered 2.85 million. It's fucking ridiculous.
Now we have to wonder why the Murdoch press is so enthusiastically supportive of the policy… especially when other states are looking to copy it.