Public Housing should be STOPPED & SOLD

[ufo_investigations]

The government buys houses and rents them out to people at a discounted rate and the tax payer has to carry this burden.

Why is this so?   Governments should not be buying houses!

I'm sorry but we should not have government housing!

Complete waste money!

All government housing should be sold to private sector!

The millions of dollars raised from the sale will build better roads, freeways, hospitals.

Governments should govern NOT buy houses for people to live in!

The job of government is to govern not babysit people!

***** Dear State Governments **** Please SELL ALL GOVERNMENT HOUSES !!! ****

[cherry*135]

---

@joz*garage wrote:

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

Government can provide financial assistance to the needy, no need to buy big ticket items like a house and land. It is a huge burden to the tax payer. The cost outweighs the objective. All they have to do is provide financial assistance. It achieves the same result without having to buy a house. Government is there to help people to a certain degree. I don't think it is fair on tax payers to carry this debt.

---

no it wouldnt

all the money would go to private landlords

---

...who would keep putting up rents because there is no competition (from public housing providers)  and high demand by low/no income - high income people wanting to lease a property.

@It is hard enough now for a family on a reasonable income to afford to rent a privately owned house @ $450 p.w.

[joz*garage]

i agree am3, rent is carzy enough as is

i couldnt believe a mate was getting $550 a week for a piece of carp

[cherry*135]

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:

That sounds right. Rent assistance paid by C/L wouldn't go far in areas where avg rent for basic 3 brm home is $450 pw.

UFO - I suppose you think a bullet proof car for the Prime Minister costing $525 000 is good value? Cars depreciate in value quite quickly don't they?

He only bought 9 of them!

---

$450 p/w is still cheaper than buying a house and land and paying maintenance on it forever. Council rates on average houses in Vic is like $1,800. Providing financial assistance works out cheaper for the tax payer.

---

Providing financial assistance works out cheaper for the tax payer.

It's dead money . No assets that have improved in value to sell. Apart from that State Govts by law are responsible to provide public housing

Rent a house all your life - what do you have at the end of that? Nothing

Buy a house, pay it off  over how many years... what do you have at the end of that? An asset, to live in, rent out for income, to sell.

As for the Prime Minister he has to protect himself from terrorists he needs maximum protection.

I don't go for that one, seeing as he spends a reasonable amount of time out riding a bicycle in public.

[cherry*135]

---

@joz*garage wrote:

i agree am3, rent is carzy enough as is

i couldnt believe a mate was getting $550 a week for a piece of carp

---

Yes, unfortunately, that is how it is in the 'real' world, especially if the demand is high for leased houses. Bit different than having a 'theory'.

[ufo_investigations]

am*3 government is not a business they are not there to buy houses for appreciation purposes. It is not their role. The purpose of government is to provide good governance at best value for tax payers.

[cherry*135]

The State Government is by law responsible for the provision of public housing.

Government owned public housing buildings are ASSETS.

[cherry*135]

Example:

QLD Housing Act, 2003

Main objects
The main objects of this Act are—
(a) to improve the access of Queenslanders to safe, secure,
appropriate and affordable housing; and
(b) to help build sustainable communities.

How the objects are to be primarily achieved
The objects are to be achieved primarily by making provision
about the following matters—
(a) housing-related activities carried on by the State,
including—
(i) providing public housing and other housing
services; and
(ii) developing, undertaking or supporting other
housing programs and initiatives;
(b) a system, for supporting and regulating certain types of
entities providing housing services, that includes—
(i) registering the entities; and
(ii) giving them financial assistance, making land
available to them or giving them other types of
assistance; and
(iii) regulating how they provide housing services using
the assistance.

[cherry*135]

The purpose of taxation is for the Govt to collect it and redistribute it to areas of need..

[ufo_investigations]

---

@am*3 wrote:

The State Government is by law responsible for the provision of public housing.

Government owned public housing buildings are ASSETS.

---

The assets become liabilities as soon as they rent them out, the ROI does not cover the interest nor the upkeep. The expense to acquire them simply makes no economic sense. Government need to get rid of the legal requirement for this provision as the burden is too great on the tax payer.

Would you buy a house for 1/2 million dollars and rent it out for $150 per week?, of course you wouldn't, why, because it makes no sense, so why do you expect the tax payer to pay for this?

Lets see: (OPTION A)

I found a 3 bedroom townhouse in RIngwood, Victoria for sale at the bargain price of $620,000

http://www.realestate.com.au/property-townhouse-vic-ringwood-118612071

CBA interest rates right now are 5.90%

That's $36,580 INTEREST ONLY.

plus Council rates

plus maintenance

Lets have a look at the alternative: (OPTION B)

How much financial assistance do you give someone in a week?

I don't know how much it would depend on individual circumstances.

Lets say $250 rental assistance.

That works out to $13,000 per year.

This is a little over 1/3 the cost of government purchasing and holding a property and paying all outgoings.

Government should govern not babysit people.

[cherry*135]

What do you suggest the State Governments do? They are required by law to provide public housing. They just can't change their minds and not do that.

$250 rent assistance would provide a 1 brm bedsit at best. Where I live that would get you a brm in someone else's house.

There are families that need accommodating, as well as single people, couples ..

People on the dole only receive $250approx a week in benefits.

The Public housing tenants do pay rent.. not market rent, but it would cover more than annual rates bill.

I don't know how much it would depend on individual circumstances.

Lets say $250 rental assistance.

That works out to $13,000 per year.

Pay that for 25 years = $325 000, price of a house.