Left Don’t Want You To Own Home
, / 1214 0

Left Don’t Want You To Own Home

Left Don’t Want You To Own Home

It was the reaction to the Treasurer’s remarks about home ownership that should have us concerned the most and not the actual content of Joe Hockey’s alleged gaffe. The ‘twittersphere’ lit-up yesterday when Joe Hockey said that first home buyers ought to “get a good job that pays good money”.

Smelling the blood online, left wing politicians leapt at the opportunity to hold spontaneous press conferences in their constituencies to parrot the online chorus, smugly tightening their purported hold on public opinion. Their proposition: that the government was out of touch. Out of touch, yes, with the views of a Canberra press gallery obsessed with soundbites and tweets.

To the rest of us, Hockey’s comments were stupid, not because they were snobbish or insensitive, but because they were quite simply, ‘Captain Obvious.’ No one has ever bought a home while being welfare hand-out dependent, nor has anyone ever bought a home living off the minimum wage. Gee whiz, thanks Joe.

So, what was the issue then? Why was the government alleged to be out of touch? It is simply not in the interests of the Left for there to be more home owners.

Given the chance, the contemporary Left would love to raise taxes and bolster federal coffers (in the short term) while the taxpayer gives up more and more of their income, reducing Mr & Mrs Australia’s propensity to save and therefore their ability to buy their own home.

The Hockey ‘gaffe’ also fits into the Left’s narrative of opposing negative gearing, the great double-tax on individuals looking to avoid relying on a pension in retirement or those looking after their children’s future. The Greens suggested this week that they could increase the supply of government housing, if Australia removed negative gearing, and inadvertently any incentive to create private housing for lower income earners.

This should be no surprise, as the Left wants more people dependent on the government, because they become the effective, ‘employer’ but also the effective, ‘provider’ to those individuals. Indebted to their ‘employer’ and ‘provider’, these people will continue to ensure that this particular government is re-elected, and the carousel does not grind to a halt.

On the other hand, once individuals become homeowners, they build wealth from their savings and investments, often becoming (if they were not already) sympathetic to those that believe in empowering individuals to provide and prosper independently.

Paul Keating was always a great advocate for creating a nation of shareholders, knowing the looming challenges for the Australian economy and budget bottom line, particularly if baby boomers were not able to be financially independent in retirement. This attitude has disappeared in modern, trendy, Left wing politics. The Left no longer wish to celebrate Keating telling students to go “get a job” instead, they would much rather indulge in class warfare rhetoric, before considering the consequences of a nation dependent on the tax dollar.

The media and political classes may have a lot of #AdviceforJoe and they may never want to work smart or hard enough to afford their own home, which is all well and good. They should not however, be propagating a message that suggests that they are barracking for home ownership, independent of government, en masse, when that is the last thing they actually want.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This is a demo store for testing purposes — no orders shall be fulfilled.