Sorry guys love your work but this one misses the mark a bit. $2M is not a massive spend for a property. Especially for a person on $1.2M salary. Then there's the fact that the interest rate rises would be hurting her as well if she is borrowing for it. Rich person buy a $2M house. Not sure there is much to see here.
Appreciate the comment, Greg. One of the things we hope to achieve with Deepcut is creating space for smart debates and discussions without the shouting/rage of social platforms.
Re the substance of your point, I think it depends from which perspective you sit. If you're someone sitting around the median salary of $74k, renting with little prospect of home ownership, $2m is a lot. Four properties under one name is a lot. A $1.1m salary 1,500% your own (that your taxes pay for) is a lot. Not just a lot, but highlights the widening and unfair inequality that is hurting this nation.
One thing I'd like to ask readers - and something I try to remind myself of constantly (none of us are faultless in this regard) - is trying to put ourselves in the shoes of those less privileged (who are a significant chunk if not the majority of the country). About 1/3 are renters, another 1/3 are mortgage holders. There’s a hell of a lot of people doing it tough. The idea that a public servant could earn an exorbitant salary from taxes paid by a struggling working class, which funds a personal multi-million dollar property portfolio (while this public servant tells working Australians to do it even harder) … that is absolutely a matter that requires scrutiny. Don't you think?
I don't think leftist commentators wave inflation away as an irrelevance. E.g. Greg Jericho (along with The Aus Institute) have been making the same point repeatedly over the last few years - that recent/current inflation is largely supply driven, and the RBA's lever only batters people already suffering and doesn't tackle supply. Critiques are needed outside of centrist neo-liberalism (and outside of the mainstream/AFR's way of talking about economics) to imagine a model that doesn't inflict so much pain on middle and working classes. How is change to come if outside-of-the-box thinking doesn't occur?
With regards to this piece in particular, another implication is the deep inequity in the current model. The inequity could not be more stark than a governor earning $1.1m of public money - 1500% the median salary - and who is expanding their multi-million dollar property portfolio while telling Australians that more should lose their jobs. I'm not quite sure those pointing out the unfairness of the system are the ones at risk of losing credibility.
Sorry guys love your work but this one misses the mark a bit. $2M is not a massive spend for a property. Especially for a person on $1.2M salary. Then there's the fact that the interest rate rises would be hurting her as well if she is borrowing for it. Rich person buy a $2M house. Not sure there is much to see here.
Appreciate the comment, Greg. One of the things we hope to achieve with Deepcut is creating space for smart debates and discussions without the shouting/rage of social platforms.
Re the substance of your point, I think it depends from which perspective you sit. If you're someone sitting around the median salary of $74k, renting with little prospect of home ownership, $2m is a lot. Four properties under one name is a lot. A $1.1m salary 1,500% your own (that your taxes pay for) is a lot. Not just a lot, but highlights the widening and unfair inequality that is hurting this nation.
One thing I'd like to ask readers - and something I try to remind myself of constantly (none of us are faultless in this regard) - is trying to put ourselves in the shoes of those less privileged (who are a significant chunk if not the majority of the country). About 1/3 are renters, another 1/3 are mortgage holders. There’s a hell of a lot of people doing it tough. The idea that a public servant could earn an exorbitant salary from taxes paid by a struggling working class, which funds a personal multi-million dollar property portfolio (while this public servant tells working Australians to do it even harder) … that is absolutely a matter that requires scrutiny. Don't you think?
I don't think leftist commentators wave inflation away as an irrelevance. E.g. Greg Jericho (along with The Aus Institute) have been making the same point repeatedly over the last few years - that recent/current inflation is largely supply driven, and the RBA's lever only batters people already suffering and doesn't tackle supply. Critiques are needed outside of centrist neo-liberalism (and outside of the mainstream/AFR's way of talking about economics) to imagine a model that doesn't inflict so much pain on middle and working classes. How is change to come if outside-of-the-box thinking doesn't occur?
With regards to this piece in particular, another implication is the deep inequity in the current model. The inequity could not be more stark than a governor earning $1.1m of public money - 1500% the median salary - and who is expanding their multi-million dollar property portfolio while telling Australians that more should lose their jobs. I'm not quite sure those pointing out the unfairness of the system are the ones at risk of losing credibility.