Do/Should We Have a Lying Flat Movement in Australia?

I've been reading a lot about the lying flat movement that has developed recently in light of rising inflation and the pointlessness of certain groups of our society participating in the workplace.

I'm sure we all can do the math behind mortgage repayments and yet you still see people taking up mortgages with the expectation that it will never really be paid off in their retirement. The question I have is why aren't there many people bold enough to give up the rat race. Is our society conditioning people to continue to work themselves to death? Why?

The definition of insanity is that you conduct yourself in a manner where you know the outcome is irrational but you continue on that pathway. I keep seeing it again and again. We have the FIRE movement in Australia, but it seems like the masses haven't really woken up yet. The ones that should be lying flat aren't for some reason. It seems irrational and puzzling. Is the reason at the heart of people's financial misdirection, the historical meme, known as an aussie battler? What are your opinions on this?

Comments

  • +17 votes

    Its not that hard to pay a mortgage, the reality is people cant be bothered to reduce their spending and actually save a deposit.

    Work smarter, not harder - educate yourself and get a higher paying job!

    • +6 votes

      You still need employers to be in on that and give people a chance to get a foot in the door…
      My son is going through this at moment… unrealistic job qualification requirements and expectations for his age.

      And you need employers to be happy to pay a good wage. Which is why my work has a turn over of staff like a chocolate wheel

      • +6 votes

        I dream of having a chocolate wheel at work…

    • +13 votes

      Work smarter, not harder

      My old boss used to say that. Every time he did, I wanted to smash him in the face

      • +8 votes

        "old boss"

        How did it feel when you finally did it?

    •  

      Its not that hard to pay a mortgage, the reality is people cant be bothered to reduce their spending and actually save a deposit.

      It is that hard if you borrow every cent you can and literally have no money left over.

      Work smarter, not harder - educate yourself and get a higher paying job!

      Then you hear about these techies on OzB making $200k plus and doing it tough.

      • +7 votes

        Anyone doing it tough on $200k+ is mismanaging their money.

        •  

          No shortage of people

    • +2 votes

      Correct. People just prioritise spending on other things like eating out too often, getting the latest iPhone or driving a new car they can't afford via a loan.

      Aussie's are real suckers for marketing and feel they need to "keep up with the Jones'". Most look rich but are up to their eyeballs in debt.

    • +2 votes

      Work smarter, not harder - educate yourself and get a higher paying job!

      Lol wut. I have a six figure salary and the housing market in aus is ridiculous.

      so you're saying people who work in retail, who haven't had the opportunities in life to get educated (or have had other circumstances) don't deserve to have a place to live?

      •  

        Conservatives aren’t interested in nuance & minutiae. They hate complexity & uncertainty
        To the conservative voter, complex problems have simple solutions

    • -1 vote

      Ok, conservative.

  • +11 votes

    Aussies have a rich history of dropping out.
    Head to the beach on a weekday and all will become clear.

  • +26 votes

    Is our society conditioning people to continue to work themselves to death?

    This is personal choice. No one is forcing someone making $100k to take on a $1m mortgage.

    No one is being forced to take out loans to buy a new BMW every 2 years.

    I work full time and make ok money, wife works part time and makes ok money. Mortgage is $430 a week. Everything else we have was purchased in cash. Used cars, used boat. No "56 months no repayments" to buy a tv, cash.

    Most of the money goes on the kids and just doing things when we want to. If either of us gets sick/injured, loses their job etc, we can still carry on. Why people want to be one week away from insolvency is beyond me.

    • +8 votes

      Keeping up with their mates - who are keeping up with them, rinse, repeat, debt, die.

      IMO it's all about status within their peer group.

      Status anxiety is a b!tch.

    • -2 votes

      This is personal choice. No one is forcing someone making $100k to take on a $1m mortgage.

      LOL. $100k package take home is $5.7k a month. $1m mortgage at 2% is $3.7k a month. Good luck surviving because you're left with almost less than a single person on old age pension ($1k a fortnight).

      • +3 votes

        Yeah, that's pretty much the point?

        • +1 vote

          Nobody is lending you a million on $100k salary. No way you would pass affordability.

          • +1 vote

            @netjock: I take it you don't understand exaggeration to make a point? The numbers aren't important, it was simply to represent massively overstretching.

            • +1 vote

              @brendanm:

              The numbers aren't important

              Explains why people go bidding $1.2m for a property they can't afford.

              Don't exaggerate. It just takes away from your credibility.

              • +1 vote

                @netjock:

                Don't exaggerate. It just takes away from your credibility.

                Not at all, I think most people can grasp the point, that people go to the very edge of what they can possibly service, and sometimes over. If interest rates go up a decent amount, there's going to be a few people in a spot of bother.

          • +2 votes

            @netjock: Maybe not after the royal commission, but I was preapproved something similar to that on a similar income about 3-4 years ago. The main hurdle is still having enough of a deposit left after stamp duty and LMI. Of course this was back when my bank was offering to increase my credit card limit to $50k, so the bank was doing stupid things at the time.

            Point being there are totally gonna be people out there that took a stupid offer from the bank and put themselves in a bad positions.

            Also 1k per fortnight isn’t difficult to live on if you aren’t including housing costs in that.

            •  

              @db draught:

              if you aren’t including housing costs in that.

              The fixed costs are what kills you in this country. You can buy cheaper pizza but you can't opt for a cheaper council for lower council rates.

              Water supply is like $50 a month
              Gas and Electric supply is probably another $60 a month
              Council is $150 a month
              Broadband $50 a month
              Car registration $50 a month

              $350 a month just standing still.

              • +1 vote

                @netjock: Yep, my fixed costs are a bit higher than that and some of those are completely unavoidable. Without being too frugal my living costs excluding mortgage are about $1500 per fortnight. I could get that down under $1000 by stopping eating out, automatic donations and not taking my dogs to the groomers monthly. I know I could also reduce my grocery bill, technically I don’t need a car since public transport isn’t too bad where I live so I could get rid of that and stay home more on weekends which would save another couple of hundred in fuel and rego, maybe I don’t actually need NBN since I have mobile 4G, the of things I can skimp on is pretty long, but It’s much more sensible to just not borrow 10x your annual income so that you’ve got some spare cash - even though I know I could make it work.

    • +1 vote

      This is personal choice. No one is forcing someone making $100k to take on a $1m mortgage.

      the problem isn't that you're taking a 1m mortgage, it's that 1m gets you a shit hole in blacktown.

  • +30 votes

    Is our society conditioning people to continue to work themselves to death? Why?

    As someone who didn't grow up here I can guarantee you the majority of Australians are anything but "working themselves to death".
    I save that term for individuals who do laborious work for 14+ hours to earn $5-10 a day, who can and will go starve, be out on the street if they don't get that $10 for the day, not your typical 8-12 hour shifts earning minimum $20-30/hour.

    Reality is if you mustn't have the nicest houses with the biggest backyards, sporting the latest cars, phones, watches and handbags, eating out every other nights, one shouldn't struggle in Australia on minimum income.
    We do have it pretty damn good here, both the employed and unemployed alike.

    • +6 votes

      …the nicest houses with the biggest backyards, sporting the latest cars, phones, watches and handbags, eating out every other nights, one shouldn't struggle in Australia on minimum income.

      But I thought these were just the basic entitlements… Sit around all day doing jack-all and get a free home and nice car. It's unfair if I actually have to go and work for it! lol

      • +5 votes

        Press F to scream for fA1rNeSS & eQuAliTy.

        •  

          🤣🤣

      • +3 votes

        entitlements

        let's not forget people wore their pants 3 times and seeking refund because it no longer fits well!

        • +1 vote

          Yeah, but were the tags in place?

          •  

            @iDroid: tag were already removed by that OP.

    • -1 vote

      And I can guarantee you Boomers didn’t work themselves to death to obtain their (often unearned) wealth

    • -1 vote

      Exactly. It's very unusual to see someone here in Australia "working to death". You can save that for some developing countries where people often work 12 to 16 hours a day in two or three different jobs to have just enough income to pay for basic housing and food, and maybe a Yaris, not for a nice house in a nice neighbourhood and a BMW.

  • +12 votes

    It's hard to take these "movements" seriously because people seem to like to just sit around in their own comfort zones and complain about things being "too hard" instead of just getting off their arses and doing what it takes.

    These people expect everyone else to do the heavy lifting for them. No-one is going to help you if you don't try to help yourself.

    • +2 votes

      complain about things being "too hard" instead of just getting off their arses and doing what it takes.

      Sounds like a JobSeeker Professional.

      • +2 votes

        The people who constantly complain about how hard life in Australia hasn't seen anything yet! They need to take a trip to Asia or India or any one of a stack of other countries to see what "normal" life over there looks like.

    • +12 votes

      A quick google search for "Lying Flat Movement" shows it's of Chinese origin.

      The technology industry espouses a “996” culture — 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., six days a week — that on occasion has worked people to death. source

      If I was Chinese and working 12 hour days, six days a week then I would take the movement seriously.

      I'm lucky enough to live in Australia where we our eight hour day movement started in the 19th century and was made mainstream before any of us were born. I think in Australia we under appreciate the struggles our forbears went through to build the society we have today.

  • +11 votes

    Start a movement, eat a prune.

    • +8 votes

      I just look at a prune and there's movement.

    • +6 votes

      Eat a whole tin and start a revolution

      •  

        That would be unleashing hell….

  • +1 vote

    I joined that movement 10 years ago.

    10 years of bliss.

  •  

    It'd be good to provide some background. From searching online, it appears to be a phenomenon mainly in China. It's an extremely competitive job market in China and other Asian countries given you have a large pool of workers to choose from. The attitude of Kiasu is ingrained in most Asian cultures.

    I don't think it applies in Australia given our minimum wage and overtime policies.

  • +2 votes

    the historical meme, known as an aussie battler?

    fyi, I am not lying down at the moment.

  • +1 vote

    Debt is how the big end of town and their lawmakers friends get cogs to work from the cradle to the grave.

    https://twitter.com/ecb/status/1385554398697463810?s=09
    "We should be happier to have a job than to have our savings protected," C.L

    Make your own choices and break free from the shackles of a 9 to 5 job (in some cases 12hr to 16hr).

    •  

      Debt is the currency of slaves.

  •  

    Working hours in Australia aren't even that bad. Pay is great too. If you still can't save up/invest or have a decent life, that's on you unfortunately. I used to work 11-12 hours a day in Singapore. It's paradise here.

  • +2 votes

    What is the lying down movement?

    I thought it was a movement by the disenfranchised to not conform to society's norms.

    For example, China have removed the one child policy and will remove the 2 child policy in the hope that parents with have one for mum, one for dad and one for the Mainland. Chinese feel it is so hard to just raise one with the work arrangements that they just want to give up.

    I am happy to let others take up lying down provided they are barred from all forms of welfare and social safety nets including Medicare.

    • +2 votes

      What is the lying down movement?

      That would be the movement used to satisfy your partner.

    • +2 votes

      I thought of this
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planking_(fad)

    •  

      What is the lying down movement?

      From google, seems to just be a lazy man's FIRE.

      I am happy to let others take up lying down provided they are barred from all forms of welfare and social safety nets including Medicare.

      100%. People think the rejection of society is the rejection of work. They don't realise that absolute baseline is still fighting/farming for survival outside the welfare system.

  • +6 votes

    As a late gen Z, we do have an equivalent, as a reaction to older generations stealing our wealth through mismanagement of the housing market, mismanagement of education and mismanagement of welfare (pensioners almost drain more tax money than all other welfare combined, and still complain about it).

    And that's avoiding having kids, either subconsciously or actively as part of the ChildFree movement. Both us and millennials been told not to have kids until we're 100% ready, we've been told that if we don't provide top notch education and support so that our kids can compete that we'll fail as parents, we've been given long-term 99.9% effective birth control, and young women are told that they'll be paid less if they take a career break to have them, with almost no incentives beyond the joy of parenthood.

    So, we don't. The ones that do want kids only want 1, maybe 2 if they're family orientated, and they lock that behind financial and housing stability. With the rise of casualization and inflation cutting financial stability to at a minimum mid career professionals, that's only achieved in mid-late twenties for the best of us.

    And with most livable 3 bedroom houses in good school catchment areas requiring 2 good incomes just to borrow 80%, most people are stuck with expensive and insecure year-to-year leases that make saving a deposit (let alone paying off HECS) near impossible until their mid-late thirties.

    So by the time most people who want kids are at the point of feeling ready for kids, they're passed their prime child-rearing ages and are used to a selfish 'me-me-me' lifestyle. They might have one $20k+ IVF baby after dealing with late-fertility issues, spend $$$ on Montessori preschools, send them to a private or good public school, and call it a day on kids.

    Others will fall off the wagon along the way and just live ChildFree, and others will see it all as too hard to begin with and not even try. Some might be lucky enough to be given parental/grandparent help and speed it up into reachable territory, but very few people can achieve financial and housing stability in their peak child-rearing ages by themselves.

    That's what we, as Gen Z, see from millennials, and that's been normalized to us now. We laugh at Gen X complaining about not getting grandkids and boomers for not getting great-grandkids, because it's largely their own fault. And I can't see any of that changing without a huge redistribution of wealth, either through Gen X/Boomers giving their kids/grandkids houses or help, or through huge government incentives like better public education funding (+ preschool funding) and baby bonuses.

    • +4 votes

      Housing isn't overpriced everywhere. Leave your Melbourne bubble and you'll see there are plenty of places that offer more (unless you absolutely need your organic, free trade, made-by-a-hipster-barista, mocha frapachino), at a lower price.

      • +1 vote

        Not really so - there is typically a BIG trade-off in availability of work and reward for said work. Those places are cheaper for a reason - it's just not that simple.

        • +5 votes

          Yeah, the pay may be slightly less, but homes half the price. Lots of people do just fine not being in Melbourne.

          • +3 votes

            @brendanm: Lots of people have a job/skills that can suit a more remote location. But lots don't.

            • +4 votes

              @iDroid: Not Melbourne/Sydney does not equal "remote".

              •  

                @brendanm: It's all relative to skills, work availability, travel time, etc. I'm just saying, it's not as simple as "just move further away" things are not that simple.

                •  

                  @iDroid: I'm aware. The first thing should be, "will this career I'm thinking of pursuing, completely limit me in terms of where I have to live, what I can earn, and job availability?".

                  It's almost like going to uni and doing the exact same bachelor degree as a million other people, to compete for jobs where there are 3 available places, is a bad idea.

                  •  

                    @brendanm: True, except something like 80% (arse plucked figure there) of the population already had their degree/qualifications/career before property got this crazy expensive.

                    Some have that choice to make now, but far more don't have that luxury.

                    Your assertion also relies on one's ability to foresee the future, hindsight is always crystal clear.

                    •  

                      @iDroid: True to an extent, Melbourne and Sydney have always been more expensive though. Also, the number of people who continue to go into careers that have been saturated for years continues to boggle my mind.

      • +3 votes

        See there's a catch-22 here that I don't think the 'young people should leave overpriced melbourne/sydney/paramatta/canberra/brisbane' crowd understands.

        If you're on welfare then Centrelink can, and will, cut your payments for moving to an area with less employment. Everyone says move to xyz cheap country area, except the government.

        If you're working a service job that could be done in a cheap regional area, then your kids will get a pretty subpar education as you'd struggle to pay for private school fees if one even exists in the area, as public education is godawful in most of the country.

        If you're working a professional job, then you flat out won't be able to get a job out there, because no one hires programmers in a town of 4000. Remote jobs are more accessible now after covid, but most still require frequent office visits, especially early career.

        Let alone being cut off from family, friends, support networks, professional networking, health services and general services.

        This advice might be great for a mid-late career person who is advanced enough to work a 100% remote job or a professional service job like nursing/teaching/trades, but you can't build a professional career outside of education hubs.

        • +4 votes

          Then isn't this a choice that the person has made? No one forced them to go into a career where they can only live in Melbourne, that's a choice. I just can't understand the whining about a self made situation. Everyone knows it's expensive to live there, it's not exactly a surprise.

          •  

            @brendanm: I don't understand what you're trying to contradict?

            The topic of the thread is young people making choices to disengage from parts of society as a passive or active form of protest against crappy economic circumstances forced on them.

            My entire point was that people are making the choice to disengage from parenthood by not have children, either by delaying it indefinitely because they've decided to live in what are now prohibitively expensive areas, or by actively deciding not to. They see the consequences of going somewhere else as worse than not having kids, so they make an informed choice and live with it.

            Sure someone could drop out at Y10, move to Wodonga and work as a fish and chip shop worker until retirement, nothing stopping most people. But most young people in cities don't want to do that, nice careers and being around family/friends is more important, so they stay.

            By your own logic, Gen X parents and Boomers shouldn't be allowed to whine about the lack of grandkids/great grandkids because it's a choice they made when they added HECs and screwed up the housing market for their own gain.

            • +4 votes

              @Jolakot: I wasn't talking about the kids part. That's something people have to decide for themselves, if they want to listen to others rather than do what they want, they reap what they sow.

              "Nice career". What's a "nice career" exactly? Is it one where you get to drive your Mercedes and compare it with the other employees also driving their Mercedes, working 100 hours a week for a bank, while making $80k a year? Sounds pretty crap to me.

              I'm sure you realise there are many things in between leaving school at 15 to work at a fish and chip shop, and have 24 kids to a guy named Bazza, and working 100 hour weeks and having zero kids, but you have a brand new A class Merc with the AMG badge package.

              Most people I know are able to have kids, a house, and a normal job.

              •  

                @brendanm: A 'nice' career is one that provides the self actualization we were all told to expect from careers at a young age. Whether that's through making a difference socially, earning a bunch of cash and buying expensive stuff to show off, finding a role that affords you the time, money and energy to focus on hobbies, or finding a role that you genuinely enjoy doing each day.

                Don't get me wrong, a lot of those careers exist outside of cities or education hubs, but they're rarely possible until mid-late career. A doctor needs to study for years and do residency hours, the studying has to be done in a city and the hours are much easier to get when there's dozens of hospitals around. A teacher needs to do a 3/4 year degree, do placement and then find a school to take them on, again much easier in a city. Nurses, social workers, engineers, accountants all need to follow a similar path too, they need to start in a city and can only move once their career has taken off.

                I don't think anything is impossible now that was possible 20-40 years ago when economic circumstances were better, it just takes a lot more work and time to achieve, pushing the timelines for everything else in life further back. That's fine for stuff that isn't time sensitive, but having kids is.

              •  

                @brendanm: A 'nice' career is one that provides the self actualization we were all told to expect from careers at a young age. Whether that's through making a difference socially, earning a bunch of cash and buying expensive stuff to show off, finding a role that affords you the time, money and energy to focus on hobbies, or finding a role that you genuinely enjoy doing each day.

                Don't get me wrong, a lot of those careers exist outside of cities or education hubs, but they're rarely possible until mid-late career. A doctor needs to study for years and do residency hours, the studying has to be done in a city and the hours are much easier to get when there's dozens of hospitals around. A teacher needs to do a 3/4 year degree, do placement and then find a school to take them on, again much easier in a city. Nurses, social workers, engineers, accountants all need to follow a similar path too, they need to start in a city and can only move once their career has taken off.

                I don't think anything is impossible now that was possible 20-40 years ago when economic circumstances were better, it just takes a lot more work and time to achieve, pushing the timelines for everything else in life further back. That's fine for stuff that isn't time sensitive, but having kids is.

                •  

                  @Jolakot: Weird, I do just fine, making more per hour than teachers and nurses apparently. Started out in a small town, now on the gold coast. Same story with plenty of people I know here. Perhaps the problem is that people are sold the lie that going to uni and living in Melbourne/Sydney will make all their dreams come true?

                  It's almost like people should go for jobs where the market isn't already massively oversaturated.

              •  

                @brendanm: A class, work harder.

      • +1 vote

        You can only leave your Melbourne bubble by buying outside of Melbourne which appears cheap on Melbourne pay. It is cheap for a reason because the locals can't afford it.

        Sorry to pop your bubble.

        • +3 votes

          What? Lots of people outside Melbourne buying houses.

          Also, from what I could find quickly, Melbourne doesn't have a significantly higher median income than the rest of the country, but has a much higher cost of living.

  • -1 vote

    Lying flat movement used to be the dead beats who live generations in public housing. Some kids to escape public housing by working hard. Or the ones that give up and basically live with their parents until they are 50 and before you know it life is wasted.

    I'm sure we all can do the math behind mortgage repayments

    No we can't that is the point. Or people are just looking at having a greater fool. If you think about it. All it takes is for a single bidder to bid an extra $50k on a house and expectations go up on all housing stock. Basically it is like the stock market, the last buyer sets a new price which increases the market cap. When everyone wants to exit the prices fall.

    Because overseas investors come in and inflate luxury property 20% then normal people on $300k property wants extra 20% too.

    If you are speculating and flipping property then do it like hot cakes and don't get a margin call.

  •  

    Working hard is a mugs game, for the majority it will never pay off. I admire those who choose to drop out of society and live life on their own terms, hopefully we see more of it in the years ahead. I believe that a UBI is not too far away now. In reality most people want to contribute to society in some way, it's just this toxic 35+ hour/full time work culture that I and many others absolutely detest. I want to work on my own terms, location independent, choosing my hours and making money from my computer. Life is too short to spend the majority of it stuck behind a computer/desk feeling miserable.

    • +1 vote

      UBI - where is the money going to come from? Government can hardly pay for everything now. JobKeeper / higher rate JobSeeker can be looked at as UBI and the government is in up to their eye balls in debt.

      •  

        I've asked this before, no one can ever say where it's coming from.

        • +1 vote

          Tax the rich and the corporations. We have enough to go around, it's all concentrated in that 0.1% of 0.1% of people & companies profit sheets.

          •  

            @Stephen2: Yep I just scribbled some random numbers down on to a napkin and by gosh this blokes right. If the filthy rich sell their beach houses we can have it all!!

          •  

            @Stephen2: Then the rich and the corporation's move out of Australia.

            •  

              @brendanm: Yeah, of course. No point angering them with taxes and chasing them away.

              Well, let's look at the 2 top entries on Australia's Rich List. Gina Rinehart and Andrew 'Twiggy' Forrest.

              Can you imagine the economic chaos we would have if they chose to mine their coal over in some tax-dodge island like Bermuda or somewhere? All those Aussie jobs and taxes lost, while they excavate that island instead.

              •  

                @CrowReally: Not sure if you are being facetious, but you obviously can't just decide to randomly mine things, where there aren't things to mine.

                I personally think mining companies should be taxed more, they are digging things up that belong to all Australians, we should get a bigger cut out of it.

                •  

                  @brendanm: Yes, that's exactly the point. The "don't tax them too much, they'll go overseas to get a better deal" line is spoken by business lobbyists and people who view themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

                  It assumes the logic that they, the rich, actually have a parallel/much better business arrangement waiting in the wings but they're choosing to business here out of the kindness of their hearts. They don't mind paying what they pay here, but they also know they could be getting supremely better deals elsewhere, and yet they remain. Out of reciprocation for this kindness, we should go easy on taxing them.

                  That fact that Australia's richest are mining companies and it's literally impossible for them to mine this resource anywhere else in the world is the most absurd extreme of this level of thinking. It doesn't belong in any normal macro-economic discussion, but it especially doesn't belong in one about Australia.

                  •  

                    @CrowReally: I never mentioned mining. You've assumed that.

                    However, as I said, I would agree with taxing mining companies more than they currently are, for the reasons I outlined.

                    •  

                      @brendanm: I think any discussion of taxing the rich in a resources-rich country (where the richest people are, yes, mine owners) would have had to necessarily involve mining.

                      I feel like we agree on this? I mean, I don't think "rich people and corporations will leave" is a valid argument, but given you've acknowledge you want to tax our richest people and corporations, being the miners, I'm guessing you agree on that too?

                      •  

                        @CrowReally: Taxing the "richest people" won't work, there are a million and one ways they can dodge tax.

                        Taxing mining companies more is a great idea, as they make their profit from digging up stuff that's owned by all Australians.

                        Other companies that don't rely on mining will be hard to tax more, as they are able to move if they want.

                        Another thing we could do, is cut expenditure on so many levels of government, all just vampires sucking everyone dry, while adding no value.

                        •  

                          @brendanm: I agree in our current system now practically it's easier to chase down the middle class people and squeeze some taxes out of them (unlike the rich they don't have expensive tax lawyers. It's easier to get a few dollars out of 10 millions people rather than 10 million dollars out of a few people) - but we're discussing designing a new system here - "how would UBI work?". The answer "close the loopholes and make the rich pay".

                          This is actually happening - Ireland and the Netherlands are striking up international tax agreements so that the nonsense of "I'm an Australian marketing company owned by an Irish trust that is now domiciled in the Netherlands, carry the one, boom, no tax to be paid" type of accounting is being grandfathered out. Let's not forget this is 5-6 years after Project Wickenby ended. "The rich get away with everything" is a defeatist argument, muttered over a schooner at the local pub. It's cut from the same fabric as America's "Gun laws are pointless, criminals don't obey laws anyway" thinking.

                          I mean, rich people also have access to the best lawyers but that doesn't mean we should decide to exempt them from the legal system ("Oh, they'd probably get acquitted anyway"). Likewise too, we shouldn't assume a tax rise means all business leaves Australia forever either. There's a difference between changing the top tax rate to 55% and changing the top tax rate to 100%, for instance.

                          •  

                            @CrowReally:

                            This is actually happening - Ireland and the Netherlands are striking up international tax agreements so that the nonsense of "I'm an Australian marketing company owned by an Irish trust that is now domiciled in the Netherlands, carry the one, boom, no tax to be paid" type of accounting is being grandfathered out.

                            If we could actually do this, it would be great. I foresee it being an issue, as this will cut into politicians income, they won't want to jeopardise that.

                            As you say, it's much easier to just whack more tax on the middle class, which is not a fair way to go about it.

        •  

          In the sense that I think about it these days it would be in the context of the near future AI revolution.

          However there are other proposals and modelling out there. Milton Friedman proposed one in the 70s for example.

        •  

          Just like every other debts, they come from the future..

  • +2 votes

    flat out like a lizard

    •  

      ……….drinking

  •  

    you still see people taking up mortgages with the expectation that it will never really be paid off in their retirement.

    After the royal commission you need to have solid exit strategy to pay off the mortgage.

  • +6 votes

    Basically I think it's human nature. We all want nice things, we all want a nice home and car etc and when it becomes within our means we grab it. There's a tendency to focus on the now and not worry about the later, hence the mortgage that may never be paid off.

    Have to laugh at the millenials blaming the boomers for everything. Free uni, for example, came in thanks to Gough and was far too late for most boomers to take advantage of. FFS birth control only became available in the late 60s and even then you had to be MARRIED in order to get a prescription for the pill. As for being paid less if you take a career break - well Boomers didn't have maternity leave - women had to leave their jobs if they fell pregnant. Hell, when I first entered the workforce women had to leave their jobs if they got married.

    I don't deny that some things were "easier"; house prices were a LOT less compared to incomes, but then back then most families only had one breadwinner, with wife being a stay at home mother. Where are the studies showing housing affordability based on two wages, which is common these days?

    • -1 vote

      Ok, conservative.

      • +1 vote

        Ok, booger

      •  

        Your only rebuttal is "conservative", or random Twitter sayings. Pathetic.

  •  

    We all feel young and invincible and we all want 'more' and none of us earn enoug- no matter what salary you're on. The income to make anyone comfortable, worldwide, is the same for everyone; the income, wether you live in New York or Mogadishu, Singapore or Bhutan, the most comfortable income is 21% more.

    It is what got us out of the trees, it is why we catapulted ahead of dogs and monkeys, cats and fish, we were never happy with what we had. If we had a soft spot to sit on during the day and someone else had same but with a view, then we wanted that! Us humans always think of improvements and believe we need them too. It motivates us to invent, to work, it gives us goals and inspiration.

    And this 'greed' applies to 60+ year olds as well. They do want that bigger caravan or that Tesla ute or that 79" TV and they wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they stopped work anyways, so just carry on! Carry on like you were 29….

    Yes, it's crazy and probably not fair to the younger generation who needs work, but young people don't nurture their old relatives like they should. We don't look after our parents anymore, we expect the government to do that. So mum and dad and grandpa continue doing what they're doing. If you invite them to live with you and the kids they may enjoy being home and weed your garden and look after kids etc, fill up the days with meaningful family activities, but that's not happening in our society.

    •  

      Yes, it's crazy and probably not fair to the younger generation who needs work, but young people don't nurture their old relatives like they should. We don't look after our parents anymore, we expect the government to do that. So mum and dad and grandpa continue doing what they're doing. If you invite them to live with you and the kids they may enjoy being home and weed your garden and look after kids etc, fill up the days with meaningful family activities, but that's not happening in our society.

      Considering the greed & indifference of Boomers & Silents, maybe life’s chickens are coming home to roost…..

      •  

        Considering the greed & indifference of Boomers & Silents, maybe life’s chickens are coming home to roost…..

        Spot on!!!

        Parents dumping their children in Kindy since they were 1.5 years old will doom to have a nasty effect with the young ones.