this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
125 points (99.2% liked)

Australia

3582 readers
299 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

My first instinct is "yes" but then I thought about it and I think it's just going to exacerbate the short-stay problem unless combined with other measures.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] abhibeckert -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

It should be based on bedrooms.

A four bedroom house should have a minimum three people living there as their principle place of residence. The address on their drivers license, electoral roll, school encirclement, etc. If you have less people, you should pay... I dunno, $40k per year in tax?

The government can use that $40k per house in tax revenue to buy all the homes people are suddenly going to want to sell, and put them on the rental market. In some parts of Europe half of all rentals are owned by the government. It's a system that works well. It also makes town planning easier - often homes need to be demolished in order to build infrastructure for example. The government can do that if it owns a suitable residence with a lease that's ending soon.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Nah, i don't like this idea at all.

IMO it violates the age old principle of "quiet enjoyment". Whether you own or rent, you should be able to determine what happens in your own home, provided that it doesn't impose on anyone else's quiet enjoyment of their premises, nor the personal liberties of your co-occupants.

Imagine whatever agency knocking on your door to confirm that the registered occupants do actually reside there. No thanks.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Doesn't this encourage knocking down walls, making bigger bedrooms, reclassifying rooms as non-bedroom, and knockdown rebuilds.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Bold! I like it. I worry it would fall into arguments of what is a bedroom and what is a study/wfh space, etc. Also, what if someone can't find someone to fill their extra bedroom? A 40k tax would force people to live with people they don't feel safe around.