New posts

Reply to thread

Message

We do if you compare it between generations ? The family home is the main asset of most people, many of the younger generations will never be able to own a home.

If we calculated the life of a low income person say between 35-55 equivalent with the desire to own a home starting from a time born in the 1950s to their age 70 or 80s and did the same for a person born in the early 1990s and extrapolated the results we would most likely find that once retired the person born in the 1990s would not be able to pay rent. While the person born in the 1950s would own a 3 bedroom home in an outer suburb, possibly an investment property and have a sizable super accessible at a reasonable age.

You can make up a bunch of stuff and say that person doesn't matter and only look at very aggregate results for a person that either doesn't exist or is even more limited and claim something from that which I think is pretty wrong as the homeless elderly person from my example would still be homeless.

If that is not inequality then you're just playing around with a narrowly defined technical definition which doesn't mean anything beyond its own self contained definition.

<blockquote data-quote="Mrmagoo" data-source="post: 841838" data-attributes="member: 45754">We do if you compare it between generations ? The family home is the main asset of most people, many of the younger generations will never be able to own a home. If we calculated the life of a low income person say between 35-55 equivalent with the desire to own a home starting from a time born in the 1950s to their age 70 or 80s and did the same for a person born in the early 1990s and extrapolated the results we would most likely find that once retired the person born in the 1990s would not be able to pay rent. While the person born in the 1950s would own a 3 bedroom home in an outer suburb, possibly an investment property and have a sizable super accessible at a reasonable age. You can make up a bunch of stuff and say that person doesn&#039;t matter and only look at very aggregate results for a person that either doesn&#039;t exist or is even more limited and claim something from that which I think is pretty wrong&nbsp; as the homeless elderly person from my example would still be homeless.If that is not inequality then you&#039;re just playing around with a narrowly defined technical definition which doesn&#039;t mean anything beyond its own self contained definition.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mrmagoo, post: 841838, member: 45754"] We do if you compare it between generations ? The family home is the main asset of most people, many of the younger generations will never be able to own a home. If we calculated the life of a low income person say between 35-55 equivalent with the desire to own a home starting from a time born in the 1950s to their age 70 or 80s and did the same for a person born in the early 1990s and extrapolated the results we would most likely find that once retired the person born in the 1990s would not be able to pay rent. While the person born in the 1950s would own a 3 bedroom home in an outer suburb, possibly an investment property and have a sizable super accessible at a reasonable age. You can make up a bunch of stuff and say that person doesn't matter and only look at very aggregate results for a person that either doesn't exist or is even more limited and claim something from that which I think is pretty wrong as the homeless elderly person from my example would still be homeless. If that is not inequality then you're just playing around with a narrowly defined technical definition which doesn't mean anything beyond its own self contained definition. [/QUOTE]

Verification