Like teensy, weensy clockwork cogs and gears, every time that the property bubble re-inflates we go through the same reflexive insults for would-be home-owners. The most insulting of the abortive debates is “tiny houses”, usually led by the bourgeois hypocrites at the ABC. Today is no exception:
- Academic eggheads Heather Shearer and Paul Burton argue that “tiny houses” are booming. Yet nobody is living them.
- The eggheads are bemused by this because tiny houses are so much cheaper.
- They put the discrepancy down to “values”.
- But remain committed to tiny house reform because it is so much more “sustainable”.
I know your blood is already boiling so I will just offer a very quick summary of what is wrong with this argument:
- Why does the article declare there is a boom if there is not? The only boom is in spruiking “tiny houses” as a fallacious fix for the bubble.
- Hoocoodanode that people don’t want to live in pimped-up caravans and become tailor trash.
That’s all there is to this story. “Tiny houses” can help the homeless, who are already “trash”, and see a caravan as the Hilton. But the rest of us see living in a caravan as an utter failure.
Because it is.
So, here is what we should do with every “tiny house” in Australia not currently occupied or useful to Aussie “trash”.
Drive them all to Canberra. Swing an axe through the lot. Pile the kindling one hundred feet high up against the parliament. Douse it with petrol. And burn the entire edifice to the ground.
In short, get off your arse and do something to change housing affordability. It’s a deliberate inter-generational war and it will not end until youth puts enough heat on parliament to change it.
Tiny houses should enrage not placate.
