Archive for March 31, 2010

And around and around we go: How the RBA and the government are refusing to create new solutions for housing affordability

When I read articles like this one I am left scratching my head at the ability of people in power to tackle serious problems.    Here’s a quote from the RBA (Reserve Bank of Australia) leader man:

“I think it is a mistake to assume that a, you know, riskless easy, guaranteed way to Prosperity is just to be leveraged up into property,” he told the Seven Network. “You know, it isn’t going to be that easy.”

He added that he worries about whether future generations will be able to achieve home ownership.

“I’ve got kids that within not too many more years are going to want somewhere of their own to live and you wonder, you know, how is that going to be afforded because prices are getting quite high.”

Prices are continuing to rise on the back of demand from a growing population outstripping housing supply.

Is this guy on crack? He’s the leader of the reserve bank and he wonders if his children will be able to afford a house?  So the leaders of this nation are quite happy to let the rich get richer and increase housing in-affordability in Australia?

The place where I grew up is the third most expensive place to live in the world and it’s not that flash.  For me to buy a house in my suburb means that I need 6.5 going 7 times my current income, almost as bad as places like London or Sydney.   So what’s the answer from the man in charge.  Allow me to paraphrase for you:

“Oh who knows.  I mean my kids can’t afford it but instead of actually managing the issue you know what I am going to do?  I am going to treat this as if it has nothing to do with me.  It’s the market!   Oh by the way, if you are looking to get into the market, you can’t because we made it too expensive for the average young Australian wage earner.  Sorry about that.  So you young people, just sit around collecting degrees and um er… yeah as you were.”

This is not solving the problem, it’s absolving it.  Sitting there and wondering as it passes you buy.  No offense man, but seriously if you don’t know what to do, what the hell am I supposed to tell my kids?  Good luck kids, get a massive home loan and live in the middle of Uranus.

A lesson in Problem Absolving – Problem Solving is not doing nothing!

The late Russell Ackoff called problem absolution (doing nothing) the option most people take.  Nothing is being done to fix this issues so it cycles around the system creating no improvement.  When a situation is improved, we notice.  We say, ‘holy crap, I can afford a house.’  When it gets worse we say, ‘OMG, the problem isn’t getting any better.’  Simple?  Doing nothing is, ‘Oh that’s a problem, er… come back and see me in a year and you will be ok.’

I am at a complete loss to explain a lack of governmental response to the price of houses.  Even with a grant, the boost and any other kind of incentive, there is no way I can ever hope to live anywhere near I work and raise my family.  It just won’t happen.  It’s not just me either.  Data from the latest ABS survey indicates (it does go here to check it out) that housing debt carried by Australian families is approaching the 40% mark.  Putting aside my hobby horse for a moment, consider the ramifications of that.  What happens if that becomes too much in the future?  What happens to our economy?  Forget about home ownership: what about long term security?

Possible Solutions

I am not an economist, I am barely an academic so here goes.  A list of things we could do right now:

  • Take away the financial imperative: Create a situation where home ownership is regulated by the government.  A years wage (on average) for a house.  Ok, so like I said, I am not an economist.  Economists: why won’t this work?
  • Remodel work so it can be done from anywhere and support the mobile workforce:  Create hubs and campuses for city dwellers in places like Uranus, I mean Pluto, I mean the country.  Change the reason for living in a city to one of lifestyle and promote that.  Sure, that will drive prices higher and create weird developer towns like North Lakes.  It will give losers like me an entry point.
  • Stop blaming the market and think about price ceilings: There is a natural level of supply for demand but here’s the kicker, Price. Supply and Demand is regulated by the price people are willing and able to pay. These stupid arguments about not enough land, blah blah blah.  What about price?  The argument goes: price drives up demand because of the lack of supply for a scarce resource.  I.e.  From the above quoted article: “Prices are continuing to rise on the back of demand from a growing population outstripping housing supply.”  If this were true why is there so much vacant land in the outer regions of Australia?  A better way of saying this would be: At the current price, which is rising due to the perceived lack of supply and a growing base of people wanting to buy in city areas, housing is become more expensive.  Therefore, demand for these city properties is surging and the price ceiling (the price people are willing and able to pay), has yet to be reached.   Oh but is there a price ceiling?  I thought house prices only ever went up… right?  WRONG!  Conventional economics says that price regulates supply and demand, yet I can’t find a single article that clearly explains this, why?  Well, I have no idea about economics that’s why!
  • Change our desires: This is a tough one.  We want a house because we desire.  Give me some drugs so I don’t want me own place. Now I know why a lot of people smoke weed (I don’t).
  • Make bigger caravan parks: Okay so now I am getting silly.  At least I have attempted to apply some ideas to the problem instead of turning on the money hose or sitting back, scratching my arse saying,’Oh yeah that is a problem eh!’.

As I write this I am pondering my future and looking with dismay as I save money, labour under yet another dragon of a landlord and work towards my first home purchase.  The question, that will no doubt go unanswered is this:  What are we going to do about it?  The answer I expect is nothing because all of the rhetoric I see coming out of the media is complete bullshit.  You know, stuff like: Save a deposit (can’t save that much – I have two kids), don’t want a massive house for your first home (I am looking for a small 3 Bedroom place for me and me kids bro), don’t complain, Entitlement mentality (I am not entitled but this is a desire you are profiting from mr. developer, take it away and I write about something else) and all the other shit the media says people in my generation are guilty of.  I say, cram it with walnuts jack! How’s this:  If I save for ten years I will have saved one-quarter of what I need in today’s prices.  What will the prices be in ten years?  A million dollars for a complete dog box with no windows in the middle of the ocean?  Jesus wept!

I will leave you with this link to remind you of what happens when we don’t take a proactive approach towards our problems.  I would also recommend that all Australians read the Subprime Solution by Robert Shiller.  Sure, that may not happen here but it may help us structure the problem in a way that leads to… OMG… a solution!

New Century New Jobs Example #1: Life Coaches on Twitter

In this new era of jobs it’s not surprise that careers are based entirely on the internet.  This was emailed to me this week and I found it very interesting:

50 Life Coaches on Twitter.

This seems like a natural use of the service and it’s really interesting to see this field branching out in this way.  Leave a comment if you have seen others like these examples above.

An example of Creativity in Action: Chatroulette Piano Man

This is a great example and funny (expletives therein – you have been warned) of human creativity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32vpgNiAH60

Thoughts?

Does your life make sense?

Mine doesn’t.

False Advertising?

Courtesy of ImageShack

It most industries I have encountered, advertisers lie.  This is obvious to most and the distrust bread in the general public is now at a point where I believe most people have stopped believing what advertising says to us.  When the celebrity comes on to our screens and smiles showing us, ‘you can look just like me’ an uneven false image is created.   You can’t hope to look like them.  Yet advertisers build their campaigns around a deep down truth that is a lie we tell ourselves.  Things such as:

You can look younger by using skin cream

You can improve you health by drinking this

Take these pills and you will lose weight fast with no side effects

And so on and so on. Why do we buy these lies?  Even television channels do this by piquing our interest with clever editing in the commercials.  They place a well-crafted lie in a commercial and we accept it… or do we?  I think we know it’s false and realise the lie but buy things in hope.  We don’t believe false advertising with our minds, we believe them with our actions, often against our better judgement.

I think this is kind of theatre we have grown accustomed to and expect.  Take for example the following advertisement:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

In a strange way Cadbury are selling chocolate by way of entertainment.  A marketing guru I saw on the Gruen Transfer argued that chocolate sales went up as a result of that ad.  I would say it this way: Interest was piqued in chocolate because of that ad and people remembered why they liked it and went and bought it.  I don’t think you need to advertise to sell chocolate, just sell it at a reasonable price and people will buy it and this is the point isn’t it?

What Advertising people do so well is play with our Engagement, the way we think and act in social settings.  Engagement is a word I have used to talk about how people think and how that influences the way they act.  Advertising plays on both.  If I was being a pragmatic philosopher I would say, ‘thinking is acting’.  That is, advertisers make us think and because that influences our behaviour.  That’s no surprise but what is: they deceive us to do it.   For my final example, I will use real estate advertising.

Real Estate is a controversial area.  So many people have been ‘ripped’ off by agents in one way or another.  Yet, the way a house is sold relies explicitly on the honesty of the buyer and the real estate agent.  My father in law told me how he recently pulled out of buying a house simply because the building inspection came back as showing evidence of termites.  In Australia, especially Brisbane, this is a big deal.  It can mean you have massive damage to the structure of the house and you will be up for thousands of dollars in repair bills.   He had built into the contract that subject to a building inspection, he wouldn’t purchase the house.   So he didn’t.  He lost his deposit and recent reports show that the same house has been resold twice in three years.  All that pain could have been avoided if an honest approach prevailed.  Yet, you can’t sell a house unless you lie… right?

Putting aside all arguments about ethics, integrity and character, there is another pragmatic issue for advertisers here that needs thinking about.  That is, the issue of how to sell things in an economy where attention is the scarcity.  Does that mean more dishonesty should come in so we pay attention?  Are we really to believe the claims of real-estate agents?  I think not.  Yet, these are the social connections we have forged.  It doesn’t mean every real estate agent is a liar or a cheat.  Of course not.  But, which one that you know would happily point out the termites in a building and say, ‘hey check this out, there’s a huge problem that’s going to cost you thousands of dollars.’  It’s ‘buyer beware’ because that’s the society we live in and that’s what we expect.  So it is in advertising, we know it’s pretend so we go along with so-called false advertising and accept it because we know we are being lied. It’s a social contract.

The question is: why have we come to accept it?

You don’t need more information to make better decisions… you need better ideas

Often we say when we are making decisions that we need ‘more’ information.  As Clay Shirky said in something I watched once: it’s not about more information, it’s about better filtering.  I think it’s about better perspectives, ideas and concepts.  Yes that probably is more information but it’s filtered, tailored and well suited to your problem.  Sometimes more information leads to confusion and this isn’t helpful.

What then?

More perspectives?  How about better ideas?  Why keep digging the metaphorical hole in the same place… try something else.  Get somebody from outside the problem to come in and have a look.  Quite often they will frame it in way you don’t expect.  Sometimes we are coming from the completely wrong angle… this isn’t at all helpful either.

In the long run I suppose it would be easier to say that having more information would justify the amount of weight we put on the top of a organisation.  Ultimately though, most of the time, better ideas will do.  Wherever you can find them.

Bipolar ideas

We often argue with people simply to prove our point or win.  Take for example the following debate:

‘I believe in free will I can do what I want.’

VS.

‘I believe in FATE everything is predetermined.’

For the record I don’t know what I believe.  Back to the post.  How can you ever resolve this?  You can’t.  It’s a bipolar idea.  It has one side which is a the down side and one which is the upside.  Do you know what these ideas have in common?  They are based on an assumption/assessment of the future.  Yet there is a connection here.  If these people both went about their lives something would happen… something magical.  They would eventually die and at some point they are likely to pay tax.   Yet they would never report the event in the same way:  It’s God’s will that I pay tax, I choose to pay tax.  It’s God’s plan that I die, I die because I choose to keep living.  Both ways of thinking are different yet can never be proven outside the frame of human thought.  Why?  Because, they are bipolar ideas.  If one says the sun is up, the other says it’s down.

Here’s a third option

Try another idea.  Why not say somethings are predetermined others are not, because I choose.  Or let’s just do away with the whole stupid bipolar idea in the first place and say it this way: I have no idea.  I pay tax because I don’t want to go to jail and I die because life stops at some point.  No big deal.  It’s just the way it has to be because I choose to pay tax.    Or because I can’t cheat death I choose to keep living until I expire.  The predetermined has now become my choice, even though it’s not a choice at all.

Breaking your brain?

Maybe.  But remember it’s only an idea and that’s all it could be ever ever ever.  Why?  I don’t know why it’s just what I believe.  An idea only has the power to convey the abstract long enough until the reality of life hammers it out.  Yet, I won’t know that a turtle rules world as suggested by some religions and Stephen King until I die.  Even then I may never find out.  It may be black and I will be alone.  I still believe in Ghosts.

Is there more than one answer?

To Bipolar ideas?  No.  They are the same idea but looked at from two different points of view at once.   Not all ideas are bipolar some tripolar some have no polar, others are simply unanswerable.   Some ideas though have a special quality in that they are the same idea but because they are dealing with a difficult concept you can actually see them two ways at once.

See what happens when you do a PhD kids you eventually go crazy.

Can’t Thinking

Whenever we are faced with a new problem a reaction can be, ‘can’t thinking’.  What?

Can’t thinking is when we are faced with the opportunity to change or do something and we say ‘can’t’.  The Late Russell Ackoff highlighted this is something of his I read saying that those unchallenged ideas, the one’s that can’t are often not impossible but are considered to be impossible.  They are possible but our mindset tells us it ‘can’t’ be done.  It’s more likely that we won’t try because of what we think or what we expect.  The reality could be completely different.

Newsflash: You won’t know until you try.  So instead of saying ‘can’t’ say ‘won’t’ or ‘yes’ and see what happens.  If you really can’t… then don’t.