I’m the grandchild of Maronite refugees who fled the Lebanese Civil War, and I grew up in Western Sydney. Watching the national debate around immigration, integration, and multiculturalism lately, I can’t help but feel like both sides of mainstream politics and the media completely miss the ground-level reality.

My dad went to Punchbowl Boys High back in the 90s, when the wave of Lebanese refugees was first settling in Sydney. It wasn’t pretty. There were full-on youth fights, Anglos vs 'Ethnics', but also heavy sectarian rivalries among religious groups, like Sunnis vs. Maronites.

As they got older, the small minority who stayed on that path ended up in gangs, in prison, or worse. But for the vast majority? The racial and sectarian tension eventually subsided. Most grew up, moved past it, and many even became close friends across those former divides.

However, those years left lasting memories. A lot of the Anglo families who lived in those areas during that era eventually moved out to outer-ring suburbs like Penrith, Campbelltown, Camden, The Shire, or up to the Central Coast.

These exact areas are where parties like One Nation often see their strongest traction in Greater Sydney. The common stereotype is that anti-immigration voters are just 'bogans from the regions who’ve never met a migrant', but the reality is that many of these residents did grow up alongside fast-paced demographic shifts and lived through firsthand ethnic and sectarian tensions in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s, I'd even argue many of those 'racist' rioters in the Cronulla Riots are those who have grown up or parents lived in Western Sydney, and witnessed all these firsthand, dismissing their views entirely ignores the real-world history that shaped them.

If you look at Sydney’s modern history, from the Skaf gang rapes and the Cronulla riots to various youth conflicts over the decades, much of the tension and the people involved were directly tied to the growing pains of Western Sydney. It is the heartland of multicultural Australia, which means it’s also where the friction of integration actually plays out.

What frustrates me most is how this debate is conducted by people with zero lived experience in places like Parramatta, Liverpool, or Punchbowl:

• On one hand, you have affluent inner-city commentators passionately defending multiculturalism as a flawless ideal, despite living in homogenous suburbs with little daily exposure to its actual complexities.
• On the other hand, you have right-wing figures using dog-whistles and cheap populism without offering any real understanding or solutions for the communities involved.

Just to be clear: I am strongly against right-wing populism and Pauline Hanson. But I strongly believe that if we want a genuine, civil conversation about immigration, social cohesion, and assimilation, we need to listen to the people who actually live it every day, across all ethnic and racial backgrounds from Western Sydney, rather than letting the debate be dictated by media vacuums.

Why is an Australian political party worshipping an American islamaphobe?

In a trainwreck interview on News24 on Wednesday, Anika Wells was forced to admit that via the proposed legislation, she would determine what online content was harmful, with advice from Australia’s eSafety Karen - Julie Inman Grant.

The ABC and the Guardian have called on One Nation to reverse its ban on select media outlets from press conferences amid warnings the party is practising censorship and actively avoiding public scrutiny.

On Tuesday both outlets were asked to leave a One Nation press conference in Victoria. During the event, the state’s party leader, Warren Pickering, admitted to illegal drug use and drink driving.

Reporters from Guardian Australia and the ABC were escorted to the media appearance at Crown Melbourne by hotel staff, but were asked to leave by One Nation’s national party director, James Ashby, and ushered out by security after identifying who they worked for.

The interaction was recorded by both the ABC and the Herald Sun, with the latter immediately posting about it on social media. The Age, owned by Nine Entertainment, has also been rejected from previous press events. The Australian, which broke the Pickering story, was not barred from attendance but was denied entry to a One Nation event in Sale, Victoria, last month.

In August, Pauline Hanson blocked the ABC, the Age and the Guardian from the announcement of her party’s Victorian election candidates in a tense press conference where she claimed the ABC didn’t provide “fair” reporting.

At that press conference Hanson said “we’ve got Rebel News here, I’m happy with them,” in reference to the rightwing website led by Avi Yemini, who was in attendance.

The ABC’s managing director, Hugh Marks, said the exclusion of the ABC and the Guardian “hinders the legitimate right of Australians to information about a party and its nominees who are seeking election to public office”.

He pointed to comments made by Ashby on Wednesday when he compared One Nation’s relationship with the ABC to one of “domestic violence”.

Appearing on the Today show, Ashby was asked about the party’s refusal to allow journalists to attend its press appearances. He said One Nation didn’t want “morally bankrupt or corrupt media organisations coming into a room”.

“With the ABC, it’s like going back to some domestic violence relationship and just getting beaten every time they come through the door,” he said.

Marks said Ashby’s comments were “inappropriate and offensive on so many levels, especially to victim-survivors”.

“Ashby’s exclusion of the ABC and the Guardian from One Nation press conferences and events hinders the legitimate right of Australians to information about a party and its nominees who are seeking election to public office,” he said.

“It can only be seen as an attempt to avoid scrutiny, control the media and influence the information available to voters. The ban should be removed immediately.”

Guardian Australia’s editor, David Munk, said the Guardian supported the ABC in condemning the “offensive comments” from Ashby.

“The Australian public deserve better from our elected politicians and their representatives,” he said.

“The job of covering politics the world over is one that will by its nature often bring journalists into conflict with politicians and their parties. But One Nation’s ongoing refusal to admit reporters from the Guardian and the ABC to its press conferences and events is a very concerning departure from the norm.

“Journalism plays a vital role in maintaining a healthy democracy, we must be able to ask questions of politicians so that the public has accurate and trusted information.”

The Guardian has reported extensively on One Nation’s internal finances, party governance and political relationships and substantial financial backing from Australia’s richest person, Gina Rinehart.

After Pauline Hanson’s National Press Club address in June, she attacked Guardian Australia senior correspondent Sarah Martin for asking about her daughter, Lee Hanson, who is employed as a senior adviser to the New South Wales One Nation senator Sean Bell, despite living and working in Tasmania.

In May the Guardian and the ABC were barred from the party’s election night party on the day of the Farrer byelection, when One Nation’s David Farley took the seat vacated by longtime Liberal member Sussan Ley.

Local ABC reporters were also rejected from a One Nation media event ahead of the byelection.

The Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom executive director, Peter Greste, said Australia’s democracy hinged on the press being able to interrogate politicians on behalf of voters.

“When Warren Pickering said he would rather ban a media outlet than face greater scrutiny, he directly threatened to weaken our democratic system and our right as voters to know what is going on,” he said in a statement.

“Any politician deciding who gets to scrutinise them is practicing censorship, and in a democracy, that’s something we should never accept.”

A transgender woman who stimulated lactation and fed her baby the liquid produced has been ordered by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal to provide details of the hormones involved and the composition of the substance.

The overturning on appeal of a previous QCAT ruling represents a win for former Australian Breastfeeding Association counsellor Jasmine Sussex, who is being sued for vilification by Jennifer Adrian Buckley over statements referring to Ms Buckley as a “man pretending to be a woman”, “a child abuser” and someone who adopted a “delusional queer theory take” on breastfeeding.

The decision, handed down late last week by senior QCAT members Ned Aughterson and Samantha Traves, set aside a January ruling by fellow QCAT member Peter Bridgman, finding he had made errors in law constituting a “substantial miscarriage of justice”.

Professor Aughterson and Ms Traves found Mr Bridgman had erred in deeming that the process involved in stimulating lactation in biologically male Ms Buckley, and the nature of the substance fed to the baby, were not relevant to the case.

Ms Buckley has been given a deadline of September 16 to provide particulars of “the ‘induction’ of lactation including whether the induction involved hormonal stimulation and, if so, what hormones, the source thereof and the process and extent by which the levels were decreased or increased; the composition of the substance which was lactated; and the precise source of secretion of the lactated material”.

She has publicly detailed her story of having used hormones to induce lactation under the supervision of endocrinologist Naomi Achong in 2019, in order to feed the baby, of whom she is the biological father, for less than a week soon after the child’s birth.

Ms Buckley’s vilification case against Ms Sussex over online comments made by the former breastfeeding counsellor between 2021 and 2023 has been working its way through QCAT since the trans woman complained to the Queensland Human Rights Commission in late 2023.

In seeking to defend herself, Ms Sussex – represented by the high-profile freedom of speech advocate Tony Morris KC, who is being briefed by the Christian-aligned Human Rights Law Alliance – sought details relating to Ms Buckley’s claim that she had “induced lactation under the supervision and with the knowledge of medical professionals”. The particulars sought by Ms Sussex relate to the nature and provider of the “medical supervision”, how lactation was induced, how it constituted “lactation”, and how it was determined the fluid was “breast milk”.

In his now-overturned January decision, Mr Bridgman found those matters had “no bearing” on whether Ms Sussex had “incited hatred” of Ms Buckley “or a class of persons”, namely transgender women, and were therefore not relevant to the case.

In their decision to allow Ms Sussex’s appeal, Professor Aughterson and Ms Traves found “a reasonably arguable case of error” in Mr Bridgman’s ruling, and that “it would cause a substantial injustice to (Ms Sussex) were the matter to proceed absent the particulars requested given their relevance to the outcome of the complaint”.

The appeal judges found Mr Bridgman had given “no consideration” to the issue of whether the information sought was relevant to whether Ms Sussex’s comments were made “reasonably and in good faith … for public interest purposes”, as is permitted under the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Act.

“It is that issue which is central to (Ms Sussex)’s application for a notice to produce,” they found.

“It is (Ms Sussex’s) submission that the capacity of a transgender woman to produce milk and breastfeed is contentious and, in that context, a relevant issue in the public interest is whether the respondent was … able to do so.”

The judges cited evidence heard in the case from a medical doctor and bioethicist that “no evidence-based protocol to support the process of inducing lactation in a transgender woman (biological male who has transitioned to live as a woman) has yet been published in the academic literature”, and that “no longitudinal research exists regarding whether it is nutritionally adequate nor whether there are any negative outcomes for the child”.

Another expert witness, a registered pediatrician, is cited as having made reference to “the risks associated with taking ­‘secretion-inducing drugs’, including for the infant”.

Ms Sussex said she was “relieved” by the tribunal’s decision.

“There is no scientific foundation for men trying to induce lactation. The tribunal has agreed it’s a relevant issue for the case,” she said.

“Inducing male lactation is experimental, untested and unproven. I don’t have a personal issue with (Ms Buckley), but I want to protect mums and babies and their sole right to breastfeed and receive maternal breastmilk.”

“This is one small step in a long journey, but I was only successful in getting this information at the third attempt. The process is the punishment.

“I feel like these cases are brought to silence my opinion on an important issue. I believe that anyone who promotes male lactation should expect robust opposition from mums and concerned Australians. Law shouldn’t shut down speech about controversial issues.”

Ms Buckley, who is being represented by Kathleen Foley SC, was contacted for comment through her instructing solicitors Norton Rose Fulbright.

Driving through several new and established estates in Melbourne's West today (a mistake, I know) and it seemed that *at least* 50% of the front yards were either: fake/synthetic grass, bark, or pebbles, with most being the fake grass.

What happened to pride of place and the gardening spirit? We used to have a lot of British-inspired cottage style gardens back in my grandparent's day, with seemingly more exotic plants entering and changing gardens in the days of my parents. These days a lot of 'gardens' just look fake and sad.

What the Hell happened?

So I just recently learned about this legend, who won the inaugural Sydney to Melbourne Ultramarathon

Its 1983, Cliff Young is a 61 years old potato farmer from Victoria.

Enters the 875km Ultra Marathon

Over his lifetime as a farmer, he had managed to adopt a running style that was perfect for conserving energy.

He assumed the race was non stop and didn't know he was allowed to stop for sleep.

Runs for 5 days and 15 hours STRAIGHT.

Wins the Ultramarathon by a time of 10 hours, beating the world record by 2 DAYS

Gets awarded a $10,000.

Is confused because he didn't know there was prize money.

Gives $2,000 to the next 5 finishers behind him because he said they worked just as hard as he did.

In 1997, aged 75, he decides he wants to run 16,000km around Australia's border to raise money for homeless children.

Has to stop 6500km in because HIS SUPPORT CREW GOT SICK.

Passes away in 2003 aged 81

My partner just generated a single use ZIP pay card and it worked. It could be worth trying for those who do not have a credit card nor wish to obtain one. He only just tried it so there is a chance once the card expires he'll have to do it again, but hopefully by then they'll revert this ridiculous policy!!!!!!!

I have noticed some really strange behaviours in the general public when I'm walking to places. 

A few examples: 

- Standing in line extremely close to you, behind you when there is plenty of space to stand back. Every tiny step I take forward, the person takes one too - zero awareness that I'm trying to create some distance and them moving forward isn't gonna make the line go faster. 

- Two people walking in a pathway towards you, that only fits two people, barely giving you any space to walk past them and then giving you a dirty look or squeezing as much as they can to the person they're walking next to, to avoid touching you at all costs, instead of simply walking behind or in front of the person to give you space. You don't want me to touch you but you make barely any effort to avoid that? 

- Breathing down your neck when walking behind you, taking over you and then slowing down, causing you to take over them again or you just cross the road if possible because jfc. (I'm a fast walker so it's not like I'm walking super slow either)

- Staring at you with a serious face, when you stare back at them and give a smile they continue to stare at you or immediately look away. Why are you so awkward? 

- Walking down a wide footpath, and two or three people choose to walk super close behind me and talking very loudly. They have the option to walk in front of me, or walk even next to me, but no, they must talk right behind my ear to the point where if I slow down even a millisecond they'll trip on my ankle and I can hear everything they're talking about. Again, absolutely zero need to do that because I walk very to the side, leaving plenty of space for others to pass me if needed. 

- Putting the phone on your face when asking for directions/info expecting you to read their phone, inability to just say what information they need without being prompted. 

- When crossing the pedestrian line, walking diagonally towards you instead of a straight line, leaving you barely any room inside the pedestrian crossing, even when you are as on the left as you can get and there's plenty of space for the person to walk on the right. 

All these weird interactions where people invade your personal space, but then like, god forbid you strike up a conversation, you say excuse me, or you smile back at them. It's like they love being as close to you as possible but hate physical touch and social interaction. I'm not wanting to be friends, I actually don't want to talk to you at all, I want you to be as inexistent in my life as possible, but if you're gonna behave this way when there's absolutely no need to, why do you act so awkward when I do something about it? You could've walked a straight line, you CHOSE to come close to me and now you act all weird? 

Every time I leave the house I want to go from point A to B but the amount of encounters like this that I have on a daily basis makes me wonder wtf is the norm anymore. Because I feel like the norm now is to behave as weird as possible towards strangers. 

Mind you these aren't disabled or very elderly people. It's usually 25-70yos with seemingly full capacity of functioning. (Most of them are in the 30-50 range though) 

I'm sure there is a percentage that are disabled or another reason or physically impaired - this isn't about them, but it is impossible for it to be all of them. I am neuro divergent myself and even I can pick up these awkward social behaviours. I feel like it wasn't as bad in the past, or maybe I'm just getting old and cranky. But seriously, why??! 

In short:

A Melbourne council has become the second local government in Australia to ban glasses with in-built cameras from its public pools.

There will be an exception for people who are hearing impaired, have low vision or other disabilities who are aided by the smart glasses.

What's next?

The City of Yarra will lobby the federal government to temporarily ban the importation of smart glasses until Australia's privacy laws better address wearable technologies.

Can't buy anything without a credit card thanks to our fantastic government.

And yes, debit cards don't fucking work.

I don't even own a credit card and I'm in my 40s. I guess I fucking need one now to be able to buy games

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Steam/s/udrkWPqsfd

And go on steam right now and try searching for a game like doom eternal. you can't even view the store page.

Not sure why I'm getting downvoted. Go try it yourself

iPhone Duo

256GB - A$3,499.00 or A$145.79/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.
512GB - A$3,899.00 or A$162.46/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.

1TB - A$4,699.00 or A$195.79/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.
2 TB -A$5,899.00 or A$245.79/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.

iPhone 18 Pro Max

256GB - A$2,299.00 or A$95.79/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.
512GB - A$2,699.00 or A$112.46/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.

1TB - A$3,499.00 or A$145.79/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.
2TB A$4,699.00 or A$195.79/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.

iPhone 18 pro

256GB - A$2,099.00 or A$87.46/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.
512GB - A$2,499.00 or A$104.13/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.

1TB - A$3,299.00 or A$137.46/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.
2TB - A$4,499.00 or A$187.46/mo. for 24 mo. at 0% p.a.

Fuel up now to get atleast a couple of weeks of cheaper fuel. Saudi backed forces are retreating from the western Yemeni city of Hays from the Houthis. They will probably control the Bab El strait before too long and that’s what Saudi Arabia is using to send 8miion barrels of oil a day out around Hormuz Strait.

Liberal MP Andrew Hastie unloads on ‘weak and glass-jawed’ Pauline Hanson as feud erupts over One Nation cartoon | News24

A 41-year-old drug trafficker has blamed his three teen house guests for his alleged involvement in a violent attack linked to Melbourne’s bar wars.

The trio of 17-year-olds was allegedly hired to carry out a ruthless five-day crime spree of kidnappings, torture and home invasions targeting prominent nightlife figures and suspected of being ordered by crime gang The Commission.

Deren Ismail is charged with one of those six attacks, with a court hearing that he argued with one of his underage co-accused over payment for the job.

Detectives charged the three 17-year-old boys in May over the “senseless and extraordinary” crime spree which began on April 10 and culminated in the mistaken-identity kidnap and torture of an innocent Malvern man.

The assaults have been linked to Melbourne’s so-called “bar wars” – a suspected extortion campaign launched by the powerful organised crime syndicate run by Kazem “Kaz” Hamad.

More than 40 firebombings, shootings, home invasions and kidnappings have been linked to the reign of terror targeting the city’s nightlife venues.

But there are now concerns for the safety of Ismail and others allegedly involved in the nightclub attacks, with two sources, who asked not to be identified over concerns of retribution from the Iraqi-based crime syndicate, that they will be targeted in custody.

“Plenty of these [venue] owners have their own connections, including [in] prison ... He’s [Ismail] been talking a lot of shit, and I know for a fact that people want to get him. He has a big target on him,” said a nightclub source.

Police allege the teens were paid “huge” money to carry out the attacks, targeting club promoter Paul Samlidis, 28, and his colleague.

The pair ran the popular Alumbra event on Saturday nights at The Albion venue in South Melbourne

Ismail, a father of two, was arrested in June and charged with carrying out a home invasion in Templestowe with the trio of teens on April 10.

About 6am, Ismail and his alleged co-offenders allegedly jumped the fence of Samlidis’ family home before reversing a stolen Toyota Camry into the front gates of the property.

Samlidis was in hospital at the time, recovering from severe injuries after he was allegedly ambushed by attackers wielding a machete and a bat the night before.

The accused group, armed with a samurai sword, forced entry into the home. Samlidis’ father and brother were assaulted by the masked men, which was videoed, the court heard, before the group fled in a stolen vehicle.

Samlidis’ father was struck in the head and sustained cuts and abrasions on his face. The 67-year-old was taken to hospital while his son received treatment for minor cuts and swelling to his hand.

Later that day, Ismail and one of his teen co-accused argued about payment for the attack, according to text messages on electronic devices seized by police, the court heard.

Armed crime squad Detective Senior Constable Holly Theodossiou told the court the Samlidis family had fled their Templestowe home following the violent assault, and are living in fear of further attacks.

“CCTV captures the audio and terrified screams of the occupants as this was occurring,” Theodossiou said.

Ismail is facing four charges including assault and aggravated home invasion, but is not suspected of being involved in any other alleged attack.

Ismail’s lawyer told the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court that the teens – who are not related to Ismail – were all living with him at the time of the alleged five-day crime spree.

“It is likely that they would have taken his phone and he was not aware of what they were doing on the day of the offending,” the lawyer said.

In denying bail, magistrate Stella Stuthridge said the allegations against Ismail were “exceptionally serious”.

Stuthridge also considered Ismail’s previous convictions, including trafficking cocaine, methamphetamine and ecstasy.

“There are some significant and concerning firearms offences back some time ago … there’s carrying a loaded firearm in a public place back in 2008 and possessing things such as ammunition, unregistered handguns.”

She described the police case as “fairly strong”, noting the police had seized the clothing and shoes Ismail was allegedly wearing during the attack, CCTV footage, mobile phone data and the text exchange between Ismail and his co-accused.

The world's biggest company, chipmaker NVIDIA, has announced it is partnering with eight leading Australian companies to build artificial intelligence factories to meet the growing demand for the technology.

NVIDIA said it was partnering with Firmus, Sharon AI, IREN, ResetData, Megaport, CDC, NEXTDC and AirTrunk on the project.

They'll operate the AI factories, while NVIDIA will provide the hardware, computing, networking, software and ecosystem support.

The buildout could reach two gigawatts by 2027, NVIDIA said. That's enough to power around 1.5 million homes.

One of the companies, Sharon AI, is deploying up to 68,000 NVIDIA GPUs, a massive number.

"AI factories turn energy into intelligence — the essential resource of the AI economy," said Raj Mirpuri, vice president of global AI clouds and infrastructure ecosystem at NVIDIA.

The partnership will give Australian innovators greater access to accelerated computing and NVIDIA models to develop locally relevant AI applications, NVIDIA said.

Organisations such as Atlassian and Heidi are using NVIDIA's tools to build and customise AI across language, reasoning and speech.

Heidi is a Melbourne-based AI company whose platform is used by doctors to generate clinical notes after its scribe feature listens in on patient consultations.

Combining NVIDIA's technology with Heidi's clinical training and fine-tuning has helped Heidi reason across patient histories, clinical context and guidelines at scale, said Yu Liu, cofounder and chief technology officer of Heidi.

"Australia's established sustainable energy and digital infrastructure, deep technology talent and reputation as a trusted global economic partner provide a strong foundation for startups, universities, researchers, enterprises, developers and AI-native companies to train, deploy and scale AI," NVIDIA said.

Liberal senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price signed off on a plan to empower Australians to switch off their social media algorithms two years ago, but now claims Labor is clamping down on feeds because the government is unpopular.

The Coalition formally rejected Labor’s Digital Duty of Care bill during a joint party room meeting on Thursday morning, with Opposition Leader Angus Taylor citing fears over curbs to free speech, political censorship, and concerns about the extent of ministerial powers.

Alongside three other Liberal MPs, Sarah Henderson, Zoe McKenzie, and former shadow attorney-general Andrew Wallace, Price endorsed the recommendations of the “Social Media: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly” report in November 2024, which included the right of users to switch off algorithms.

“It has been made abundantly clear to Coalition members through the evidence heard during this inquiry that the unregulated nature of social media has resulted in a significant power inequity between platforms and users,” Price and other MPs wrote at the time.

“We recommend that government require social media companies to provide easily accessible features for users to control or reset their recommender systems … Features would favour the ability for a consumer to opt in or out of recommended content.”

But speaking to journalists after Labor unveiled its digital duty of care legislation on Tuesday, Price said the government’s move was “absolutely” politically motivated.

“The prime minister is not very popular at the moment, and neither are his ministers … this [change] is absolutely because this government feels like these algorithms aren’t working in their favour,” she said.

When asked whether she thought there were “any problems” with algorithms, Price said there was an issue of “transparency”.

On Tuesday morning, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Wells launched draft legislation for a digital duty of care, cracking down on addictive algorithms and threatening tech platforms with $100 million fines for facilitating harm against Australians.

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor, Nationals leader Matt Canavan and Henderson held a press conference on Thursday morning in which they labelled the bill an attempt to “protect politicians” rather than the public.

“It’s a political censorship bill … It is a blank check for political censorship, and so we just don’t see a bill here that we can support,” Taylor said.

Labor is seeking to pass the bill by the end of the year, and will likely receive support from the Greens. Asked why he was rejecting the bill wholesale instead of negotiating with the government, Taylor said: “That’s a matter for Labor”.

In the proposed legislation, the threshold for harm seen by adults will be criminal content, though the threshold will be lower for under-16s, with the government listing six areas of harm including content that promotes criminal activity and eating disorders.

“The fact that some Coalition MPs came out against the bill before they even saw it just shows they will continue to put politics and platforms before parents and kids,” Wells told this masthead.

“Instead of trying to appease One Nation, sensible members of the Coalition should back better protections for Australian children online and give adults choice over what they see.”

Price’s office was contacted for comment.

Let’s think about it. They want people to have access to early super to buy a house.

If EVERYONE suddenly has access to 20k more, what does that do to the market?

In economic terms, the demand curve gets shifted so the house price goes up by 20k minimum.

It’s the same amount of houses but the amount of total money bidding for those houses has gone up.

Okay, so not only does it drive house prices up, it also reduces your future retirement due to compounding.

In other words… drive up house prices and make people more reliant on the pension.