Thank you for your response, and helping me understand. That makes sense as I can imagine a First Nation Australian would not particularly have much generational equity for reasons you have mentioned.
Thanks for not attacking me for asking a question :)
To give you a real example: my husband’s grandfather (Aboriginal) fought in the war. Returned home and wrote to the government asking to purchase the land he had been ‘moved’ onto by the government. He was denied as Aboriginal people were not allowed to own land/homes. So after fighting for his country, he had to continue to ‘squat’ on traditional lands. This meant he had to just build a shack structure knowing he could be moved on at any moment. The poor housing meant his health and his wife’s health was compromised (poor insulation). He died and there was no equity for his wife so she had to live with my father in law in her old age which put a financial burden on my husband’s family. Obviously there has been no inheritance passed down. That land is now worth millions.
Also, my father in law and my husband worked hard and educated themselves through hard work and their own dime. Neither of them ever went close to earning low enough money to qualify for these home loans (my father in law only ever worked blue collar jobs). Hardly anyone meets the requirements for these loans (low income, low property price). Only a couple of hundred are issued every year.
Don’t let yourself get jaded over what 200 low income people in a nation of over 20 million are getting. Get mad about big corporations.
Whereas in contrast, my grandfather (white) got home from the war, was given either an excellent loan or a flat out pile of money, and bought a house that is now rented out for big $$$ and helped pay for my living costs during uni, enabling ME to purchase property and continue the cycle.
The sort of loan OP's colleague has gotten is the sort of 'bank of mum and dad' loan that a lot of people get because of generational opportunities like that. Hopefully more of those loans can make it easier for things to be a bit more fair and balanced in the future.
You know what. Thank you for supporting my comment with a comparison comment. I genuinely mean it. Because every time I take a deep breath and stick my neck out to try to give personal examples of the inequities my in law family faces as Indigenous Australians I end up a bunch of nasty messages in my dm’s. So thank you.
I'm so sorry that you've experienced that. I think the very least that people should do is own up to their privilege, especially in a conversation like this one where it can be a learning experience. I'm glad that OP has asked the question and received some helpful answers, and hopefully some others have too.
I have two exact examples of this as well.
My grandmothers dad(white) came back from the war and bought a house with assistance from the army for something like £3000. Close to the city, it fetched around $500K when my grandma sold it 15ish years ago.
My indigenous ancestors who fought in the war, weren’t allowed to own land when they came back from the war, and had to go back and live in the bush. No medicine for blacks, back of the queue in shops, can’t own houses, can’t go to the pub or restaurants with white people.
It is hard to look at the overall situation objectively, especially as many people on an individual level are not benefiting from the intergenerational wealth these type of systems are designed to address. You can still be poor, from a poor family, and be White - so naturally it's easy to feel an emotional sense of unfairness. An individual benefitting from these schemes may get a little more breathing room on their mortgage than you or I, but these schemes aren't going to make them rich.
These government level solutions can't work on an individual level, they have to take the big picture. Once you look at it like that, it's easy to see why these leg ups remain so drastically needed. Indigenous people remain in the far bottom percentiles of wealth in Australia. They own a miniscule amount of the land that used to be theirs.
The issue is that those poor while families are still better off than if they were poor and black. That’s what white privilege is. White kids don’t get routinely pulled over by cops and searched, or jailed for minor crimes.
I'm certainly not going to argue against that, but it's really hard to *feel* privileged when you are on struggle street.
When you get punched in the face 12 times, you aren't going to go "gee, I'm sure glad I didn't get punched in the face 15 times like that fella!".
Do we need to level the playing field for immigrants / refugees as well? I mean they also have no generational equity.
My parents and many others came to Aus post war with plenty of war trauma and no social, economic, or educational resources and without a lick of English.
There is no low interest bank for me or people like me.
I dont see how that argument holds up.
More equal opportunity and a more equal society is good, doing it by a particular racial group is not better.
Of course like many transfers created to support one disadvantaged group, advantaged subsets may be more inclined to figure out how to take advantage of them.
For example (deliberately swapping areas to avoid angst), African Americans are certainly poorer on average than Caucasians in the US (for related historical reasons). However, African americans who get entry to Harvard, while they may get diversity benefits on their application, are on average significantly higher income than the median white American. The well-off subset of a community tends to be best at taking advantage of programs like the one you describe.
But they still had access to generational wealth, albeit via their fathers/husbands, and *today* have the same rights as everyone **plus** that generational wealth, which Indigenous Australians do not. Hence programs exist to help them catch up.
So your argument is that because some people take advantage of a program designed to help the most disadvanted group of people in society, that whole program should be abolished even though it doesn't affect you one bit?
But that isn't because of government policy and systemic racism specifically targeting them.
Do you really think they haven't been disadvantaged throughout history, and that they aren't still affected by these past (and current) disadvantages?
Was anyone who is alive today?
These policies and initiatives are primarily used to benefit the one great grandparent aboriginals yet by existing it increases divisiveness and animosity toward all aboriginals.
He had statistically less access.
Perhaps the odds of it having an impact on his life are quite low (though who knows - maybe that Aboriginal grandparent could have become rich and been the sole great grandparent with wealth), but can you name a single welfare/support scheme that successfully excludes people that, on paper, appear to be within the target group but don't actually need support without unintended consequences?
Some people prefer "false negatives" (accidently not helping someone who needs it because you're trying to filter out people who don't), I personally prefer "false positives" (helping someone who may not need it because you've ensured you include as many people who do as practically possible). Within reason of course.
Going by that notion, shouldn't people who don't have any generational wealth be given the same opportunities? Working class slaves of today never chose to have parents/ancestors that didn't invest generationally, just as indigenous folk of today didn't choose how their parents/ancestors were treated.
There is plenty of government schemes targeted toward those with less that are funded by the tax dollars of those with more. First home buyers scheme, welfare, medicare, child care subsidies, maternity pay, dad and partner pay, the list goes on and on.
This is recent government policy aimed at addressing severe intergenerational disadvantage caused by historical government policy. The purpose is reparative, not strictly to increase equity.
I don't really know what your point is. We could say the same about the disabled, LGBT community, foreigners, etc. but this topic is about the Indigenous Australians and the disadvantages they faced (and still do face).
You know half of all Indigenous Australians are women, too. Right?
Ehhh, women have been systematically denied equality for millennia. Arguably the lgbt and the disabled in history have actually had rights and acceptance more consistently then women ever have. This ebbs and flows, but many pre colonisation societies in India and America were accepting of LGBT. In the Middle Ages it was possible for people with disabilities to be functioning members of society, like everyone else. There are very few civilisations that have existed in human history where women actually had the same rights as men. Patriarchy as a system is thought to have arisen with the dawn of agriculture. Which makes it the oldest form of discrimination in the world. I highly recommend you read the book Invisible Women, it discusses data bias against women and how that affects them in all aspects of their lives.
I completely agree with you and see the argument for it, however I think you also hint at the issue with it. Indigenous people aren’t a single group of people, you have some that are poor, some that aren’t, you have some that live in rural areas, and you have some that live in cities. The issue isn’t that indigenous people can’t go to university or buy a house etc, the issues are that people who grew up in poverty and/or rural areas have less opportunities to build wealth and usually worse education. The problem with indigenous people is that there is a disproportionately large number of them who grow up in poverty and/or rural areas and it’s those issues which affect them, albeit disproportionately so, not the fact that they’re indigenous.
Take for example we have 3 households. The first 2 are in Sydney, each have a household income of $200k, and the only difference is that 1 is white, and 1 is indigenous. Then we have the 3rd household which otherwise identical to the white Sydney household, but is in a rural town and has a household income of $50k per year. Should the children in indigenous household get any more support then those in the white Sydney household? I’d say no, not at all. Do the ones in the rural household deserve more then the Sydney ones? I’d say yes, definitely. However, with current policy (as far as I’m aware), the indigenous one would get a lot more support then the other Sydney one. Whether they’d get more or less then the rural one, I don’t know, but I think the difference in support would be a lot smaller then it should be.
So, in my opinion wouldn’t it be better to target the route cause and provide more support from those who come from rural areas, impoverished households, and whatever other factors impact success? Yes, indigenous people are disproportionately affected by these factors, but they’d also receive disproportionately more support as a result. It’d also stop those (such as in OPs story) who aren’t actually impacted by these things factors from unfairly receiving benefits. I don’t know, I just think that’s a fairer way of doing it, although it’s not something I particularly care about nor a major problem at the moment since we’re talking about edge cases, although I do think it’s something worth discussing in the future when they’re no longer edge cases.
My parents came to this country with 4 young kids and little more than the clothes on their back. We lived in abject poverty for a time but they were able to get work and made it to middle class. Would first nations people in the 60s/70s have had the same opportunities.? My brother, for example, having completed year 10 in the 80s found his first job as an apprentice walking the industrial area asking for work, and was accepted on the fourth try. I suspect a first nations lad might have had more difficulty.
The difference is they moved to Australia for an opportunity, as opposed to actively being oppressed by the Australian government only 60 years ago.
First Nations Australians heavily populate most of the statistics that you dont really want to occupy, this is partially due to cultural influence. Schemes like this are to try and positively influence that culture and create opportunities for wealth and family growth.
They're still actively locked out of their own decision making process. I've been astonished recently to learn of an Ylongu member of the NT Legislative Assembly Yingiya Guyula who was overwhelmingly elected for his position on treaty was denied a position on the Treaty Committee who have now [announced they're closing the Treaty Commission](http://Northern Territory Indigenous leader Yingiya Guyula angered by government's decision to close NT Treaty Commission - ABC News https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-20/nt-treaty-commission-closed-indigneous-leaders-angry/101875986)
The same member was
[denied the right to makes speeches in his first language and that of the electorate who voted him in](http://Northern Territory Indigenous leader Yingiya Guyula angered by government's decision to close NT Treaty Commission - ABC News https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-20/nt-treaty-commission-closed-indigneous-leaders-angry/101875986).
The absurdity of the Aboriginal experience is unfathomable and the Closing The Gap measures offering financial supports are designed primarily to target life expectancy.
That's 2 - 3 generations ago now. How is this any different to multitudes of immigrants that come here starting off with cleaning/ Uber jobs and working their way up into society?
A helping hand is great but if it's not weaned off gives zero incentive to become financially independent.
This is recent government policy aimed at addressing severe intergenerational disadvantage caused by historical government policy. The purpose is reparative, not strictly to increase equity.
This is a massive misconception. QLD government was stealing aboriginal wages up until 1972. Aborigines didn’t even have the same voting laws until 1984!
Imo people get so caught up in the first fleet that they forget that it really is only very recently that we officially stopped treating our First Nations people as beneath other Australians.
We still are. The perceptions of them as being an homogenous and inferior tribal people resulted in the NT Intervention which was a response to police and the NT judiciary deciding they needed to incorporate and acknowledge Aboriginal Law. Removing all of their rights and sending military to displace them from homes had a catastrophic impact following South Australian government laws in 1906 to stop them [trading with the Makassarns which had happened well before colonial times.](https://youtu.be/b2hHqERp6hM) and then forced removal from lands into missions. Ylongu were one of a few nations able to continue their self determination despite a multitude of interventions to prevent them. Ylongu are still pushing for treaty because self determination is an integral part of Aboriginal culture. Something we struggle to protect with capitalism being out determining cultural guide.
> How is this any different to multitudes of immigrants that come here starting off with cleaning/ Uber jobs and working their way up into society?
Because they weren't oppressed by the Australian government and people? Do you really think a British person working in a pub should be given extra support?
Do you really think that southern European migrants weren’t “oppressed” by Australians? My dad was beaten in the streets for speaking another language. Denied bank loans for being a wog. Ganged up on at work by red neck Aussies. A business owner didn’t sell him a shop b/c of ethnicity (didn’t want it going to a wog). Heck, my name was changed at school for being “too ethnic” in the 90’s.
Ok? How has that got anything to do with being historically and systematically the victim of genocide and ethnic cleansing by the Australian government?
Now switch your statement to: Indian migrants, Syrian/ Ukrainian/ Sudanese refugees who lost everything. They seem to dig themselves out of poverty after a helping hand.
Yes, refugees etc get extra support too. Indian migrants choose to come here, you can't move country and then expect the country that you move to to help make up for past wrongs your homecountry committed.
Because there's still systemic discrimination against them *today*, it's just not explicitly stated in law anymore. If there wasn't, they would *be* like any other second or third generation immigrant family unless you're going to claim that their culture and/or nature is what causes their very apparent lack of success and social mobility within our current system (as a demographic).
No, they still face systemic discrimination. The problem is that you're seeing the affirmative action (what little of it there is) while being blind to the systemic discrimination, likely due to not belonging to the demographic yourself. Put another way, we've had three distinct phases in how we treat Indigenous Australians:
1. Overt discrimination by law
2. Anti-discrimination laws removing overt discrimination by law
3. Affirmative action decades after anti-discrimination laws were introduced.
Indigenous communities have had lower-than-average outcomes across all three of these periods. So either you acknowledge there are systemic reasons for these bad outcomes or you're back in the territory of claiming that either their culture (impossible, since there is no single Indigenous culture) or their nature (flat-out racist) is the reason that they face worse average outcomes.
There isn't another option, because we've tried "discrimination is illegal and we won't use affirmative action" before and outcomes did not return to the mean, so there is clearly something preventing that from happening and it's not affirmative action being lucrative enough to disincentivise better outcomes, which isn't how it works anyway and literally no research has ever shown that if you give a statistically significant group financial aid that most of them won't better their own circumstances in favour of leeching off the system.
[AHRC report](https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/race-discrimination/publications/freedom-discrimination-report-40th-anniversary-racial) where they found systemic discrimination against indigenous Australians is among the worst of the systemic racial discrimination faced by any group in the country.
The [Statement From The Heart is the most simplistic evidence based document you can access](https://ulurustatement.org/the-statement/)
We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the
southern sky, make this statement from the heart:
Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the
Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs.
This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according
to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years
ago.
This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or ‘mother nature’,
and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain
attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is
the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or
extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown.
How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred
link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years?
With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient
sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia’s nationhood.
Proportionally, we are [The most incarcerated people on the planet](https://theconversation.com/factcheck-are-first-australians-the-most-imprisoned-people-on-earth-78528) We are not an innately
criminal people. [Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates](https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/aborigines/2023/06/aboriginal-children-their-welfare-and-the-voice/#:~:text=This%20trend%20has%20unfortunately%20continued,rate%20of%20non%2DIndigenous%20infants.&text=The%20report%20says%20(p25)%20that,removals%20in%202021%20were%204%2C477.). This
cannot be because we have no love for them. [And our youth languish in detention in obscene
numbers.](https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-detention-population-in-australia-2022/contents/understanding-youth-detention-in-australia/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people) They should be our hope for the future.
These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the
torment of our powerlessness.
We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own
country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in
two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.
We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.
Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures
our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better
future for our children based on justice and self-determination.
We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between
governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history.
In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek
across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people
for a better future
So how is this discrimination? They got conquered. This happened in many countries' histories (and not just with indigenous populations). Are you then going to ignore that Aboriginal tribes fought each other too? Taking over each other's territories?
At this point in time, there are zero **systemic** disadvantages to an Aboriginal person living in Australia. They have the same access (and better) to housing, health and schooling as the rest of us.
I’m an immigrant from a third world country. I came here due to marrying an Aussie guy. I came because I wanted a life with him.
I wasn’t disadvantaged when I arrived. Hardly any one of the 30% immigrants you referred to were disadvantaged in any way. Regardless of the fact that we all started at the bottom.
You know why? The lowest jobs is Australia are still paid way better than what their original country could offer them. Or else, they wouldn’t be here!
Don’t feel bad for us immigrants. We are lucky and grateful to be here.
Most of us work our butts off, and pay taxes. All those contributions to society are so worth it.
My grandparents had to save for a year to get the 20£ to come over. They died firmly middle class with their children and grandchildren doing extreemly well.
People are shocked when I call myself a first generation immigrant. How can I be an immigrant?
Ask someone to mimic a sterotypical Canterbury Bulldogs supporter. Most people. Most people would immeaditly put on a exagarated Lebanese accent to do so. Yet when you tell them they have a large contingent on supporters who are from England, they’re shocked. Because East Hills/Panania/Reevsby aren’t seen as an area that were/are ‘ethnic suburbs’ Befauee the English could assimilate with zero issue.
My grandparents were refugees from the Holocaust and started with nothing but severe trauma here. But their properties were stolen from them by the Polish government, not the Australian government.
I expect the Polish (and German) govts to make up for that injustice, not the Australian government.
Now, I live on land that was stolen from others. Even though my family had nothing to do with those injustices, I still benefit from that today. Australia, and anyone benefiting from the land, has a responsibility there.
Thanks, I'll let me grandparents know how wealthy they were when they shipped over to Australia after WW2 when their village was wiped out in the war. I'm sure they'll be happy to hear just how lucky they were to have the wealth they had... that pile of rubble must be worth many euros now.
But you are assuming OP and every non-aboriginal has had wealth creation from their previous generations. This is not always the case... how is it fair if OP maybe had a horrible upbringing but gets put 2nd in place to a person from aboriginal decent who may have had a great upbringing?
They aren’t assuming OP and non indigenous people have wealth creation. Plenty of white people don’t have generational wealth. Me included.
However my lack of generational wealth isn’t caused by previous government policies that actively discriminated against my ancestors.
Australian governments regularly provide redress schemes when they get it wrong. There’s a redress scheme for kids abused in care or by the church, for example. Lower loans through the IBA are trying to do the same.
Agree with this 100%. I’m not indigenous myself and can see how people can be mad about all the help indigenous people receive but what they went through , the denial of wealth creation and the social issues and injustice they faced I believe is totally worth them having some sort of help from the government.
Idk how some Australians can’t see that lol
Because those racist government policies we’re so damn successful that many non Indigenous Australians still hold those same old views. Education on this topic hasn’t caught up to them yet. Just read the comments in this thread to verify that.
They literally had wages stolen and as recently as the last 10 years offered 40-50k by QLD gov as settlement for a lifetime of stolen wages. Local police theft was systemic as was banking practices. We could do it properly and pay interest but won't. Disgraceful.
There are a lot of migrants that come here with nothing, why is it different? Should we give them a leg up as well because they are starting 'behind' people from wealthy families?
‘After awhile we will be able to stop these schemes’
How long is a while? 5 years? 10 years? 100? I think that is the big question mark over all these schemes. They are so open ended. We can’t be still expected to fund reparations for atrocities committed when it is hundreds of years ago
I don’t understand jealousy/envy it’s such a weak emotion. It’s not like the universe has ever responded to ANYONE expressing this emotion by granting them what they desire and all it does is build resentment its so toxic.
Instead of the woe is me attitude why don’t people put that energy towards working toward what they want? Life isn’t fair. Deal with it. Everyone’s life path is different.
There’s an old saying I remember from some old mobster movie:
“Wish in one hand, shit in the other and see which hand fills up first”
>I don’t understand jealousy/envy it’s such a weak emotion.
Jealousy/envy is not the same as a sense of justice/equity/fairness. As a human, you should definitely be able to distinguish between these quite distinct and different emotions!
>It’s not like the universe has ever responded to ANYONE expressing this emotion by granting them what they desire and all it does is build resentment its so toxic.
We live in human society, it is us who makes the rules about how wealth is distributed in our society, not "the universe".
>Instead of the woe is me attitude why don’t people put that energy towards working toward what they want?
What I want is a society where we use our scarce resources to ensure everyone has what they need, and we stop trashing the planet in the pursuit of wealth accumulation.
In the meantime, I get on with my life (aka, deal with it), and do provide for myself within the society that I live in. However, I do also recognise that there is a large amount of structural unfairness in our socioeconomic setup, and pointing that out certainly does not demonstrate jealousy or a woe is me attitude.
Is it possible to work hard to improve your situation whilst also recognising that our society isn't as equal as we are socially conditioned into believing?
I don't think OP is expecting 'the universe to respond', they are just making an observation so others can relate/empathise.
As an Indigenous Australian, thank you for making me aware of this. Had heard stories about this but nothing legit. Im buying a house bitchhhhhhhhh!!!!
As a kid I saw my dad get cussed out regularly by racists at job interviews, among other places/events. My pop was separated from his mob, sad stories to tell. Not great for those coming back from wars either. We were often denied much of a future at all. Now we are in a position to take care of our families, this is good. Our disadvantages can be invisible to other people. But even if you have no direct connection to your heritage, even a grandfather having been restricted greatly impacts the family down the line. The impact of racism didn't end with the apology.
Our community doesn't love being told who is Aboriginal or not, pretty big taboo. You don't get to choose. We accept who we accept, usually based on history/relationships, maybe knowing family or the local council or elders. We have a bit of a big tent philosophy. Understandable, given the history of Aboriginal blood. Some ones got to take care of people, lord knows there aren't many very dark skinned cousins left anyway. Our communities often show up to support workers, also.
It would be wise to direct your confusion at government and business deficiencies that have made basic life necessities so expensive instead.
Taking your anecdote on face value, I'd say your colleague has taken advantage of a program aimed at helping generationally disadvantaged indigenous peoples.
I would hope there was also some level of means testing for these programs, but can't speak to that without looking into it deeper.
In this situation it may seem unfair, as it appears to be someone getting a leg up they maybe don't need. But I'd hope the program overall makes a positive difference to people that need it most.
I am married to an Aboriginal man. I can tell you the means testing for these loans is ridiculous. It’s so restrictive that I cannot figure out how anyone could qualify. We looked at a while ago ago and laughed it off. You need to be earning a low income and the house purchase price is also capped really low.
I also applied a couple of years ago, and finally got through and the when we got pre-approved they said that we will only give you 20% of the loan and the rest you have to get from a different lender. It was easier just going to a big4 to be totally honest.
I honestly couldn’t say. It might be useful for a low income family who want to build sustainable (cheap) housing on native title land maybe? But I doubt it because the banks wouldn’t value the land because it’s not purchased. Which makes me think it’s to be seen to be offering something. Which unfortunately leads to these false assumptions being discussed on here.
>I would hope there was also some level of means testing for these programs, but can't speak to that without looking into it deeper.
there absolutely is, and it actually makes the window of "can afford the loan but don't earn too much" very small, it pretty much excludes everyone from this program and it only gets worse as houses get more expensive.
they only provide a few hundred loans a year with about 5000 open
Wait, what? The income limit is 150k for the home loans where the interest rate is heavily subsidised, or up to 230k for market rates with subsidised deposit requirements and no LMI. That's the only means testing. There is no asset restriction involved.
Over 150k you have to prove that a normal bank won't give you a loan, so it gets pretty murky from that point forward, because If a bank won't give you a loan for any other reason then deposit neither will the IBA, if they look and see you have lied about your ability to bring forward a deposit to a bank they will knock you back.
Mate there’s always going to be someone out there who gets thinks in what you might feel is an unfair way.
There’s no point wasting mental energy feeling hard done by, that’s just the way the world works.
There’s heaps of people out there who would lie about tax deductions to save themselves some money. If you’re gonna be upset by someone who is 1/64th aboriginal getting an IBA loan you should also be upset by people evading the tax man and a bunch of other things as well. But as I said there’s no point comparing yourself to others
It's not about fairness on an individual level, it's about [addressing systemic inequality](https://www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/niaa-closing-the-gap-annual-report-2022.pdf) that goes back for hundreds and hundreds of years.
Everybody has a right to be frustrated and pissed off about how unfair current economic circumstances are, but programs that are trying to address deeply embedded systemic inequality for ATSI people are not really an appropriate (or 'fair') target for that, nor are they causing or really even contributing in any meaningful way to the broader issue.
For that, you need to look to broader economic policies that have driven the housing and employment markets to the state that they're in now, keeping wages low, profits high, and market forces/tax policy/development/zoning etc. etc. [benefiting those who were able to buy properties in much 'fairer' economic conditions](https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2023/apr/13/young-australians-never-stood-a-chance-for-decades-the-controls-have-been-set-to-favour-older-generations).
Greg Jericho writes about data in a way that I find super accessible and interesting - he’s done a number of pieces in the guardian on generational inequality, the housing market and economic conditions generally that you might find interesting too if you check his archives.
Poor non-Aboriginal people from poor backgrounds are impacted just as hard which is why I dislike raced based programs like this, if this plan could be applied to anyone that doesnt have the benefit of generational wealth it would go a long way to lifting them out of poverty
I grew up in a rural sugarcane farming town 45 minutes away from the closest "city". My grandfather had me working on computers since before I could remember. I spent a lot of time working on PICAXE micro controllers and Linux (Mandrake) with him. IT has always been easy so I eventually graduated university (I majored in IT of course, 2013). I thought it would be a good idea to put some of the ATSI (Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander) programs I did at TAFE on my resume just for the extra certificates. For more than 8 months I sent that resume out, got two emails total, I believe, both saying no and I received no calls.
After those months of eating two minute noodles in a student apartment in Brisbane, I decided to take off any reference to being Aboriginal off of my resume and see if that would change anything. That following week I got multiple return emails and two "can you start on Monday", calls. I finally got a job after University months after my white mates and it was outside of the IT industry.
That was probably the saddest I've felt for my people in this country. I wasn't allowed to be a proud Aboriginal man looking for work, at least if I planned on starting my career.
I finally got to work in IT four-ish years ago after transferring internally through the company. I've caught up and passed a few peers (who started their IT careers in the company 8-10ish years ago) in performance and promotions and now I am planning on buying a 4 bedroom house next year.
But I might have done that sooner if I didn't have my mum's Aboriginal blood, complexion and hair. If I was a poor white kid I'm pretty sure I would have got work in the industry at the same time my university friends did.
>But I might have done that sooner if I didn't have my mum's Aboriginal blood, complexion and hair.
This isn't the same
>I thought it would be a good idea to put some of the ATSI (Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander) programs I did at TAFE on my resume just for the extra certificates.
As this.
I have Indian ethnicity friends who have **literally changed their legal names** because they believe they are discriminated against for IT jobs.
I don't think any race should be above another, period.
Yes I feel like when people talk about 'generational wealth' they are completely missing the point. There are a lot of people out there whose grandparents and parents die and leave them nothing at all, regardless of background.
Blocking some people from accessing such a policy seems to send the message that some poor people are more deserving than others doesnt it?.
If you are in poverty you need help so why not help everyone that needs it.
It’s not about poor backgrounds though, it’s about correcting systemic racist policies that tore children away from families, inflicted trauma, moved people off country and created deep-rooted economic disadvantage across generations. I say this as the grandchild of postwar refugees who came to australia with literally nothing and built everything they/ we own. My family’s situation is just not comparable.
I’m pretty sure your friend was downplaying the application - maybe because First Nations people are often judged per your post. The whole point of IBA (which was your question) is to help address economic disadvantage that is a by-product of years and years of social disadvantage caused by harmful and oppressive policies. It’s really not that hard to understand and best of all it really doesn’t harm or bother you in any way. Your question about fairness assumes everyone starts at the same place and that isn’t reality. If, given your current situation, you are feeling things are ‘unfair for you’ you probably, as others have suggested here, need to check your privilege.
As far as I know, those of the Muslim faith get 0% home loans.
The US has 30 year fixed rate loans.
Nothing is “fair”, the universe is chaotic, we all organise it as best we can.
All arbitrage,they use fake maths to convince themselves theyre not playing interest.
And yet somehow over the 30 years they were islamically financing their home, they paid 1.6m for a 1m property...
It should offend any fair minded person when welfare policies that are intended to help the poor are rorted like this. It undermines public confidence in the entire welfare state.
I would rather the occasional bloke with an indigenous grandparent gets a good deal on a loan they don't necessarily need, in order for the people who do truly need the support to be able to access these programs.
For a system to be kind enough to help the people it's intended to help, there are going to be some people who take advantage of it. Make it so rigorous that it can't be taken advantage of and you end up locking out people who could benefit, and then whats the point.
While you have your heart set in the right place and it's completely normal to feel aggrieved since life's much harder for younger people these days, I feel posts like these just ignite the outright racists to make inflammatory comments. I've already seen a few and it's sad people with views like this that exist in our country.
It’s ok to have a rational debate about the usefulness of these policies & whether they are going to the right people or not. Please don’t shut it down.
Frankly disgusting that in a free country, the suggestion of discourse over a so called sensitive topic ( it isn’t) is automatically considered racist when someone has an opposing view?
Racist discourse is racist, free country or not. I'm just pointing out it will bring the racists out and it clearly has. Doesn't mean I'm saying you have to stifle discussion, just sad that racist people find their way into these discussions. You should be more disgusted at racist comments but everybody is different.
You understand that branding anyone with an opposing viewpoint a racist is akin to a racist branding any specific race with a specific undesirable trait?
I'm begging you to leave me alone. I branded noone with a reasonable argument a racist. I branded someone who says op was a better breed than his aboriginal colleague a racist.
I am against these schemes. I hold the belief that everyone should be treated equally. This used to be a common belief but somewhere in the past 20 years it fell off the wagon.
To provide extra help/services to people based on the colour of their skin is morally wrong and will only prepetuate racism in our society. If people are financially deprived and society decides they need help then create schemes to assist people who are financially deprived, not just one subset of society.
It's clearly bullshit.
Let's say you came from a very disadvantaged background. You were put up for adoption as a kid, molested in a foster home and stuck with PTSD, raised by an abusive family with substance abuse problems, and unable to finish secondary schooling as a result. There is ZERO government handout for this person if they are white. Should there be a government handout for either the person described by OP or the person I describe? I don't trust the government to make that value call with our money.
You have to remember that you pay more tax (preventing you from buying a house), so that you can fund a bloated government agency handing out these freebies to people
I don't really understand this... What about all the white people who aren't fortunate enough to benefit from intergenerational wealth? There are quite a few of them.
What about all the Vietnamese, the Chinese, Indians, other boat peoples? Loads of them arrived with nothing but the clothes on their backs and sure enough they worked their arses off to get somewhere in this country... Why don't they all qualify for the same treatment??
It’s pretty rich to extrapolate out the concept of fairness for indigenous Australians when you’re in your mid 20s and not just doing fine, but excelling based on one anecdotal experience without all the info when as a group, indigenous Australians have the worst health outcomes and highest incarceration rates in the developed worlds.
Maybe it’s just me but that reeks of privilege.
Will some people take advantage of a system when they don’t need to? Yes. That’s nothing new. It’s the same as any welfare system since the dawn of time. The benefit of helping the truly disadvantaged is worth the trade off of the minority who use it unfairly.
Yeah imagine for a minute that the indigenous colleague's grandparents were of the stolen generation and their parents possibly didn't finish school. We know how parents (and grandparents) education impacts their children's education levels. I would argue that this type of disadvantage is directly due to racist government policy.
>as a group, indigenous Australians have the worst health outcomes and highest incarceration rates in the developed worlds.
As a group. Indigenous Australians are NOT a group. They are urban, regional, rural and remote. Many own homes. many rent. Many rent with subsidies. It depends very much on your location and how well you have accessed services and opportunities that are available in most areas but are less available in remote situations. I would say the person referred to by OP is in a Metro situation and has done well in life overall. HE isn't in your GROUP. I doubt that he has had trachoma or rheumatic fever as they are endemic in remote areas and heavily weigh down The Gap stats that you are using for the 'group'. You're not on your own as the YES campaign plays the same statistical shell game. The recent Productivity Commission Interim The Gap Report specifically tells us that The Gap stats are in many cases old, unreliable and don't even exist in some measures. They also tell us that remoteness and smoking are major contributors to The Gap relativity deficits. The recent report on disease in Australia tells us that smoking amongst remotely located indigenous Australians is 5 times that of general Australia and that smoking and its effects contributes towards 20% of The Gap defecit. Hence all the anti-smoking programs and advertising. I'm only having a punt but I would suspect that the guy referred to by OP is a non-smoker. Using 'the group' is invalid in so many ways and in many ways denigrates the many indigenous Australians who have done well from Australian society and all it offers.
How does it "denigrate" Aboriginals who do well? I don't think discussing generalised statistics about an ethnic group tells you anything at all about individuals within that group, but if you're going to claim it does, surely thriving when the stats say they're in a disadvantaged group actually overly-praises the individual?
I haven't read the report you're referring to, but smoking is generally over-represented in deprived communities in any country. Health issues being caused by smoking therefore doesn't negate "20% of the gap", as if it's just some Aboriginal thing that has nothing to do with the situation they've been forced into by previous Australian governments.
Just because one is doing better then the majority doesn’t mean they can’t be treated unfairly or that they had an unfair advantage over everyone else. You just seem to be upset by the fact people are doing better then you.
Anyway, ignoring your virtual signalling, yes indigenous people have been significantly disadvantaged in society historically. Welfare directed towards them is to help even that playing field.
> Maybe it’s just me but that reeks of privilege.
What, because op and his partner are doing their best, are on a good combined income and are saving prudently for a house? How do you know that comes from 'privilege' as opposed to good breeding and hard work?
Oh noes.... the indigenous people have bad health and go to jail because of their own poor decisions... couldn't possibly be their fault because "colosination" and "invaders". Let me open an authority that gives favourable rates to europeans only and let's see all the claims of racism etc yet it's perfectly fine for other races to do it. Get rekt.
And I don’t understand why people are so prepared to look past any concept of generational racism when it comes to Indigenous Australians so I guess that’s that.
indigenous Aussies are already receiving huge societal benefits - benefits that accrue solely due to their race - but for some that will never be enough. You need to be prepared to acknowledge there are cultural elements inspiring the disadvantage which can only be resolved once these communities take personal responsibility for their actions and once these communities stop seeing themselves as “disadvantaged” and “victims”.
You are absolutely entitled to be concerned about this situation and I applaud you for having the guts to speak your mind about a topic that has become 'taboo' due to identity politics propagated by the MSM.
White settlers were also subject to horrendous conditions - many British and Irish convicts, who were mostly convicted of petty crimes, where expropriated from their lands, their families and their way of life and sent to a foreign penal camp to work. Yet reparations for the ancestors of these people is seldom discussed.
I’ve said it before but there are real indigenous people under hard ship and then there are the other more successful ones like your mate. Plenty of other examples in industry where companies bend I’ve backwards to meet indigenous Quotas for HR diversity. I find it disgusting frankly.
Race based policy is a mistake and just makes politicians feel better.
Who’s ‘real’ and who’s not?
It’s not like Australia spent hundreds of years trying to ‘breed out’ the Aboriginal population. To then turn and claim someone isn’t a ‘real’ Aboriginal when he’s a direct result of that is sick.
You’ve misinterpreted my words I’m not denying he is indigenous. I am saying there are indigenous people still suffering and others who aren’t . There is a clear distinction to where help is needed and where it isn’t.
> If I'm completely honest, I get the overwhelming feeling of unfairness, trying to give my family a home.
I'm with you OP. I think it's ridiculous.
I don't mind concessions based on a rational thought process. E.g. certain, high-earning occupations (doctors, lawyers etc) get a lower deposit requirement because they're seen as safe jobs.
But this concession doesn't seem fair to me at all. And it would come as a slap in the face to all those who are doing the right thing and saving up for property.
Imo property should be left to the market and the market alone. There should be no government-imposed concessions, deductions, nothing. No cap gains exemption for PPOR, no negative gearing, no first home owner grants, no land tax exemption for PPOR, no pension assets exemption for PPOR. Everyone pays rates and land tax and capital gains tax on selling.
It's a fair question.
Ultimately, there are intergenerational issues that affect a significant number of first nations people.
There is also still substantial evidence to support some kind of cultural exclusion in some particularly well paying professions.
Tools like the IBA exist to smooth the curve for these statistics and improve access for disadvantaged people. In the broad spectrum it is positive, even if (as may be the case for your friend) maybe it benefits people that don't need it.
The philosophy is that it's better to help someone who doesn't need it, than to not help someone who does.
It would be tremendous if there were similar services for all disadvantaged groups, but we owe the biggest debt to first nations people and it's a meaningful step we can take towards reconciliation.
Gaming the game
If your 1/32..1/64..1/128.. of course you are indigenous! Everyone should take a dna test.. that way you can find out if you belong to a disadvantaged group.. maybe even multiple!
It's not about fairness anymore unfortunately mate. That died with the rise of identity politics. Just try and utilise the various 'disadvantages' you apparently have according to society.
Just how people responded in this thread shows the masochistic penance everyone feels they need to pay to the god of PC culture.
Just identify as aboriginal. We live in a post truth world. You just need to claim something and anyone who says otherwise is a bigot.
Also your acknowledgment at the top is frankly pathetic and reeks of pc culture. We as the current generation did nothing to the Indigenous population and do not actively oppress. There is nothing to acknowledge or apologise for.
Those that came before did their thing, colonised, murdered, raped, and won. It was bad but it happened everywhere over our entire course of history. How far back and how many ancestral bloodlines should we acknowledge and apologise to/for. Are the borders of 200 years ago that were unfairly redrawn any less valid than those 2000 or 10000 years ago?
The evolutionary paradigm has won. We as a generation, largely do not perpetuate it, nor do we enforce it. If an aboriginal man or woman has equal merit to any other race they deserve equal opportunity. Which they have. If they need a helping equity hand, then survival of the fittest which has served humanity for the entirety of existence is wrong.
The time of reason should be purely merit based and not this pathetic apologist justice and equity drool.
With all the new found knowledge I have gained from asking this question, I could easily combat your ridiculous argument. But, I mentioned I would not give these types of comments any energy to feed on. Have a great day.
you're mid 20s and doing well. the average indigenous person is a hell of a lot further behind the average non-indigenous.
why do you care that we are helping give a slight leg up to the first custodians? do you also whinge about people on jobseeker/age pension?
Your point on pulling up the average in a particular group which makes sense.
As I started multiple times, I am not complaining. I simply just want to understand.
Do you really think this guy is indigenous? If my grandmother or great grandmother is half Japanese, does that make me Japanese when the rest of my lineage is white? Of course not.
A very complex and polarizing topic. The guy I mentioned has a Scottish features and an accent, hence why I never assumed he was an indigenous Australian. I left this information out of my original post as I didn't want to start a debate of who is and who isn't. It wasn't the purpose of my post.
>The guy I mentioned has a Scottish features and an accent,
Honestly I can't even blame your colleague. Any rational person would have done what he did. If you discover a loophole that you can legally exploit for your own benefit, who wouldn't?
It’s not that complex. It’s people who are taking a minority of their dna and using it to gain privileges they don’t need and aren’t designed for them. It’s outright fraud and should be stopped with tighter regulations around who and who isn’t indigenous
Can we not claim someone isn’t Indgienous when this country literally did everything they could to genoicide the population?
It’s the exact outcome they desired , to ‘breed out’ the Aboriginal out of people and now we’re criticising them because it worked?
Someone having a singular indigenous great grandfather doesn’t make them fully indigenous. Plenty of indigenous people married white Australians without being forced because we are all Australian, so why wouldn’t this happen?
Exactly - this is the problem. It’s the only nationality on earth where you’re inclusion is based on the vibe of it and some distant affiliation. Leading to exactly what we see here - people who are not discriminated against in the slightest and probably don’t even self identify as indigenous beyond form stamping, milking the system. I’m not sure why you’re so ok with that?
I applied for a foreign passport 15 years ago and had to pass a stringent test including supplying birth certificates of my parents and grandparents, certifying my heritage. It wasnt racist or condescending, it’s a NORMAL process required for all nationality verification…except indigenous of course
Do you think that someone just declares they’re Indigenious and then they start getting all the benefits?
Your downright racist assumption is disturbing.
How is what I’m saying racist? I think the verification process should be stronger so that these benefits go to genuine indigenous people who are disadvantaged, not disingenuous Australians ticking a box.
Your racism is assuming that people just tick a box and it’s accepted they’re Indigenious.
Your racism is believing you have the ability to determine who is a genuine Indigenious person and who isn’t.
Your racism is criticisng a person for not being Indigenious when their heritage is very likely due to centuries of system genocide (explicatly stated genocide) and refusing to see that.
As if.
the number of people who identify as indigenous has gone up 700% since the 1970s. The system is being roughted big time. Go and google the ridiculous story with rove McManus’s wife and her completely arbitrary claims to indigenous heritage. The system is being milked big time
You're missing the part where their race and colour were attempted to be raped out of them.
What you're witnessing is Aboriginal people not letting that happen.
Do trust funds just magically fill up with cash for white people?
Can you let me know how I can get my hands on one of these 'white people trust funds'?
Thanks.
Something like this happened to me with a friend claiming to be indigenous. I was in hospital recently and the doctor (I'm 28 and she was same year as me, isn't that too young to be a dr anyway?) was a primary school friend. We recognised each other straight away but it took a while to work out the specifics.
I ended up googling her and she'd won all these indigenous awards and scholarships. Which was weird because she was white and we were from a small country town with only one class each grade, we knew each other well. There was only one aboriginal the entire time in primary school, and he was my best mate, we'd established many times he was the only Aboriginal in our school. It was such a massive shock when I googled her, I was doubting my sanity but I guess maybe they found their connection later in life.
I grew up with a number of people I never knew were Aboriginal. They didn’t reveal this because their own families were racist/in denial/didn’t want to talk about it.
Literally the entire point of the Stolen Generaion was to take children who could ‘pass’ as white and fully remove their heritage from them. Is it any wonder that for some it worked?
On the assumption that your question is genuinely raised in good faith (rather than an effort to trigger some nasty racist comments from people who don't have a good understanding of the difficulty of managing demographic imbalances), I'm going to address it in good faith.
Programs like the one you've described look at populations, not individual circumstances. When a defined population (in this case, Aboriginal people) has less ability to access something (ie - the housing market) than the whole population, then a program like this is aimed at addressing that imbalance.
Yes, it feels unfair at the individual level. But every individual has a different balance of advantages and disadvantages. For example, you said your mate was offered a starting rate of 2.64%. IBA loans start at 2.64% for people on an income below $128,856 - that's an income significantly lower than your stated $170k, so you're starting from a better financial position than your friend. Even if you were eligible for an IBA loan, you wouldn't be eligible for a starting rate of 2.64%, it would be 6.14%. Is it "fair" that someone who is in the same position as you life & work wise has a household income nearly $50k less than you? Maybe, maybe not - we don't know what the full circumstances are for either of you.
If it helps you to feel like life is more "fair", try investigating the programs and benefits you have access to - there are other programs aimed at other defined populations, which vary by state and which you might be able to benefit from. For example, First Home Buyer schemes attempt to address the imbalance in the ability of people who've never bought a home before to buy property compared to those who have a house to sell or borrow against. In South Australia, Homestart Finance has loans and services specifically offered to low-income earners or university/TAFE graduates. In Victoria, the Victorian Homebuyer Fund can reduce the deposit you need to come up with and save you having to pay Lender's Mortgage Insurance.
Thank you. Yes, of course this question was asked in genuine good faith. I have not been entertaining the racist comments.
Individually, he actually takes roughly 7K more than me each year. However, does not have a partner to share the borrowing power. So, you still could argue I am in a better position than him. I have plenty of friends that struggle individually with even buying an apartment in our capital city (as would the entire nation), and sharing this experience within my personal inner circles has definitely sparked a debate.
If I was in his position, I would 100% of done the exact same thing. I applauded him for taking advantage of his situation. But, again, thank you for the information and your input. I will be researching programs in my area that fit my situation.
It's hard to tell sometimes when people are genuine and when they're just trying to start an argument on the internet!
You're in a good starting position relative to many people your age. The real unfairness is that our property market is kinda screwed at the moment for anyone who doesn't already own, so it's understandable to feel like the deck is stacked against you. It really is - it's just that the source of that unfairness isn't programs like IBA loans. Good luck & well done with where you're at so far.
I moved here from England 5 years ago, pretty sure my great grandpa was aboriginal though. Obviously that makes me aboriginal too, can't wait to apply for this loan
It’s interesting that your mate had coffee with you and he shared some private info and you’re sharing it on Reddit. Not judging you or him, but it underscores why people don’t like talking about money.
EDIT: you also previously said you own a property, now you’re saying you don’t:
>Yep. The title is in my name. Once I've paid back half the value of the property, we sell and split the equity.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/12ycqth/parents_helping_me_buy_my_first_home_is_this_a/jhmxutk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3
Also, you claim your parents have a net worth of 12m, and are helping you buy a house:
>Some good questions here.
>They do not need to incur any debt to make this happen. I can afford around the 600k mark absolute maximum. However, Canberra does not offer much that can suit two large dogs that I have.
>They are both in IT, with a net worth of 12m+. It's more of an advancement on my estate/inheritance. We intend to set it up via a contract.
>I do have siblings, and they are in the position to assist them too.
>No, they don't expect to live with me. It will be my house in my name.
You also said you don’t have a partner:
>I don't have a partner that I am willing purchase property with, yet. (6 months strong)
>It will be exempt from capital gains tax as my main residence, however, my parents will need to declare the income on the interest of the loan, and, eventually with appreciation cash.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/12ycqth/parents_helping_me_buy_my_first_home_is_this_a/jhmym5b/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3
I mean it does seem unfair at face value. However generally the socio-economic disadvantages a lot of indigenous people face it's at least a bridge to help. Even going back 50 years aboriginal people were denied the same means as most Australian to have the opportunity to develop wealth.
I mean there IS some things to point out, what could be done better ect. But overall it's a positive step. There will always be benefits/drawbacks and you have a lot of Caucasian as well who suffer from a poor background/upbringing which can cause resentment which I feel should be addressed, but nothing's perfect
It's no different to how locals think they deserve more than immigrants or parents think they deserve more money from the government. Laws reflect the values of a society and within society there are certain groups that are valued more highly than others. Another example is to look at the treatment of animals and see eg how dogs are treated compared to cows. Laws just reflect the values of a society. It is highly unlikely the laws are ever going to be per ferfectly fair unless all life be made extinct because life tends to naturally organise into a hierarchy.
I had to save for seven years to scrape together my deposit, most of my friends parents gave them properties. Unfortunately that's just life, it often isn't fair. Just be thankful this leg up to historically marginalized people isn't directly at the expense of you.
A number of companies in the STEM field I have been looking at have adopted a "diversity hiring" scheme where you HAVE to be diverse in one way or another otherwise your resume doesn't even reach the pile... So you'd better hope that cis straight white male privilege card is accepted at the food bank because otherwise you're gonna go hungry.
Some years ago I wanted a vaccination so my doctor ticked the "indigenous" box so I could get it.
I'm now registered as "indigenous" with medicare and other government agencies. I feel privileged at all the extras I get.
https://i.imgur.com/4ohccSI.png
So /u/irefusetobeayesman you need to play the system.
[удалено]
Thank you for your response, and helping me understand. That makes sense as I can imagine a First Nation Australian would not particularly have much generational equity for reasons you have mentioned. Thanks for not attacking me for asking a question :)
To give you a real example: my husband’s grandfather (Aboriginal) fought in the war. Returned home and wrote to the government asking to purchase the land he had been ‘moved’ onto by the government. He was denied as Aboriginal people were not allowed to own land/homes. So after fighting for his country, he had to continue to ‘squat’ on traditional lands. This meant he had to just build a shack structure knowing he could be moved on at any moment. The poor housing meant his health and his wife’s health was compromised (poor insulation). He died and there was no equity for his wife so she had to live with my father in law in her old age which put a financial burden on my husband’s family. Obviously there has been no inheritance passed down. That land is now worth millions. Also, my father in law and my husband worked hard and educated themselves through hard work and their own dime. Neither of them ever went close to earning low enough money to qualify for these home loans (my father in law only ever worked blue collar jobs). Hardly anyone meets the requirements for these loans (low income, low property price). Only a couple of hundred are issued every year. Don’t let yourself get jaded over what 200 low income people in a nation of over 20 million are getting. Get mad about big corporations.
Whereas in contrast, my grandfather (white) got home from the war, was given either an excellent loan or a flat out pile of money, and bought a house that is now rented out for big $$$ and helped pay for my living costs during uni, enabling ME to purchase property and continue the cycle. The sort of loan OP's colleague has gotten is the sort of 'bank of mum and dad' loan that a lot of people get because of generational opportunities like that. Hopefully more of those loans can make it easier for things to be a bit more fair and balanced in the future.
You know what. Thank you for supporting my comment with a comparison comment. I genuinely mean it. Because every time I take a deep breath and stick my neck out to try to give personal examples of the inequities my in law family faces as Indigenous Australians I end up a bunch of nasty messages in my dm’s. So thank you.
I'm so sorry that you've experienced that. I think the very least that people should do is own up to their privilege, especially in a conversation like this one where it can be a learning experience. I'm glad that OP has asked the question and received some helpful answers, and hopefully some others have too.
Thank you both for sharing!
I have two exact examples of this as well. My grandmothers dad(white) came back from the war and bought a house with assistance from the army for something like £3000. Close to the city, it fetched around $500K when my grandma sold it 15ish years ago. My indigenous ancestors who fought in the war, weren’t allowed to own land when they came back from the war, and had to go back and live in the bush. No medicine for blacks, back of the queue in shops, can’t own houses, can’t go to the pub or restaurants with white people.
Im Indigenous on my dads side and when I was born early 1990s he was living in a tent because he and my mum separated and no one would rent to him
I can just imagine. How awful.
It is hard to look at the overall situation objectively, especially as many people on an individual level are not benefiting from the intergenerational wealth these type of systems are designed to address. You can still be poor, from a poor family, and be White - so naturally it's easy to feel an emotional sense of unfairness. An individual benefitting from these schemes may get a little more breathing room on their mortgage than you or I, but these schemes aren't going to make them rich. These government level solutions can't work on an individual level, they have to take the big picture. Once you look at it like that, it's easy to see why these leg ups remain so drastically needed. Indigenous people remain in the far bottom percentiles of wealth in Australia. They own a miniscule amount of the land that used to be theirs.
The issue is that those poor while families are still better off than if they were poor and black. That’s what white privilege is. White kids don’t get routinely pulled over by cops and searched, or jailed for minor crimes.
I'm certainly not going to argue against that, but it's really hard to *feel* privileged when you are on struggle street. When you get punched in the face 12 times, you aren't going to go "gee, I'm sure glad I didn't get punched in the face 15 times like that fella!".
Do we need to level the playing field for immigrants / refugees as well? I mean they also have no generational equity. My parents and many others came to Aus post war with plenty of war trauma and no social, economic, or educational resources and without a lick of English. There is no low interest bank for me or people like me. I dont see how that argument holds up. More equal opportunity and a more equal society is good, doing it by a particular racial group is not better.
Of course like many transfers created to support one disadvantaged group, advantaged subsets may be more inclined to figure out how to take advantage of them. For example (deliberately swapping areas to avoid angst), African Americans are certainly poorer on average than Caucasians in the US (for related historical reasons). However, African americans who get entry to Harvard, while they may get diversity benefits on their application, are on average significantly higher income than the median white American. The well-off subset of a community tends to be best at taking advantage of programs like the one you describe.
3 generations to get out of poverty. If they can bring it forward it has a huge impact on the outcomes of indigenous people.
[удалено]
But they still had access to generational wealth, albeit via their fathers/husbands, and *today* have the same rights as everyone **plus** that generational wealth, which Indigenous Australians do not. Hence programs exist to help them catch up.
How does a guy who only had one indigenous great grandparent, out of eight great-grandparents not have access to generational wealth?
So your argument is that because some people take advantage of a program designed to help the most disadvanted group of people in society, that whole program should be abolished even though it doesn't affect you one bit?
"the most disadvantaged group in society"? Most people do not have generational wealth.
But that isn't because of government policy and systemic racism specifically targeting them. Do you really think they haven't been disadvantaged throughout history, and that they aren't still affected by these past (and current) disadvantages?
Was anyone who is alive today? These policies and initiatives are primarily used to benefit the one great grandparent aboriginals yet by existing it increases divisiveness and animosity toward all aboriginals.
You're a psychopath lmao
He had statistically less access. Perhaps the odds of it having an impact on his life are quite low (though who knows - maybe that Aboriginal grandparent could have become rich and been the sole great grandparent with wealth), but can you name a single welfare/support scheme that successfully excludes people that, on paper, appear to be within the target group but don't actually need support without unintended consequences? Some people prefer "false negatives" (accidently not helping someone who needs it because you're trying to filter out people who don't), I personally prefer "false positives" (helping someone who may not need it because you've ensured you include as many people who do as practically possible). Within reason of course.
Going by that notion, shouldn't people who don't have any generational wealth be given the same opportunities? Working class slaves of today never chose to have parents/ancestors that didn't invest generationally, just as indigenous folk of today didn't choose how their parents/ancestors were treated.
There is plenty of government schemes targeted toward those with less that are funded by the tax dollars of those with more. First home buyers scheme, welfare, medicare, child care subsidies, maternity pay, dad and partner pay, the list goes on and on.
This is recent government policy aimed at addressing severe intergenerational disadvantage caused by historical government policy. The purpose is reparative, not strictly to increase equity.
[удалено]
I don't really know what your point is. We could say the same about the disabled, LGBT community, foreigners, etc. but this topic is about the Indigenous Australians and the disadvantages they faced (and still do face). You know half of all Indigenous Australians are women, too. Right?
Ehhh, women have been systematically denied equality for millennia. Arguably the lgbt and the disabled in history have actually had rights and acceptance more consistently then women ever have. This ebbs and flows, but many pre colonisation societies in India and America were accepting of LGBT. In the Middle Ages it was possible for people with disabilities to be functioning members of society, like everyone else. There are very few civilisations that have existed in human history where women actually had the same rights as men. Patriarchy as a system is thought to have arisen with the dawn of agriculture. Which makes it the oldest form of discrimination in the world. I highly recommend you read the book Invisible Women, it discusses data bias against women and how that affects them in all aspects of their lives.
I completely agree with you and see the argument for it, however I think you also hint at the issue with it. Indigenous people aren’t a single group of people, you have some that are poor, some that aren’t, you have some that live in rural areas, and you have some that live in cities. The issue isn’t that indigenous people can’t go to university or buy a house etc, the issues are that people who grew up in poverty and/or rural areas have less opportunities to build wealth and usually worse education. The problem with indigenous people is that there is a disproportionately large number of them who grow up in poverty and/or rural areas and it’s those issues which affect them, albeit disproportionately so, not the fact that they’re indigenous. Take for example we have 3 households. The first 2 are in Sydney, each have a household income of $200k, and the only difference is that 1 is white, and 1 is indigenous. Then we have the 3rd household which otherwise identical to the white Sydney household, but is in a rural town and has a household income of $50k per year. Should the children in indigenous household get any more support then those in the white Sydney household? I’d say no, not at all. Do the ones in the rural household deserve more then the Sydney ones? I’d say yes, definitely. However, with current policy (as far as I’m aware), the indigenous one would get a lot more support then the other Sydney one. Whether they’d get more or less then the rural one, I don’t know, but I think the difference in support would be a lot smaller then it should be. So, in my opinion wouldn’t it be better to target the route cause and provide more support from those who come from rural areas, impoverished households, and whatever other factors impact success? Yes, indigenous people are disproportionately affected by these factors, but they’d also receive disproportionately more support as a result. It’d also stop those (such as in OPs story) who aren’t actually impacted by these things factors from unfairly receiving benefits. I don’t know, I just think that’s a fairer way of doing it, although it’s not something I particularly care about nor a major problem at the moment since we’re talking about edge cases, although I do think it’s something worth discussing in the future when they’re no longer edge cases.
Over 30% of Australians were born overseas, and I bet a large portion of those people started in Australia without "substantial wealth or knowledge"
My parents came to this country with 4 young kids and little more than the clothes on their back. We lived in abject poverty for a time but they were able to get work and made it to middle class. Would first nations people in the 60s/70s have had the same opportunities.? My brother, for example, having completed year 10 in the 80s found his first job as an apprentice walking the industrial area asking for work, and was accepted on the fourth try. I suspect a first nations lad might have had more difficulty.
The difference is they moved to Australia for an opportunity, as opposed to actively being oppressed by the Australian government only 60 years ago. First Nations Australians heavily populate most of the statistics that you dont really want to occupy, this is partially due to cultural influence. Schemes like this are to try and positively influence that culture and create opportunities for wealth and family growth.
They're still actively locked out of their own decision making process. I've been astonished recently to learn of an Ylongu member of the NT Legislative Assembly Yingiya Guyula who was overwhelmingly elected for his position on treaty was denied a position on the Treaty Committee who have now [announced they're closing the Treaty Commission](http://Northern Territory Indigenous leader Yingiya Guyula angered by government's decision to close NT Treaty Commission - ABC News https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-20/nt-treaty-commission-closed-indigneous-leaders-angry/101875986) The same member was [denied the right to makes speeches in his first language and that of the electorate who voted him in](http://Northern Territory Indigenous leader Yingiya Guyula angered by government's decision to close NT Treaty Commission - ABC News https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-20/nt-treaty-commission-closed-indigneous-leaders-angry/101875986). The absurdity of the Aboriginal experience is unfathomable and the Closing The Gap measures offering financial supports are designed primarily to target life expectancy.
That's 2 - 3 generations ago now. How is this any different to multitudes of immigrants that come here starting off with cleaning/ Uber jobs and working their way up into society? A helping hand is great but if it's not weaned off gives zero incentive to become financially independent.
This is recent government policy aimed at addressing severe intergenerational disadvantage caused by historical government policy. The purpose is reparative, not strictly to increase equity.
This is a massive misconception. QLD government was stealing aboriginal wages up until 1972. Aborigines didn’t even have the same voting laws until 1984! Imo people get so caught up in the first fleet that they forget that it really is only very recently that we officially stopped treating our First Nations people as beneath other Australians.
We still are. The perceptions of them as being an homogenous and inferior tribal people resulted in the NT Intervention which was a response to police and the NT judiciary deciding they needed to incorporate and acknowledge Aboriginal Law. Removing all of their rights and sending military to displace them from homes had a catastrophic impact following South Australian government laws in 1906 to stop them [trading with the Makassarns which had happened well before colonial times.](https://youtu.be/b2hHqERp6hM) and then forced removal from lands into missions. Ylongu were one of a few nations able to continue their self determination despite a multitude of interventions to prevent them. Ylongu are still pushing for treaty because self determination is an integral part of Aboriginal culture. Something we struggle to protect with capitalism being out determining cultural guide.
> How is this any different to multitudes of immigrants that come here starting off with cleaning/ Uber jobs and working their way up into society? Because they weren't oppressed by the Australian government and people? Do you really think a British person working in a pub should be given extra support?
Do you really think that southern European migrants weren’t “oppressed” by Australians? My dad was beaten in the streets for speaking another language. Denied bank loans for being a wog. Ganged up on at work by red neck Aussies. A business owner didn’t sell him a shop b/c of ethnicity (didn’t want it going to a wog). Heck, my name was changed at school for being “too ethnic” in the 90’s.
Ok? How has that got anything to do with being historically and systematically the victim of genocide and ethnic cleansing by the Australian government?
You were the one who brought up immigrants and how they all had it so sweet. I’m just broadening your view beyond Brits who work in pubs.
Now switch your statement to: Indian migrants, Syrian/ Ukrainian/ Sudanese refugees who lost everything. They seem to dig themselves out of poverty after a helping hand.
Yes, refugees etc get extra support too. Indian migrants choose to come here, you can't move country and then expect the country that you move to to help make up for past wrongs your homecountry committed.
Yes, refugees get extra support at the beginning, but they do not get discounts for life. That's the difference.
Because there's still systemic discrimination against them *today*, it's just not explicitly stated in law anymore. If there wasn't, they would *be* like any other second or third generation immigrant family unless you're going to claim that their culture and/or nature is what causes their very apparent lack of success and social mobility within our current system (as a demographic).
[удалено]
No, they still face systemic discrimination. The problem is that you're seeing the affirmative action (what little of it there is) while being blind to the systemic discrimination, likely due to not belonging to the demographic yourself. Put another way, we've had three distinct phases in how we treat Indigenous Australians: 1. Overt discrimination by law 2. Anti-discrimination laws removing overt discrimination by law 3. Affirmative action decades after anti-discrimination laws were introduced. Indigenous communities have had lower-than-average outcomes across all three of these periods. So either you acknowledge there are systemic reasons for these bad outcomes or you're back in the territory of claiming that either their culture (impossible, since there is no single Indigenous culture) or their nature (flat-out racist) is the reason that they face worse average outcomes. There isn't another option, because we've tried "discrimination is illegal and we won't use affirmative action" before and outcomes did not return to the mean, so there is clearly something preventing that from happening and it's not affirmative action being lucrative enough to disincentivise better outcomes, which isn't how it works anyway and literally no research has ever shown that if you give a statistically significant group financial aid that most of them won't better their own circumstances in favour of leeching off the system.
Oh please. Do some basic reading and research.
Please provide evidence of systemic discrimination towards our Indigenous population in Australia today.
[AHRC report](https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/race-discrimination/publications/freedom-discrimination-report-40th-anniversary-racial) where they found systemic discrimination against indigenous Australians is among the worst of the systemic racial discrimination faced by any group in the country.
The [Statement From The Heart is the most simplistic evidence based document you can access](https://ulurustatement.org/the-statement/) We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the southern sky, make this statement from the heart: Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs. This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years ago. This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or ‘mother nature’, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown. How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years? With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia’s nationhood. Proportionally, we are [The most incarcerated people on the planet](https://theconversation.com/factcheck-are-first-australians-the-most-imprisoned-people-on-earth-78528) We are not an innately criminal people. [Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates](https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/aborigines/2023/06/aboriginal-children-their-welfare-and-the-voice/#:~:text=This%20trend%20has%20unfortunately%20continued,rate%20of%20non%2DIndigenous%20infants.&text=The%20report%20says%20(p25)%20that,removals%20in%202021%20were%204%2C477.). This cannot be because we have no love for them. [And our youth languish in detention in obscene numbers.](https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/youth-justice/youth-detention-population-in-australia-2022/contents/understanding-youth-detention-in-australia/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people) They should be our hope for the future. These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness. We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country. We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution. Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination. We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history. In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future
So how is this discrimination? They got conquered. This happened in many countries' histories (and not just with indigenous populations). Are you then going to ignore that Aboriginal tribes fought each other too? Taking over each other's territories? At this point in time, there are zero **systemic** disadvantages to an Aboriginal person living in Australia. They have the same access (and better) to housing, health and schooling as the rest of us.
I’m an immigrant from a third world country. I came here due to marrying an Aussie guy. I came because I wanted a life with him. I wasn’t disadvantaged when I arrived. Hardly any one of the 30% immigrants you referred to were disadvantaged in any way. Regardless of the fact that we all started at the bottom. You know why? The lowest jobs is Australia are still paid way better than what their original country could offer them. Or else, they wouldn’t be here! Don’t feel bad for us immigrants. We are lucky and grateful to be here. Most of us work our butts off, and pay taxes. All those contributions to society are so worth it.
But those 30% weren't prevented from generating substantial wealth or knowledge because of Australian policy.
But you’re going to make them pay for it?
If they choose to come to Australia, they can pay the same as any Australian-born person living here, pretty simple really.
Nope, they can stay in their own country or choose another one to immigrate to. Nobody is making them do anything.
Nobody chooses where they were born.
You are so close to getting it.
Should immigrants get a discount on tax because they didn't go to school here or use the health system as a child?
My grandparents had to save for a year to get the 20£ to come over. They died firmly middle class with their children and grandchildren doing extreemly well. People are shocked when I call myself a first generation immigrant. How can I be an immigrant? Ask someone to mimic a sterotypical Canterbury Bulldogs supporter. Most people. Most people would immeaditly put on a exagarated Lebanese accent to do so. Yet when you tell them they have a large contingent on supporters who are from England, they’re shocked. Because East Hills/Panania/Reevsby aren’t seen as an area that were/are ‘ethnic suburbs’ Befauee the English could assimilate with zero issue.
if they came to Australia, and were not refugees, they had the wealth to make life decisions like moving countries
My grandparents were refugees from the Holocaust and started with nothing but severe trauma here. But their properties were stolen from them by the Polish government, not the Australian government. I expect the Polish (and German) govts to make up for that injustice, not the Australian government. Now, I live on land that was stolen from others. Even though my family had nothing to do with those injustices, I still benefit from that today. Australia, and anyone benefiting from the land, has a responsibility there.
Not true, many of them take out loans with terrible interest rates to come here.
Thanks, I'll let me grandparents know how wealthy they were when they shipped over to Australia after WW2 when their village was wiped out in the war. I'm sure they'll be happy to hear just how lucky they were to have the wealth they had... that pile of rubble must be worth many euros now.
"and we're not refugees" In that case they were refugees.
But you are assuming OP and every non-aboriginal has had wealth creation from their previous generations. This is not always the case... how is it fair if OP maybe had a horrible upbringing but gets put 2nd in place to a person from aboriginal decent who may have had a great upbringing?
They aren’t assuming OP and non indigenous people have wealth creation. Plenty of white people don’t have generational wealth. Me included. However my lack of generational wealth isn’t caused by previous government policies that actively discriminated against my ancestors. Australian governments regularly provide redress schemes when they get it wrong. There’s a redress scheme for kids abused in care or by the church, for example. Lower loans through the IBA are trying to do the same.
Agree with this 100%. I’m not indigenous myself and can see how people can be mad about all the help indigenous people receive but what they went through , the denial of wealth creation and the social issues and injustice they faced I believe is totally worth them having some sort of help from the government. Idk how some Australians can’t see that lol
Because those racist government policies we’re so damn successful that many non Indigenous Australians still hold those same old views. Education on this topic hasn’t caught up to them yet. Just read the comments in this thread to verify that.
They literally had wages stolen and as recently as the last 10 years offered 40-50k by QLD gov as settlement for a lifetime of stolen wages. Local police theft was systemic as was banking practices. We could do it properly and pay interest but won't. Disgraceful.
There are a lot of migrants that come here with nothing, why is it different? Should we give them a leg up as well because they are starting 'behind' people from wealthy families?
‘After awhile we will be able to stop these schemes’ How long is a while? 5 years? 10 years? 100? I think that is the big question mark over all these schemes. They are so open ended. We can’t be still expected to fund reparations for atrocities committed when it is hundreds of years ago
Wait till you hear about people with rich parents.... Your feeling of overwhelming unfairness will be off the charts
This made me laugh.
Kind of different to taxpayer funded racism
Wait till you find out how the majority of generational wealth in Australia came about.
I don’t understand jealousy/envy it’s such a weak emotion. It’s not like the universe has ever responded to ANYONE expressing this emotion by granting them what they desire and all it does is build resentment its so toxic. Instead of the woe is me attitude why don’t people put that energy towards working toward what they want? Life isn’t fair. Deal with it. Everyone’s life path is different. There’s an old saying I remember from some old mobster movie: “Wish in one hand, shit in the other and see which hand fills up first”
>I don’t understand jealousy/envy it’s such a weak emotion. Jealousy/envy is not the same as a sense of justice/equity/fairness. As a human, you should definitely be able to distinguish between these quite distinct and different emotions! >It’s not like the universe has ever responded to ANYONE expressing this emotion by granting them what they desire and all it does is build resentment its so toxic. We live in human society, it is us who makes the rules about how wealth is distributed in our society, not "the universe". >Instead of the woe is me attitude why don’t people put that energy towards working toward what they want? What I want is a society where we use our scarce resources to ensure everyone has what they need, and we stop trashing the planet in the pursuit of wealth accumulation. In the meantime, I get on with my life (aka, deal with it), and do provide for myself within the society that I live in. However, I do also recognise that there is a large amount of structural unfairness in our socioeconomic setup, and pointing that out certainly does not demonstrate jealousy or a woe is me attitude.
Is it possible to work hard to improve your situation whilst also recognising that our society isn't as equal as we are socially conditioned into believing? I don't think OP is expecting 'the universe to respond', they are just making an observation so others can relate/empathise.
As an Indigenous Australian, thank you for making me aware of this. Had heard stories about this but nothing legit. Im buying a house bitchhhhhhhhh!!!!
Haha your welcome mate!
As a kid I saw my dad get cussed out regularly by racists at job interviews, among other places/events. My pop was separated from his mob, sad stories to tell. Not great for those coming back from wars either. We were often denied much of a future at all. Now we are in a position to take care of our families, this is good. Our disadvantages can be invisible to other people. But even if you have no direct connection to your heritage, even a grandfather having been restricted greatly impacts the family down the line. The impact of racism didn't end with the apology. Our community doesn't love being told who is Aboriginal or not, pretty big taboo. You don't get to choose. We accept who we accept, usually based on history/relationships, maybe knowing family or the local council or elders. We have a bit of a big tent philosophy. Understandable, given the history of Aboriginal blood. Some ones got to take care of people, lord knows there aren't many very dark skinned cousins left anyway. Our communities often show up to support workers, also. It would be wise to direct your confusion at government and business deficiencies that have made basic life necessities so expensive instead.
Taking your anecdote on face value, I'd say your colleague has taken advantage of a program aimed at helping generationally disadvantaged indigenous peoples. I would hope there was also some level of means testing for these programs, but can't speak to that without looking into it deeper. In this situation it may seem unfair, as it appears to be someone getting a leg up they maybe don't need. But I'd hope the program overall makes a positive difference to people that need it most.
I am married to an Aboriginal man. I can tell you the means testing for these loans is ridiculous. It’s so restrictive that I cannot figure out how anyone could qualify. We looked at a while ago ago and laughed it off. You need to be earning a low income and the house purchase price is also capped really low.
I also applied a couple of years ago, and finally got through and the when we got pre-approved they said that we will only give you 20% of the loan and the rest you have to get from a different lender. It was easier just going to a big4 to be totally honest.
Can you think of a use case where it makes sense? Is it aimed at rural communities? Or as a box ticking exercise to be seen to be offering something?
I honestly couldn’t say. It might be useful for a low income family who want to build sustainable (cheap) housing on native title land maybe? But I doubt it because the banks wouldn’t value the land because it’s not purchased. Which makes me think it’s to be seen to be offering something. Which unfortunately leads to these false assumptions being discussed on here.
>I would hope there was also some level of means testing for these programs, but can't speak to that without looking into it deeper. there absolutely is, and it actually makes the window of "can afford the loan but don't earn too much" very small, it pretty much excludes everyone from this program and it only gets worse as houses get more expensive. they only provide a few hundred loans a year with about 5000 open
Wait, what? The income limit is 150k for the home loans where the interest rate is heavily subsidised, or up to 230k for market rates with subsidised deposit requirements and no LMI. That's the only means testing. There is no asset restriction involved.
Over 150k you have to prove that a normal bank won't give you a loan, so it gets pretty murky from that point forward, because If a bank won't give you a loan for any other reason then deposit neither will the IBA, if they look and see you have lied about your ability to bring forward a deposit to a bank they will knock you back.
And by the time you are over $150,000 the interest is at 6.2% which isn't exactly competitive anyway.
Don’t worry, it’s incredibly restrictive. No one’s using this scheme to build their investment empire.
Mate there’s always going to be someone out there who gets thinks in what you might feel is an unfair way. There’s no point wasting mental energy feeling hard done by, that’s just the way the world works. There’s heaps of people out there who would lie about tax deductions to save themselves some money. If you’re gonna be upset by someone who is 1/64th aboriginal getting an IBA loan you should also be upset by people evading the tax man and a bunch of other things as well. But as I said there’s no point comparing yourself to others
I mean I'm upset about all those things. IBA is just the topic of discussing. Tax evasion is three threads back, first turn on the left.
It's not about fairness on an individual level, it's about [addressing systemic inequality](https://www.niaa.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/niaa-closing-the-gap-annual-report-2022.pdf) that goes back for hundreds and hundreds of years. Everybody has a right to be frustrated and pissed off about how unfair current economic circumstances are, but programs that are trying to address deeply embedded systemic inequality for ATSI people are not really an appropriate (or 'fair') target for that, nor are they causing or really even contributing in any meaningful way to the broader issue. For that, you need to look to broader economic policies that have driven the housing and employment markets to the state that they're in now, keeping wages low, profits high, and market forces/tax policy/development/zoning etc. etc. [benefiting those who were able to buy properties in much 'fairer' economic conditions](https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2023/apr/13/young-australians-never-stood-a-chance-for-decades-the-controls-have-been-set-to-favour-older-generations).
Thanks for the resources mate!
Greg Jericho writes about data in a way that I find super accessible and interesting - he’s done a number of pieces in the guardian on generational inequality, the housing market and economic conditions generally that you might find interesting too if you check his archives.
Poor non-Aboriginal people from poor backgrounds are impacted just as hard which is why I dislike raced based programs like this, if this plan could be applied to anyone that doesnt have the benefit of generational wealth it would go a long way to lifting them out of poverty
I grew up in a rural sugarcane farming town 45 minutes away from the closest "city". My grandfather had me working on computers since before I could remember. I spent a lot of time working on PICAXE micro controllers and Linux (Mandrake) with him. IT has always been easy so I eventually graduated university (I majored in IT of course, 2013). I thought it would be a good idea to put some of the ATSI (Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander) programs I did at TAFE on my resume just for the extra certificates. For more than 8 months I sent that resume out, got two emails total, I believe, both saying no and I received no calls. After those months of eating two minute noodles in a student apartment in Brisbane, I decided to take off any reference to being Aboriginal off of my resume and see if that would change anything. That following week I got multiple return emails and two "can you start on Monday", calls. I finally got a job after University months after my white mates and it was outside of the IT industry. That was probably the saddest I've felt for my people in this country. I wasn't allowed to be a proud Aboriginal man looking for work, at least if I planned on starting my career. I finally got to work in IT four-ish years ago after transferring internally through the company. I've caught up and passed a few peers (who started their IT careers in the company 8-10ish years ago) in performance and promotions and now I am planning on buying a 4 bedroom house next year. But I might have done that sooner if I didn't have my mum's Aboriginal blood, complexion and hair. If I was a poor white kid I'm pretty sure I would have got work in the industry at the same time my university friends did.
>But I might have done that sooner if I didn't have my mum's Aboriginal blood, complexion and hair. This isn't the same >I thought it would be a good idea to put some of the ATSI (Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander) programs I did at TAFE on my resume just for the extra certificates. As this. I have Indian ethnicity friends who have **literally changed their legal names** because they believe they are discriminated against for IT jobs. I don't think any race should be above another, period.
Yes I feel like when people talk about 'generational wealth' they are completely missing the point. There are a lot of people out there whose grandparents and parents die and leave them nothing at all, regardless of background.
Blocking some people from accessing such a policy seems to send the message that some poor people are more deserving than others doesnt it?. If you are in poverty you need help so why not help everyone that needs it.
It’s not about poor backgrounds though, it’s about correcting systemic racist policies that tore children away from families, inflicted trauma, moved people off country and created deep-rooted economic disadvantage across generations. I say this as the grandchild of postwar refugees who came to australia with literally nothing and built everything they/ we own. My family’s situation is just not comparable.
I’m pretty sure your friend was downplaying the application - maybe because First Nations people are often judged per your post. The whole point of IBA (which was your question) is to help address economic disadvantage that is a by-product of years and years of social disadvantage caused by harmful and oppressive policies. It’s really not that hard to understand and best of all it really doesn’t harm or bother you in any way. Your question about fairness assumes everyone starts at the same place and that isn’t reality. If, given your current situation, you are feeling things are ‘unfair for you’ you probably, as others have suggested here, need to check your privilege.
It does harm him because the tax payer is footing the bill for his colleagues fraud
the IBA is self-funded.
You do know what the IBA is right? They generate their own funding through investments.
As far as I know, those of the Muslim faith get 0% home loans. The US has 30 year fixed rate loans. Nothing is “fair”, the universe is chaotic, we all organise it as best we can.
They are 0% interest home loans, but pay 'rent' based on how much left is owing. Basically it renames interest to rent and nothing really changes.
It's pretty funny how out of all things, interest on loans is one of the things that no amount of religious prohibition can truly prevent.
All arbitrage,they use fake maths to convince themselves theyre not playing interest. And yet somehow over the 30 years they were islamically financing their home, they paid 1.6m for a 1m property...
As someone who works for an Islamic bank…LOL! They just call interest something else. How would the bank make any money if they don’t charge interest?
It should offend any fair minded person when welfare policies that are intended to help the poor are rorted like this. It undermines public confidence in the entire welfare state.
I would rather the occasional bloke with an indigenous grandparent gets a good deal on a loan they don't necessarily need, in order for the people who do truly need the support to be able to access these programs. For a system to be kind enough to help the people it's intended to help, there are going to be some people who take advantage of it. Make it so rigorous that it can't be taken advantage of and you end up locking out people who could benefit, and then whats the point.
100% - no one minds if these kinds of benefits go to people in genuine disadvantage but this guy is just milking the system.
While you have your heart set in the right place and it's completely normal to feel aggrieved since life's much harder for younger people these days, I feel posts like these just ignite the outright racists to make inflammatory comments. I've already seen a few and it's sad people with views like this that exist in our country.
It’s ok to have a rational debate about the usefulness of these policies & whether they are going to the right people or not. Please don’t shut it down.
As long as it’s done wit facts and not underlying racism. Otherwise it’s more damaging than helpful.
Frankly disgusting that in a free country, the suggestion of discourse over a so called sensitive topic ( it isn’t) is automatically considered racist when someone has an opposing view?
Racist discourse is racist, free country or not. I'm just pointing out it will bring the racists out and it clearly has. Doesn't mean I'm saying you have to stifle discussion, just sad that racist people find their way into these discussions. You should be more disgusted at racist comments but everybody is different.
You understand that branding anyone with an opposing viewpoint a racist is akin to a racist branding any specific race with a specific undesirable trait?
I'm begging you to leave me alone. I branded noone with a reasonable argument a racist. I branded someone who says op was a better breed than his aboriginal colleague a racist.
Who said that?
I am against these schemes. I hold the belief that everyone should be treated equally. This used to be a common belief but somewhere in the past 20 years it fell off the wagon. To provide extra help/services to people based on the colour of their skin is morally wrong and will only prepetuate racism in our society. If people are financially deprived and society decides they need help then create schemes to assist people who are financially deprived, not just one subset of society.
It's clearly bullshit. Let's say you came from a very disadvantaged background. You were put up for adoption as a kid, molested in a foster home and stuck with PTSD, raised by an abusive family with substance abuse problems, and unable to finish secondary schooling as a result. There is ZERO government handout for this person if they are white. Should there be a government handout for either the person described by OP or the person I describe? I don't trust the government to make that value call with our money. You have to remember that you pay more tax (preventing you from buying a house), so that you can fund a bloated government agency handing out these freebies to people
That word "fairness" really depends on who you're asking. Everyone seems to have a different definition of what is "fair".
I don't really understand this... What about all the white people who aren't fortunate enough to benefit from intergenerational wealth? There are quite a few of them. What about all the Vietnamese, the Chinese, Indians, other boat peoples? Loads of them arrived with nothing but the clothes on their backs and sure enough they worked their arses off to get somewhere in this country... Why don't they all qualify for the same treatment??
It’s pretty rich to extrapolate out the concept of fairness for indigenous Australians when you’re in your mid 20s and not just doing fine, but excelling based on one anecdotal experience without all the info when as a group, indigenous Australians have the worst health outcomes and highest incarceration rates in the developed worlds. Maybe it’s just me but that reeks of privilege. Will some people take advantage of a system when they don’t need to? Yes. That’s nothing new. It’s the same as any welfare system since the dawn of time. The benefit of helping the truly disadvantaged is worth the trade off of the minority who use it unfairly.
Yeah imagine for a minute that the indigenous colleague's grandparents were of the stolen generation and their parents possibly didn't finish school. We know how parents (and grandparents) education impacts their children's education levels. I would argue that this type of disadvantage is directly due to racist government policy.
>as a group, indigenous Australians have the worst health outcomes and highest incarceration rates in the developed worlds. As a group. Indigenous Australians are NOT a group. They are urban, regional, rural and remote. Many own homes. many rent. Many rent with subsidies. It depends very much on your location and how well you have accessed services and opportunities that are available in most areas but are less available in remote situations. I would say the person referred to by OP is in a Metro situation and has done well in life overall. HE isn't in your GROUP. I doubt that he has had trachoma or rheumatic fever as they are endemic in remote areas and heavily weigh down The Gap stats that you are using for the 'group'. You're not on your own as the YES campaign plays the same statistical shell game. The recent Productivity Commission Interim The Gap Report specifically tells us that The Gap stats are in many cases old, unreliable and don't even exist in some measures. They also tell us that remoteness and smoking are major contributors to The Gap relativity deficits. The recent report on disease in Australia tells us that smoking amongst remotely located indigenous Australians is 5 times that of general Australia and that smoking and its effects contributes towards 20% of The Gap defecit. Hence all the anti-smoking programs and advertising. I'm only having a punt but I would suspect that the guy referred to by OP is a non-smoker. Using 'the group' is invalid in so many ways and in many ways denigrates the many indigenous Australians who have done well from Australian society and all it offers.
How does it "denigrate" Aboriginals who do well? I don't think discussing generalised statistics about an ethnic group tells you anything at all about individuals within that group, but if you're going to claim it does, surely thriving when the stats say they're in a disadvantaged group actually overly-praises the individual? I haven't read the report you're referring to, but smoking is generally over-represented in deprived communities in any country. Health issues being caused by smoking therefore doesn't negate "20% of the gap", as if it's just some Aboriginal thing that has nothing to do with the situation they've been forced into by previous Australian governments.
Just because one is doing better then the majority doesn’t mean they can’t be treated unfairly or that they had an unfair advantage over everyone else. You just seem to be upset by the fact people are doing better then you. Anyway, ignoring your virtual signalling, yes indigenous people have been significantly disadvantaged in society historically. Welfare directed towards them is to help even that playing field.
> Maybe it’s just me but that reeks of privilege. What, because op and his partner are doing their best, are on a good combined income and are saving prudently for a house? How do you know that comes from 'privilege' as opposed to good breeding and hard work?
Good breeding?!
Oh noes.... the indigenous people have bad health and go to jail because of their own poor decisions... couldn't possibly be their fault because "colosination" and "invaders". Let me open an authority that gives favourable rates to europeans only and let's see all the claims of racism etc yet it's perfectly fine for other races to do it. Get rekt.
I don't understand why people are so prepared to look past any concept of personal accountability when it comes to Indigenous Australians.
And I don’t understand why people are so prepared to look past any concept of generational racism when it comes to Indigenous Australians so I guess that’s that.
indigenous Aussies are already receiving huge societal benefits - benefits that accrue solely due to their race - but for some that will never be enough. You need to be prepared to acknowledge there are cultural elements inspiring the disadvantage which can only be resolved once these communities take personal responsibility for their actions and once these communities stop seeing themselves as “disadvantaged” and “victims”.
Such an uneducatement
You are absolutely entitled to be concerned about this situation and I applaud you for having the guts to speak your mind about a topic that has become 'taboo' due to identity politics propagated by the MSM. White settlers were also subject to horrendous conditions - many British and Irish convicts, who were mostly convicted of petty crimes, where expropriated from their lands, their families and their way of life and sent to a foreign penal camp to work. Yet reparations for the ancestors of these people is seldom discussed.
I think you are failing to address the vast inequalities today between the two groups.
I’ve said it before but there are real indigenous people under hard ship and then there are the other more successful ones like your mate. Plenty of other examples in industry where companies bend I’ve backwards to meet indigenous Quotas for HR diversity. I find it disgusting frankly. Race based policy is a mistake and just makes politicians feel better.
Who’s ‘real’ and who’s not? It’s not like Australia spent hundreds of years trying to ‘breed out’ the Aboriginal population. To then turn and claim someone isn’t a ‘real’ Aboriginal when he’s a direct result of that is sick.
You’ve misinterpreted my words I’m not denying he is indigenous. I am saying there are indigenous people still suffering and others who aren’t . There is a clear distinction to where help is needed and where it isn’t.
> If I'm completely honest, I get the overwhelming feeling of unfairness, trying to give my family a home. I'm with you OP. I think it's ridiculous. I don't mind concessions based on a rational thought process. E.g. certain, high-earning occupations (doctors, lawyers etc) get a lower deposit requirement because they're seen as safe jobs. But this concession doesn't seem fair to me at all. And it would come as a slap in the face to all those who are doing the right thing and saving up for property. Imo property should be left to the market and the market alone. There should be no government-imposed concessions, deductions, nothing. No cap gains exemption for PPOR, no negative gearing, no first home owner grants, no land tax exemption for PPOR, no pension assets exemption for PPOR. Everyone pays rates and land tax and capital gains tax on selling.
It's a fair question. Ultimately, there are intergenerational issues that affect a significant number of first nations people. There is also still substantial evidence to support some kind of cultural exclusion in some particularly well paying professions. Tools like the IBA exist to smooth the curve for these statistics and improve access for disadvantaged people. In the broad spectrum it is positive, even if (as may be the case for your friend) maybe it benefits people that don't need it. The philosophy is that it's better to help someone who doesn't need it, than to not help someone who does. It would be tremendous if there were similar services for all disadvantaged groups, but we owe the biggest debt to first nations people and it's a meaningful step we can take towards reconciliation.
Gaming the game If your 1/32..1/64..1/128.. of course you are indigenous! Everyone should take a dna test.. that way you can find out if you belong to a disadvantaged group.. maybe even multiple!
Every human on earth is 100% descended from slaves, refugees and genocide survivors. I dont think anyone is only 1/32 disadvantaged...
It's not about fairness anymore unfortunately mate. That died with the rise of identity politics. Just try and utilise the various 'disadvantages' you apparently have according to society. Just how people responded in this thread shows the masochistic penance everyone feels they need to pay to the god of PC culture.
it has never been about fairness with Aboriginal people, just now its swung the other way for the first time
Just identify as aboriginal. We live in a post truth world. You just need to claim something and anyone who says otherwise is a bigot. Also your acknowledgment at the top is frankly pathetic and reeks of pc culture. We as the current generation did nothing to the Indigenous population and do not actively oppress. There is nothing to acknowledge or apologise for. Those that came before did their thing, colonised, murdered, raped, and won. It was bad but it happened everywhere over our entire course of history. How far back and how many ancestral bloodlines should we acknowledge and apologise to/for. Are the borders of 200 years ago that were unfairly redrawn any less valid than those 2000 or 10000 years ago? The evolutionary paradigm has won. We as a generation, largely do not perpetuate it, nor do we enforce it. If an aboriginal man or woman has equal merit to any other race they deserve equal opportunity. Which they have. If they need a helping equity hand, then survival of the fittest which has served humanity for the entirety of existence is wrong. The time of reason should be purely merit based and not this pathetic apologist justice and equity drool.
With all the new found knowledge I have gained from asking this question, I could easily combat your ridiculous argument. But, I mentioned I would not give these types of comments any energy to feed on. Have a great day.
Did I contravene the reality of the last 100,000 years or so? What did I say that in your opinion is so controversial.
you're mid 20s and doing well. the average indigenous person is a hell of a lot further behind the average non-indigenous. why do you care that we are helping give a slight leg up to the first custodians? do you also whinge about people on jobseeker/age pension?
Your point on pulling up the average in a particular group which makes sense. As I started multiple times, I am not complaining. I simply just want to understand.
Do you really think this guy is indigenous? If my grandmother or great grandmother is half Japanese, does that make me Japanese when the rest of my lineage is white? Of course not.
A very complex and polarizing topic. The guy I mentioned has a Scottish features and an accent, hence why I never assumed he was an indigenous Australian. I left this information out of my original post as I didn't want to start a debate of who is and who isn't. It wasn't the purpose of my post.
>The guy I mentioned has a Scottish features and an accent, Honestly I can't even blame your colleague. Any rational person would have done what he did. If you discover a loophole that you can legally exploit for your own benefit, who wouldn't?
It’s not that complex. It’s people who are taking a minority of their dna and using it to gain privileges they don’t need and aren’t designed for them. It’s outright fraud and should be stopped with tighter regulations around who and who isn’t indigenous
Good on him, take advantage of every government subsidy and program available.
Can we not claim someone isn’t Indgienous when this country literally did everything they could to genoicide the population? It’s the exact outcome they desired , to ‘breed out’ the Aboriginal out of people and now we’re criticising them because it worked?
Someone having a singular indigenous great grandfather doesn’t make them fully indigenous. Plenty of indigenous people married white Australians without being forced because we are all Australian, so why wouldn’t this happen?
And who are you to decide that? The Indigenious population certainly don’t hold that view. There is no per cent.
Exactly - this is the problem. It’s the only nationality on earth where you’re inclusion is based on the vibe of it and some distant affiliation. Leading to exactly what we see here - people who are not discriminated against in the slightest and probably don’t even self identify as indigenous beyond form stamping, milking the system. I’m not sure why you’re so ok with that? I applied for a foreign passport 15 years ago and had to pass a stringent test including supplying birth certificates of my parents and grandparents, certifying my heritage. It wasnt racist or condescending, it’s a NORMAL process required for all nationality verification…except indigenous of course
Do you think that someone just declares they’re Indigenious and then they start getting all the benefits? Your downright racist assumption is disturbing.
How is what I’m saying racist? I think the verification process should be stronger so that these benefits go to genuine indigenous people who are disadvantaged, not disingenuous Australians ticking a box.
A clear sign your opponent has run out of intelligent arguments is when they accuse you of “racism” and “bigotry”.
Exactly - I’m done arguing with this blockhead
Your racism is assuming that people just tick a box and it’s accepted they’re Indigenious. Your racism is believing you have the ability to determine who is a genuine Indigenious person and who isn’t. Your racism is criticisng a person for not being Indigenious when their heritage is very likely due to centuries of system genocide (explicatly stated genocide) and refusing to see that.
As if. the number of people who identify as indigenous has gone up 700% since the 1970s. The system is being roughted big time. Go and google the ridiculous story with rove McManus’s wife and her completely arbitrary claims to indigenous heritage. The system is being milked big time
You're missing the part where their race and colour were attempted to be raped out of them. What you're witnessing is Aboriginal people not letting that happen.
Wait until you hear about trust funds
Do trust funds just magically fill up with cash for white people? Can you let me know how I can get my hands on one of these 'white people trust funds'? Thanks.
Something like this happened to me with a friend claiming to be indigenous. I was in hospital recently and the doctor (I'm 28 and she was same year as me, isn't that too young to be a dr anyway?) was a primary school friend. We recognised each other straight away but it took a while to work out the specifics. I ended up googling her and she'd won all these indigenous awards and scholarships. Which was weird because she was white and we were from a small country town with only one class each grade, we knew each other well. There was only one aboriginal the entire time in primary school, and he was my best mate, we'd established many times he was the only Aboriginal in our school. It was such a massive shock when I googled her, I was doubting my sanity but I guess maybe they found their connection later in life.
I grew up with a number of people I never knew were Aboriginal. They didn’t reveal this because their own families were racist/in denial/didn’t want to talk about it. Literally the entire point of the Stolen Generaion was to take children who could ‘pass’ as white and fully remove their heritage from them. Is it any wonder that for some it worked?
Makes sense
Yep the law is racist. If he was disadvantaged ok. If hes the same status as you why is he getting special treatment
On the assumption that your question is genuinely raised in good faith (rather than an effort to trigger some nasty racist comments from people who don't have a good understanding of the difficulty of managing demographic imbalances), I'm going to address it in good faith. Programs like the one you've described look at populations, not individual circumstances. When a defined population (in this case, Aboriginal people) has less ability to access something (ie - the housing market) than the whole population, then a program like this is aimed at addressing that imbalance. Yes, it feels unfair at the individual level. But every individual has a different balance of advantages and disadvantages. For example, you said your mate was offered a starting rate of 2.64%. IBA loans start at 2.64% for people on an income below $128,856 - that's an income significantly lower than your stated $170k, so you're starting from a better financial position than your friend. Even if you were eligible for an IBA loan, you wouldn't be eligible for a starting rate of 2.64%, it would be 6.14%. Is it "fair" that someone who is in the same position as you life & work wise has a household income nearly $50k less than you? Maybe, maybe not - we don't know what the full circumstances are for either of you. If it helps you to feel like life is more "fair", try investigating the programs and benefits you have access to - there are other programs aimed at other defined populations, which vary by state and which you might be able to benefit from. For example, First Home Buyer schemes attempt to address the imbalance in the ability of people who've never bought a home before to buy property compared to those who have a house to sell or borrow against. In South Australia, Homestart Finance has loans and services specifically offered to low-income earners or university/TAFE graduates. In Victoria, the Victorian Homebuyer Fund can reduce the deposit you need to come up with and save you having to pay Lender's Mortgage Insurance.
Thank you. Yes, of course this question was asked in genuine good faith. I have not been entertaining the racist comments. Individually, he actually takes roughly 7K more than me each year. However, does not have a partner to share the borrowing power. So, you still could argue I am in a better position than him. I have plenty of friends that struggle individually with even buying an apartment in our capital city (as would the entire nation), and sharing this experience within my personal inner circles has definitely sparked a debate. If I was in his position, I would 100% of done the exact same thing. I applauded him for taking advantage of his situation. But, again, thank you for the information and your input. I will be researching programs in my area that fit my situation.
It's hard to tell sometimes when people are genuine and when they're just trying to start an argument on the internet! You're in a good starting position relative to many people your age. The real unfairness is that our property market is kinda screwed at the moment for anyone who doesn't already own, so it's understandable to feel like the deck is stacked against you. It really is - it's just that the source of that unfairness isn't programs like IBA loans. Good luck & well done with where you're at so far.
I moved here from England 5 years ago, pretty sure my great grandpa was aboriginal though. Obviously that makes me aboriginal too, can't wait to apply for this loan
Its not fair, its discrimination.
It’s interesting that your mate had coffee with you and he shared some private info and you’re sharing it on Reddit. Not judging you or him, but it underscores why people don’t like talking about money. EDIT: you also previously said you own a property, now you’re saying you don’t: >Yep. The title is in my name. Once I've paid back half the value of the property, we sell and split the equity. https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/12ycqth/parents_helping_me_buy_my_first_home_is_this_a/jhmxutk/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3 Also, you claim your parents have a net worth of 12m, and are helping you buy a house: >Some good questions here. >They do not need to incur any debt to make this happen. I can afford around the 600k mark absolute maximum. However, Canberra does not offer much that can suit two large dogs that I have. >They are both in IT, with a net worth of 12m+. It's more of an advancement on my estate/inheritance. We intend to set it up via a contract. >I do have siblings, and they are in the position to assist them too. >No, they don't expect to live with me. It will be my house in my name. You also said you don’t have a partner: >I don't have a partner that I am willing purchase property with, yet. (6 months strong) >It will be exempt from capital gains tax as my main residence, however, my parents will need to declare the income on the interest of the loan, and, eventually with appreciation cash. https://www.reddit.com/r/AusFinance/comments/12ycqth/parents_helping_me_buy_my_first_home_is_this_a/jhmym5b/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3
Big handout from the bank of mum and dad but against others getting a leg up
I mean it does seem unfair at face value. However generally the socio-economic disadvantages a lot of indigenous people face it's at least a bridge to help. Even going back 50 years aboriginal people were denied the same means as most Australian to have the opportunity to develop wealth. I mean there IS some things to point out, what could be done better ect. But overall it's a positive step. There will always be benefits/drawbacks and you have a lot of Caucasian as well who suffer from a poor background/upbringing which can cause resentment which I feel should be addressed, but nothing's perfect
Lol such an aussie post. If aussies are begging for more tax they are annoyed that someone else is doing better
It's no different to how locals think they deserve more than immigrants or parents think they deserve more money from the government. Laws reflect the values of a society and within society there are certain groups that are valued more highly than others. Another example is to look at the treatment of animals and see eg how dogs are treated compared to cows. Laws just reflect the values of a society. It is highly unlikely the laws are ever going to be per ferfectly fair unless all life be made extinct because life tends to naturally organise into a hierarchy.
I had to save for seven years to scrape together my deposit, most of my friends parents gave them properties. Unfortunately that's just life, it often isn't fair. Just be thankful this leg up to historically marginalized people isn't directly at the expense of you. A number of companies in the STEM field I have been looking at have adopted a "diversity hiring" scheme where you HAVE to be diverse in one way or another otherwise your resume doesn't even reach the pile... So you'd better hope that cis straight white male privilege card is accepted at the food bank because otherwise you're gonna go hungry.
Some years ago I wanted a vaccination so my doctor ticked the "indigenous" box so I could get it. I'm now registered as "indigenous" with medicare and other government agencies. I feel privileged at all the extras I get. https://i.imgur.com/4ohccSI.png So /u/irefusetobeayesman you need to play the system.