Pyramid Scheme (Early Access + Free Video)

It's not an issue with straightforward accounting principles. Overlooking the point of distinction between the two funding models by which to invest in affordable housing. The way you measure return on investment (and so too the value the asset holds) is quite simply not analogous to simplistic transactions like those involved in managing a household budget even if that includes a diverse portfolio of assets. V sophisticated economy situated in context of global financial markets where this funding model is designed within the reality of the world we find ourselves with one of the factors in its favour being that it is capable of being more productive than direct funding I.e spending (with no shortage of hands outreached for their cut in process of transforming dollars into houses). Building one house a demanding resource-heavy undertaking. I.e it costs a lot and is not something which can be provided on an expedient way or with lean resources. Direct funding can't be improved upon to make it more efficient. Labor's Bill proposes a method of funding productive of not only more capital (I.e. The dollars) but productive of a market which itself is more productive of building houses! !

Heather Hebs

It is perhaps worth noting that Jordan did say over the next two years. So, $9.5 Billion of payment in the last budget (including the extra $2 billion in June) +$7.5 billion for the next budget (which I think it's reasonable to assume Labor may invest the same amount or more next year) + ~$3 billion in direct payments in the HAFF bill and then $1 billion from the revenue of the HAFF over two years. I don't think the $575 million + $300 million +$2 Billion that will be added in the HAFF is included in the $7.5 billion figure. As the $7.5 billion was in the budget where the other amount is in the HAFF bill itself. This comes to $21 billion without including private investment. I don't think anything there is overcounting and does include an assumption but I think that covers the total. Which if we ignore the 500 million each year from the HAFF and the government does do an extra $2 billion to help the states then that comes to $22 billion.

Exobyte Monolith

I think that's spot on honestly. Thanks for the deep dive. Would love Jordan to respond to this.

Adam Steel

I thought the video was great. The Greens don't often get any real scrutiny. I Saw this post on the subreddit trying to go over the math in the video pasted in full below. Can someone refute it. "Pyramid Scheme Video Maths I wanted to double check one of the claims Jordan makes in the video. (TLDR at the bottom.) So around the 20 minute mark in the Pyramid Scheme video, and just after he's had a go at Max Chandler-Mather for not being able to understand maths, Jordan pulls out a virtual whiteboard to demonstrate that $22b-$31b is bigger than $2b. Which it is! But the number seemed pretty big, so I wanted to see whether it actually added up. Now to start with Jordan is using [this](https://www.pm.gov.au/media/albanese-government-delivers-immediate-2-billion-accelerated-social-housing-program) press release from the Prime Ministers Office to back up his claim, combined with the $10b Haff, and [this article](https://www.afr.com/property/commercial/haff-could-trigger-9bn-of-housing-work-over-next-two-years-nhfic-20230627-p5djto) in the AFR for the $9b investment. So the HAFF isn't direct investment in housing. It's supposed to make money each year which is directly invested in housing (as Jordan notes in the video). We're going to use the original HAFF model proposed by Labor, and use Jordan's 9.5% per year return (averaged over the last 10 years). First you need to subtract inflation (which the HAFF was originally going to do - it was required to keep its value compared to 2023 dollars) which is averaged at 2.3% per year between 2012 and 2022. Then we're going to remove costs (direct and look through, based on [this document](https://www.transparency.gov.au/annual-reports/future-fund-management-agency/reporting-year/2020-21-18)) of about 1.5%. And so we end up at 5.5% return, which is a bit more than 500m per year. Given that Labor originally had a ceiling of 500m, I think that's a perfectly reasonable number to use for how much the HAFF is likely to make per year. Next we have the $9.5b investment that Jordan refers to at 20.26. Now this includes the $2b that was announced after the Greens didn't pass the HAFF, which is what Jordan is comparing these numbers to. So we're only going to include the $7.5b, as it seems dishonest to put the $2b on both sides of the comparison. Next is the "close to another $3b in additional funding" which Jordan mentions at 20.40. Now these quotes come from the same press release from the Prime Ministers office, and it's actually just the PM's office providing quotes to the media from Julia Collins, the housing minister, talking about the $2b announcement. So the $2b is Jordan counting the announcement money twice because it was mentioned twice in the press release, and the $575m and $350m seem to be parts of the $7.5b which the PM mentioned in the press released, just with slightly more detail. I'm not 100% sure of those last two figures! It's ambiguous as to what the $7.5b represents. So feel free to do a deep dive into it yourselves. And finally the last $9b is based on an article in the AFR, which mentions the value of houses being built, but not that this money will come from the private market. I get Jordan's point that by investing in housing more money from the private market will flow into building even more housing (although he undercuts this later by pointing out supply chain issues), but his claim that an additional $9b will be invested if the HAFF passes is... not what the article says. **TLDR**: the $22b figure Jordan mentions counts the $2b claim twice, and includes the $10b HAFF which isn't directly invested but actually provides $0.5b per year. If you count them properly (subtracting $14b), it should really be $8b +$0.5b/year, as compared to what the Greens are claiming which is... $8b +$0.5b/year, plus an extra $2b which they're proud of having pressured the government into announcing. (And whether or not it was the greens who made that happen is an interesting point, but doesn't make up for all the bad faith maths Jordan used to get there.) Full disclosure, I am a member of the greens. I also have a degree in theatre. I only mention because Jordan loves bringing up people's possible biases. "

One question I do have- Nicholas Proud said 25,000 homes would be built if the bill was passed. Given it's a fund, we have to wait for the returns on the fund before anything is invested in housing. What am I missing? How were the 25,000 homes going to be built asap? Didn't hear much about that $7.5bn and $2bn spent on social housing, or the funding for the Housing Accord etc, so is this one of the other parts of the bill? I only hear about the HAFF specifically so I'd love to hear more about the other parts of the bill.

Adam Steel

I love the Greens' self-own when Albo reads the document in parliament. "Allowing the HAFF to pass would demobilize the growing section of civil society that is justifiably angry about the degree of poverty and financial stress that exists in such a wealthy country." In other words "If we were to pass this legislation, it would start helping the people who need it and we wouldn't have a platform"

Speaking of not proof reading their press releases the "You show me yours and I'll show you mine" at 36:22 has another typo in it lol. "2109 to 2021"

I voted Green Party in 🇨🇦 and they instantly reneged ON EVERY PROMISE and went woke.

DanseTheAtomBombDance

Here's a really whacky idea... Instead of buying shitty subs, how about using that money to build social housing now rather then sticking it into some investment fund of which $200M goes to management fees? Wow, an hour of Greens bashing. I sometimes which the Greens would waive through Albo's HAFF just to shut the Labor psycophants up.

Max’s oblong face never ceases to jumpscare me every time I see him on Instagram

DESTRON

That Also dunk on Max Chandler-Mather was actually the maddest own. Greens members aren't even in the same league

ryan-bagge

Good trifecta of doco’s over a wide range of issues domestic and foreign 🤘.Albo at 52.25 into this clip stuttered saying “country” a good accidental way of describing the greens stance on everything.Well done on your work.

Al Goormay

Thank u

Lucas Sherriff

Could we have a video explaining the relationship between unions and the greens?

David

FREEZE RENTS FREEZE YOGURT FREEZE RENTS FREEZE YOGURT FREEZE RENTS FREEZE YOGURT FREEZE RENTS FREEZE YOGURT FREEZE RENTS FREEZE YOGURT FREEZE RENTS FREEZE YOGURT

The Airport protests was the canary in the coal mine for what type of shitheel Max is. The aircraft noise is a legitimate issue. It was a problem caused by the Nationals not running Airservices Australia who didn't run any public consultation on the new flight paths. The solution was equally political, have a competent government in who could force ASA to consult with the public and find a solution. Terri Butler was making huge inroads on this, promising that Labor would send ASA back to the drawing board (which, they did, FYI). But Max wanted to exploit this community anxiety, but he couldn't present the problem as political because that would be accepting that Labor could fix it. So who does he blame instead? Brisbane Airport Corporation... Because Corporations are neoliberalism. Important to know that BAC only manages the terminals and hangers, they have no jurisdiction on flight paths or even the runways. But Max wouldn't let that get in the way of a good protest. He hijacked the community with a small group of Greens activists and turned the anger away from ASA and onto BAC. He even lead a maskless protest of the BAC head office DURING THE PANDEMIC, less than a week before QLD had to lockdown because someone from the airport had covid. When BAC closed their doors and sent a team outside to collect complaints, Max tried to claim that BAC were ignoring their protest because they won't let a bunch of maskless Karen's walk aimlessly around their small office space. What were Max's demands? That Brisbane Airport gains a curfew, something that would cost the state of Queensland billions of dollars and WOULDN'T BE DECIDED BY BAC. I've heard since he got elected, he hasn't spoken to BAC at all, in fact, refuses to speak with them. He still occasionally posts in their Facebook groups claiming that discussions are still ongoing though! Also, he once protested a carbon neutral apartment block in the Brisbane CBD on Labor Day by "blockading" a different development.. on a public holiday... Because the apartment building cast a shadow. Dude is the definition of political LARPing

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Grace Frick