Australia

How come spending $368,000,000,0000 on nuclear submarines that won't arrive until 2050, and most likely won't be useful in 2050 because they will most likely be detectable, for a war that will never happen, is a good use of taxpayer funds but spending much less than that on housing is?

They don't even need to spend on housing, they just need to take a risk and kill the housing market, maybe pay off people's mortgages.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

"It's challenging and I think 0.3 per cent (vacancy rate), that's needle in a haystack type stuff," chief of research and economics at Domain Nicola Powell said.

Ms Powell said record low vacancy rates are being driven by ongoing factors like rapid population growth and rising property prices, leaving more renters stuck in the rental market.

But perhaps the biggest problem is a shortage of supply, and that sluggishness has been brought into sharp focus by the latest Bureau of Statistics building approvals data.

CoreLogic's head of research Tim Lawless said the problem is construction companies are reluctant to build because they can't turn a profit.

And for those hopeful renters looking for at least something to cling onto, Domain data shows, on a national scale, the average views per rental listing continued to decrease in February.

While it may mean that Australians are sleeping rough, on the flip side, Ms Powell said others are choosing to stay at home to save up for a house of their own.

The original article contains 699 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 76%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

Definitely keep bringing in 300k people a year, while building fewer dwellings than the existing population require, and definitely continue incentivising them to be built either a) where nobody wants to live or b) of such a low quality you're forced to take option a.

All guaranteed to improve housing affordability and security for decades and decades and decades and decades.