There is something almost comical about the current vogue for blaming baby boomers for Australia’s housing woes and increasing affordability. Picture the scene: a retiree in a modest three-bedroom home, stubbornly refusing to downsize, single-handedly propping up median prices that now flirt with ten times the average income.
It makes for punchy headlines and social media rants, but for the overwhelming majority of seniors, it’s a complete misrepresentation of reality. Poverty among retirees is increasing steadily, and close to 60% of people over the age of 50 are struggling to pay for essentials like food.
The truth of the situation is far less entertaining and far more prosaic: successive governments, both Labor and Coalition, have presided over a decades-long failure to match housing supply with demand, all while sprinkling policies that gently inflate the bubble.
As someone who spends their days reporting on aged care, I have watched the ‘wealthy boomer’ narrative take hold with a mixture of amusement and concern. It paints seniors as avaricious gatekeepers of wealth, hoarding oversized homes while younger generations scramble for rentals that devour half their pay.
The resentment is palpable and entirely understandable. But directing it at grandparents rather than the architects of the system is rather like shouting at the symptom instead of treating the disease. Governments have found this generational finger-pointing terribly convenient.
It distracts from their own record: a persistent undersupply of dwellings amid population growth, restrictive planning laws that would make a Soviet bureaucrat blush, and a never-ending and steadily increasing amount of taxes.
Consider the numbers, which have a stubborn habit of undermining tidy scapegoats. The National Housing Supply and Affordability Council’s 2025 report makes for sobering reading. Australia remains gripped by a crisis “decades in the making” through our “persistent failure to deliver enough homes to meet demand”.
Prices and rents hit record highs in 2024, with affordability deteriorating across most capitals and regions. The government’s own ambitious target of 1.2 million new homes by mid-2029? Forecasts suggest we will fall short by hundreds of thousands.
This is not the work of obstinate empty nesters; it is the predictable outcome of slow approvals, zoning that prioritises “local character” over actual homes, and construction costs inflated by taxes and red tape that can account for half the price of a new build.
Migration policy adds another layer of irony. High net overseas migration has been a bipartisan darling for boosting GDP figures, yet little thought was given to whether the infrastructure, let alone the roofs, could keep pace.
Demand surges, supply limps, and prices do what prices do. Meanwhile, schemes meant to help first-home buyers often end up bidding up the market further.
The broader cost-of-living squeeze follows a similar script. Inflation, compounded by global shocks and domestic rate hikes, has eroded real wages and disposable incomes. Australian households suffered one of the sharpest falls in living standards among developed nations in recent years.
Energy rebates and tax tweaks offer temporary relief, but they paper over structural issues: weak productivity growth, supermarket concentration, and policies that have shifted income from wages to profits.
Single-income households, once the norm, are now a rarity, not because boomers magically rewrote family economics, but because housing costs force both partners into the workforce while welfare settings and wage stagnation make staying home a luxury few can afford.
This is where the scapegoating becomes not just misleading, but actively harmful. It fosters a false divide, pitting generations against each other when the real cleavage is between ordinary Australians and a policy elite that has prioritised short-term growth over long-term liveability.
Surveys show younger people perceive stark intergenerational conflict, yet family support remains robust, with parents dipping into savings or equity to help adult children navigate the market. The narrative of “greedy boomers” ignores that many retirees live modestly, on pensions indexed just enough to keep pace with basics, in homes they bought when prices were lower but interest rates could hit double digits.
There is a sly wit in how governments deploy this distraction. By murmuring about downsizing incentives or inheritance taxes, they signal action without tackling the thorny bits: reforming negative gearing and capital gains discounts that fuel investor demand, overhauling planning to allow denser building in established suburbs, or aligning migration with genuine capacity.
These are politically tricky, touching vested interests and sacred cows. Far easier to let the public bicker over who had it easier.
Yet the joke wears thin when loneliness in aged care rises alongside youth anxiety over insecure futures. When families fracture under financial strain that could have been mitigated by bolder supply-side reforms.
Young Australians have every reason to be furious, at ballooning deposits, vanishing single-income viability, groceries that mock the budget. But that fury is squandered on fellow citizens who navigated their own era’s challenges, from Vietnam conscription to 18 per cent mortgages.
The path forward lies in unity, not division. Demand policies that treat housing as shelter first, investment second. Insist on supply unleashes that match population ambitions. Push for tax and welfare settings that restore balance, not entrench advantage.
And lastly, but most importantly, Australians need to become wedded to good ideas, not political tribes or individual politicians, because blind loyalty ensures that bad policy has defenders.
Boomers will soon pass the demographic baton; millennials and Gen Z already outnumber them at the ballot box. Use that power wisely, to fix the system, not feud over its spoils. After all, today’s seniors were once young dreamers too, fighting different battles under the same sun. It is time we fought the real one together.
Great article Jakob. We have been let down by successive governments as you say since the 80’s that implemented policies that turned housing from a place you called home and built happy memories in to an investment vehicle for building wealth, while at the same time reducing social housing to a trickle compared with previous decades (1950’s – 1970’s). Boomers were the beneficiaries of these policies but as you say it’s not right to blame them, they simply worked with the rules that were in place at the time. But it was always a gravy train that was going to end in generational inequity. As a student and observer of economics the signs have been there for a long time but have been ignored by the politicians who just want to get reelected and the housing and real estate industries which want the gravy train to continue. If you look at most countries around the world they don’t treat housing as an investment vehicle, it’s a place to call home and raise a family. We have lost our way and younger generations are paying the price. Unless you can get help from mum and dad or are earning a very big income it’s almost impossible for young people to get on the property ladder. I know several young people that have bought property recently and every one of them had help from either their mum and dad or grandparents. So that’s the society we have created, those with generational wealth and those without. We are reversing to the way we were before 1950, families with money and families without. As social inequity grows we may see the social fabric decay. We need to turn this around now. I feel very grateful to have lived in Australia all my life but I am very concerned for many young people who see no future. Work hard but never get the opportunity that previous generations took for granted. It’s not fair and it’s not the Australia I want to live in.
Great article,
My Husband and I while raising 5 children, were lucky enough to have our own businesses and could work 7 days a week most weeks, with the occasional Sunday off. We schemed it so someone was always there for the kids.
Now, we are those dreadful Boomers, who live off their own Super and don’t receive a Health Care Card.
Oh, how I wish now, that we should have taken those holidays etc. Bought the new cars etc, but we didn’t and here we are.
Just have given $100,000 to one child to pay off their home loan, given another child $50,000 to purchase an old home that needs work. If they save up the deposit we will help them.
Everyone has the same opportunities, I don’t have a Uni degree and my Husband was a humble painter, who built a business as did I.
It really annoys me when people say we had it easy, we didn’t and we get no free ride from anyone who now pays taxes. We pay for everything ourselves, including our Grandson’s Private School Fees.
I am a proud Boomer and am proud of being brought up in a poor home, with nothing, as it made me who I am.
As a member of the baby boomer generation, I find it troubling to hear claims that we have always benefited from privilege and will become a burden on the aged care system. This perspective is not only unfair, but it also overlooks the real hardships many of us have endured. For instance, we lived through periods when interest rates soared above 17%, making it extremely difficult to buy a home or manage mortgages. High inflation eroded our savings and made everyday necessities more expensive. Pay structures were often inequitable, with significant gender pay gaps and limited opportunities for women and minorities to advance in their careers.
Beyond economic challenges, we also faced significant social obstacles. Many of us grew up during times of strict social norms and expectations, which limited personal freedoms and choices—such as restrictions on women’s participation in the workforce, limited access to higher education for some groups, and social stigma around divorce or single parenthood. We witnessed and participated in major social movements, including the fight for gender equality, Indigenous rights, and the push for multiculturalism, often facing resistance and slow progress. The transition from traditional family structures to more diverse and inclusive models required adaptation and resilience.
Additionally, we experienced job insecurity during major economic downturns, such as the recessions of the early 1980s and 1990s, which led to widespread layoffs and uncertainty. We navigated frequent industrial disputes, including the widespread strikes of the 1970s and 1980s, and had to adapt to rapidly changing workplace laws and conditions. The shift from manufacturing to a service-based economy meant that many had to retrain or change careers entirely, often with little support. The introduction of new technologies transformed workplaces, requiring ongoing learning and adaptation.
Despite these challenges—both economic and social—we are now criticized for supposedly straining an aged care system that is already under-resourced and struggling to meet demand.
It aint our fault and the orchestrator of the system needs to take responsibility and cease passing the buck.
Absolutely! Baby Boomers had their struggles too. Thankyou for expressing and explaining our frustration .
Some Boomers would gladly move to smaller homes but after paying stamp duty often can’t afford to. Aparments aren’t necessarily cheaper.
Also many share their homes with younger generations, where would they live without Boomer’s larger homes to accommodate them?
This is a very true and accurate summary of our countries woes. It is a pity it is not readily available to everyone to read. As so called baby boomers, we had 19% interest rates and at times a single income, yes it was hard but we appreciated everything that we worked for. Hand me down furniture and an old house we renovated, were where we started, today’s young couples want all new things. Still have furniture bought in the 90’s, when we could finally could afford decent timber, not the particle board rubbish of today.
That was a comprehensive article but still showed a bias towards the boomers. Most investment properties were bought with the desire to remain off the pension and be self supporting particularly when there was no super to rely on. Also, by not getting the pension or any of its benefits and by maintaining an investment propety, the boomerr does not rely on the government for a pension and provides additional housing in the rental market. Not everyone wants to buy a house at a particular time. Others need to rent whilst they save for a home. The Govt. is not helping either of those people – the man and pa investors are, And yet, they are hit with an overly unjust capital gains tax which is not based on actual values but only on “hypothetical” values – modeling of Robodebt – an appalling tax grab. Not to mention the onerous paperwork, rules and regulations and other taxes which render the ma and pa investers almost financially destitute. Most of them are living on the breadline but hold out because who wants to deal with Centrelink! Yes, they could sell but the Govt. takes a tidy profit – what for – they worked verfy hard doiong without many things to buy the property, paid tax to buy it, they paid tax to keep it and now they are paying tax to sell it. This was their nest egg to provide for their independence in old age – just as super is supposed to – and yet the govt. wants to make them the villians when, in fact, the villian is the greedy and incompetent Govt. No wonder our politicians have a nice gravy train of money to fund their obscene perks. Also, even if the boomers sell their home, the first home buyers could not afford them. Equally, the downsizers cant find smaller homes unless they are home units or strata premises which incur very high levies which escalate every year. Or they have to go intgo regional areas where they lose all the familiarity of their previous area as well as their doctors, friends etc. and would have to rely on a car when they can’t drive and many of the services are miles apart from one another. I can’t tell you how many elderly people have had to sell their strata properties because they cannot afford to live in them due to high and increasing levies which are unsustainable.
The the salaries of today are very high – not the meagre ones most of the boomers had at their disposal – so they rented, saved, bought a butter box and used fruit boxes with a table cloth over it to pretend it was a table etc. etc. They hoped to own their home and be mortgage free when they were in their 60s. They did not expect Carrera marble, stainless steel, huge modern homes with all the mod cons, latest cars and all the tech toys etc. etc. – unlike many of the bleating entitled youth of today. The only one to blame for the lack of housing is the Govt. which couldn’t run a tuck shop and make a profit. It consistently supported massive numbers of immigration when there was not enough stock and they cared only to listen to the big end of town and not the populace. Why do you think Pauline Hanson is on the rise – because at long last – even the ignorant diehards are finally realising that they have been duped. I agree fully with the author’s last two paragraphs which hold the key to much needed change –
” …………And lastly, but most importantly, Australians need to become wedded to good ideas, not political tribes or individual politicians, because blind loyalty ensures that bad policy has defenders.
Boomers will soon pass the demographic baton; millennials and Gen Z already outnumber them at the ballot box. Use that power wisely, to fix the system, not feud over its spoils. After all, today’s seniors were once young dreamers too, fighting different battles under the same sun. It is time we fought the real one together”.
I agree, see my post above.
This week, I became a member of One Nation and paid the fees for a yearly membership.
We are also self funded Retirees as per above.
Well said, Bridgette. Previous governments started the trend to doom, followed by each government after!
It’s nonsense to be subjected to such inequality and ignorance. Shame on them all. I hope they aren’t so blind to see that when they get old, they will meet the same problems, but something tells me they can’t look that far ahead. I think their heads are in the sand …. or somewhere?!
Well written agree with your view of the situation with society today and the lack of real leaders in government today and previously.
Negative gearing and franked dividends need to be phased out. Why bother going to work and paying 20 to 30% in tax when you can sit at home and pay 15% on your Australian dividends or better still speculate in the housing market and use negative gearing ? Democracy and social inequality don’t work well together. You only have to look at the USA to see where we are going if we don’t introduce a fairer tax system and redistribute wealth so that people can afford to live.
“This is not the work of obstinate empty nesters; it is the predictable outcome of slow approvals, zoning that prioritises “local character” over actual homes, and construction costs inflated by taxes and red tape that can account for half the price of a new build.”
Well said, Jakob! In a nutshell, well said!
“Migration policy adds another layer of irony. High net overseas migration has been a bipartisan darling for boosting GDP figures, yet little thought was given to whether the infrastructure, let alone the roofs, could keep pace.”
All those new houses out in the sticks, without any amenities and shocking traffic problems! No thought was put into those projects. Wasting money as if it were not precious!
And like you say, “The path forward lies in unity, not division.” The sooner everyone, and I mean, everyone, wakes up to thinking like this, the better!
I applaud your tenacity Jakob and I enjoy your written expression! Thank you for being unrelenting. Something we could all be.