i do actually think a communist revolution in Japan or Australia would increase life expectancy- primarily because of free housing and the consequent end of homelessness. Plus the proposed platform of the Japanese Communist Party seems to me to be preferable to the policy of the current Japanese government.
Momentum is building for ending homelessness by giving people homes, there has already been a trial program in Melbourne with promising results.
It’s based on cost reduction instead of ideology, but what can you do.
Are there empty homes in Australia/Japan that could be given to the homeless? “Free housing” kind of requires there to be housing to give away freely and if the housing market is a free market,* then the price of housing already accurately reflects how much is available.
If they’re not giving homes away for almost free, then: There are fewer homes than are demanded or there is a market intervention that makes it bad business to earn a dollar by selling a $4 home for $5.
(My guess is: “Both.”)
My actual guess is: There are probably empty homes available for very cheap, but they’re far away from urban centers where the homeless want to be. All the homes near urban centers are either already lived in or very temporarily empty and giving the temporarily empty to the homeless just means the people who would have bought them e.g. when moving to the city to pursue their career now cannot buy that home.
This is definitely a problem locally – we have (rounded numbers) 2.5 million homes for 5 million people, that is, 1 home for every two people. The average family is 4 people. That is: We have more than enough homes, I could buy a house for less than a single years wage. A shitty house far from everywhere I want to be, but I can. Instituting communism would not solve our homelessness problem because our homelessness problem is caused by the fact that our homeless would rather be homeless than live in their assigned homes, far from their community of fellow homeless. Where they want to be is in the city centers, and no amount of communism will make land value in the city center go down, it will, at most, make it illegal to make housing decisions based on land value (Hint: this is a terrible idea.)
*hahaha i slay 😦
Cheapest one: $40k
Assuming a 30 year mortgage and 10% interest, you pay a monthly “rent” of $350. For a house. That you get to keep, you’re not even renting. You can rent out one of the rooms in that house for almost as much as you have to pay on the loan.
Except it is literally the worst home, in the worst location.
Which brings us back to: The homeless don’t want homes, they want homes in the parts of Australia where everybody else wants homes. There are not enough homes in those locations for everybody who wants them, which is why they’re expensive. Making a government mandate that the homes become free of charge will not magically make more homes appear, it just means you’ll have to find a different way of rationing the scarce resource than money.