Budgeting for homes and babies

Two related Herald items caught my interest. The first was Parnell Palme McGuiness noting that a major cause of despair among many of the 18 to 35 generation was the impossibility of ever owning their own home (“Young Australians are despairing. I decided to find out why”, March 22). Second was Matt Canavan appealing Australians to have more babies (“It’s one of the greatest challenges we face, but oh baby, simplistic solutions won’t fix it”, March 16). There are many avenues open to the federal government to acquire funds to assist young first home buyers and possibly encourage them to have larger families. Here is a list: Remove CGT benefits on residential property, eliminate negative gearing, abolish franked share payouts, stop funding extremely wealthy private schools, get out of AUKUS, reduce or modify tax dodging family trusts, remove or reduce funding of fossil fuels. I could carry on but the point is that such savings could make a significant contribution to reducing the feeling of despair in the younger generation and with little or no impact on the mental state of wealthy boomers and retirees. Hopefully the next budget will tackle some of these initiatives. Neil Austen, Collaroy

More resources, less studies

Did we really need another study to tell us that lack of sleep and a dysfunctional home environment are potentially damaging to mental health (“Revealed: Secret to happy teens”, March 22)? It’s also obvious that preoccupation with social media and school bullying are major factors in the increase in mental health problems. However, as with most issues, what’s needed are more solutions and more resources, not more studies and inquiries. Graham Lum, North Rocks

For goodness’ sake, how much time and money was spent on a study that concluded sleep is needed for teenagers’ mental health and that trouble at home leads to anxiety, when all the researchers had to do was ask their grandmothers? Alicia Dawson, Balmain

Clear the smoke

Isn’t it time the government addressed what is already widely understood about the illegal tobacco market (“Australia’s smoking rates fell for decades. But that’s changed – and here’s why”, March 22)? By steadily increasing taxes on cigarettes while simultaneously restricting access to and diminishing the appeal of vaping products, the government has created a clear policy contradiction. These two markets are closely linked, yet vapes – widely recognised as a more effective, popular, and significantly less harmful alternative for smokers seeking to quit – have been treated as a threat rather than an opportunity. The result has been to compress two regulated markets into a single, expanding illicit one, eroding both public health outcomes and regulatory oversight. How much more taxpayer money will be spent trying to enforce policies that are increasingly proving ineffective? Pam Mulholland, Meadow Springs (WA)

Young mothers

The Sun-Herald article about a young, unmarried woman being forced to give up her baby touched my heart (“Drugged and terrified, I heard small cries in the distance. The nurses had taken my baby away”, March 22). In Waverley, not far from the Crown Street, my friends and I used to walk past grounds where many young, pregnant girls lived in a big house with a big beautiful garden. When we asked about the girls, our mothers would use their sad and painful plight as a fear-based contraception method for us. By the early 1970s, my friends and I had joined thousands of other women fighting passionately for women’s rights. We will continue to support women’s rights as long as the memories of our teenage years remain. Cecily Chittick, Wyong

Reading the article on forced adoptions brought back a vivid memory. In 1976, I had a very difficult birth with my first child at Crown St Women’s Hospital and because of injuries incurred with the birth I was in there for several weeks. It upsets me to think the doctors and nurses who cared for me with such compassion may have been involved in some way with this shocking, cruel practice. Mary Lawson, Marrickville

Tolerant voting

Rob Harris is right – preferential voting is the antidote to the system that tolerates the intolerance of the Liberal Party and One Nation ( “The Hanson paradox. How a populist surge becsme Labor’s friend”, March 22). South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas, in his acceptance speech, addressed tolerance in a Henry Lawson poem and a promise to listen to the disenchanted. Bur historically and most particularly, One Nation thrives on intolerance of difference, and to a lesser extent the Liberal Party does too. Its move away from progressive acceptance of the Voice to parliament and the common good of climate policy has its roots in intolerance of science and First Nations. It flirted with the intolerance that is Trump. Overwhelmingly, it is the tolerance in preferential choices that secures a tolerant society in Australia. Anne Eagar, Epping

• To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
• The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.