WHEN I was working I paid someone $50 a week to clean through the house. I have never pretended to be Supermum so it was money well spent.
I worked to keep me sane and to help another woman make ends meet. It seemed a good deal.
After I resigned last year, I took over the cleaning duties and now pay myself the $50.
This morning after I finished cleaning the bathrooms and toilets I sat down to a coffee and The Age.
An ad on the front of the classifieds caught my eye.
It was an ad for a typical McMansion.
The house had four toilets, four bathrooms and three bedrooms, a library, guest suite, rumpus room and family room, as well as the usual living/dining area and kitchen.
And I thought, ``What a lot of cleaning.''
I had cleaned two toilets and two bathrooms and it had taken most of the morning.
Who wants to clean four?
They would all get used. If no-one has to wait in a queue they go more often.
That's more water down the sewer, more ``toilet duck'', more paper.
If I was in government I would put a tax on toilets. Divide the number of toilets by the number of occupants in the household and if the result is more than 0.5 slap on the tax.
In fact, my government would tax households with too much floorspace. That would raise taxes and cut house prices at the same time.
The outer suburban McMansion offered ``45sq from $252,900''.
Given that the average couple has less than two children, that's more than 10 square a person. Whole families used to live in not much more.
And who wants to clean 45 squares?
Smaller houses are cheaper, take up less land, use less resources and cost less to maintain.
That adds up to win, win and win. Good for the environment, good for the community and good for the hip pocket.
Time saved on cleaning the house and paying the mortgage could be spent exercising and socialising. Better health. Better relationships. Happier couples and children.
The government proscribed house sizes and floor plans after WWII so it can be done.
But it would take a brave government to do it today.
In the 1950s the average adult wage supported the average family with an average mortgage.
A generation later it took one adult on an average wage and a second adult working part-time to do the same.
The average family shrunk and the average home grew.
Now two adults working full-time struggle to pay the mortgage on the average home and have time with their one-point-something children.
Where to from here? It's the kids or the house. I would keep the kids but something tells me McMansions will win.
I worked to keep me sane and to help another woman make ends meet. It seemed a good deal.
After I resigned last year, I took over the cleaning duties and now pay myself the $50.
This morning after I finished cleaning the bathrooms and toilets I sat down to a coffee and The Age.
An ad on the front of the classifieds caught my eye.
It was an ad for a typical McMansion.
The house had four toilets, four bathrooms and three bedrooms, a library, guest suite, rumpus room and family room, as well as the usual living/dining area and kitchen.
And I thought, ``What a lot of cleaning.''
I had cleaned two toilets and two bathrooms and it had taken most of the morning.
Who wants to clean four?
They would all get used. If no-one has to wait in a queue they go more often.
That's more water down the sewer, more ``toilet duck'', more paper.
If I was in government I would put a tax on toilets. Divide the number of toilets by the number of occupants in the household and if the result is more than 0.5 slap on the tax.
In fact, my government would tax households with too much floorspace. That would raise taxes and cut house prices at the same time.
The outer suburban McMansion offered ``45sq from $252,900''.
Given that the average couple has less than two children, that's more than 10 square a person. Whole families used to live in not much more.
And who wants to clean 45 squares?
Smaller houses are cheaper, take up less land, use less resources and cost less to maintain.
That adds up to win, win and win. Good for the environment, good for the community and good for the hip pocket.
Time saved on cleaning the house and paying the mortgage could be spent exercising and socialising. Better health. Better relationships. Happier couples and children.
The government proscribed house sizes and floor plans after WWII so it can be done.
But it would take a brave government to do it today.
In the 1950s the average adult wage supported the average family with an average mortgage.
A generation later it took one adult on an average wage and a second adult working part-time to do the same.
The average family shrunk and the average home grew.
Now two adults working full-time struggle to pay the mortgage on the average home and have time with their one-point-something children.
Where to from here? It's the kids or the house. I would keep the kids but something tells me McMansions will win.
