For lovers of a good euphemism, the past week really delivered. As the week began, the stage 3 tax cuts were variously on the table and under the spotlight. By Tuesday, they were set to be “redesigned” or “tweaked”. On Wednesday, as the patient was wheeled out from surgery – having been on the table, under the spotlight getting a redesign – it was established that it had been “pared back”.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers finally pronounced the makeover a success, declaring that Labor had found a “better way” for stage 3 to be. Stage 3.2 nipped and tucked an adjustment for bracket creep, dressed up as a tax cut, to turn it into an election wedge, dressed up as a tax cut.

Illustration: Matt DavidsonCredit:

Without all the fancy words, stage 3 remastered is yet another way the concept of “fairness” can be used to betray younger generations.

For people earning under $135,000 a year, Jim’s “better way” tucks about $15 a week, on top of what the Coalition’s un-nipped stage 3 cuts would have delivered, of their own money back into their pockets. People earning over $147,000 will retain less of their earnings than they would have under the original plan.

That puts the income threshold at which Labor now considers Australians rich at just under $150,000. Young Australians, the Millennials and Gen Zs who are already despairing of ever owning a home, should be especially sensitive to this. Albanese’s cosmetically enhanced tax baby may be the only baby they can ever afford.

Think about it like this: if you start life with nothing but brains and brawn, the income you can earn is your key to eventually joining the comfortable classes. With hustle, a clever kid might eventually make enough to put a deposit on a home. That home represents physical security, but more importantly, it is a source of wealth accumulation. Over time, as property values rise, it becomes a nest egg.

That’s basically the alpha and omega of social mobility: to move from merely earning your daily bread to investing in a loaf that keeps rising under you.

Meanwhile, the value of the average home to the value of the average salary is gaping. Financial comparison site Finder estimates that the minimum annual income required to afford a home in any state in Australia is now above $100,000. In NSW the average required is $193,340, in Victoria it’s $158,084, and in the cheapest place to own a home, the Northern Territory, the minimum is a mere $118,568. Mind you, the average salary in the NT is much lower too.