Australia housing bubble

[kazawaki]

Pretty simple maths purchased house 2001 paid $170,000 sixteen years later $700,000 bank valuation.Only over priced real estate will devalue and nope a good property will never burst.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

The only reasons to own your own home outright versus renting (apart from having equity to borrow against and something to leave your kids).... Is one day;

1. You may be long term unemployed and cannot afford rent.

2. Unable to work through injury / health, and on a disability pension and cannot afford the rent.

3. The day you retire... You may only have the government pension to live on, and it won't be enough to cover both future high rent and expenses.

Yeah, not to mention that the renters are all down the pub everyday, having a dozen pints, occasionally checking the keno board and inserting the dollar coins from the change from the smoke machine in the pokies, all while waiting for their drug dealer to show so they can have a couple of billys before bingo starts...

I think that's all the stereo types covered ....right

I love how all the examples given for the renter are extreme worst case scenarios, long term unemployment, sickness, disability like those things don't happen to people who have mortgages unpaid off because they've been accessing equity maaaaaate for the entire 30yrs of the initial loan, yet when you discuss the possible worst case scenarios of owning its, that only happens in **** holes in the middle of nowhere etc. etc. etc.

[FTE217]

Not just what the rent maybe in the future but living expense's as well.
I know its a viscous circle but I'd sooner have equity than none at all !

[Maka]

Informative but maybe scary story on interest rates & housing stress in Australia -

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-0...74?pfmredir=sm

cheers, Maka

[GASWAGON]

Originally Posted by Maka

Informative but maybe scary story on interest rates & housing stress in Australia -

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-0...74?pfmredir=sm

cheers, Maka

I don't think the RBA have the balls to raise rates even though they say the Oz economy is getting better like they say the U.S is also improving 10 years after the GFC.

U.S interest rates were basically 0.00% for near on 8-9 full years to try an spur on borrowing again but it did'nt work.

As your article shows even a .5% here in Oz up from 1.5% will have an impact.

I think wages need to rise.

[b0son]

Wages cant rise. Company profits are trending down.

You're dead right, with our ridiculous property prices, even a modest rate rise would nuke the property market. And with so much spending fuelled by housing equity, the government just cant risk it.

Originally Posted by b0son

And with so much spending fuelled by housing equity, the government just cant risk it.

Why not? A large portion of the population has been locked out of being able to buy a house at all. That seems to be ok though, right? Protect the 'haves' at the expense of the 'have-nots'? House prices are increasing faster than people can earn acquire the difference in deposit over the same time period.

Meanwhile the government keeps smoothing the waters whenever they start to get turbulent. And while you acknowledge that the "government can't risk it", those with at-risk mortgages keep rubbing non-home-owners' noses in it, saying that they just need to work harder, stop buying new phones and eating avocados for breakfast.

Mind you... if pigs fly and the property market does actually explode and send people bankrupt... I'd be willing to bet that those same people with mortgages, the ones doing the nose rubbing, will be the first to complain about how the government needs to protect them from financial ruin. That they deserve financial breaks and grants to help them in their time of need.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by leesa

Why not?

If house prices go into free-fall, do you think banks will lend money at low rates for a depreciating asset? Do you think people with a rapidly worsening equity position will be inclined to spend money freely in the economy? Do you think the young people licking their lips at the prospect of lower house prices will even have jobs if the economy grinds to a halt?

[MITCHAY]

Get busy working with what the reality is or keep hoping for what you want it to be.

I'm a firm believer that houses shouldn't be an investment but it is what it is. The only merit is if it increases the stock.

I put down almost 25% deposit so if it crashes that hard then the whole economy will be ****ed anyway in my opinion.

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

I'm a firm believer that houses shouldn't be an investment but it is what it is.

Same here, I don't think it should be permitted to treat housing as an investment.

It used to be that you'd buy a house so that you had somewhere to live when you retired to enjoy the last years of your life. My preservation age is 60 and my pension age 67, assuming the government don't change either one before I get there.

There's a whole lot of people not even making it to that age, so you're pretty much working your guts out and making do with the bare minimum in the best years of your life with the hope of one day paying off your own house.
If you make it that far, you get to live in it debt-free for a few years until you die. Doesn't that sound wonderful?

[b0son]

Originally Posted by leesa

Same here, I don't think it should be permitted to treat housing as an investment.

I don't think housing as an investment is the problem, I think housing propped up by the taxation system is the problem. CGT is overly generous. Negative gearing is overly generous. Fix those, and then it becomes an investment again, one with actual risk, unlike now where its a sure thing which as a result is self-fueling.

[xax2]

[QUOTE=leesa;5992334]Same here, I don't think it should be permitted to treat housing as an investment.

So, no one should own an investment property????? Where are all the people that want to (or have to) rent going to live?....the government is going to be able to supply house for all of them.

Since the end of the mining boom, the Australian economy, particularly on the East coast has been propped up by a construction boom, much of it townhouses & apartments. Many of these townhouses & apartments have been purchased by 'mum & dad' investors...those rotten people trying to get ahead in life...without all this building, our economy would be going backwards because we don't manufacture as much here any more. Without investors to buy much of that construction, it probably wouldn't get built.

Although none of us want to see spiralling house prices, which leads to unaffordability for the next generation, believe me, you don't want to see a price crash either....that happened in the early 1990's and people stopped spending on all sorts of things. Businesses went backwards and stopped employing and it became a vicious cycle.
Steady growth is what we need. If you want to buy a house, find an area where you can afford. There are country towns within an hour of most capital cities with homes for less than $200,000 (that's repayments of less than $200pw). Otherwise rent where you want.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by xax2

There are country towns within an hour of most capital cities with homes for less than $200,000 (that's repayments of less than $200pw). Otherwise rent where you want.

That gets you a block of land out here barely, forget the house and we're an hour out of Melbourne.

I think if I'm going to buy something the plan is country block, shed + nice caravan and tow rig

Can chase work interstate if I want and live out of the van.

[xax2]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

That gets you a block of land out here barely, forget the house and we're an hour out of Melbourne.

I'm in Melbourne as well and there are a number of towns within an hour where you can still buy a house for under $200,000 today....Seymour, Yea and others.
The only Capital I'm not sure about is Sydney (I did say 'most' capitals) but I'm sure someone will come up with something if they look hard enough.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

That gets you a block of land out here barely, forget the house and we're an hour out of Melbourne.

Sydney's no better... Mittagong, 120km out of Sydney, has new houses in the $900k's now.

Originally Posted by xax2

So, no one should own an investment property????? Where are all the people that want to (or have to) rent going to live?....the government is going to be able to supply house for all of them.

There aren't many people that "want" to rent. If price/income ratio was as it used to be, most people would be able to buy a house.

Steady growth is what we need.

Why is steady growth what we need? What good is that without an equally steady rise in incomes, which we haven't had? You just end up in the exact predicament that we are in. If mums and dads want to get ahead in life, they should find a business that doesn't include the housing industry and riding off the backs of the next generations who can't afford the inflated prices that they've caused.

Kids have to jump from job to job, chasing pay increase after pay increase until they might one day be able to afford a horse. Then they get the "old folks" criticising them for their lack of loyalty towards a business that's willing to take a chance on them. Sounds like they can't win, hey?

Originally Posted by b0son

If house prices go into free-fall, do you think banks will lend money at low rates for a depreciating asset? Do you think people with a rapidly worsening equity position will be inclined to spend money freely in the economy? Do you think the young people licking their lips at the prospect of lower house prices will even have jobs if the economy grinds to a halt?

I'm not saying it wouldn't have a disastrous effect, but I actually think this country needs the *** to fall out of the economy so that we can start again.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by leesa

I'm not saying it wouldn't have a disastrous effect, but I actually think this country needs the *** to fall out of the economy so that we can start again.

Its always better to slowly let the air out of a balloon than to pop it. It wouldn't matter that houses were dirt cheap, no one would be able to get a deposit together.

Originally Posted by xax2

Since the end of the mining boom, the Australian economy, particularly on the East coast has been propped up by a construction boom, much of it townhouses & apartments. Many of these townhouses & apartments have been purchased by 'mum & dad' investors...those rotten people trying to get ahead in life...without all this building, our economy would be going backwards because we don't manufacture as much here any more. Without investors to buy much of that construction, it probably wouldn't get built.

I came back in to have another whinge because what you said just makes me cranky.
"propped up" the australian economy indeed.

You (sarcastically) say that mum and dad investors are rotten people trying to get ahead in life but that's exactly what they are. What a lazy way to try and get ahead in life. Creating an epidemic where people come and snap up all the houses which then makes them more expensive and it's a vicious cycle where they keep getting so much more expensive until people either can't afford their mortgage anymore or can't afford to buy a house at all.

Buy a few and then sit back for a few years while the market continues to inflate as people thrash like piranhas in a feeding frenzy to grab hold of whatever is left. No different from those assholes who take more than they need from the grocery store shelf when there's bad weather on the way. No care or consideration for what they're denying from others as long as they have more than they need.

It's a perfect example of the average lazy aussie - wanting to get ahead without doing a damn thing, just climbing up off the backs of others.

Ironically..... there's another thread here called "Australia - No Infrastructure" about how Australia doesn't have the ability to create awesome things. It's because we're lazy assholes who want maximum profit with no effort, and at any cost... even if it means stiffing every generation who is born after yours.

Now it sounds like the economy is ****ed and the banks can't move left or right without the whole bloody country falling down. Great job! Looks like the propping up worked a treat!

And like that wasn't bad enough then came the national effort to keep wages low so that they didn't also increase in proportion to the houses, just to scrape even more money out of people.

We introduced visas so that companies could claim they couldn't find suitably-qualified aussies to hire and instead bring someone over on dirt cheap wages. How many people lost their jobs? Couldn't find qualified people, my ***. More like 'couldn't find qualified people at the ridiculously low price that I want to pay'.

And whats-his-face introduced Work Choices which really sunk the boot in.

Anyway, my point is that there has been a concerted effort to block wage growth in this country. Now we're in this predicament for no other reason than the sheer greed of your average australian.

[Bayson]

Rent vs buy will always be debated but history paints a one sided scorecard.

A friend i know about 15 years ago got married and said she would initially rent and then buy. That was 15 years ago and she fell into the rent trap, still rents shifting from place to place depending upon her landlords wishes.

I caught up with her a few weeks ago and topic of house prices come up. She was red faced. This topic was like a red flag to a bull as she knows everyone else made their money. She was actually in a position back then to buy a house too but her husband thought he knew better, but the housing market has left them for dead.

My advice today was still to get in, you gotta jump in somewhere. otherwise she would just continue to be left even further behind.

Fast forward another 15 years, does anyone think a renter will be better off?

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by Bayson

Fast forward another 15 years, does anyone think a renter will be better off?

We rented for about 10 years then paid cash for our house at 42. Got a mortgage for about 30% to 'prove' to the banking system our reliability, just in case, then transferred the mortgage to an offset account type which sits as fully paid. In case we want some cash back for another deposit above whats left, back renting again OS while the first one is being rented paying for a reasonable percentage of our rent here overseas.
Im a firm believer that renting long term is financially beneficial over bying early. as long as you don't want to decorate, or need the capital improvement, and are disciplined to save the balance between renting and a mortgage. Another plus I've always lived city side or closer.
We have renovated our Australian house before putting it up for rent with fully fitted kitchen, solar, air and heat to all living spaces, new flooring, replastered, repainted, skirtings and architraves throughout, repointed, gardens, and insulation, so should also benefit from capital growth if we decide we have to sell to buy here. All of savings accumulated while renting.
I don't believe we would be in this position if we had bought at 20 years old.

JP

[Franco Cozzo]

Theres economic troubles abound already, people are tightening up on spending spondoolies.

I've noticed the auto repair sector are hardly buying parts from their suppliers, all the workshops in the SE Suburbs of Melbourne I sell to are all complaining about it being slow and the last 6 months being crap.

October, November, December and January are usually peak periods in my game, last year/this year it was the worst its ever been, people driving around with problems instead of fixing their cars and everyone else I spoke to said similar.

[theunfairadvant]

I know in my younger years that the pension and super can't help you retire and get the lifestyle that I want,
that's why i start investing in properties in Sydney, Mel and Brissy.

The rental is good and i have never ever look back now,
my life is still the same nothing have change.

Never ever trust what you read and the housing will never ever bubble if you were to buy or invest in property
for the long term as every 7 to 10 years property prices double or come close to double and this have been a fact.

[FTE217]

Its a vicious circle And isn't it life.
No matter the decade era it is what it is.
How would could it get any better fellas/gals seriously ?
Think about it - todays Govs can't change the course as once it could, once upon a time we were isolated so to speak, back in the day is was simpler, we were dying to be part of the rest of the world, now part of the world is/has come and with that life is changing drastically.
That wonderful saying - be careful what you wish for, it sure did arrive.
Now people biatch,complain and to be honest what can you do about it ? people biatched before as well.
Well, the Gov ain't gonna change any course because it can't, well unless the global market makes a sudden shift.
Reserve Bank imo are scared but to sit as it is for now.
So, just get on with it - if there is ever a time to just look after yourself and future this is it.

leesa does make a point, us aussies have been greedy and have always looked for the easy buck BUT tell me that isn't done anywhere else in the world ?! so it isn't fair putting blame on ordinary aussies for most are looking after themselves for blame the Govs all we want but who put them there in the first place lol.......
Yep Mans worst traits keep taking chunks from us law abiding over taxed citizens.
As I said, just get on with it - Mal said Life wasn't meant to be easy haha.
Want easy, want less.
Makes sense.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by FTE217

Its a vicious circle And isn't it life.
No matter the decade era it is what it is.

Its never been this bad. I bang my head on my desk whenever anyone mentions the high interest rates of 89 as if they're comparing apples with aples...

[FTE217]

Originally Posted by b0son

Its never been this bad. I bang my head on my desk whenever anyone mentions the high interest rates of 89 as if they're comparing apples with aples...

The point I'm saying what's going to change mate !
I never said anything of long ago interest rates but that it's never easy but unless your born with a silver spoon.
Banging your head just adds more headache no

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by b0son

Its never been this bad. I bang my head on my desk whenever anyone mentions the high interest rates of 89 as if they're comparing apples with aples...

There is some truth in this - the high interest rates didn't last more than 6 years whereas high house prices are seemingly here to stay.

I couldn't make any inroad on my mortgage back then, but I could afford to buy a house initially. It's the reverse situation for many now.

Just jump in, any way you can. It will hurt like hell but don't still be a victim 20 years from now.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by FairmontGS

I couldn't make any inroad on my mortgage back then, but I could afford to buy a house initially. It's the reverse situation for many now.

Something few consider. Interest rates may be lower, but the house is far more as a % of income. Trying to get a deposit together is way harder, with prices often rising faster than people can save.

Originally Posted by FTE217

Its a vicious circle And isn't it life.
No matter the decade era it is what it is.
How would could it get any better fellas/gals seriously ?
Think about it - todays Govs can't change the course as once it could, once upon a time we were isolated so to speak, back in the day is was simpler, we were dying to be part of the rest of the world, now part of the world is/has come and with that life is changing drastically.

Well, the Gov ain't gonna change any course because it can't, well unless the global market makes a sudden shift.
Reserve Bank imo are scared but to sit as it is for now.

leesa does make a point, us aussies have been greedy and have always looked for the easy buck BUT tell me that isn't done anywhere else in the world ?! so it isn't fair putting blame on ordinary aussies for most are looking after themselves for blame the Govs all we want but who put them there in the first place lol.......

To be fair... I did say that they were chasing the easy buck at any cost... even if it means stiffing every generation who is born after yours.
When "chasing the easy buck" results in what we have today, I personally think that you have to be almost morally bankrupt to willingly do that to others whether those "others" are perfect strangers, your kids or your kids' kids.

I don't think that is done everywhere else in the world. Actually, maybe except for China where they repeatedly chase the easy buck by doing things like selling melamine-tainted baby formula to falsely prop up protein content in lab tests. That one caused deaths of children and the people behind it were executed.

The housing industry obviously isn't quite as serious as that but what has happened here has still had quite an effect on the lives of the younger generations and will change the future of our Country. Expensive housing results in people waiting longer to leave home and start renting (if they ever do), it results in people holding off having kids until they're older... which results in increased numbers of abnormalities like downs syndrome which has knock-on effects for the rest of the country in terms of $$ care required for that child's life.

As for the government not being able to do anything, they absolutely could have done something the moment they saw it happening. Instead they sat back and marveled at the dollars that it was bringing in and how it made our country seem rich on paper. Look at how many politicians own investment houses. They have been grooming the system because their own bloody snouts are in the trough! Why would they want to change it when they themselves are profiting from it?!

The next logical step was for other countries to notice how our housing market was going up and so overseas investors started buying our houses to offshore their money in a more stable market than their own country, the government AGAIN didn't step in. They just gobbled that **** up and let it happen. Why would they want to stop it?

That just compounded the problem because those overseas investors weren't actually interested in renting out those houses, they just bought it to park their funds in a more financially-stable country. So the removal of those houses as rentable properties caused even less supply of houses in our country with already such a high demand that we couldn't satisfy.

Did the government step in THEN? **** no! Allowing overseas investors to buy - but not rent out - houses had a knock-on effect of driving up the prices of homes even more because the supply kept being reduced. With so many pollies having a vested interest in their own personal property portfolio, why would they get involved and stop it? It's quite the opposite - it made them happy as a pig in mud because it increased the value and equity in their own properties.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-2...etails/8453782

David Gillespie has EIGHTEEN investment properties. That's eighteen families forced to rent houses at inflated prices. Barry O'sullivan has 33.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-2...estors/8454978

The politicians charged with tackling the thorny issue of spiralling house prices are among the nation's most aggressive property investors, an analysis by the ABC has revealed.

The 226 individuals own 525 properties between them and about half of them own investment properties.

That means many of our politicians have a very personal interest in any changes to negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount.

Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. In my view it's just as bad as insider trading and should be illegal for politicians to profit from the systems that they've shaped.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politi...20-gvp2g5.html

When this article was printed it began with the sentence "When Fairfax Media asked MPs to talk about their investment properties, an email went out telling them not to cooperate". That particular line has since been removed and every copy of the article that I can find has been scrubbed of it. It's now only visible in old copies of google cache.

The government won't fix this. They have too much of a vested interest in it themselves.

[FTE217]

Originally Posted by leesa

To be fair... I did say that they were chasing the easy buck at any cost... even if it means stiffing every generation who is born after yours.
When "chasing the easy buck" results in what we have today, I personally think that you have to be almost morally bankrupt to willingly do that to others whether those "others" are perfect strangers, your kids or your kids' kids.

I don't think that is done everywhere else in the world. Actually, maybe except for China where they repeatedly chase the easy buck by doing things like selling melamine-tainted baby formula to falsely prop up protein content in lab tests. That one caused deaths of children and the people behind it were executed.

The housing industry obviously isn't quite as serious as that but what has happened here has still had quite an effect on the lives of the younger generations and will change the future of our Country. Expensive housing results in people waiting longer to leave home and start renting (if they ever do), it results in people holding off having kids until they're older... which results in increased numbers of abnormalities like downs syndrome which has knock-on effects for the rest of the country in terms of $$ care required for that child's life.

As for the government not being able to do anything, they absolutely could have done something the moment they saw it happening. Instead they sat back and marveled at the dollars that it was bringing in and how it made our country seem rich on paper. Look at how many politicians own investment houses. They have been grooming the system because their own bloody snouts are in the trough! Why would they want to change it when they themselves are profiting from it?!

The next logical step was for other countries to notice how our housing market was going up and so overseas investors started buying our houses to offshore their money in a more stable market than their own country, the government AGAIN didn't step in. They just gobbled that **** up and let it happen. Why would they want to stop it?

That just compounded the problem because those overseas investors weren't actually interested in renting out those houses, they just bought it to park their funds in a more financially-stable country. So the removal of those houses as rentable properties caused even less supply of houses in our country with already such a high demand that we couldn't satisfy.

Did the government step in THEN? **** no! Allowing overseas investors to buy - but not rent out - houses had a knock-on effect of driving up the prices of homes even more because the supply kept being reduced. With so many pollies having a vested interest in their own personal property portfolio, why would they get involved and stop it? It's quite the opposite - it made them happy as a pig in mud because it increased the value and equity in their own properties.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-2...etails/8453782

David Gillespie has EIGHTEEN investment properties. That's eighteen families forced to rent houses at inflated prices. Barry O'sullivan has 33.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-2...estors/8454978



Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse. In my view it's just as bad as insider trading and should be illegal for politicians to profit from the systems that they've shaped.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politi...20-gvp2g5.html

When this article was printed it began with the sentence "When Fairfax Media asked MPs to talk about their investment properties, an email went out telling them not to cooperate". That particular line has since been removed and every copy of the article that I can find has been scrubbed of it. It's now only visible in old copies of google cache.

The government won't fix this. They have too much of a vested interest in it themselves.

I'm just responding to your part quoting my post.
In bold, do you really think so ? I can't agree I'm afraid.
and do you really see it that way regards to the portion of Mum n Dad investors that have worked hard to get in that position are intentionally are dinking their kids kids of kids etcetc....seriously that is a dark way to look at people in general imo.