Australian Housing Affordability Discussion

[medhead]

I'm guessing these were not written by those terrible baby boomers who control the mainstream press.

In that mainstream press we have Sydney more affordable than 26 years ago:

http://news.domain.com.au/domain/re...rdable-than-26-years-ago-20150617-ghoxqb.html

and Sydney pipped at the post:

http://news.domain.com.au/domain/re...but-hong-kong-ranked-no1-20150617-ghp79j.html

Good to see the comparisons....Oz property prices have plenty left in the tank :mrgreen:

Of course if we actually read the article we find that sydney isn't really pipped at the post. The quote about ranking sydney alone, instead of all of Oz, would see it at the top might be a bit of a give away.

 

[Renato1]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

I'm still honestly wondering what the fuss is about. Isn't what the Treasurer said simply true? if you want to buy a house [and the topic was Sydney housing] you DO need a good job. Unless you have the cash in hand, no financial institution will lend you the required funds without evidence you can service the loan. Like a good paying job.

Someone pls tell me what is actually problematical with what the quote says. Just straight up and down - what's incorrect?

Absolutely agree with you, there is nothing incorrect with what the Treasurer said.

The only thing "wrong" with what the Treasurer said, is that the truth hurts and it forces people to confront that truth. If you don't have a job, you won't buy a house. If your job doesn't pay enough, you won't be able to afford a house.

Although he could have given alternatives like,
a. If you have a job that doesn't pay quite so well, buy a house, live at home, sponge off your parents, and let someone else pay the house off with rent. Though some capital gains tax will be payable when sold, even if you eventually move into it and live there for a long time, or

b. Marry someone with a house, then divorce him or her, and you will own half a house.
Cheers,
Renato

 

[medhead]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

Absolutely agree with you, there is nothing incorrect with what the Treasurer said.

The only thing "wrong" with what the Treasurer said, is that the truth hurts and it forces people to confront that truth. If you don't have a job, you won't buy a house. If your job doesn't pay enough, you won't be able to afford a house.

Although he could have given alternatives like,
a. If you have a job that doesn't pay quite so well, buy a house, live at home, sponge off your parents, and let someone else pay the house off with rent. Though some capital gains tax will be payable when sold, even if you eventually move into it and live there for a long time, or

b. Marry someone with a house, then divorce him or her, and you will own half a house.
Cheers,
Renato

Actually his advice was wrong. A few of his defenders here have already given alternative versions that actually address all the issues that he completely ignored. His advice was simplistic nonsense.

 

[alieninperth]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

Having read the trasnscript, but only seen snippets of the footage, I would agree that there was nothing inherintly wrong with what the Treasurer said. However his delivery was off. Mr Hockey's style of delivery can be a bit confrontational or advaserial. He is not particularly good at expressing empathy.

This, coupled with the lack of action or decent policy on this particular issue can lead some to believe that he just doesn't care/get it. I don't think this is true but there you go.

In term of housing affordabilty over the past 10 years the following programmes have been cancelled at the Federal level.
Housing Affordability Fund (for private developers to help pay for infrastructure works. (not renewed/cancelled under the PMship of K Rudd (first))) Not sure of the merits of this scheme as I have not been able to see the corrolation between the investment by the Federal Govt and the end selling price of land/property.
National Rental Affordability Scheme (introduced by K Rudd (first) and cancelled by T Abbott). Clearly some serious issues with this scheme but it did have merit. Interesting to note that this was not a housing affordability scheme per say. It was established to support the residential building sector during the GFC and used housing as a mechanism to do this.
First Home Buyers savings accounts (I believe that it was cancelled yesterday by T Abbott with support from the ALP). Here the arguement was with poor take up (only 50,000 people have accounts). However, it was costing the govt. $134/$135m over the forward estimates (4/5 years). Lets compare that to -ve gearing and CGT offsets, in his speach on housing affordability yesterday, Senator Ludlum (Greens) has said that this would be used over 6 days. Now I haven't indepentaly checked those figures but when the Office of Budget responsibilty says that ending -ve gearing will save $42b over ten years so about $11.5m per day, then its pretty close.

I am not saying that any one party has is right but lets not pretend, as the Federal level of govt is doing, that the only solution is to reduce more land. As with all issues, especially those invloving govt, there are many, many, many, many issues that can address these issues.

 

[OATEK]

Actually I believe it had Sydney third being Hong Kong and Vancouver further down in the article.

Of course if we actually read the article we find that sydney isn't really pipped at the post. The quote about ranking sydney alone, instead of all of Oz, would see it at the top might be a bit of a give away.

 

[JessicaTam]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

Absolutely agree with you, there is nothing incorrect with what the Treasurer said.

The only thing "wrong" with what the Treasurer said, is that the truth hurts and it forces people to confront that truth. If you don't have a job, you won't buy a house. If your job doesn't pay enough, you won't be able to afford a house.

Although he could have given alternatives like,
a. If you have a job that doesn't pay quite so well, buy a house, live at home, sponge off your parents, and let someone else pay the house off with rent. Though some capital gains tax will be payable when sold, even if you eventually move into it and live there for a long time, or

b. Marry someone with a house, then divorce him or her, and you will own half a house.
Cheers,
Renato

I think it was Zsa Zsa Gabor who said she "... was a very good housekeeper. Every time she got a divorce, she kept the house".

 

[medhead]

Actually I believe it had Sydney third being Hong Kong and Vancouver further down in the article.

That was a different measure, median house price relative to median household income (whatever that means). The first measure was house price growth. The only reference was a sentence in the article but no numbers to back it up.

 

[Renato1]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

Actually his advice was wrong. A few of his defenders here have already given alternative versions that actually address all the issues that he completely ignored. His advice was simplistic nonsense.

True - he could have been more sophisticated and said "Sit on your backside, do nothing, and maybe your parents will croak it and you'll get their house, or the Government might build you one and give it to you for free, and make other tax payers pay for it".
Cheers,
Renato

 

[Renato1]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

I think it was Zsa Zsa Gabor who said she "... was a very good housekeeper. Every time she got a divorce, she kept the house".

I know of one husband who did that to his wife. My observation is that in divorce outcomes it is usually either the husband who is an outright bast##d or the wife who is an outright bi##h, that winds up getting a bigger share of the property. The nice guy or nice gal winds up coming last.
Regards,
Renato

 

[medhead]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

True - he could have been more sophisticated and said "Sit on your backside, do nothing, and maybe your parents will croak it and you'll get their house, or the Government might build you one and give it to you for free, and make other tax payers pay for it".
Cheers,
Renato

Instead he said just go get a job that pays good money. Nothing about saving, nothing about study, nothing about building a career. Get a good job that pays good money. Does he/you really think people are not already doing the job that pays the most they can get? They just magically find a new job that pays good money. It is simply unrealistic nonsense.

 

[Moody]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

The problem with housing (particularly in Sydney) is that the low interest rates are allowing people to borrow huge sums in a quite speculative market. All well and good whilst rates stay down in the basement, but when they come back up to a more neutral setting the last people on board will be screwed.

 

[NFF]

That politician is out of touch. It's might be right to get a better paying job to buy a Ferrari, however housing is a universal right.

 

[drron]

The problem with housing (particularly in Sydney) is that the low interest rates are allowing people to borrow huge sums in a quite speculative market. All well and good whilst rates stay down in the basement, but when they come back up to a more neutral setting the last people on board will be screwed.

Absolutely correct.

That politician is out of touch. It's might be right to get a better paying job to buy a Ferrari, however housing is a universal right.

I'm sorry but to own a home is hardly an universal right.

 

[whatmeworry]

Good article from Junkee analysing claims from the daily telegraph, that a young woman from Sydney has six properties. On the surface it seems that anybody can do it, but it turns out she is the daughter from a wealthy family who didn't have to put any money down as her mother was her guarantor. Plus she at 20 years old she was a policy advisor to Bronwyn Bishop.

Okaaaay, so she wasn’t exactly battling that whole time pre-home ownership — twenty-year-olds don’t get jobs as policy advisors for Bronwyn Bishop without just a smidge of who-you-know, and your average Sydney uni student would give their eyeteeth for a bit of “pocket money” courtesy of Mum and Dad to help pay rent, let alone live rent-free. But she still cobbled together the money to put a deposit on a house, right? I don’t care if your parents are running Saudi Arabia, that’s a huge achievement for any young person to pull off on their own.
Only hold on. Wait. Waaaait, what’s this now:
“Though she had around $100,000 in savings she persuaded her mother to go guarantor for $60,000 with the Belrose family home — meaning she didn’t pay any deposit at all.
Four months later she put $80,000 of her savings on her second place in Collaroy.”
So by virtue of her parent’s property wealth, Brennan was able to leapfrog the all-important deposit hurdle — the one that most people will spend decades of their lives trying to clear — and join the elite, members-only Home Ownership Club. That is slightly less impressive than the hard-luck story the Tele tried to paint — much like Drake, Brennan started from the bottom only because of a profound misunderstanding of where the bottom actually is.

The Daily Telegraph Thinks This Young Woman With Six Properties Is “Proof” That Anyone Can Do It | Junkee

 

[alieninperth]

Owning a home is housing, but housing isn't just home ownership.

 

[chelzmalee]

Good article from Junkee analysing claims from the daily telegraph that a young woman from Sydney has six properties. On the surface it seems that anybody can do it, but it turns out she is the daughter from a wealthy family who didn't have to put any money down as her mother was her guarantor. Plus she at 20 years old a policy advisor to Bronwyn Bishop.


The Daily Telegraph Thinks This Young Woman With Six Properties Is “Proof” That Anyone Can Do It | Junkee

Plus it was basically just a massive plug for her new company. Mummy and Daddy know people, much?

 

[NFF]

https://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-housing

It's just that Australia is slow in recognising human rights.

 

[drron]

And just why does NESRI have the right to tell the world what rights they have?
Yes people have a right to housing but owning that housing is a very different thing.
And who decides what adequate housing is?
Go to some of our close neighbours and their idea of adequate housing is far different from those living in our capital cities.

 

[Renato1]

Re: Housing Affordability Discussion

Instead he said just go get a job that pays good money. Nothing about saving, nothing about study, nothing about building a career. Get a good job that pays good money. Does he/you really think people are not already doing the job that pays the most they can get? They just magically find a new job that pays good money. It is simply unrealistic nonsense.

Uhhmm - it is now the treasurer's job to tell everyone the bleeding obvious that to get a good job entails studying, and building a career and also that getting a house loan involves saving money.

So you feel that the treasurer is just plain wrong because he does not go out of his way to explain the bleeding obvious? Is he supposed to say this on the off-chance that children came from a very deprived background and their parents did not tell them this, and that they still do not know this as adults?

You have a different idea of what constitutes "wrong" to my idea.
Regards,
Renato

 

[Renato1]

https://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-housing

It's just that Australia is slow in recognising human rights.

The right to Housing isn't in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Seems to me like this "Right to Housing" is something someone made up.
Regards,
Renato