Australian Housing Affordability Discussion

[whatmeworry]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

But I will concede one point. The only people who have had it easy the past 20+ years is those benefitting from obscene executive salaries. I still do not understand how these executive salaries got out of control in such a way. If your best employee is worth ~$150,000 then the CEO should only be worth $300,000 max. Not more.

That is because the 1% have conned the populous and governments into passing laws to make them richer. Trump is conning the American population that he is anti-establishment, but if elected he will personally pocket a $1.4 million tax cut per year and his family collectively, potentially 7 billion less in tax.

In the United States, CEOs make 300 times what their workers make. That is simply immoral and must be dealt with.

https://twitter.com/sensanders/status/685824738933997568

Australian Human rights commissioner had this to say, way back in 1999.

IF there’s one generation to blame for Australia’s social problems, it’s the baby boomers.

That was the controversial verdict of Australia’s Human Rights Commissioner way back in 1999, and it’s one he stands by today.
As younger Australians struggle with rising house prices and HECS debts, Chris Sidoti, who headed the commission under John Howard between 1995-2000, once famously labelled the generation born between 1946-1961 “the most selfish generation in history”.
They’d “refused to pay their share of tax”, been given a “free ride” through tertiary education and were guilty of imposing enormous debt burdens on those who came after them, most notably through the HECS debt devised by boomer politicians.
Fifteen years on, Mr Sidoti says “the chickens are coming home to roost”.
“I don’t think there’s been a generation like this that has been so unwilling to pay a fair share of taxation to ensure everyone in the community the support that’s required and the services that are needed,” he told The Daily Telegraph in 1999, acknowledging that he himself was a baby boomer.
“We are now the people who are in positions of influence with the media, government, business and most walks of life, and it we are to say there are people in Australia who aren’t doing well, I think we have to look at ourselves as the people who are responsible for that.
“Young people are entering the workforce debt-ridden.”
This week, when asked if he stood by his comments, he was quick to answer.



“Yes,” he said, remembering them as “the most controversial” remarks he’s ever delivered.
“Things have changed in 15 years but I stand by my views about the stinginess of my generation,” he told news.com.au.

House prices, HECS: Are baby boomers to blame for GenY struggles?

 

[Pushka]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Oh. Well. If he says us baby boomers are sponges then it must be true. Wonder what his super payout is?

 

[drron]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

So your source is the opinion of a human rights lawyer.
So I regard it as the same as an opinion of any other citizen and in no way adding any weight to your opinion.

 

[JohnK]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Are we talking in Zimbabwean Dollars are we?

I wish they were getting paid in Zimbabwean dollars.

 

[RAM]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

'The more I practise the luckier I get.'

My parents and grandparents never owned a home. They just could never afford it. I was the first one in the family to get a Uni degree. First one to own a home. Not sure why the pity goes with the current generation.

There has been a major shift in the 'collective' speak pushed by certain interest groups such as:

• Media
• Political donors
• Lobbyists
• Banking/Finance (loans are good, excessive loans are better!)
• Property Developers (why buy tomorrow when the price will be higher and my profit will be less?)
• Shopping centre operators etc

The above list is not exclusive - time limits completeness.

The advent of credit card issuing market share fights coinciding with changes to the national/state education standards/approach seemed to generate the perfect storm that produced;
"I should be able to buy a 3 bedroom house in the same area (street) as my parents and have a new car, big(ger) screen TV, air con, overseas holidays, 2 car garage WHEN I've just left school - it is just so UNFAIR!"

 

[Pushka]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

There has been a major shift in the 'collective' speak pushed by certain interest groups such as:

• Media
• Political donors
• Lobbyists
• Banking/Finance (loans are good, excessive loans are better!)
• Property Developers (why buy tomorrow when the price will be higher and my profit will be less?)
• Shopping centre operators etc

The above list is not exclusive - time limits completeness.

The advent of credit card issuing market share fights coinciding with changes to the national/state education standards/approach seemed to generate the perfect storm that produced;
"I should be able to buy a 3 bedroom house in the same area (street) as my parents and have a new car, big(ger) screen TV, air con, overseas holidays, 2 car garage WHEN I've just left school - it is just so UNFAIR!"

My first home. Built from scratch. No carpets - masonry board. One second hand TV. No curtains - we used sheets. The bed was my Aunty's second hand one. New fridge and washing machine as wedding presents. No airconditioning. The garden? We still had some of the soil on the land from building excavation until we could afford to remove it. None of these things were purchased for several months into our marriage.

These days if we had a child we would probably have been reported for neglect!

 

[GarrettM]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

My first home. Built from scratch. No carpets - masonry board. One second hand TV. No curtains - we used sheets. The bed was my Aunty's second hand one. New fridge and washing machine as wedding presents. No airconditioning. The garden? We still had some of the soil on the land from building excavation until we could afford to remove it. None of these things were purchased for several months into our marriage.

These days if we had a child we would probably have been reported for neglect!

And today it would set you back about $500k.

 

[love_the_life]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

My first home. Built from scratch. No carpets - masonry board. One second hand TV. No curtains - we used sheets. The bed was my Aunty's second hand one. New fridge and washing machine as wedding presents. No airconditioning. The garden? We still had some of the soil on the land from building excavation until we could afford to remove it. None of these things were purchased for several months into our marriage.

These days if we had a child we would probably have been reported for neglect!

I remember when we got married that several of MrLtL's school friends were horrified that we had not bought a house. They had all left school, gone to work and lived at home with parents, saving their money. We had moved away from home to attend university and basically had no money.
It wasn't till we were married for several years that we could afford to buy a new house in the outer suburbs. Like Pushka, no carpets (bare boards), no drapes (had matching sheets for the windows though) no tiling. We laid the bathroom and laundry tiles and the kitchen vinyl ourselves. I do remember wall paper was all the rage and we did hang lots of it. That was the house we sold when we moved to Canberra. I don't think we made any money on it much and it was when interest rates were sky high. Canberra prices were at least $20,000 more than outer Melbourne when we moved. That was a bit of a shock but we managed somehow.
Son is unlikely to ever own a property. Daughter has a good job and after paying us rent for a townhouse, bought it a few years back.
The idea of living at home with the parents seems to be quite popular and friends from Melb who were visiting last week have 2 still at home - a 35 yr old and a 26 yr old. I just couldn't do it!

 

[GarrettM]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I remember when we got married that several of MrLtL's school friends were horrified that we had not bought a house. They had all left school, gone to work and lived at home with parents, saving their money. We had moved away from home to attend university and basically had no money.
It wasn't till we were married for several years that we could afford to buy a new house in the outer suburbs. Like Pushka, no carpets (bare boards), no drapes (had matching sheets for the windows though) no tiling. We laid the bathroom and laundry tiles and the kitchen vinyl ourselves. I do remember wall paper was all the rage and we did hang lots of it. That was the house we sold when we moved to Canberra. I don't think we made any money on it much and it was when interest rates were sky high. Canberra prices were at least $20,000 more than outer Melbourne when we moved. That was a bit of a shock but we managed somehow.
Son is unlikely to ever own a property. Daughter has a good job and after paying us rent for a townhouse, bought it a few years back.
The idea of living at home with the parents seems to be quite popular and friends from Melb who were visiting last week have 2 still at home - a 35 yr old and a 26 yr old. I just couldn't do it!

I lived at home until I was 28. From 18-25 I did it because I worked close by and while I didn't pay rent as such, I supported my folks financially in other ways, and tried to make life easier for them while dealing with my less than helpful siblings.
When- at 25 - I realised I needed a change for my own future, I stayed at home to make my life easier while studying. I worked part time as well and still helped them with money.
I would have moved out anyway once I'd finished uni, but getting a job offer in the Goldfields first up made that choice much easier.

 

[Pushka]

The totally off-topic thread

And today it would set you back about $500k.

Not in Adelaide

But look at salary. In 1977 - $12,000.

 

[blackcat20]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I lived at home until I was 28. From 18-25 I did it because I worked close by and while I didn't pay rent as such, I supported my folks financially in other ways, and tried to make life easier for them while dealing with my less than helpful siblings.
When- at 25 - I realised I needed a change for my own future, I stayed at home to make my life easier while studying. I worked part time as well and still helped them with money.
I would have moved out anyway once I'd finished uni, but getting a job offer in the Goldfields first up made that choice much easier.

I did the same, as I was doing my PhD and had no decent income ($300 a week doesnt go far). But I did more than my fair share around the house; all the washing, gardening and half the cooking. The house we lived in was "outer suburbs" because that's what my mum could afford. Nothing fancy. It's the house we now live in (mum moved). The problem is, despite being 20km from the city, its now one of those must-have suburbs which has pushed house prices up; its not unusual for a house to go for $3m. Now how on earth does a first home buyer buy something liveable (I'm not talking brand new McMansion) in such an outer suburb when house prices have gone that stupid?

 

[love_the_life]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Not in Adelaide

But look at salary. In 1977 - $12,000.

My first year's salary as a teacher was a touch under $6000 PA - they had received a big pay rise just before I started . I remember my father working for the Vic Public Service earned about $12,000.

 

[RAM]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

My first year's salary as a teacher was a touch under $6000 PA - they had received a big pay rise just before I started . I remember my father working for the Vic Public Service earned about $12,000.

1982 entry level Commodore $12,990
2016 entry level Commodore $37,990

At least some things are relatively cheaper!

Especially if you take into account the tax scales - remember top marginal tax rate was 65% (was it not?)

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Now how on earth does a first home buyer buy something liveable (I'm not talking brand new McMansion) in such an outer suburb when house prices have gone that stupid?

Take 2-3 jobs. Stop drinking alcohol. Don't take holidays. Try vegetarianism. Consider putting off having kids, or send the kids to public schools. Do the 25/30 year plan.

I dunno.....

 

[blackcat20]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

Take 2-3 jobs. Stop drinking alcohol. Don't take holidays. Try vegetarianism. Consider putting off having kids, or send the kids to public schools. Do the 25/30 year plan.

I dunno.....

It's ok for you to put off kids, but that's not an option for us women. These things have a finite lifespan. I already work full time and run a business. Holidays are done using points. Wine is a pleasure that I enjoy. And sometimes we spend on these things because we have no hope in hell of buying a house. An unliveable knockdown in our suburb is $1.8million. How do you suppose a young person with joy family assistance with an average job can afford somewhere to live.

 

[anat0l]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

It's ok for you to put off kids, but that's not an option for us women. These things have a finite lifespan. I already work full time and run a business. Holidays are done using points. Wine is a pleasure that I enjoy. And sometimes we spend on these things because we have no hope in hell of buying a house. An unliveable knockdown in our suburb is $1.8million. How do you suppose a young person with joy family assistance with an average job can afford somewhere to live.

See, if I were a capitalist hard right wing, I'd just say that obviously, you aren't working hard enough (or your job isn't good enough, so go get a better one). This is a really common argument even now, e.g. a labourer says they are doing it tough, so that side of politics says, "well get off your bl**dy backside, go train and/or get a better job."

Of course, the other option then is find a cheaper house, whatever that means. If it means living further out, then tough bikkies.

Wine is a pleasure; it isn't essential. So if you were trying to save money, it would have to go. I'm sure there are plenty in the retirement ranks railing about how they were content with their cheap beer and so on and what's all this clap-trap about the current generation needing to buy expensive wine.

Points only pays mainly for the flights to go on vacation. It doesn't pay for the rest of the vacation (usually), which is often actually a greater proportion of the budget these days compared to then, even if you had bought the air tickets in cash. So people will still rail and say that you can still save a lot of money by not going on holiday.

The point I was trying to (facetiously) make is that you often hear about the older (retirement) generation saying that they did their hard yards (in particular those born during or just after the wars) and yet achieved so much - their own house, a career, etc. etc.. They also broadly claim that the current generation is better equipped (i.e. technology), has benefitted from great advances (not just technological) since their age, a broadly healthier economy, as well as being largely spoilt (don't have to fight as hard for things), entitled and greedy (want everything attitude), lazy (afraid to do "hard work" and wanting instant gratification) and ungrateful (don't value what they have, lack of respect).

So when someone says they can't afford a house, the older generation doesn't really care that it's because it costs $3 million. They just think you're spouting any excuse to cop out of life.

 

[penegal]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

You do live in a particularly interesting area BC20. Your suburb is more expensive than suburbs on every side (including heading into the city). This is because of the wonderful school system we have and the quality of the local school. It's one of the best government schools in the state and many prospective parents see it as an alternative to a private school.

Buy a house in your suburb = cheap education = save $20K per year, per child.

A $0.5M premium on houses makes sense when you are saving ~$240K over 8 years. Add in the time value of money, and the fact that you are likely to sell said house at an equivalently inflated price, then you would be silly NOT to live in such a suburb. Over 10 years you probably end up ahead of living down the road and paying for Wesley, Caulfield or Haileybury out of your own pocket.

 

[blackcat20]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

See, if I were a capitalist hard right wing, I'd just say that obviously, you aren't working hard enough (or your job isn't good enough, so go get a better one). This is a really common argument even now, e.g. a labourer says they are doing it tough, so that side of politics says, "well get off your bl**dy backside, go train and/or get a better job."

Of course, the other option then is find a cheaper house, whatever that means. If it means living further out, then tough bikkies.

Wine is a pleasure; it isn't essential. So if you were trying to save money, it would have to go. I'm sure there are plenty in the retirement ranks railing about how they were content with their cheap beer and so on and what's all this clap-trap about the current generation needing to buy expensive wine.

Points only pays mainly for the flights to go on vacation. It doesn't pay for the rest of the vacation (usually), which is often actually a greater proportion of the budget these days compared to then, even if you had bought the air tickets in cash. So people will still rail and say that you can still save a lot of money by not going on holiday.

The point I was trying to (facetiously) make is that you often hear about the older (retirement) generation saying that they did their hard yards (in particular those born during or just after the wars) and yet achieved so much - their own house, a career, etc. etc.. They also broadly claim that the current generation is better equipped (i.e. technology), has benefitted from great advances (not just technological) since their age, a broadly healthier economy, as well as being largely spoilt (don't have to fight as hard for things), entitled and greedy (want everything attitude), lazy (afraid to do "hard work" and wanting instant gratification) and ungrateful (don't value what they have, lack of respect).

So when someone says they can't afford a house, the older generation doesn't really care that it's because it costs $3 million. They just think you're spouting any excuse to cop out of life.

The older generation also didn't have many of the costs that younger people have today. It's all good and well to say 'go without your phone' but most people can't. Work expects you to have a phone but they aren't going to pay you for it.
When it comes to the wine and the travel you knew what? I think, no way in hell can I afford a house any time soon, so I might as well enjoy my life. You've only got one, and I refuse to spend it living like a miser surviving on basics just to have a place to live. I'm lucky to have a roof over my head, it's just unfortunate I don't own it.

As for living in an affordable suburb....did the boomers have to live 2 hours drive from work? Because if we moved to a suburb we could actually afford, I'd be spending up to four hours a day commuting. And what kind of life is that.

 

[Flashback]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

As for living in an affordable suburb....did the boomers have to live 2 hours drive from work? Because if we moved to a suburb we could actually afford, I'd be spending up to four hours a day commuting. And what kind of life is that.

I think that's more a result of urban expansion more so than anything else. Growing population and all that.

 

[GarrettM]

Re: The totally off-topic thread

I think that's more a result of urban expansion more so than anything else. Growing population and all that.

The human ponzi scheme.