Re: The totally off-topic thread
Yet today, two people on average salaries can't really afford an average house
Never use average, use median. If you ever see someone using avg for some comparison then you know it is generally 'post-truth' aka misleading.
Simple example: 5 houses sold @ 400K, 420K, 450K, 460K and 5,800K
Median price = 450K
Avg price = 1,506K
Which is more representative of the prices? Median = middle figure - has the same number of observations above the number as below it.
Part of the problem is that most people have an 'arithmetic' brain not geometric.
Confused???
Many when asked "If you make 15% on your money a year for 4 years then how much have you made?" answer 60% (a private survey run by a fund mgmt house annually, > 70-80% result each year).
The reality is 75%. They add the figures not compound them.
Switch to the property market.
Look at Sydney for example. Most Expensive/ most popular suburbs have not really changed since the late 1950s or early 60s. Harbourside or beach-side areas. The land area in those suburbs has not increased as curiously enough these were often the same suburbs that were first settled in the 1850-70s.
However the population of Sydney has gone up significantly.
Surprisingly, the land area available for housing in the inner-Sydney ring has actually FALLEN since then?
Why? Toll roads, motor ways, road widening, some hospital/University/TAFE/medical practises/pre-schools/daycare/schools.
With a smaller land area available for housing AND the 1960s medium/high rise that was already added to them (Zetland anyone, Blues Point Tower etc etc) have meant that the ease of adding more high rise to infrastructure constrained areas is lacking DESPITE WHAT THE DEVELOPERS/lobbyists/donors may say.
Did you know that in the early 2000s 5 of the top 10 donors to both major political parties were?:
- Leightons
- Lend Lease
- Meriton
- Mirvac
- Westfield
If 12% of a significantly smaller population could live in these areas in the 1960s then with a population significantly greater (and a much higher proportion of 'empty' houses/units today as bolt holes from China predominantly) then the percentage is now around 5%.
A bit like the price of a bottle of 1972 Grange being more expensive than a 2015 bottle. Time for a political witch hunt on Grange prices as well...
vs London or New York?
Even before the GFC - you could buy a house 15 km out of New York for less than a house on a smaller parcel of land in Sydney, 20 km out, 30km out etc. Commuting times and frequency of train service were significantly better for NY than Sydney as well.
Very similar result in the UK with London, except within the 5km circle but arguably Sydney waterfront homes also beat out all but three sales in that circle.
Difference is that those Govts do not seem to be ruled, to the same extent, by their donors. Google London Cross rail and see how for a lower price per km London is tunneling under central London with less than 5cm clearances vs existing tunnels and stations than the above ground CSELR is being done in Sydney above ground.
One major difference is the capacity of the London is above 50,000 passengers/hour (targeting above 34 trains one way/hours, allowing for trains to be 2 carriages longer than present, travelling on avg 4-5 times faster than the CSELR).
The CSELR will carry at 'crush capacity' around 6,750 with 15/hour possibly (not feasible actually) 18.5 in the 2030s.
There's a lot more going on to cause the 'crisis' than reaches the public domain.