Society/Culture Australian Property Prices to Crash?

Remove this Banner Ad

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
Of course there's issues with it. It's a massive shift in thinking. But what we're doing currently is not sustainable.

Companies sign up knowing its free rent for a fixed term only. Once a city is established the free market will drive rents as it does currently.

Low cost accommodation for the poor? Where are thye going to build that? There's no space inner city, so it's going to need to be a ghetto out near Drouin where there's land but no jobs.

It's insane that 40% of our population lives in 2 cities in a country this big.
this is why I suggested Government provide significant tax incentives for people to move away from Major cities.
 

FRUMPY

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2006
22,099
23,576
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Say they remove the ability to buy more than 1 investment property and negative gearing as per some people's ideas on here, how much do you think a house you cant currently afford in say, Ivanhoe or Brunswick or wherever etc wil be available for in say 5 or 10 years time? more or less than now?
 

Royal Flush

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 14, 2008
7,844
6,172
Brisbane
AFL Club
North Melbourne
I have a house so doesnt help me. But cutting immigration to sensible levels would help with house prices, the environment, the growing congestion in cities etc. Just because immigration has been beneficial in the past doesnt mean high immigration levels are good now.

On SM-G570F using BigFooty.com mobile app
How will it help the environment? These people still exist on the planet.
The reason why Australia has become so prosperous and will continue so, is because there is a queue of hundreds of thousands of families all around the world whose ultimate prefered destination is Australia.
We let in 150-180k of these people, who sell up in their country of origin and bring their prosperity here.
We are in a fortunate position , because our criteria for selection is high.
Yes the downside is an impact and demand for housing. But what everbody must realise, is the quality of life we have as a result means we are all better off.
Plus the humanitarian aspect and global responsibility we have to immigrants who are fleeing poverty and war.
(give me a Bahn mi over a sausage roll with tomato sauce any day of the week)

do you see what im getting at? Its very self centred and selfish to want otherwise, for the sake of affrodablity within a 15km arch of the CBD.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
64,863
120,019
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
this is why I suggested Government provide significant tax incentives for people to move away from Major cities.
politically that cannot be done

regardless of tax rate, you only move somewhere if you are likely to get work. That means its WFH peeps mainly taking up the offer, and these are peeps on decent incomes (usually). Its an upper class tax cut by default

intent makes sense, but it needs to get through parliament
 

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
politically that cannot be done

regardless of tax rate, you only move somewhere if you are likely to get work. That means its WFH peeps mainly taking up the offer, and these are peeps on decent incomes (usually). Its an upper class tax cut by default

intent makes sense, but it needs to get through parliament
of course it needs to get through parliament?

but it can be done - obviously you limit the tax brackets it applies too. But if it means more people move out of major cities I think its a good thing. Where people live industry follows.
 

Royal Flush

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 14, 2008
7,844
6,172
Brisbane
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Say they remove the ability to buy more than 1 investment property and negative gearing as per some people's ideas on here, how much do you think a house you cant currently afford in say, Ivanhoe or Brunswick or wherever etc wil be available for in say 5 or 10 years time? more or less than now?
They wont tell you, they wont say, because they dont know or if they do some basic research will learn it undermines their whole premise.
Because those buzz terms, are Meme politics for the dummies.
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
64,863
120,019
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
of course it needs to get through parliament?

but it can be done - obviously you limit the tax brackets it applies too. But if it means more people move out of major cities I think its a good thing. Where people live industry follows.
if you limit it to low income earners, you kill the pool of people who this would apply for.

short term stuff like this wont change migration patterns. you would need to do something extreme (and expensive).

This is not my plan (2 mins of thought just to get an example), but you need a permanent non-discriminatory approach to this that caters to both the labour resource and business

1) waive all payroll taxes for firms based more than 100km outside Melbourne and Sydney CBD

2) waive stamp duty and land taxes on all residential housing blocks under 1000sqm outside greater sydney and melbourne

3) increase GST by applying it on all goods and services

4) put a legislated planning ban on expansion of greater sydney and melbourne beyond current boundaries



and if you're doing all of this:

5) high speed rail link from brisbane to melbourne (via newcastle, sydney, canberra, wodonga)
 

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
if you limit it to low income earners, you kill the pool of people who this would apply for.

short term stuff like this wont change migration patterns. you would need to do something extreme (and expensive).

This is not my plan (2 mins of thought just to get an example), but you need a permanent non-discriminatory approach to this that caters to both the labour resource and business

1) waive all payroll taxes for firms based more than 100km outside Melbourne and Sydney CBD

2) waive stamp duty and land taxes on all residential housing blocks under 1000sqm outside greater sydney and melbourne

3) increase GST to 10% and apply it on all goods and services

4) put a legislated planning ban on expansion of greater sydney and melbourne beyond current boundaries
these are pretty decent ideas. I still think investors need more limitation. Like what they are doing in New Zealand atm.
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
64,863
120,019
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
these are pretty decent ideas. I still think investors need more limitation. Like what they are doing in New Zealand atm.
investors are not the issue. they are not buying the properties first home owners are after.

the issue is competition. when you rock up to an auction and it has 50+ bidders, they are not investors
 

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
investors are not the issue. they are not buying the properties first home owners are after.

the issue is competition. when you rock up to an auction and it has 50+ bidders, they are not investors
Yes. They are.

There have been numerous properties for Example in the Hills District in Sydney priced in the 1.1m to 1.4 million range (First Home Buyer Range) which have sold and then 1 month later they have for lease signs out the front.

There are plenty of Investors taking advantage of people wanting to move out from expensive inner city rentals to houses where they have more space to WFH.

Don't kid yourself that only first home buyers and upgraders are going to these auctions. investors certainly aren't the only problem, but they are very much part of it.

I know this because like I said before my Parents and my Wife's Parents are investors who are doing this exact thing. Targeting cheaper properties in the burbs that they cant rent out and NG.
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
64,863
120,019
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
Yes. They are.

There have been numerous properties for Example in the Hills District in Sydney priced in the 1.1m to 1.4 million range (First Home Buyer Range) which have sold and then 1 month later they have for lease signs out the front.

There are plenty of Investors taking advantage of people wanting to move out from expensive inner city rentals to houses where they have more space to WFH.

Don't kid yourself that only first home buyers and upgraders are going to these auctions. They certainly aren't the only problem, but they are very much part of it.

I know this because like I said before my Parents and my Wife's Parents are investors who are doing this exact thing.
so a handful is enough to move an entire market? no.

again, for the 15th time. Population in melbourne rose 50% over the last 20 years. And thats excluding those who live outside melbourne on the train corridors. thats 1.7m million people needing homes in a land area thats unchanged. Its demand from this population, not investors that is the issue.

you could ban all property investment tomorrow, and guess what, prices wouldnt fall. reason being the demand that remains still exceeds supply. its econ 101
 

FRUMPY

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2006
22,099
23,576
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Yes. They are.

There have been numerous properties for Example in the Hills District in Sydney priced in the 1.1m to 1.4 million range (First Home Buyer Range) which have sold and then 1 month later they have for lease signs out the front.

There are plenty of Investors taking advantage of people wanting to move out from expensive inner city rentals to houses where they have more space to WFH.

Don't kid yourself that only first home buyers and upgraders are going to these auctions. investors certainly aren't the only problem, but they are very much part of it.

I know this because like I said before my Parents and my Wife's Parents are investors who are doing this exact thing. Targeting cheaper properties in the burbs that they cant rent out and NG.
I find it funny you say 1.1m-14m is the first home buyer range......i think i see the problem with people unable to get into the market....
 

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
so a handful is enough to move an entire market? no.

again, for the 15th time. Population in melbourne rose 50% over the last 20 years. And thats excluding those who live outside melbourne on the train corridors. thats 1.7m million people needing homes in a land area thats unchanged. Its demand from this population, not investors that is the issue.

you could ban all property investment tomorrow, and guess what, prices wouldnt fall. reason being the demand that remains still exceeds supply. its econ 101
you keep thinking i'm saying investors are the only problem, I have said ******* 10 times they are not the only problem, THEY ARE JUST PART OF IT. getting frustrating.

Yes there is over population occurring. This is why I'm suggesting investors are limited to the amount of properties they are allowed to own. This frees up stock, more stock means, less demand which means lower prices. Less competition means lower prices. NZ have just removed investor tax benefits, they get it.

If we roll this out in Melbourne/Sydney, is it going to fic the problem over night? No it wont. but it is a simple solution to help stem the crazy price increases, obviously yes, other macro and micro economic factors also need to be implemented.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
I find it funny you say 1.1m-14m is the first home buyer range......i think i see the problem with people unable to get into the market....
I bought my first home with a 280k deposit? My wife and I started saving in 2012 and bought in 2016.

Literally all my friends have had similar deposit amounts when they bought their first home.

1.1 - 1.4 is certainly within reach for first home buyers with low interest rates. Especially considering the AVERAGE Sydney home is over 1.2m
 

FRUMPY

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2006
22,099
23,576
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
I bought my first home with a 280k deposit? My wife and I started saving in 2012 and bought in 2016.

Literally all my friends have had similar deposit amounts when they bought their first home.

1.1 - 1.4 is certainly within reach for first home buyers with low interest rates. Especially considering the AVERAGE Sydney home is over 1.2m
Good on you, but people around here complain they cant get a deposit for $600k+ house and you help me prove that its easily achievable
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
64,863
120,019
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
you keep thinking i'm saying investors are the only problem, I have said ******* 10 times they are not the only problem, THEY ARE JUST PART OF IT. getting frustrating.

Yes there is over population occurring. This is why I'm suggesting investors are limited to the amount of properties they are allowed to own. This frees up stock, more stock means, less demand which means lower prices. Less competition means lower prices. NZ have just removed investor tax benefits, they get it.

If we roll this out in Melbourne/Sydney, is it going to fic the problem over night? No it wont. but it is a simple solution to help stem the crazy price increases, obviously yes, other macro and micro economic factors also need to be implemented.
It won't do that. Existing purchases will be grandfathered, and it will only eftect new stock

Also you just killed the developer market (who redevelop single lots into multiple units), which further restricts supply.

As an investor, here is what we want:

1) new builds, so we get the off the plan stamp duty saving
2) low maintenance

Above is why investors love apartments. Good tax breaks, easy to get tenants, low maitenance

3) property that you can redevelop to improve the capital value
4) property you can subdivide so you can sell one unit and rent out the rest

Buying a house in truganina is a pain in the arse. If something goes wrong it's expensive, and I have a cheap rental to pay for it


Your ban on investors will make you feel good, but it won't do sh*t for housing affordability.
 

iluvparis

Premium Platinum
Apr 1, 2005
39,433
32,291
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Calgary Flames, Man Utd
I bought my first home with a 280k deposit? My wife and I started saving in 2012 and bought in 2016.

Literally all my friends have had similar deposit amounts when they bought their first home.

1.1 - 1.4 is certainly within reach for first home buyers with low interest rates. Especially considering the AVERAGE Sydney home is over 1.2m
That's great but the average first home owner couple is not saving 70k per year.
 

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
That's great but the average first home owner couple is not saving 70k per year.
Then they are doing something wrong. We saved just over 50k a year between us for 5 years to get our deposit, if you average it out. We were 23 when we started saving. We obviously started out on less money after Graduating Uni but we steadily increased.

The Average Income in Australia is 88k. As a couple that's circa 180K.

Saving 50k of this is easily achievable. Yes you need need to make sacrifices along the way but really, its not that hard.
 
Last edited:

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
It won't do that. Existing purchases will be grandfathered, and it will only eftect new stock

Also you just killed the developer market (who redevelop single lots into multiple units), which further restricts supply.

As an investor, here is what we want:

1) new builds, so we get the off the plan stamp duty saving
2) low maintenance

Above is why investors love apartments. Good tax breaks, easy to get tenants, low maitenance

3) property that you can redevelop to improve the capital value
4) property you can subdivide so you can sell one unit and rent out the rest

Buying a house in truganina is a pain in the arse. If something goes wrong it's expensive, and I have a cheap rental to pay for it


Your ban on investors will make you feel good, but it won't do sh*t for housing affordability.
How does banning investors from buying free standing homes (NCC Class 1 Buildings) kill the developer market? If your saying that investors aren't even the people buying these houses? Very confusing.

I'm only talking about limiting investors from buying multiple Class 1 Buildings, AKA free Standing Homes.

I can kind of see now why your so opposed to my idea now......
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
64,863
120,019
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
How does banning investors from buying free standing homes (NCC Class 1 Buildings) kill the developer market? If your saying that investors aren't even the people buying these houses? Very confusing.

I'm only talking about limiting investors from buying multiple Class 1 Buildings, AKA free Standing Homes.

I can kind of see now why your so opposed to my idea now......
You get stamp duty savings on new builds, not existing. This is a big factor for most investors
 

Deliverance

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 19, 2011
12,290
18,136
MCG
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Say they remove the ability to buy more than 1 investment property and negative gearing as per some people's ideas on here, how much do you think a house you cant currently afford in say, Ivanhoe or Brunswick or wherever etc wil be available for in say 5 or 10 years time? more or less than now?
SQM researched ~10 percent drop in property values with ALP's grandfathering of negative gearing.
 

HirdsTheWord

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Jun 19, 2014
6,956
7,500
AFL Club
Essendon
You get stamp duty savings on new builds, not existing. This is a big factor for most investors
That might be true, but there are still significant amount of investors buying existing dwellings both historically and continually, and using means like NG to get tax benefits, then leasing them out. This is where I see the issue specifically. Again not going to fix the whole problem but it will help stem the issue some what.

Thinking that investors are not competing for the same properties as first home buyers is just not correct. Especially in todays market.
 

Royal Flush

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 14, 2008
7,844
6,172
Brisbane
AFL Club
North Melbourne
That's hard to believe and a bit of pork barrelling.
It's kind of impossible really.
When 60% of australia's residential investment portfolio is neutral and or cash flow positive.

Do you kids deliberately oversight facts?
SQM researched ~10 percent drop in property values with ALP's grandfathering of negative gearing.
On Pixel 4a (5G) using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad