Politics Centrelink

[Bombermania]

I'm not tying one to the other, only putting a cap on one relative to the other - see what I'm saying? That is, if Australian houses are for 1) housing 2) housing people who live in the country, they could only ever be relative to median income.

Really yet you write that median house prices should be in line with median wages which is what you have done in this above comment.

 

[Bombermania]

No people are investing in property, that is the reason the prices are rising

Investing in property is only part of the market, if the ALP introduce their negative gearing policies then we will still see price growth, its ultimately driven by supply and demand.

 

[RupieDupie]

Really yet you write that median house prices should be in line with median wages which is what you have done in this above comment.

Nope, I believe you have misunderstood my argument...

 

[RupieDupie]

Investing in property is only part of the market, if the ALP introduce their negative gearing policies then we will still see price growth, its ultimately driven by supply and demand.

Have people forgotten how to build houses? How could supply drop?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

OK suppose that no-one in Australia could afford a house.
Furthermore they could not afford to pay rent.

Does anyone think that housing prices would go up in such a circumstance.

Now take the same way of thinking to a less extreme situation.

 

[ShanDog]

Have people forgotten how to build houses? How could supply drop?

I'm far from an expert in this area but I have been led to understand that Australian zoning is quite restrictive and land releases are kept fairly slow on purpose?

 

[Bombermania]

OK suppose that no-one in Australia could afford a house.
Furthermore they could not afford to pay rent.

Does anyone think that housing prices would go up in such a circumstance.

Now take the same way of thinking to a less extreme situation.

If no one was willing or able to pay the asking price then the price would fall, which is why property prices are very variable.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

If no one was willing or able to pay the asking price then the price would fall, which is why property prices are very variable.

So it does stand to reason that there is a relationship between affordability ( median income ) , and housing price ( median housing price ), though obviously not a simple relationship.

You hear about a few investors who buy property and seem happy to have it sit empty, but i'm sure its a tiny minority.

 

[RupieDupie]

I'm far from an expert in this area but I have been led to understand that Australian zoning is quite restrictive and land releases are kept fairly slow on purpose?

Exactly, especially given that a certain hypothetical person, for argument's sake let's call this person Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, has an investment in property and therefore would like prices to be kept high.

 

[RupieDupie]

If no one was willing or able to pay the asking price then the price would fall, which is why property prices are very variable.

Yes, but suppose there is a person who buys property because in the future this property will be worth more, they have equity from a current property, which is worth more because people are willing to pay more for property because in the future the property will be worth more.

You see what I'm saying?

Where is the housing in that? Where is the reality? I can see the bubble though, floating away...

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Yes, but suppose there is a person who buys property because in the future this property will be worth more, they have equity from a current property, which is worth more because people are willing to pay more for property because in the future the property will be worth more.

You see what I'm saying?

Where is the housing in that? Where is the reality? I can see the bubble though, floating away...

Investing in something because its going to be worth more one day is always a bubble. Property, bitcoins, gold.

Gold is a terrific one. Most of its use , and therefore its value, is Jewellery and Investment.
If the apocalypse came , Gold would be the last thing anyone would want or need.

 

[RupieDupie]

Investing in something because its going to be worth more one day is always a bubble. Property, bitcoins, gold.

Gold is a terrific one. Most of its use , and therefore its value, is Jewellery and Investment.
If the apocalypse came , Gold would be the last thing anyone would want or need.

Yes, it would be good if the system was grounded in a reality, in the human body the system is regulated, and when the system is unregulated, we call the body "diseased" / unhealthy. For example, when cells start uncontrollably & rapidly dividing we call that cancer.

 

[RupieDupie]

I wonder what kind of chemical imbalances Turnbull has in his brain? Most people would be able to quite comfortably live off $200M, sure, one might argue they won’t be able to afford a third world country, but I find them to be over-rated.

Especially as Turnbull is seeing out a life while already 60+ at the crease, but from what I can see, Turnbull instead decided to become Prime Minister to “ensure” his property portfolio grows at the expense of the Australian public. How much will it take to satisfy him, $500M, $1B? Maybe he could make a law whereby people can take out loans for 90 years and this debt is inherited by their offspring. Surely all property would jump quite drastically in price. Inner city housing could be valued at $7M for a one bedroom flat. Australia would have a robust economy and Turnbull will be up there in value with Putin, Trump, and Jong-Un.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I wonder what kind of chemical imbalances Turnbull has in his brain? Most people would be able to quite comfortably live off $200M, sure, one might argue they won’t be able to afford a third world country, but I find them to be over-rated.

Especially as Turnbull is seeing out a life while already 60+ at the crease, but from what I can see, Turnbull instead decided to become Prime Minister to “ensure” his property portfolio grows at the expense of the Australian public. How much will it take to satisfy him, $500M, $1B? Maybe he could make a law whereby people can take out loans for 90 years and this debt is inherited by their offspring. Surely all property would jump quite drastically in price. Inner city housing could be valued at $7M for a one bedroom flat. Australia would have a robust economy and Turnbull will be up there in value with Putin, Trump, and Jong-Un.

I don't see it as that simple.
I think he's trying to keep it going until Labour get in again purely because there's much more to it than Housing prices.

Because industries such as manufacturing of consumable goods has been allowed to die we are left with:

Retail = buy a Shipping container from China and sell the contents at a markup, and complain because people use EBAY to buy the same crap without giving you your markup, while systematically using technology to employ less people.

Building

Manufacturing = make stuff for building.

Service Industry =make coffee, mow lawns and fix crap for the above.

Mining = try to find a way to mine stuff without anyone except Gina making a cent. Offshore gas liquification using foreign equipment and workers was a great start.

Financial = Try to find ways to suck the life out off all of the above.

Building goes bust... Unemployment goes through the roof .....Retail slows right down... No-one buys coffee and they mow their own laws.... the financials forclose, but no-one wants to buy the house they are auctioning. "Oh Shit " says Malcolm... "i thought we were sending kids to IT school ... so we could be like technology leaders and stuff, what do you mean they can't get a job"

 

[RupieDupie]

I don't see it as that simple.
I think he's trying to keep it going until Labour get in again purely because there's much more to it than Housing prices.

Because industries such as manufacturing of consumable goods has been allowed to die we are left with:

Retail = buy a Shipping container from China and sell the contents at a markup, and complain because people use EBAY to buy the same crap without giving you your markup, while systematically using technology to employ less people.

Building

Manufacturing = make stuff for building.

Service Industry =make coffee, mow lawns and fix crap for the above.

Mining = try to find a way to mine stuff without anyone except Gina making a cent. Offshore gas liquification using foreign equipment and workers was a great start.

Financial = Try to find ways to suck the life out off all of the above.

Building goes bust... Unemployment goes through the roof .....Retail slows right down... No-one buys coffee and they mow their own laws.... the financials forclose, but no-one wants to buy the house they are auctioning. "Oh Shit " says Malcolm... "i thought we were sending kids to IT school ... so we could be like technology leaders and stuff, what do you mean they can't get a job"

Yeah, this is all Key Stakeholders, helping out his buddies at the expense of the Australian public, this is all part and parcel of the Democratic society we live in. Apparently what a voter could do is just vote for another person and the problem will be fixed, like Tony Abbott (Bragged about how much he wanted his house worth when PM), Julia Gillard (>$2M in property), Kevin Rudd (>$2M in property), even Johnny Rotten Howard, who bought his property for $54K in the 70s had a property worth ~$2.4M back in 2007, and if he has done absolutely nothing to this property, even let it get overgrown and the electrical wiring fail, it must be worth $5M now... they all did very nicely by representing and looking after the Australian public. What a bunch of degenerates...

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Yeah, this is all Key Stakeholders, helping out his buddies at the expense of the Australian public, this is all part and parcel of the Democratic society we live in. Apparently what a voter could do is just vote for another person and the problem will be fixed, like Tony Abbott (Bragged about how much he wanted his house worth when PM), Julia Gillard (>$2M in property), Kevin Rudd (>$2M in property), even Johnny Rotten Howard, who bought his property for $54K in the 70s had a property worth ~$2.4M back in 2007, and if he has done absolutely nothing to this property, even let it get overgrown and the electrical wiring fail, it must be worth $5M now... they all did very nicely by representing and looking after the Australian public. What a bunch of degenerates...

If you actually want to live in your property , it sucks when it goes up in value.
The Council put your rates up.

The council i live in are shockers at increasing the rates at higher than the CPI.
When the shit hits the fan and they have to stop doing it, they'll choose that time to adjust the valuations so they still get more.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Never said it was easy, however if you are choosing to do it then it must be easier to the alternative of getting a job.

Again is it wrong for people to get annoyed with money wasted on people who do not want to work?

How many do not want to work? And how is it beneficial to force them into heavy compliance anyway?

The ones who don't want to work are unlikely to make good employees. Adding more applicants to every job just makes the hiring process more expensive, and with more risk of hiring a dud. If I was running a cafe, the last thing I would want is 200 unsolicited resumes shoved in my face every couple of weeks because I happen to next to a Job Network affiliate who sends people off hoping to pick up a bonus - when the job would have been filled one way or another regardless. Making more people look for work doesn't create more jobs.

Yes, there are some areas where finding a good low-skilled person is hard. For example people don't want to do fruit picking half a continent away for a two month season, where any money made is lost in travel expenses and lost again due to the cut in benefits received when you do get a few hours work.
Newstart with full rent assistance isn't enough for a single person to rent a one bedroom unit in part of a major city where a decent job market is accessible, few people would want to live like that.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I don't see it as that simple.
I think he's trying to keep it going until Labour get in again purely because there's much more to it than Housing prices.

Because industries such as manufacturing of consumable goods has been allowed to die we are left with:

Retail = buy a Shipping container from China and sell the contents at a markup, and complain because people use EBAY to buy the same crap without giving you your markup, while systematically using technology to employ less people.

Building

Manufacturing = make stuff for building.

Service Industry =make coffee, mow lawns and fix crap for the above.

Mining = try to find a way to mine stuff without anyone except Gina making a cent. Offshore gas liquification using foreign equipment and workers was a great start.

Financial = Try to find ways to suck the life out off all of the above.

Building goes bust... Unemployment goes through the roof .....Retail slows right down... No-one buys coffee and they mow their own laws.... the financials forclose, but no-one wants to buy the house they are auctioning. "Oh Shit " says Malcolm... "i thought we were sending kids to IT school ... so we could be like technology leaders and stuff, what do you mean they can't get a job"

You missed the health services sector - government will still have to pay them; they will be able to buy the houses at a much cheaper rate...

 

[Bombermania]

Investing in something because its going to be worth more one day is always a bubble. Property, bitcoins, gold.

I wouldn't call that a bubble, a bubble occurs where the price is rising despite there being little to justify it, that is why the dot.com era techies were seen as a bubble due to many of them not even turning a profit or even earning revenue yet had fast growing share prices. Prices overtime gradually move up and down, the price of an average house today would a century ago have brought you a mansion in the most expensive street.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I wouldn't call that a bubble, a bubble occurs where the price is rising despite there being little to justify it, that is why the dot.com era techies were seen as a bubble due to many of them not even turning a profit or even earning revenue yet had fast growing share prices. Prices overtime gradually move up and down, the price of an average house today would a century ago have brought you a mansion in the most expensive street.

3 centuries ago you wouldn't have found that street.
Supply/Demand.

Someone has made up some bullshit that where we've put that street is the "only" place to live.

Australia has tonnes of land.
We don't have so much infrastructure, but where these expensive streets are, its getting to the point where the infrastructure that is there is overstretched in any event.

Go to Europe and drive around, then marvel at the way we all have to clump into our state capitals.

 

[Bombermania]

3 centuries ago you wouldn't have found that street.
Supply/Demand.

Someone has made up some bullshit that where we've put that street is the "only" place to live.

Australia has tonnes of land.
We don't have so much infrastructure, but where these expensive streets are, its getting to the point where the infrastructure that is there is overstretched in any event.

Go to Europe and drive around, then marvel at the way we all have to clump into our state capitals.

Not sure where you get that idea from because Major European cities have long had wealthy areas and poor areas. Its not about the only place to live, it is just how human society has been for centuries.

I agree that Australia's lack of decentralisation is a problem and hopefully that changes as it most probably will overtime as the population rises and as property prices rise in major cities.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Not sure where you get that idea from because Major European cities have long had wealthy areas and poor areas. Its not about the only place to live, it is just how human society has been for centuries.

I agree that Australia's lack of decentralisation is a problem and hopefully that changes as it most probably will overtime as the population rises and as property prices rise in major cities.

My point is that in Australia we've developed this stupid mentality where everyone needs to live close to the CBD of a major city. We clump together like insecure little Meercats or something.

Germany has 4 times the population of Australia in much smaller Area.



Hamburg 1.7 Million
Berlin 3.5 Million
Munich 1.5 Million
Koln 1.1 Million
Frankfurt 700 000
Stutgart 600 000
...
....
20th is Muster 300 000
30th is Aachen 245 000
40th is Kassel 197 000

Sydney : 5 Million
Melbourne : 3.8 Million
Brisbane 2.3 Million
Perth : 2 Million
Adelaide : 1.3 Million
Gold Coast : 600 000
Newcastle : 400 000
Canberra : 400 000
Woolongong : 300 000
Hobart : 224 000

20th is Launceston 80 000

Only the largest cities in Europe are bigger than ours, but they have a multitude of Cities in between Hobart and Bendigo in size.
People living in smaller cities often have the option of commuting from smaller ( cheaper ) villages.
We make our own housing / infrastructure crunch by insisting that we all live in a limited number of locations.
Look at the size of Australia and tell me why we are trying to compete with Hong Kong for housing density.

 

[GreyCrow]

Some really good discussion

Supply/Demand.

Australia has tonnes of land.
We don't have so much infrastructure,

I agree that Australia's lack of decentralisation is a problem and hopefully that changes as it most probably will overtime as the population rises and as property prices rise in major cities.

My point is that in Australia we've developed this stupid mentality where everyone needs to live close to the CBD of a major city. We clump together like insecure little Meercats or something.

We make our own housing / infrastructure crunch by insisting that we all live in a limited number of locations.
Look at the size of Australia and tell me why we are trying to compete with Hong Kong for housing density.

There are many historical and financial and recent political reasons as to why this is so.

Historically Australia thrived on the sheeps back , so we had this mindset that anything outside of the cities was farmland and couldnt be touched. Farmers and graziers prospered and this merged into the political will ie the Nationals. Also the Centralisation of services through ''cost cutting'' by Governments . This narrowing leads to the financial where developers can charge a premium because the services arent anywhere else but this narrow corridor.

Don Dunstan tried in the 70s to extend Adelaides reach towards the Murraylands by developing Monarto and by extension the SE Freeway which he hoped developers and people would move along and fill up all that space to Murray Bridge/Tailem Bend. Somewhere somehow that died.

Mt Barker is the largest ''rural'' town (aside from Mt Gambier) and services have been moved away into the CBD of Adelaide.

The bigger fear is now the internet will stop ANY de-centralisation as its Governments and Service Function that creates bigger country cities

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Some really good discussion





There are many historical and financial and recent political reasons as to why this is so.

Historically Australia thrived on the sheeps back , so we had this mindset that anything outside of the cities was farmland and couldnt be touched. Farmers and graziers prospered and this merged into the political will ie the Nationals. Also the Centralisation of services through ''cost cutting'' by Governments . This narrowing leads to the financial where developers can charge a premium because the services arent anywhere else but this narrow corridor.

Don Dunstan tried in the 70s to extend Adelaides reach towards the Murraylands by developing Monarto and by extension the SE Freeway which he hoped developers and people would move along and fill up all that space to Murray Bridge/Tailem Bend. Somewhere somehow that died.

Mt Barker is the largest ''rural'' town (aside from Mt Gambier) and services have been moved away into the CBD of Adelaide.

The bigger fear is now the internet will stop ANY de-centralisation as its Governments and Service Function that creates bigger country cities

I often wonder if the Bendigo Bank has any real disadvantage being based in Bendigo rather than the capital cities.
In the olden days banks needed to frequently exchange paperwork with other firms. Other Banks, Stock Exchange, Fincance companies.
Does this still happen at all? Why?

 

[NSWCROW]

Top 5 Welfare Burdens To Distract You From How Little Tax The Daily Telegraph Has Paid

http://www.betootaadvocate.com/brea...-how-little-tax-the-daily-telegraph-has-paid/