Mega Thread The Random Thoughts Thread Part 1

[Eddie Dingle]

50%

From the Fin Review yesterday;

Affordability worsens: Moody's says mortgage repayment burden up in year to March

"Affordability deteriorated in Adelaide, to 23.2 per cent from 21.9 per cent [of monthly income]"

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

 

[El_Scorcho]

You don't have to buy a house you know, it isn't compulsory.

No, it's not compulsory, and lots of people who are in there teens and 20s in 2016 will never own a house and will pay dead rent money for the rest of their lives to increase the wealth of someone who bought their first house 30 years ago when it was much, much easier to do so and were able to leverage that massively advantaged position to buy further properties and drive up property prices.

It further entrenches the class divide and it further entrenches poverty, which is exactly why housing affordability is such an issue. Having a housing affordability problem widens the gap between rich and poor, because you have to live somewhere, which means you have to either be able to afford a place, or pay rent to someone who could.

"You don't have to buy a house" is as dumb a thing to say as "Just get your parents to front your the deposit".

50%

From the Fin Review yesterday;

Affordability worsens: Moody's says mortgage repayment burden up in year to March

"Affordability deteriorated in Adelaide, to 23.2 per cent from 21.9 per cent [of monthly income]"

Check the table on single househole income. I didn't say household income, I said average salary.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

My point isn't that it was harder then, it wasn't. My point is that you aren't the first generation to struggle but you are certainly the most vocal about it. Yes you have more mediums to whinge through but give it a rest for a second. Sit down with your parents and grandparents, great grandparents if you have them. Learn about what they struggled through.

Depressions, Wars yadda yadda it's all just boody whinge whinge with these old people eddie

 

[Andre]

You don't have to buy a house you know, it isn't compulsory.

The economy in the 80's outside housing was worse. Higher taxes, higher unemployment, childcare (haha), etc.

I'm in the middle stage of kids at school and wife at uni. Whilst paying off the mortgage and it's no fun, but there's no way I'd trade today's economy, of which housing affordability is just a part, for the 80's halcyon days.

 

[chiwigi]

You don't have to buy a house you know, it isn't compulsory.

But you do have to live somewhere and if the stock is bought by investors who keep rents high (to cover their inflated costs caused by the false market), then that is a problem.

Take a look at the buy to let situation in the UK to see where we are headed.

 

[Magus]

I love this whole attitude of "shits always been hard for everyone, why bother trying to make it better?"

 

[Andre]

But you do have to live somewhere and if the stock is bought by investors who keep rents high (to cover their inflated costs caused by the false market), then that is a problem.

Take a look at the buy to let situation in the UK to see where we are headed.

If you just remove negative gearing then rents will go up, so investors recoup their money. My ideal one would be they grandfathered existing properties and replaced negative gearing with allowing your home (not investment property) loan interest payments to be tax deductible. You'd increase the number of owner-occupiers, as buying becomes more comparable to renting, so you don't drop the floor out of the market (you'd be hard pressed to find many of the millions who have a home they live in that want it to drop in value) and make it more affordable for the owner-occupiers at the expense of future investors.

 

[chiwigi]

If you just remove negative gearing then rents will go up, so investors recoup their money. My ideal one would be they grandfathered existing properties and replaced negative gearing with allowing your home (not investment property) loan interest payments to be tax deductible. You'd increase the number of owner-occupiers so you don't drop the floor out of the market (you'd be hard pressed to find many of the millions who have a home they live in that want it to drop in value) and make it more affordable for the owner-occupiers at the expense of future investors.

Where did I say that?

We not only have negative gearing, we have rent assist as well, the whole thing is a ****ing mess, just to give the illusion of middle class wealth.

The problem is the pillars, though shaky, are still holding up (as you identify).

Only a market collapse an the subsequent removal of the prop ups will do the job, something the prop ups are desperately trying to avoid. This coupled with a revamp of the stamp duty and rates system would create a true market.

It is a false and subsidised market that makes the car industry look profitable. One that benefits very few people and at great cost to the more vulnerable.

It provides no jobs, no products, nothing apart from perceived wealth generation and indebtedness to banks.

 

[Steve Dore]

I considering investing in tulips

 

[Biggles62]

If you just remove negative gearing then rents will go up, so investors recoup their money. My ideal one would be they grandfathered existing properties and replaced negative gearing with allowing your home (not investment property) loan interest payments to be tax deductible. You'd increase the number of owner-occupiers, as buying becomes more comparable to renting, so you don't drop the floor out of the market (you'd be hard pressed to find many of the millions who have a home they live in that want it to drop in value) and make it more affordable for the owner-occupiers at the expense of future investors.

Rents will not go up if negative gearing is removed. Rents will only go up to what the market can afford. If investor/landlords put the rents up and no one can afford it then they are screwed. As it seems rents are at the top end of the scale then they could hardly move upwards.

The problem with negative gearing is that it promotes making a lose against your personal income. Higher end earners especially. By making a gain through lowering your tax rate and getting the pay off at the end when you sell the property via capital gains tax.

In a capitalist society I thought it was about making a profit. Why therefore would you get into business that is designed to make a loss by shifting your tax burden from your personal income to your investment income.

All designed to keep the property market floating along by those who are heavily invested in it.

 

[I Dont Care]

He still had his job but the bank was foreclosing on his house. The guy left a note. He was a proud man that was too embarrassed to to front his wife and children and say they had to leave.

Yes it was that simple.

The drought in '82 - '83 really affected the cost of living. The Murray was stagnant and bacteria built up. We grew tomatoes up on the Riverland, and some new disease hit us and every other grower, we had the University come grab samples and were told not to sell anything, nor take any to the Co-op. Tomatoes topped 8 dollars a kilo and nobody from the Riverland could sell any. Cash crop farms were going broke everywhere, banks were foreclosing, it happened to us. It wasn't just with tomatoes, I'm just using this as an example because it was close to home. This was a national disaster with no Govt handouts like you see these days, and set the tone for the 80's. I have never bought a house, so I can't comment about that side of things, but I have lived through both the '80's and now. The 80's was easily more tougher financially on Australians than the last 10 years has been, but I feel an 80's type recession is upon us right now

 

[Grave Danger]

I considering investing in tulips

 

[chiwigi]

I considering investing in tulips

The South Sea is where it is at. My barista told me.

 

[Jonts]

Just take away stamp duty for first home buyers regardless of new or old home
Or increase the first home owners grant (new and old homes)

 

[chiwigi]

Just take away stamp duty for first home buyers regardless of new or old home
Or increase the first home owners grant (new and old homes)

Subsidies on top of subsidies to maintain the illusion and keep the banks happy.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Just take away stamp duty for first home buyers regardless of new or old home
Or increase the first home owners grant (new and old homes)

lol I missed out on the huge old first home owners grant by like a few months, I got the tiny one that in place now. Alas, who cares.

 

[Steve Dore]

The South Sea is where it is at. My barista told me.

My hairdresser tried to talk me out of tulips and into Mississippi. What would she know

 

[Steve Dore]

Just take away stamp duty for first home buyers regardless of new or old home
Or increase the first home owners grant (new and old homes)

Didn't the introduction of the first home owners grant result in an increase in house prices?

House price spike linked to first home owners' grant

"MELBOURNE median house price soared by 30 per cent between the beginning of 2009 and the middle of last year [2010]. This extraordinary growth in prices was due to a surge in first home buyers' activity unleashed by the first home owners' grant boost. According to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, 47,449 home loans were approved for first home buyers in 2009 compared with 31,728 in 2008."

House price spike linked to first home owners' grant

 

[Jonts]

Didn't the introduction of the first home owners grant result in an increase in house prices?

House price spike linked to first home owners' grant

"MELBOURNE median house price soared by 30 per cent between the beginning of 2009 and the middle of last year [2010]. This extraordinary growth in prices was due to a surge in first home buyers' activity unleashed by the first home owners' grant boost. According to Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, 47,449 home loans were approved for first home buyers in 2009 compared with 31,728 in 2008."

House price spike linked to first home owners' grant

Any change is that is going to help buyers will create a short term bubble.

The question you should be asking is how we help the situation in 5-10-20 years

Sadly there is very little realistic options that will help in the next 1-2 years

 

[Andre]

Just take away stamp duty for first home buyers regardless of new or old home
Or increase the first home owners grant (new and old homes)

First home buyers grant does let people into the market as more can meet the deposit requirements then, but it does just bump the house prices up by around the same, so once they've bought housing affordability is still shit.

Now the market is inflated the choice is between letting it crash at least 25% to get affordability down, which screws millions of existing home owners (not just investors) or the current situation. Let it crash and that goes beyond just the house prices. There are tens of thousands of people who'd have their home as collateral for businesses, that'd risk getting called in as no longer sufficient. It'd have a huge knock on effect to employment and business bankruptcies.

The best that can be hoped for is either steady prices or a very gradual decline (1-2% a year). Governments of all persuasions have been willing to get the kudos for price rises the last 20 years, so I wouldn't expect any of them to allow a big correction.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Any change is that is going to help buyers will create a short term bubble.

The question you should be asking is how we help the situation in 5-10-20 years

Sadly there is very little realistic options that will help in the next 1-2 years

The wheel turns slowly. Will be interesting to see what happens when the boomers begin to die off and whether the families hold the properties or sell them. Things balance out, they just need small nudges in certain directions by Government policy. There is no one policy change that is going to be any sort of silver bullet, it's all the butterfly effect tier shit. Of course, as the nations population continues to grow - there aren't exactly more properties being built near the city to accommodate this, so it's only going to get worse as supply and demand gets worse - that is unless you want to live in apartments. That's just economics, not gearing or any other policy.

It's interesting seeing the different housing markets across Australia, because Adelaide fails to attract big private business, we get a workforce full of moderately well compensated government workers and then tradesman. The rest of the talent moves interstate for big salaries and as a result, more money to throw at the average house. In Sydney for example, your retail workers will never own property because they all get snapped up from demand/investors who are on good wages. It's very difficult to stop this sort of thing happening outside of radical and dangerous policy regarding investment or house prices.

Moral of the story, come live in Adelaide, work for the Government and buy a 3 bedroom house in the north for 250k because capitalism.

But seriously, Millennials are going to have to suck it up because there is no change the government can feasibly make that will reduce house prices enough (or subsidise buyers) to allow them to purchase in their desired area or state. That's a fact. I'm not saying changes shouldn't be made, but the wheel will turn extremely slowly.

Moral of the story, start saving you campaigners.

Oh and house price reductions can **** off, I bought in the past few years and house prices are high - I don't want to lose my equity because you campaigners want a house for cheaper. Economics is shit.

 

[Steve Dore]

.... The question you should be asking is how we help the situation in 5-10-20 years .....

Why should I be asking?

 

[edgie]

She Sells Sanctuary is a belter from the Vice City soundtrack

I think Rain ended up on GTA V as well. The Rock* sound guys love certain acts, always giving them multiple songs.

The Cult, Elton John, Phil Collins, Stevie Nicks, Bob Seger, Queen, Hall & Oates.

Even a mostly unheard AC/DC album track that's an absolute belter.

 

[edgie]

Something for everybody to ponder.



Dave Mustaine is a man with his fingers on the pulse of the hot topic social issues.

 

[Doctor Feel]

I think Rain ended up on GTA V as well. The Rock* sound guys love certain acts, always giving them multiple songs.

The Cult, Elton John, Phil Collins, Stevie Nicks, Bob Seger, Queen, Hall & Oates.

Even a mostly unheard AC/DC album track that's an absolute belter.

Literally how do you fit AC/DC into absolutely everything? I don't know whether I should be angry or impressed.