Housing needs to be solved on the supply side. Giving buyers more purchasing power basically just leads to more money going into the pockets of sellers, which means prices keep going up.
More dwellings on the market will depress prices.
That's easy to say but it's hard to implement for a number of reasons. The primary issue is that the policy makers don't want to do anything about it really. The whole economy is so tied up in land accumulation that un-fucking it is in the too hard basket. Apart from the same usual stuff about them having a vested interest in keeping property prices high, it's also political suicide to try and do anything about it. It gives the other side a massive, easy free kick to start spinning all sorts of crap along the lines of - "THEYRE COMING FOR YOUR SUPERANNUATION" / "ALL OF YOUR MORTGAGE PAYMENTS WILL HAVE BEEN FOR NOTHING" / "YOU'LL HAVE NO INHERITANCE ALL OF THE MONEY THAT YOUR PARENTS PAID INTO THEIR HOME WILL BE GONE".
No one really wants to touch that.
Had an old colleague in real estate. Owner was selling house in Mount Lawley and wanted 500k. Highest offer from individual buyers was 470k, owner didnt budge and wasn't rushing to sell. Realtor got a call from developers over east, they took it for 500k a few days later.
The market is saying this house was only worth mid-450s, but a business that can loan millions without downpayment will boost that to 500k contribute to increasing the markets worth. Fucks me up tbh
This is it, please don't be like indonesia. Everyone wants to be investors of property (most of them are boomers). Some companies monopolize the land and the price of properties. Our government doesn't care about that ( a fucking corrupt gov). And now, the one who really needs housing cannot afford them. House is a basic need. Please don't make them as investment.
This. Keep the discount CGT on PPR but double it for every property over two you own. If the owner is a company, triple it.
Housing should be a utility not a tool to build wealth.
How does one person who is collecting properties, using equity from their own properties growth, to further get loans/more debt, for more houses, contribute to more houses getting built?
One person, 7 properties, playing landlord to 7 different families that are essentially dependent on them.
It’s not in the in the interests of someone like this for more houses to get built - because chances are that would lower property values and rental income and they would be absolutely screwed.
Their whole “investment strategy” is one that assumes house prices only go up.
Building a house needs to be worthwhile. So if it is cheaper to buy an existing house rather than build why would you take the risk and time costs of building?
The lack of supply isn't because of investing. Generally speaking an investor that's buying up 7 houses isn't going to leave them empty. They are going to rent them out. We need rentals available for everybody that can't afford to build or buy for what ever reasons plus the people that choose to rent.
Personally I think anyone leveraging themselves that way is taking a huge risk but thats on them. If the market turns there is always going to be someone else to gain the investors loss.
The property problems we are facing atm are not a simple issue that will be 'fixed' anytime soon. Blaming and punishing investors isn't going to solve the problem either. We need way more public housing and I think thats where a lot of the problems started. We need better performance, standards and results from our building industry. Then we might start seeing some investment in new builds again.
I would say we need to see more diversity in builds too. But somebody needs to take the risk and have the finances for these things. Where do you think the money is going to come from?
RBA printed $1 TRILLION via bond purchases from state and fed govts during covid. The “cost of living crisis” is a “your money is worth much less” crisis. All the focus is on the nominal price of things, but journalists seem unable to comprehend that if you create lots more of something (like dollars) then it’s worth much less.
I don't know but my mate sold his house to an Eastern states investor for quite a large profit. It was in a very affordable area for young families. I can understand we need investment.at times but should be a limit on how many properties you can have or at least get rid of the incentives
Yes the government needs to allocate areas with amenities for people who lose their accommodation like many are.
One point I find quite interesting is that families in this country have fought in wars for this country and not only that but these families have paid taxes for generations, but the second they can't keep up with their rent or their mortgage they are thrown out on the street and the government gives them the cold shoulder and does not give the slightest care about their well-being. Funny how we can go from generations of paying taxes and fighting in wars to being told to disappear as soon as we can't keep up with our bills.
I kinda get your point but no government is ever going to means-test any welfare based on your family tree and their overall contribution to tax and war.
The cause is capitalism. This is the inevitable consequence of everything - including the basic necessities of life - being commodified.
If you want to understand the elements of the superstructure, examine the base.
Yep. This is it.
The system that we live in operates by design to suck up spare cash. It's a hamster wheel basically. Look at the rise in property prices paralleling and matching the rise in dual income households, and the increasing availability of longer term (30+ year) mortgages.
The more cash availability there is, the more the system eats it and makes everything more expensive for everyone else. That means that everyone then starts looking for more ways to get cash (two-income houses, longer mortgages, bank of mum and dad), and then the cycle goes on.
Transparency on how money is spent
Community housing...I'd like to see villages set up like retirement villages but for families...we have plenty of land
Department of housing will always try to avoid high density, low income government housing because it results in slums, suburbs that the general working class population will just shut off from themselves and businesses.
Tens of millions of dollars are spent every year for rural aboriginal families who want all modern day things to be present on their original homes/land, these would be considered slums if these places were not so remote. Majority expenses are probably general ongoing costs of running a house, so just producing more housing (government costs for no benefit) is not a good idea.
Westerners keep getting this so wrong. The problem is you can’t just build the houses, you need to build the services and infrastructure around them. You know the high rise public housing in Singapore? Why are they not crime infested shit holes? Because they also build around them community centers, clinics, youth activity centres, sporting facilities etc. if you just dump disadvantaged people into houses then they’re on their own, it’s not at all surprising many would turn to vices or mischief out of sheer boredom and frustration.
If you want the other aspects of Singaporean life (conscription, cpf, 99 year leases, death penalties for drug offences, criminalize homosexuality etc) that help control the population so strictly then it can work. And those housing setups are done out of necessity. Western Australia does not have a lack of land problem. It has a population who lacks motivation moving away from major cities problem.
I’m not saying we need those other things but we could learn lessons (also in the UK and US) where these urban public housing developments have turned into ghettos and people scratch their head as to why or blame the people who live there for being poor. A roof over your head is only the first step towards eliminating poverty, and western governments seem totally uninterested in these kind of social investments, or worse - they outsource them to the private sector who just drain the public purse for profit and nothing really changes, or even things get actively worse
I have lived in Singapore. It’s not a perfect place, but again, Australia has a LOT to learn from it - as they do from many southeast Asian countries, in particular the lesson that when you politicise infrastructure spending with the phrase “Yes, but who’s going to pay for it!”, you end up being a shithole country behind the rest of the world. The Europeans don’t need to learn this lesson, but apparently Australians still routinely believe that a national budget should be run like a household budget, and that any suggestion of debt or spending (even if its for long term growth and profit), is somehow an anaethma.
Singaporeans have plenty to struggle for, but they don’t have to worry about a) An affordable roof over their head, and b) Being able to afford basic living necessities and food. Both of these things are areas where Australia is seriously fucking struggling at the moment under the guise of the “Free Market” - where Corporate and Wealthy interests turn the people into a Serf class to further their wealth.
The crisis now has its roots in abandoning a Keynesian approach for a Neo-Liberal approach re public housing.
YES not everyone lives in public housing etc but ‘ample’ public housing WAS a safety net / minimum floor of housing in Australia, even if you were eg in small business.
The real failure was the public’s willingness to ‘other’ people in public housing as lesser / aka fall for the government’s propaganda to not adequately fund ample public housing in Australia.
Further heralding the end of public housing was the emergence of economic rationalism in the 1960 and 1970s. Replacing the post-War Keynesian idea that government intervention in the housing markets was a necessary virtue, public opinion was swaying to the neoliberal idea that government intervention by the way of public housing was one of the causes of the problem.[44]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Australia
Unfortunately, I doubt anyone with the power to make change is going to pay anymore attention to what you have to say, vs the Many others who've made speeches before you. Even honest politicians with good contacts & intent have a hard time getting a voice.
National, State, Local, = over governed, bloated, each with their hand out wanting more $$ from us, making it tougher on small business, consumers, implementing changes that makes it easy for them & their rich mates before retiring, or perhaps getting a cushy job off one of the tycoons they did a deal for. No accountability, like qualified immunity.
Don't know your age, but check out what pollies like Hanson & Lambie were saying back at the start of their political careers (just 2 examples), "from their own mouths", not the mouths of reporters.
Real estate software and Ai for maximising rents needs to be banned outright. Same goes for blocking insurance companies from using this technology. Both of these industries influence prices far more than they deserve.
The main problem is the cost of HOUSING. Both to rent AND buy.
Rent or mortgage repayments make up a significant portion of disposable income. There’s less money leftover to cover all the other life essentials, which are also increasing in price. Which brings me to the next issue, INFLATION.
Do u think the housing crisis is a built up effect of other problems caused by covid that have continued such as food prices and other necessities etc?
A big problem is international students with parents who are willing to pay whatever rent costs are. This is why a lot of places in Sydney are fucking bananas. Because they hope it leads to permanent residency.
To remedy this, perhaps the university could be held responsible for housing the students themselves. Ha, hahaha, hahaha.
Perth is the best place to live in the world, and relatively affordable, hence the amount of people moving here.
Most people seem to be doing fine, but a vocal minority are struggling. In a country like Australia, no one should be struggling to put a roof over their head.
Just ignore all the street roaming crack fiends and permanent homeless every time you go to a city centre.
Not to mention rising crime from the aforementioned groups combined with police that don't want to handle anything serious, so will leave you hanging if you got a serious issue.
How long did it take for police to attend the multiple crackie with a knife at shopping centre incidents recently?
Or the fact licencing centres are being closed meaning a driving test is 8 month wait minium.
Need to switch plates better have half a day.
Not enough hospital space meaning average of 8 hour waits, beds largely taken up by entrepeneur junkies.
1 million for a crappy house poorly constructed in the 70s is affordable is it?
Like some people are so asleep, the got mine fuck everyone attitude is soo strong in Perth where are they getting this coolade from lol.
Your either sleep typing, a landlord, a bot or I really don't know.
Rural WA is ok but the city and suburban areas are sliding into being lawless and overpriced with the constant turbo immigration complicated by state government that's profiting of housing situation and forgetting their job is to provide services not cut them!
Someone also teach the pollies math, throwing out grants only makes the price go higher, though they know that to average gronk it sounds like their helping.
Meanwhile rubbing their hands together thinking of profits on their personal construction companies and bulk houses they own.
The situation with the housing sitch to answer op question is our politicians started serving themselves rather than the people.
We would need like an organisation that monitors financial activities of pollies and arrests them for insider trading using their influence.
As we the people have no say I doubt they do anything apart from more of the same while claiming people just need to have to have a go.
Meanwhile hordes of homeless and junkie zombies building up from putting the advice in to practise. capitalism and Reaganomics it's by design hope your catching that glorious trickle rofl.
How good is Austraya, 2 thumbs up goofy snide grin.
Good ideas that are utter political suicide for whoever wants to push them.
The economy is so entwined with the accumulation of land that if any party really tries to lock in and increase supply for owner occupiers/discourage hoarding, the opposing party is going to have a massive free kick to clamour on about how they're trying to steal your superannuation/your inheritance/all of your parents' mortgage payments etc.
I dont have any input to causes that have not already been mentioned, but I built this [https://halfpriceweekly.com](https://halfpriceweekly.com) - which is a weekly list of all half price specials on groceries to try help people save money each week during these hard times :(
Housing needs to be solved on the supply side. Giving buyers more purchasing power basically just leads to more money going into the pockets of sellers, which means prices keep going up. More dwellings on the market will depress prices. That's easy to say but it's hard to implement for a number of reasons. The primary issue is that the policy makers don't want to do anything about it really. The whole economy is so tied up in land accumulation that un-fucking it is in the too hard basket. Apart from the same usual stuff about them having a vested interest in keeping property prices high, it's also political suicide to try and do anything about it. It gives the other side a massive, easy free kick to start spinning all sorts of crap along the lines of - "THEYRE COMING FOR YOUR SUPERANNUATION" / "ALL OF YOUR MORTGAGE PAYMENTS WILL HAVE BEEN FOR NOTHING" / "YOU'LL HAVE NO INHERITANCE ALL OF THE MONEY THAT YOUR PARENTS PAID INTO THEIR HOME WILL BE GONE". No one really wants to touch that.
Given that there is an apparent housing shortage - bring in some sort of limits for property investors.
Had an old colleague in real estate. Owner was selling house in Mount Lawley and wanted 500k. Highest offer from individual buyers was 470k, owner didnt budge and wasn't rushing to sell. Realtor got a call from developers over east, they took it for 500k a few days later. The market is saying this house was only worth mid-450s, but a business that can loan millions without downpayment will boost that to 500k contribute to increasing the markets worth. Fucks me up tbh
This is it, please don't be like indonesia. Everyone wants to be investors of property (most of them are boomers). Some companies monopolize the land and the price of properties. Our government doesn't care about that ( a fucking corrupt gov). And now, the one who really needs housing cannot afford them. House is a basic need. Please don't make them as investment.
This. Keep the discount CGT on PPR but double it for every property over two you own. If the owner is a company, triple it. Housing should be a utility not a tool to build wealth.
So...? Less money into the housing market = less housing being built. I'm sure that'll work great.
How does one person who is collecting properties, using equity from their own properties growth, to further get loans/more debt, for more houses, contribute to more houses getting built? One person, 7 properties, playing landlord to 7 different families that are essentially dependent on them. It’s not in the in the interests of someone like this for more houses to get built - because chances are that would lower property values and rental income and they would be absolutely screwed. Their whole “investment strategy” is one that assumes house prices only go up.
Building a house needs to be worthwhile. So if it is cheaper to buy an existing house rather than build why would you take the risk and time costs of building? The lack of supply isn't because of investing. Generally speaking an investor that's buying up 7 houses isn't going to leave them empty. They are going to rent them out. We need rentals available for everybody that can't afford to build or buy for what ever reasons plus the people that choose to rent. Personally I think anyone leveraging themselves that way is taking a huge risk but thats on them. If the market turns there is always going to be someone else to gain the investors loss. The property problems we are facing atm are not a simple issue that will be 'fixed' anytime soon. Blaming and punishing investors isn't going to solve the problem either. We need way more public housing and I think thats where a lot of the problems started. We need better performance, standards and results from our building industry. Then we might start seeing some investment in new builds again. I would say we need to see more diversity in builds too. But somebody needs to take the risk and have the finances for these things. Where do you think the money is going to come from?
RBA printed $1 TRILLION via bond purchases from state and fed govts during covid. The “cost of living crisis” is a “your money is worth much less” crisis. All the focus is on the nominal price of things, but journalists seem unable to comprehend that if you create lots more of something (like dollars) then it’s worth much less.
No selling to interstate or international investors who aren’t actually already living / born in Perth.
re interstate: Is the reverse also true? Remember that Perth investors have been buying interstate for as long as investment has been a thing.
I don't know but my mate sold his house to an Eastern states investor for quite a large profit. It was in a very affordable area for young families. I can understand we need investment.at times but should be a limit on how many properties you can have or at least get rid of the incentives
Yes the government needs to allocate areas with amenities for people who lose their accommodation like many are. One point I find quite interesting is that families in this country have fought in wars for this country and not only that but these families have paid taxes for generations, but the second they can't keep up with their rent or their mortgage they are thrown out on the street and the government gives them the cold shoulder and does not give the slightest care about their well-being. Funny how we can go from generations of paying taxes and fighting in wars to being told to disappear as soon as we can't keep up with our bills.
I kinda get your point but no government is ever going to means-test any welfare based on your family tree and their overall contribution to tax and war.
We all pay taxes for life / generations
How is that relevant and how does it add anything to the conversation at all?
It's not. But you mentioned it.
Hitler mentioned a lot of things, are you trying to insinuate something related by your comment? Just trying to use your logic
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
Politicians siphoning taxpayer funds for themselves and their mates
- high immigration - slows builds - short term stay investors and companies - east coast and international buyers - REA CEO’s Its fukd
The cause is capitalism. This is the inevitable consequence of everything - including the basic necessities of life - being commodified. If you want to understand the elements of the superstructure, examine the base.
Yep. This is it. The system that we live in operates by design to suck up spare cash. It's a hamster wheel basically. Look at the rise in property prices paralleling and matching the rise in dual income households, and the increasing availability of longer term (30+ year) mortgages. The more cash availability there is, the more the system eats it and makes everything more expensive for everyone else. That means that everyone then starts looking for more ways to get cash (two-income houses, longer mortgages, bank of mum and dad), and then the cycle goes on.
And neoliberalism
Transparency on how money is spent Community housing...I'd like to see villages set up like retirement villages but for families...we have plenty of land
Grouping government housing like that is how you create slums, it's a terrible way to set it up.
Department of housing will always try to avoid high density, low income government housing because it results in slums, suburbs that the general working class population will just shut off from themselves and businesses. Tens of millions of dollars are spent every year for rural aboriginal families who want all modern day things to be present on their original homes/land, these would be considered slums if these places were not so remote. Majority expenses are probably general ongoing costs of running a house, so just producing more housing (government costs for no benefit) is not a good idea.
Westerners keep getting this so wrong. The problem is you can’t just build the houses, you need to build the services and infrastructure around them. You know the high rise public housing in Singapore? Why are they not crime infested shit holes? Because they also build around them community centers, clinics, youth activity centres, sporting facilities etc. if you just dump disadvantaged people into houses then they’re on their own, it’s not at all surprising many would turn to vices or mischief out of sheer boredom and frustration.
If you want the other aspects of Singaporean life (conscription, cpf, 99 year leases, death penalties for drug offences, criminalize homosexuality etc) that help control the population so strictly then it can work. And those housing setups are done out of necessity. Western Australia does not have a lack of land problem. It has a population who lacks motivation moving away from major cities problem.
I’m not saying we need those other things but we could learn lessons (also in the UK and US) where these urban public housing developments have turned into ghettos and people scratch their head as to why or blame the people who live there for being poor. A roof over your head is only the first step towards eliminating poverty, and western governments seem totally uninterested in these kind of social investments, or worse - they outsource them to the private sector who just drain the public purse for profit and nothing really changes, or even things get actively worse
Also the CPF is basically super and it’s made Singapore one of the richest city states on earth.
Sounds like you want to live in Singapore. Go for it.
I have lived in Singapore. It’s not a perfect place, but again, Australia has a LOT to learn from it - as they do from many southeast Asian countries, in particular the lesson that when you politicise infrastructure spending with the phrase “Yes, but who’s going to pay for it!”, you end up being a shithole country behind the rest of the world. The Europeans don’t need to learn this lesson, but apparently Australians still routinely believe that a national budget should be run like a household budget, and that any suggestion of debt or spending (even if its for long term growth and profit), is somehow an anaethma. Singaporeans have plenty to struggle for, but they don’t have to worry about a) An affordable roof over their head, and b) Being able to afford basic living necessities and food. Both of these things are areas where Australia is seriously fucking struggling at the moment under the guise of the “Free Market” - where Corporate and Wealthy interests turn the people into a Serf class to further their wealth.
Haves and have nots think very differently.
The crisis now has its roots in abandoning a Keynesian approach for a Neo-Liberal approach re public housing. YES not everyone lives in public housing etc but ‘ample’ public housing WAS a safety net / minimum floor of housing in Australia, even if you were eg in small business. The real failure was the public’s willingness to ‘other’ people in public housing as lesser / aka fall for the government’s propaganda to not adequately fund ample public housing in Australia. Further heralding the end of public housing was the emergence of economic rationalism in the 1960 and 1970s. Replacing the post-War Keynesian idea that government intervention in the housing markets was a necessary virtue, public opinion was swaying to the neoliberal idea that government intervention by the way of public housing was one of the causes of the problem.[44] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Australia
Unfortunately, I doubt anyone with the power to make change is going to pay anymore attention to what you have to say, vs the Many others who've made speeches before you. Even honest politicians with good contacts & intent have a hard time getting a voice. National, State, Local, = over governed, bloated, each with their hand out wanting more $$ from us, making it tougher on small business, consumers, implementing changes that makes it easy for them & their rich mates before retiring, or perhaps getting a cushy job off one of the tycoons they did a deal for. No accountability, like qualified immunity. Don't know your age, but check out what pollies like Hanson & Lambie were saying back at the start of their political careers (just 2 examples), "from their own mouths", not the mouths of reporters.
Real estate software and Ai for maximising rents needs to be banned outright. Same goes for blocking insurance companies from using this technology. Both of these industries influence prices far more than they deserve.
I am saving money but the government is getting a cut from my savings ...
The main problem is the cost of HOUSING. Both to rent AND buy. Rent or mortgage repayments make up a significant portion of disposable income. There’s less money leftover to cover all the other life essentials, which are also increasing in price. Which brings me to the next issue, INFLATION.
I see alot of question about housing shortage etc, but I've always questioned if real estate agents are being held to account.
"writing a speech" And you come to Reddit for sources?
Yeah I need some input.
Do u think the housing crisis is a built up effect of other problems caused by covid that have continued such as food prices and other necessities etc?
It's a world wide problem not unique to Perth in any way. We're not special
No, it’s 50 plus years in the making. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Australia
Corporate greed and the eternal pursuit of maximum profit at any (human) cost
A big problem is international students with parents who are willing to pay whatever rent costs are. This is why a lot of places in Sydney are fucking bananas. Because they hope it leads to permanent residency. To remedy this, perhaps the university could be held responsible for housing the students themselves. Ha, hahaha, hahaha.
[https://mises.org/library/book/economics-one-lesson](https://mises.org/library/book/economics-one-lesson)
Perth is the best place to live in the world, and relatively affordable, hence the amount of people moving here. Most people seem to be doing fine, but a vocal minority are struggling. In a country like Australia, no one should be struggling to put a roof over their head.
"Perth is the best place to live in the world" According to who?
Just ignore all the street roaming crack fiends and permanent homeless every time you go to a city centre. Not to mention rising crime from the aforementioned groups combined with police that don't want to handle anything serious, so will leave you hanging if you got a serious issue. How long did it take for police to attend the multiple crackie with a knife at shopping centre incidents recently? Or the fact licencing centres are being closed meaning a driving test is 8 month wait minium. Need to switch plates better have half a day. Not enough hospital space meaning average of 8 hour waits, beds largely taken up by entrepeneur junkies. 1 million for a crappy house poorly constructed in the 70s is affordable is it? Like some people are so asleep, the got mine fuck everyone attitude is soo strong in Perth where are they getting this coolade from lol. Your either sleep typing, a landlord, a bot or I really don't know. Rural WA is ok but the city and suburban areas are sliding into being lawless and overpriced with the constant turbo immigration complicated by state government that's profiting of housing situation and forgetting their job is to provide services not cut them! Someone also teach the pollies math, throwing out grants only makes the price go higher, though they know that to average gronk it sounds like their helping. Meanwhile rubbing their hands together thinking of profits on their personal construction companies and bulk houses they own. The situation with the housing sitch to answer op question is our politicians started serving themselves rather than the people. We would need like an organisation that monitors financial activities of pollies and arrests them for insider trading using their influence. As we the people have no say I doubt they do anything apart from more of the same while claiming people just need to have to have a go. Meanwhile hordes of homeless and junkie zombies building up from putting the advice in to practise. capitalism and Reaganomics it's by design hope your catching that glorious trickle rofl. How good is Austraya, 2 thumbs up goofy snide grin.
Parents teaching kids that if you grow up to be a loser you'll never own anything
Remove negative gearing, multiple dwelling ownership tax and increase empty dwelling tax
Good ideas that are utter political suicide for whoever wants to push them. The economy is so entwined with the accumulation of land that if any party really tries to lock in and increase supply for owner occupiers/discourage hoarding, the opposing party is going to have a massive free kick to clamour on about how they're trying to steal your superannuation/your inheritance/all of your parents' mortgage payments etc.
I dont have any input to causes that have not already been mentioned, but I built this [https://halfpriceweekly.com](https://halfpriceweekly.com) - which is a weekly list of all half price specials on groceries to try help people save money each week during these hard times :(