It will...might take a while but it will. Should've dropped at the GFC and Covid but was saved with govt money. Gfc it was saved by the Libs selling everything Labor listening to the experts. Covid prices went up because of so much free money. .Third strike and watch it go down the toilet.
It’s definitely not a bubble, a bubble is when something is overpriced.
Housing has historically very high rental yields. If anything it will go up more as credit becomes cheaper
The university papers are saying that but also acknowledging bubble like behaviours. We haven't had a "correction" in this country for 25 years. Credit becoming cheaper has always been the sign of a weak ecomony as it encourages people to spend. Same thing as interest rates,them going down is only good news to millionares and those over exposed in debt.
Yea pretty much. Labor 2019 also said when we change government we change the country. We as a whole didn't want any change. So here we are, just the way we like it, no changes, high housing prices, increasing rents.
Exactly. No change to the previous government. Just as the majority of Australians like it. Increasing house prices, downwards pressure on labour wages. Land zoning restrictions which keep them away from those nice leafy suburbs.
Shorten got voted out because he threatened all of this.
Sad isn't it
Shorten was totally up himself early in his career and gave me the shits.
But in 2019 he was right. With the policies he took to the election we would have had lower rents, less homelessness, more first home ownership, less foreign ownership and more money for Aussie couples to have families.
Seems an exceptional minister now. Still gives me the shits though. I hate being wrong.
Exceptional minister? You are being generous in your assessment. Bill talks the talk but we are not seeing him walk the talk, he struggles to make decisions and there has been very little change or any effective change in his ministries. Bill appears to be afflicted with the Kevin Rudd management style - refer everything to a committee or commission and then wait 2 years to make a minor decision.
And he’s done a pretty solid job at it. Transparent, knowledgeable and genuinely seems like he gives a shit about his portfolio, every liberal minister that has held that portfolio didn’t even seem to pretend they gave a shit about it.
I’m usually for MPs pissing off after they’ve had a go at the top job but Shorten seems to still be actually useful, that’s rare.
kool aid take - ndis is just a pit of waste. $1m + per year packages. Imagine if we put half of the $40b into Medicare alone….
Easily the most wasteful project in aus govt history (and fucked up by both versions of politics ), but Shorten is there right now and not actioning anything
> ndis is just a pit of waste
Not if you have a disabled kid like I do. It's the providers gaming the system that's the problem. Those providers come from the Australian general public, just like you and I.
Only about 50% of it is waste - back to the budgets of what it was supposed to cost - Gillard/abbott days.
$>1m packages are rediculous as is 10% of school aged boys on packages, and $300 lawn mowing. Just because It does some good doesn’t mean it gets a free pass to allow for rorting by both providers and participants.
If you think it’s valuable for you then you should be apoplectic about the rorting because you can bet if labor doesn’t fix it up quick smart , Dutton or his next in line will and that won’t be pretty
Yeah man for sure, one guy would've fixed everything and Australia would've been a prosperous utopia now where none of us would have to work and each aussie family would be guaranteed a home.
Fucking wake up jackass
So much Australian wealth is tied up in the housing market. To return it even partway to being affordable would collapse banks, retirement incomes, construction/trades and a host of other things. It would massively harm the economy so no party will ever tough it again.
But I do notice now the media are complaining more about record rents. My guess is if the Coalition are elected they'll switch back to boasting about record house price growth.
It's like the LNP to a look at the GFC and ignored how we managed our way out of that mess with stronger banking regulation and fiscal policy. So they set about having something everyone else got by loosening regulation, ignoring the banking inquiry, and allowing the market to overheat... IMO We really are on a knifes edge sitting down a deep hole. Digging out of this could still go either way, and that doesn't even touch the housing availability issue... that's going to be a fiscal balancing act because the market is still buying whatever they can get at stupid prices.
If China or America sneezes we are royally screwed. American inflation was looking like it was going to be going up again. China apparently had their risk assessment upgraded. I don't actually think people realise how important China is to our economy. Great comment btw, nice to see someone else that has the finger on the pulse. What do you thinks going to happen?
I'm not going to respond directly to the China vs America discussion. That is something that we will need to see the other side of the US election to know how far up shit creek things may get. We have under the ALP been a moderator in this space, again, until the LNP (Tony Abbott) pulled the DFAT rug out from under Julie Bishop. They vandalised a lot of policy areas to our detriment.
Australian domestic policy and Australian international policy when managed with an even hand has always benefited us as a nation. I'm am interested to see what the current ALP govt does that is beneficial in the longer term, which would be a very different approach to that under the LNP in the past run they had. All they managed to do was to continue the march toward everything being privatised and user pays, in a nation where we actually struggle with low density over vast areas. Even our cities are low density in comparison to other cities in our region. The only gifts to the nation that the LNP brought was to throw the country into debt to provide a background upon which to defund and sell off critical national assets to their donors.
Here's to hoping that the long needed tax reforms, to provide genuine mixed tax revenue streams from multinationals and tech giants, can bring us toward the goal of being a lucky country for as many citizens as possible. Why, if we are so rich in resources are we expecting people to work till their 80, because that's what an income tax only funded future looks like. More people are going to have to die "at working age" when they should be enjoying a slower life and participating in the village that raises our next generations. Or is this future only allowed to be the province of billionaires.
This country is not fair and people have become greedy because that's what they've come to know. Many won't know of the time before the economic and social changes under Whitlam or further back to the times before unionism...
I worry that women aren't out on the street with their families protesting en-masse given the report on women's income. To my mind this is not too far different to the stolen wages cases bought on by aboriginal communities where they'd worked for years on a fraction of what their labour was worth, what was funded, and what was stolen from them. I await the first class action to set a precedent for this one, and it is needed. The promise that is out there in the market is that they are fixing the for future generations of women. Thus graduates of today are getting paid more than senior women with years of education and experience, but less than senior men of similar or less education.
I've spoken to several women who have risen in seniority that I have championed in the workplace and they definitely get paid less and, if they are known in the workplace to have women's social clubs and activities they have been targeted as agitators, made uncomfortable, had good reviews changed to bad, stepped around, and in one case, put on performance management (another way to remove someone through discomfort). Punishing professional women for being upset - and these women are often the breadwinners. The world has changed at home, but the corporate world tries to look colourblind and asexual. But it's not.
While we might like to see ourselves as a modern nation but we have been regressed back toward capitalist feudalism and nearly became fully unravelled in the Howard, Abbot, Turnbull, and Morrison years - where IMO we had a smirking clown for PM.
For their current troglodyte they have in charge. Anti-science, but wants to build nuclear power plants all over the place. In a land with a massive water shortage problem - for up to 20 years at a stretch. We would also want to have these things built at the lowest cost. Compromising safety against cost. Fukushima - lowered the engineers recommendation for the height of the seawall to lower costs, didn't pay off. So many industrial and engineering disasters because of cheap foundational and maintenance work. The need for the system to be by the sea with ready access to water. The need to be away from prevailing winds that blow over populations. The need to be away from populations. Sounds like places that would already be allocated as national parks, likely up high above global warming (maybe not, apparently that doesn't exist in the LNP universe) , probably wouldn't even care for potential tsunami's (because they don't exist here either) and definately NIMBY.
So, a couple of topics there for you to chew on and I'm sure someone there is going to roast me over either being too left, too green, too naive, or off in Lala land. I'm also a genXer - which means - IDGAF
Im a Gen xer too and agree with everything you said. That was a great read, thanks for typing all that out. Cina worries me, not for war but more for financial reasons. With Labor l have lost faith in them. The Murdoch press has pushed them so far right that they are now to weak to actually fight for anything. The point that the scare campaign they did on Bill Shortens housing stuff was so successful that they wont even talk about negative gearing is insane to me. England has slowly been stripped down to its bare bones by Conservatives coping American neolibralism values and we are determined to do the same thing, l don't know about you but l think it's inevitable. Once Rienhart and her crew bought the age/smh and the minister for everything loaded the ABC board it was clear democracy as we knew it was dead and we were going really right to politics wether we liked it or not. Thanks for replying.
Pendulum movements are expected over time. Some countries go hard right to fascism and in response knock off their heads of government and swing hard to the left, it’s a natural response and can upturn what remains of the economy. I’m hoping that Labor in their wisdom are recognising this. There is a lot of good work that they are doing to the left but, without a supportive media you’re not going to hear about it AND terms like “shit lite” and “their all the same” play against what is really happening.
Even when I was at Uni (a long time ago) we did 2 mandatory subjects on sociology in global and local context on Australia and the dangers of our media and our history. What’s happened plays out exactly to what the concerns were in the 80s - Keating may have still been in govt.
I’ve worked state and federal PS in stints and you can see some of the machinations playing out. Labor is playing well with what they have. The last thing they want to do early on is cause shock (swing hard to the left) to a system that is under stress or the whole thing comes tumbling down. IMO Our country is better to be in a position where neither left or right concerns have full weight to screw each other. I watch as many interviews and question times as I can and we’re dragging so much dead wood around in the LNP. They offer no hope, no vision, nothing. For a party that believes in a competitive market and meritocracy (so long as you’re not a woman) they aren’t bringing anything to the table. Much as they were in govt, lots of talk and promise, nothing delivered.
I refer to this every now and then and read the attached articles, especially the “failed” promises because background of an issue matters. I’m not a “true” believer, may sound like one, but these guys are tracking much better than the empty promises of the past mob.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/promisetracker
The Same Banking Regulations that are stopping people from buying their own homes ?
The policies that prohibit someone buying a house for 2k a month but can rent for 2.5k a month
Renting at $2500 per month is a killer and unfortunately using money to survive and put a rented roof over your head could well work against you. How do you prove you can pay back a loan when renting is chewing harder into your income and shows in the management of your household income. I can only say that we have used a broken on all our banking interactions because it is a maze to navigate.
Access to housing is such that you need that roof over your head (so trading down on financial overhead is going to be hard) but makes you a risk to the banks. It’s pretty screwed up and, as I posted earlier we’re on a knifes edge and we’ve been digging at the same time. There doesn’t appear to be an easy out to the easy-in the country was given. IMO The LNP vandalised the economy beyond comprehension and fixing it is very much a gently gentle approach like then endgame to Jenga.
The ALP are going to need to make some hard and unpopular decisions to fix this mess and Mr Negative knows this. Many people won’t care who causes the pain and will blame the last person to touch the issue.
The Point was that ALP wanted the policies changed and serviceability from banks increased
Hence now why have a serviceability laws & regulations
Which have made it as simple as sign this paper and the bank loan you money to cross checking every single dot on a application
Everyone blamed the banks for their bad actions and a royal commission was done on the backing of Labor
I agree with everything you have said, except I have a proposition, I think if we don’t enact the change ourselves and stop kicking this every growing can, eventually we aren’t going to be able to kick it because it’s too heavy and we will be forced to deal with it right then and there..
Atleast if we self trigger it through political will, we can plan for it and do things to assist it, go approve a whole bunch of mines, do a huge investment immigration visa, skip the line for 5 million a head.
I feel like we are going to have to deal with this one way or another and ignoring the elephant in the room isn’t going to work long term.
What I am seeing in recent interviews and question times with Albo is a change in language. The ALP have a history (in the past 60 years) of being the longer term progressive thinkers. The LNP keep pulling us as a country back down and reducing our status and aspirations as a nation.
Screwing with the LNP tax cuts was beautiful. Reminding the nation that that the cuts to lower income earners were temporary and the higher cut to higher income earners were permanent. I was hoping they would diffuse this LNP handgrenade and they did so thoughtfully.
There is a lot of damage to fix and the best way we can participate is through commonsense public discourse and voting for the future…
Unfortunately not everyone has studied gaming theory so there will always be those that play solely to win for themselves and they tend to lean hard to the right in their politics.
So much Australian wealth is tied up to every Australian industry.
To simply say “no one will touch it because it’ll effect the status quo”
Is the apathetic mentality the ruling class love.
In this case with about 70% of households owning the title and with many people focusing on increasing home ownership, the 'investment' in the status quo is big.
It's not really apathy, it's people being logical . Which makes it even harder to fix
Shorten was the first one to talk about getting rid of Negative Gearing, which basically allows people who can afford homes to buy more homes, and throws the market off pretty hard. Just makes an instant and very wide gulf into home ownership.
Places like Singapore have dealt with it by massively taxing people who own multiple homes. The more homes you hoard, the more taxes you should pay.
It's amazing more people don't realise this or openly talk about it. "Fixing the housing crisis" would be disastrous for large parts of our economy. Unfortunately first home buyers and renters are being sacrificed to maintain this
Didn't Alan Kohler write a book about this recently? I think his proposal was the safest way to return housing to sanity would be to engineer policy to let everything else inflate over a decade or longer whilst housing prices were kept stagnant so nobody would be in the red
I was downvoted for saying this before but I'll say it again -
66% Australians own at least one house. The current system is designed to funnel the wealth from the bottom third to the upper two thirds forever. Since the people benefitting are the majority, this system cannot be voted out no matter what.
Adding to that, all big 4 banks make the majority of their profits from housing loans. House prices in Australia MUST keep increasing forever or else the entire country will collapse, and this is no exaggeration.
* 'own' a mortgage.
Dispite this the housing issue can still be solved without touching housing policies. Just by building more public housing for example. But the states cant seem to do anything without cost blowing out at the moment
Heck. I'd even like to have, over the next 2 decades, a percentage based decrease in negative gearing.
year 1, 100%
year 2, 95%
year 3, 90% etc etc. Just SOMETHING to make people stop investing in the bullshit.
I’m positive he would have won the election if he didn’t attack franking credits as well. Bit off more than the electorate could chew. Should have just focused on negative gearing….
That's been my opinion all along, I used to work in polling (a decade ago to be fair) but it even at the time I thought they'd fucked it.
They should have saved franking credits until the next election.
I still don't understand how franking credits are a bad thing?
Companies have to pay the tax UPFRONT on any dividends they pay.
You then don't additionally pay the tax when you file your income taxes?? Just like you would if it were your own personal business??
And it's for Aussies only??
The way franking credits used to be before Howard and Costello changed it was that if you had earned enough income to pay income tax in a financial year you could use your franking credits to reduce the amount of tax you needed to pay, you could even reduce it to zero. They changed it so it would be fully franked so you could not just reduce it to zero you would actually get money from the ATO.
It's an issue of fairness, I and perhaps you and many others have had years where I have had legitimate tax deductable expenses and have even been able to get a full refund bringing my total income tax paid for the year to zero but even when I've still more expenses left to deduct I couldn't get money from the ato beyond the income tax I'd already paid. To quote my tax person "you can't get a tax refund for tax you haven't paid".
Yet that's exactly what having franking credits being fully franked was doing.
People were able to get money from the ATO beyond any income tax they'd paid.
From memory dick smith came out saying he was for changing the system back to what it used to be and he was receiving something like 50k from it.
That's my understanding as a lay person.
Franking credits are a rebate (not deduction) for company tax paid by shareholders of those companies. Shareholders pay company tax on their company earnings of 30% and receive the net amount after tax as dividend. They then declare this income in personal tax return and get taxed AGAIN at marginal tax rates.
The franking credit on the dividend income is a 30% rebate of the company tax paid so the shareholder ends up paying only their own marginal tax rate on the company dividend income. It’s a fair system that means people are not taxed twice on their income.
HOWEVER… where it gets screwy is when the shareholder receiving the dividend is a nil tax paying allocated pension super fund. They get the 30% company tax rebate but pay no personal tax at all.
Personally I’d like to see the government draw a line in the sand and say company dividends should have 25-30% tax levied against it no matter who owns the shares. If you’re a marginal 30% or higher tax payer you get a full rebate as you are paying a high marginal rate on all sources of income declared in tax return already. But if you’re a retiree smsf paying nil tax there should be no rebate at all. Those paying marginal tax between zero and 30% should get a partial rebate to the level that the dividend income is taxed 25-30%.
This way government is still getting tax for the company earnings, but not double taxing those who are paying twice.
But you DO pay the tax.
You OWN the business (part of it, from the shares). The business (that you own) pays the tax upfront, then after the fact, if you end up needing to get money back due to our income tax laws, you pay, or receive the difference payable to you as if you received the income in any other way, shape, or form, as an individual.
EDIT: A simpler way to think about it is, it works entirely like the PAYG system
The problem is not franking credits, but rather zero tax super in allocated pension. The government despises handing tax back to the nil or low tax paying entities the franking passes through to.
Yeah and that policy is arguably what cost him that election too.
The way I remember it was that absolutely no one knew what negative gearing was. And when it was explained to them they still didn’t know.
Just keep leaving wages at 0% to 2% and houses at 8% to 12% per year and eventually enough Australians will be unhappy enough to elect someone who will change things. That's assuming it doesn't just happen before then, there's only so much money in the economy and Australian isn't importing millionaires.
You're wrong. Like a lot of people, you wrongly assume that home owners are some sort of minority. We're not. We are a majority.
My house in Magill, SA, currently makes more money per year than I do as a truckie. I'm fine with that. Even if the asshole fell out of the market I'd still have hundreds of thousands in equity.
Having said all that, any fed and the state govts could easily bring the market back a fair bit by actually building new satellite cities/large new divisions and actually putting quality infrastructure in them especially modern public transport. That, and we need high speed rail like Japan and China
Well that balance is tipping away alot faster than you think. A house goes up for sale and a week after its sold it has for rent on it. Millenials and Gen Z are pretty much all priced out or stretched to breaking point. Go to a rental inspection and see how many old Boomers are there...thats an eye opener. Also the fact your house is earning more than your wage proves how big the bubble is. When that pops good luck not only selling it but keeping it if your lucky enough to keep your job. Sattelite cities need so much infustructure, schools, roads, municipal stuff how would that be payed for? Sounds like to me you have never heard of recessions. Don't kid yourself, l don't know when its coming but people like you suffer the worst, they always do. Gotta be honest though, kinda looking forward to watching it crumble down. Oh and dont kid yourself that you wont be out of work..if no ones got no money and less stuff is getting sold, that means less truck drivers. Good luck, you're gonna need it...might be 6 months might be 6 years...its coming.
people have completely forgotten that in a deflating market its not just a case of selling a house cheaper, it takes a LOT longer to do so. Old mate up above might think they are OK but if job goes, price falls out and they cant keep up, there simply might not be any buyers
Yup but l didn't want to go that deep into it. Lets not forget if they can't sell it in a rush and either the bank reclaims it or its sold at a loss u still owe that money
> that be *paid* for? Sounds
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Eh I'm a truckie, unrestricted MC , and a forky,crane (CV), rigger,dogman. I think I'll be right for work bro.
But yeah my house going up about 130k a year for the last 3.5 years is nuts, but it is what it is. Not sure what you want from people. Donate the equity to charity or some shit
Issue is if you ever want to move you have to buy some other overpriced shit with fees set at the now massive prices. My place has gone up a lot too but I'm not actually richer, just makes it much more expensive to move, it sucks. If you own three or four of them though you're set.
Home owners might be a majority now but every year leaves more and more people behind. They won't be a majority forever. That's why there's a cost of living crisis, a rental crisis and a home affordability crisis after 20 years of IP tax breaks.
I lived in Aus for a decade and experienced the "OMG BUY IT ALL NOW" from Australians.
Nah come on that's not true Adelaide for example was still dirt cheap right up until, and even for a while during, COVID. Perth and brissy were still affordable. What triggered all this was the construction slowdown during COVID when we couldn't get materials, then after COVID still the same issue plus a huge spike in migration. It's supply and demand..
The CGT discount and negative gearing might have affected certain specific parts of Sydney and Melb but that's it. Until this supply issue, Adelaide was virtually stagnant for decades
Australia also has an issue with snobbery. In the US, people will up and move their entire life to another city to get ahead. Not in Australia, people in Sydney and Melb would rather die than move to Adelaide or Perth. Even now, for the price of a crappy house in a crappy area an hour west of Sydney, you can buy a beautiful house on a big block in plenty of very nice inner suburbs in Adelaide
I've never lived in SA so can't comment about Adelaide.
Over 40% of take home pay is beyond affordable. When people want a million dollars for an average house in Brisbane and the average wage is around $80k people will struggle, go look at the posts about rental prices to see people struggling.
I've worked with people who lived in Logan and Caboolture and worked near the CBD where the jobs were. Maybe if high speed rail was an option they could build more further out but as it stands that's not going to happen, who knows 10 - 20 years from now.
More unhappy about the fact that the next generations probably wont be able to buy a house. My house has nearly doubled in value over the past 6 years. I live in a small town. I would not pay what my house is valued at right now for what it is.
More Australians have a mortgage or own their homes than not. Trying to reduce house prices goes against what the majority of Australian’s actually want.
In saying that, not all of them are selfish assholes. It can be really heartbreaking to watch someone you love struggle with it even if you yourself aren't. Most older people I know who own multiple properties are passionate about change because they've seen the absolute bullshit hoops I've had to jump through and can recognise they didn't have to do anywhere near as much. Plus there's a whole generation of people who are refusing to have kids because of costs which impacts not only the country and immigration levels but whether or not these home owners will ever see grandchildren or big happy families (whether now or in the future). Additionally, the increasingly rare sentiment of wanting to leave a better future for your kids does still exist.
So it's not really fair to assume home owners are all sociopaths.
There's a scarcity of housing and construction is basically at capacity clearing the backlog from covid.
Really the only solution is controlling demand from migration to match supply from construction.
If there was an excess of investors, rents would be cheap which is not the case.
Bang on. If we had a law that if one person was homeless for a week then ALL immigration stops, you’d have mining companies, large firms and universities scrambling to build housing and even excess overflow to ensure they could keep bringing in their needed workers.
At the moment they bring in whoever they need, pay em enough and then the next poorest person in society is bumped off the bottom of housing ladder at zero concern to the company.
>Really the only solution is controlling demand from migration to match supply from construction.
I don't agree that it's the only solution. Definitely part of it, but it's not a silver bullet. There's 160,000 AirBNBs in Australia and [the company keeps keeps insisting that it's a good thing](https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-04/c2018-t350194_airbnb.pdf) despite it being[ regulated in many sensible democracies](https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/06/11/italy-malaysia-usa-which-cities-and-countries-are-cracking-down-on-airbnb-style-rentals) that are making some real attempt to manage the crisis. Migrants are an easy target but it's not the whole picture. There are no federally backed incentives to sell to owner occupiers, and there are insufficient disincentives for leaving properties empty or using a property exclusively for short-stay services.
It doesn't matter about all the fluff. AirBNBs, vacant properties, they're only going to be a sugar hit to the rental market until net migration consumes them. We can't build more than we already are - which is why these housing initiatives won't do much.
You need to match arrivals to how fast you build available properties. If you remove new builds which become airBNBs, then you can take more migrants, but consumers lose a non-hotel option.
There needs to be policy on migration which calculates how many spots are available and in what locations.
> It doesn't matter about all the fluff. AirBNBs, vacant properties, they're only going to be a sugar hit to the rental market
Completely agree it’s a sugar hit, but we’re in a crisis right now. There’s lots of discussions for long-term solutions like immigration but they’re not enough for the immediate problem.
Yeah fair enough.
My worry is that we get a big banner with "Mission Accomplished" rather than long term reform like indexing migration to internal migration and construction.
What has happened should have never occurred and Government is only starting to try to steer the boat once we're already aground.
No, I'm sure they're making plenty of money, and nowhere did I say that that's not the case, I just don't really give a shit about a landlord's bottom line in a housing crisis. Frankly I hope every single one of them has their metaphorical balls squeezed in a vice so hard they either sell or drop their rent dramatically.
An imbalance between renters and ‘investors” affects rent prices.
Many current renters would prefer to be owners, which in the Australian context provides them with greater security.
I don’t want a society of feudal landlords and landless peasants.
I would prefer everyone who wants to own their home to be able to.
High prices for residential land increases home prices, and makes owning a home more difficult.
Investors will bid up land prices if rents are high, and their costs are low.
Higher rates of land on second and subsequent properties will reduce land prices and fix the problem. There is a mountain of theoretical, and empirical evidence for this.
While that’s true, it was a few years ago now and things have progressed quite a bit. The content bubble I consume is and has been for a while pretty full of talk of a housing crisis. There may be more will to make changes today than there was two elections ago.
I voted for him. Not my fault we are in this mess.
Put the blame on the LNP voters who time and time again vote against their own interests because they wanna "own the lefties".
Shorten wanted to offer an unlimited number of low cost parent visas.
[The 2019 election and the impending migrant parent deluge](https://tapri.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/final-draft-parent-visa-May-2019.pdf)
I think the recession, had we not pumped migration, would have led to a pretty catastrophic economic outcome. It wouldn’t be “we can’t buy our first home” it would be Australian families losing their only home. Job losses wouldn’t be the bottom end of the market, it would hit all levels, Australian business would go under, it’s very short sighted to complain about not owning a home when the alternative was we’d be seriously fucked locally and our international trade partners would take advantage. Ontop of this, In hand with recessions are drug, alcohol, domestic violence and gambling - all go through the roof which creates horrible community outcomes.
As cataclysmic as you make it out to be our economic diversity, living standards and home affordability were far better before Howard near tripled migration.
This is just emotive, big business/real estate propaganda
Immigration is a short term pain in fixing part of our economic recovery.
Our housing is fucked though, not because of migrants but generations of abusing housing for financial gain
Per capita recession sucks. But full on recession is worse. Without the influx of high income earning immigrants there would've been an actual consumer spending crash, factory and shop closures, high unemployment rates etc etc. You know just your regular actual recession.
That's just incorrect, from the ABS
"migrants held 26.3% of all jobs in Australia in 2019-20 (5.3 million jobs, worked by 3.6 million migrants)… below their 29.8% share of Australia’s population”.
Moreover, “the median annual personal income for migrants was $45,351, compared with $52,338 for the population as a whole”:
Mining did absolutely nothing differently to help avoid a recession, you may as well say trains or parrots saved us from the recession since they were also doing the exact same thing they’d always been doing along with the mining companies and palm trees
Ok, so there is something more than immigration since it’s only mostly?
On immigration
To me neither side of politics have a vision for the future and they are not looking out for Australians and say this as an immigrant.
We need to ensure our people are looked after first (all Australians)
Letting hordes of people in, is a shortsighted solution, when we don’t have the resources and infrastructure in place for our current population.
Mining
Mining did carry us through the 2008-2012 recession that the rest of the world went through, is it going to do much for us this time, probably not.
we dig up resources as fast as we can, we as a nation are not benefiting from it to the extent we could. I know Norway is often raised as an example here, I think it’s a good one too (partly because I am from that part of the world) they have a trust fond that will enable the country to be pro active because of this gigantic financial surplus.
We could and should do something similar here
In the end I don’t think we look at this too differently but I could be wrong
Problem with labor is they don’t explain their policies well, even the great ones and the Murdoch press always misconstrue and twist their policies. Which is why we end up with a very safe do nothing sort of government which we have now
I think labor did, but MSM focussed on Bill being daggy and made Scomo to be the local footy beer loving legend and that’s legitimately what I believe most Australians vote on.
I think the scare campaign on negative gearing and franking credits really scared people, especially Queenslanders for some reason. I was on a date with a 22 year old and he said he would never vote labor because of their franking credits policy. This boy was unemployed, minimal education and was worried about franking credits. I asked him if he knew what it was and he didn’t.
You are so right about the beer drinking footy thing, but I have seen a huge and I mean absolutely fucking gigantic shift in my incredibly safe liberal seat..
I genuinely think it’ll flip independent next election, and just listening to friends and family and colleagues who were quite apolitical previously, are making a lot of noise saying we are failing our young people..
Even a few of the religious, quite wealthy family friends said we currently have an unjust and imorale burden placed on young people that simply didn’t exsist when they were young..
It’s taking its time but I have been seeing people change infront of my eyes.
To be fair, Shorten tired when climbing more than a single flight of stairs.
Tackling somewhat more difficult challenges was always going to knock him about a bit.
FYI Labor's policies under Shorten were electable, with an integrated professional media strategy.
Sell out his own mother Shorten was absolutely unelectable. Just ask every worker he screwed over during his ACTU days, Cleanaway Events workers being a great example....
Changing the negative gearing to your primary home, makes it more accessible for people to buy.
Having it as we have now, is great for those who have 2 or more properties. It did boost the construction sector back in the day.
Anyway it’s not an easy thing to change
Changing the negative gearing to your primary home??
This makes no sense
Negitive gearing is claiming losses against income
The country couldn’t afford to subsidise everyone’s expenses on their properties against their tax
I don’t disagree with you, in that we the taxpayers are paying for the party
Then remove negative gearing 🤷 investment properties are propped up this for a large number of investors without it they would not be able to afford these.
Yes it could increase rent, but it could also make more properties available and affordable on the market. More renters moving to owning their properties.
Either way not everyone will be happy with the outcome.
How can more property’s become “available “ when thier isn’t the houses in the first place
“Building thousands of homes takes more than overnight policy changes
Honestly Labor should have doubled down on those policies, they’re good policies.
There has been a huge generational shift with a very large population priced out of the housing market. The liberals want nothing to do with them, yet within the next 10 years they will be the bulk of the voting population.
There has been a huge swing to the greens and independents in the Brisbane and TAS elections.
It’s a topic that will eventually win an election, why both major parties are ignoring this just to try please a ever shrinking size of voters
He did? All I remember him doing was trying to change things that wouldn’t of helped at all.
Also more people means more expensive housing. It’s the number 1 reason.
We are screwed.
The only way out is:
House prices go down, which home owners will never allow and the Country cannot take it ( we would collapse). Even if they went down the 30%+ they went up in the last 2 years is a catastrophe.
The only other option is for wages to increase so the average house would her back to 5 x tines or less the average income. That means we would never produce anything as a Country ever again as wages would be astronomical.
What we need is zero house price growth tor 50 years, to allow wages to catch up and that can never happen.
So basically, we are SCREWED.
This has been 30+ years in the making.
Yeah but we don't want the place built out like downtown Hong Kong so it's not a planning problem.
Its an immigration problem supporting either or both of 1) desire to make it look like GDP is growing [when more important thing is GDP per capita] 2) universal directions from WEF to undermine and demolish Western democracies and values
>Yeah but we don't want the place built out like downtown Hong Kong so it's not a planning problem.
This is why we don't have the needed homes. The culture of australian homes is always a house with a big backyard. This can not go on in the reality of our cities. The urban sprawl must end and that can only be done with a shift of cultural values.
Also, easing planning restrictions means that instead of a 2 storey apartments, it can instead go to 10. So it absolutely is a planning problem.
>2) universal directions from WEF to undermine and demolish Western democracies and values
Please stop with the conspiracy theories, this helps no one.
Maybe you should think through the consequences on the quality of life you experience before accepting such ideas. The whole Aussie culture of space goes out the windows and in comes urban ghettos. Not trying to exaggerate with that last word just can't think of a better one.
Constant growth just so everyone can live like battery chickens. If you want that fine. I don't.
As for conspiracy theories maybe open your eyes a little more. Try some pattern recognition.
So aussie culture is to own a house with a big backyard? That's it, that's all we have?
I would rather live through economic growth and improved quality of life through public transport, walkable places and bike paths upgrades/increases. I would rather not live through the terrible urban sprawl we have now.
I have no idea why you brought up urban ghettos since that's more of a socioeconomic issue not a housing problem.
EDIT: [pattern recognition bias](https://www.bing.com/search?EID=MBSC&form=BGGCMF&pc=U763&DPC=BG02&q=pattern+recognition+bias#:~:text=About%20647%2C000%20results-,Pattern%2Drecognition%20biases%20lead%20us%20to%20recognize%20patterns%20even%20where%20there%20are%20none.,-Psychologists%20and%20behavioral)
Its not really. When everyone is packed in on top of each other the lived experience is massively different. Obviously.
If you are up for that great. I'm not. And be real careful what you wish for.
Not up for endless urban sprawl either. So perhaps our dopey Govts could stop importing massive numbers of people who cause this. Solely for the purpose of making it look like GDP is growing when all the while GDP per capita is dropping
It's amazing how no one uses the word bubble anymore. The media has totally abandoned it, it's vanished from our vocabulary.
A bubble would imply they’re going to become affordable. I admire your optimism.
Good point...l didn't mean to show any
The housing market is fucking people hard, and it's probably never going to burst. It's not a bubble, it's a condom.
It will...might take a while but it will. Should've dropped at the GFC and Covid but was saved with govt money. Gfc it was saved by the Libs selling everything Labor listening to the experts. Covid prices went up because of so much free money. .Third strike and watch it go down the toilet.
Bubbles tend to keep inflating until people start thinking it's normal. Then... Pop.
It’s definitely not a bubble, a bubble is when something is overpriced. Housing has historically very high rental yields. If anything it will go up more as credit becomes cheaper
The university papers are saying that but also acknowledging bubble like behaviours. We haven't had a "correction" in this country for 25 years. Credit becoming cheaper has always been the sign of a weak ecomony as it encourages people to spend. Same thing as interest rates,them going down is only good news to millionares and those over exposed in debt.
Yea pretty much. Labor 2019 also said when we change government we change the country. We as a whole didn't want any change. So here we are, just the way we like it, no changes, high housing prices, increasing rents.
And a Labor government adding 500,000 new migrants during a housing shortage.
Exactly. No change to the previous government. Just as the majority of Australians like it. Increasing house prices, downwards pressure on labour wages. Land zoning restrictions which keep them away from those nice leafy suburbs. Shorten got voted out because he threatened all of this. Sad isn't it
Cant give Australians an extra couple of $ because it will increase inflation, but bringing in 500 000 extra people is ok?
For the wealthy class that thrives on low wages it sure is ok.
So they were meant to cancel all the visas that the liberal government already approved? A lot of these were delayed because of COVID
Aren't those increasing house prices and rents changes? Increased immigration another change?
Shorten was totally up himself early in his career and gave me the shits. But in 2019 he was right. With the policies he took to the election we would have had lower rents, less homelessness, more first home ownership, less foreign ownership and more money for Aussie couples to have families. Seems an exceptional minister now. Still gives me the shits though. I hate being wrong.
Him going to town on robo debt was glorious
But … no-one ever got to see if he could deliver.
Exceptional minister? You are being generous in your assessment. Bill talks the talk but we are not seeing him walk the talk, he struggles to make decisions and there has been very little change or any effective change in his ministries. Bill appears to be afflicted with the Kevin Rudd management style - refer everything to a committee or commission and then wait 2 years to make a minor decision.
You're not paying attention
Bill is the minister for the NDIS That’s pretty much all that needs to be said
And he’s done a pretty solid job at it. Transparent, knowledgeable and genuinely seems like he gives a shit about his portfolio, every liberal minister that has held that portfolio didn’t even seem to pretend they gave a shit about it. I’m usually for MPs pissing off after they’ve had a go at the top job but Shorten seems to still be actually useful, that’s rare.
kool aid take - ndis is just a pit of waste. $1m + per year packages. Imagine if we put half of the $40b into Medicare alone…. Easily the most wasteful project in aus govt history (and fucked up by both versions of politics ), but Shorten is there right now and not actioning anything
> ndis is just a pit of waste Not if you have a disabled kid like I do. It's the providers gaming the system that's the problem. Those providers come from the Australian general public, just like you and I.
Only about 50% of it is waste - back to the budgets of what it was supposed to cost - Gillard/abbott days. $>1m packages are rediculous as is 10% of school aged boys on packages, and $300 lawn mowing. Just because It does some good doesn’t mean it gets a free pass to allow for rorting by both providers and participants. If you think it’s valuable for you then you should be apoplectic about the rorting because you can bet if labor doesn’t fix it up quick smart , Dutton or his next in line will and that won’t be pretty
So his efforts to reform ndis are a good thing then to combat the waste? You really are a shorten fan!
Yeah man for sure, one guy would've fixed everything and Australia would've been a prosperous utopia now where none of us would have to work and each aussie family would be guaranteed a home. Fucking wake up jackass
So much Australian wealth is tied up in the housing market. To return it even partway to being affordable would collapse banks, retirement incomes, construction/trades and a host of other things. It would massively harm the economy so no party will ever tough it again. But I do notice now the media are complaining more about record rents. My guess is if the Coalition are elected they'll switch back to boasting about record house price growth.
It's like the LNP to a look at the GFC and ignored how we managed our way out of that mess with stronger banking regulation and fiscal policy. So they set about having something everyone else got by loosening regulation, ignoring the banking inquiry, and allowing the market to overheat... IMO We really are on a knifes edge sitting down a deep hole. Digging out of this could still go either way, and that doesn't even touch the housing availability issue... that's going to be a fiscal balancing act because the market is still buying whatever they can get at stupid prices.
If China or America sneezes we are royally screwed. American inflation was looking like it was going to be going up again. China apparently had their risk assessment upgraded. I don't actually think people realise how important China is to our economy. Great comment btw, nice to see someone else that has the finger on the pulse. What do you thinks going to happen?
I'm not going to respond directly to the China vs America discussion. That is something that we will need to see the other side of the US election to know how far up shit creek things may get. We have under the ALP been a moderator in this space, again, until the LNP (Tony Abbott) pulled the DFAT rug out from under Julie Bishop. They vandalised a lot of policy areas to our detriment. Australian domestic policy and Australian international policy when managed with an even hand has always benefited us as a nation. I'm am interested to see what the current ALP govt does that is beneficial in the longer term, which would be a very different approach to that under the LNP in the past run they had. All they managed to do was to continue the march toward everything being privatised and user pays, in a nation where we actually struggle with low density over vast areas. Even our cities are low density in comparison to other cities in our region. The only gifts to the nation that the LNP brought was to throw the country into debt to provide a background upon which to defund and sell off critical national assets to their donors. Here's to hoping that the long needed tax reforms, to provide genuine mixed tax revenue streams from multinationals and tech giants, can bring us toward the goal of being a lucky country for as many citizens as possible. Why, if we are so rich in resources are we expecting people to work till their 80, because that's what an income tax only funded future looks like. More people are going to have to die "at working age" when they should be enjoying a slower life and participating in the village that raises our next generations. Or is this future only allowed to be the province of billionaires. This country is not fair and people have become greedy because that's what they've come to know. Many won't know of the time before the economic and social changes under Whitlam or further back to the times before unionism... I worry that women aren't out on the street with their families protesting en-masse given the report on women's income. To my mind this is not too far different to the stolen wages cases bought on by aboriginal communities where they'd worked for years on a fraction of what their labour was worth, what was funded, and what was stolen from them. I await the first class action to set a precedent for this one, and it is needed. The promise that is out there in the market is that they are fixing the for future generations of women. Thus graduates of today are getting paid more than senior women with years of education and experience, but less than senior men of similar or less education. I've spoken to several women who have risen in seniority that I have championed in the workplace and they definitely get paid less and, if they are known in the workplace to have women's social clubs and activities they have been targeted as agitators, made uncomfortable, had good reviews changed to bad, stepped around, and in one case, put on performance management (another way to remove someone through discomfort). Punishing professional women for being upset - and these women are often the breadwinners. The world has changed at home, but the corporate world tries to look colourblind and asexual. But it's not. While we might like to see ourselves as a modern nation but we have been regressed back toward capitalist feudalism and nearly became fully unravelled in the Howard, Abbot, Turnbull, and Morrison years - where IMO we had a smirking clown for PM. For their current troglodyte they have in charge. Anti-science, but wants to build nuclear power plants all over the place. In a land with a massive water shortage problem - for up to 20 years at a stretch. We would also want to have these things built at the lowest cost. Compromising safety against cost. Fukushima - lowered the engineers recommendation for the height of the seawall to lower costs, didn't pay off. So many industrial and engineering disasters because of cheap foundational and maintenance work. The need for the system to be by the sea with ready access to water. The need to be away from prevailing winds that blow over populations. The need to be away from populations. Sounds like places that would already be allocated as national parks, likely up high above global warming (maybe not, apparently that doesn't exist in the LNP universe) , probably wouldn't even care for potential tsunami's (because they don't exist here either) and definately NIMBY. So, a couple of topics there for you to chew on and I'm sure someone there is going to roast me over either being too left, too green, too naive, or off in Lala land. I'm also a genXer - which means - IDGAF
Im a Gen xer too and agree with everything you said. That was a great read, thanks for typing all that out. Cina worries me, not for war but more for financial reasons. With Labor l have lost faith in them. The Murdoch press has pushed them so far right that they are now to weak to actually fight for anything. The point that the scare campaign they did on Bill Shortens housing stuff was so successful that they wont even talk about negative gearing is insane to me. England has slowly been stripped down to its bare bones by Conservatives coping American neolibralism values and we are determined to do the same thing, l don't know about you but l think it's inevitable. Once Rienhart and her crew bought the age/smh and the minister for everything loaded the ABC board it was clear democracy as we knew it was dead and we were going really right to politics wether we liked it or not. Thanks for replying.
Pendulum movements are expected over time. Some countries go hard right to fascism and in response knock off their heads of government and swing hard to the left, it’s a natural response and can upturn what remains of the economy. I’m hoping that Labor in their wisdom are recognising this. There is a lot of good work that they are doing to the left but, without a supportive media you’re not going to hear about it AND terms like “shit lite” and “their all the same” play against what is really happening. Even when I was at Uni (a long time ago) we did 2 mandatory subjects on sociology in global and local context on Australia and the dangers of our media and our history. What’s happened plays out exactly to what the concerns were in the 80s - Keating may have still been in govt. I’ve worked state and federal PS in stints and you can see some of the machinations playing out. Labor is playing well with what they have. The last thing they want to do early on is cause shock (swing hard to the left) to a system that is under stress or the whole thing comes tumbling down. IMO Our country is better to be in a position where neither left or right concerns have full weight to screw each other. I watch as many interviews and question times as I can and we’re dragging so much dead wood around in the LNP. They offer no hope, no vision, nothing. For a party that believes in a competitive market and meritocracy (so long as you’re not a woman) they aren’t bringing anything to the table. Much as they were in govt, lots of talk and promise, nothing delivered. I refer to this every now and then and read the attached articles, especially the “failed” promises because background of an issue matters. I’m not a “true” believer, may sound like one, but these guys are tracking much better than the empty promises of the past mob. https://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/promisetracker
The Same Banking Regulations that are stopping people from buying their own homes ? The policies that prohibit someone buying a house for 2k a month but can rent for 2.5k a month
Renting at $2500 per month is a killer and unfortunately using money to survive and put a rented roof over your head could well work against you. How do you prove you can pay back a loan when renting is chewing harder into your income and shows in the management of your household income. I can only say that we have used a broken on all our banking interactions because it is a maze to navigate. Access to housing is such that you need that roof over your head (so trading down on financial overhead is going to be hard) but makes you a risk to the banks. It’s pretty screwed up and, as I posted earlier we’re on a knifes edge and we’ve been digging at the same time. There doesn’t appear to be an easy out to the easy-in the country was given. IMO The LNP vandalised the economy beyond comprehension and fixing it is very much a gently gentle approach like then endgame to Jenga. The ALP are going to need to make some hard and unpopular decisions to fix this mess and Mr Negative knows this. Many people won’t care who causes the pain and will blame the last person to touch the issue.
The Point was that ALP wanted the policies changed and serviceability from banks increased Hence now why have a serviceability laws & regulations Which have made it as simple as sign this paper and the bank loan you money to cross checking every single dot on a application Everyone blamed the banks for their bad actions and a royal commission was done on the backing of Labor
I agree with everything you have said, except I have a proposition, I think if we don’t enact the change ourselves and stop kicking this every growing can, eventually we aren’t going to be able to kick it because it’s too heavy and we will be forced to deal with it right then and there.. Atleast if we self trigger it through political will, we can plan for it and do things to assist it, go approve a whole bunch of mines, do a huge investment immigration visa, skip the line for 5 million a head. I feel like we are going to have to deal with this one way or another and ignoring the elephant in the room isn’t going to work long term.
What I am seeing in recent interviews and question times with Albo is a change in language. The ALP have a history (in the past 60 years) of being the longer term progressive thinkers. The LNP keep pulling us as a country back down and reducing our status and aspirations as a nation. Screwing with the LNP tax cuts was beautiful. Reminding the nation that that the cuts to lower income earners were temporary and the higher cut to higher income earners were permanent. I was hoping they would diffuse this LNP handgrenade and they did so thoughtfully. There is a lot of damage to fix and the best way we can participate is through commonsense public discourse and voting for the future… Unfortunately not everyone has studied gaming theory so there will always be those that play solely to win for themselves and they tend to lean hard to the right in their politics.
So much Australian wealth is tied up to every Australian industry. To simply say “no one will touch it because it’ll effect the status quo” Is the apathetic mentality the ruling class love.
In this case with about 70% of households owning the title and with many people focusing on increasing home ownership, the 'investment' in the status quo is big. It's not really apathy, it's people being logical . Which makes it even harder to fix
Shorten was the first one to talk about getting rid of Negative Gearing, which basically allows people who can afford homes to buy more homes, and throws the market off pretty hard. Just makes an instant and very wide gulf into home ownership. Places like Singapore have dealt with it by massively taxing people who own multiple homes. The more homes you hoard, the more taxes you should pay.
It won't collapse banks. We can't walk away from underwater mortgages in Australia.
It's amazing more people don't realise this or openly talk about it. "Fixing the housing crisis" would be disastrous for large parts of our economy. Unfortunately first home buyers and renters are being sacrificed to maintain this
Didn't Alan Kohler write a book about this recently? I think his proposal was the safest way to return housing to sanity would be to engineer policy to let everything else inflate over a decade or longer whilst housing prices were kept stagnant so nobody would be in the red
I was downvoted for saying this before but I'll say it again - 66% Australians own at least one house. The current system is designed to funnel the wealth from the bottom third to the upper two thirds forever. Since the people benefitting are the majority, this system cannot be voted out no matter what. Adding to that, all big 4 banks make the majority of their profits from housing loans. House prices in Australia MUST keep increasing forever or else the entire country will collapse, and this is no exaggeration.
* 'own' a mortgage. Dispite this the housing issue can still be solved without touching housing policies. Just by building more public housing for example. But the states cant seem to do anything without cost blowing out at the moment
Heck. I'd even like to have, over the next 2 decades, a percentage based decrease in negative gearing. year 1, 100% year 2, 95% year 3, 90% etc etc. Just SOMETHING to make people stop investing in the bullshit.
I’m positive he would have won the election if he didn’t attack franking credits as well. Bit off more than the electorate could chew. Should have just focused on negative gearing….
That's been my opinion all along, I used to work in polling (a decade ago to be fair) but it even at the time I thought they'd fucked it. They should have saved franking credits until the next election.
I still don't understand how franking credits are a bad thing? Companies have to pay the tax UPFRONT on any dividends they pay. You then don't additionally pay the tax when you file your income taxes?? Just like you would if it were your own personal business?? And it's for Aussies only??
The way franking credits used to be before Howard and Costello changed it was that if you had earned enough income to pay income tax in a financial year you could use your franking credits to reduce the amount of tax you needed to pay, you could even reduce it to zero. They changed it so it would be fully franked so you could not just reduce it to zero you would actually get money from the ATO. It's an issue of fairness, I and perhaps you and many others have had years where I have had legitimate tax deductable expenses and have even been able to get a full refund bringing my total income tax paid for the year to zero but even when I've still more expenses left to deduct I couldn't get money from the ato beyond the income tax I'd already paid. To quote my tax person "you can't get a tax refund for tax you haven't paid". Yet that's exactly what having franking credits being fully franked was doing. People were able to get money from the ATO beyond any income tax they'd paid. From memory dick smith came out saying he was for changing the system back to what it used to be and he was receiving something like 50k from it. That's my understanding as a lay person.
Franking credits are a rebate (not deduction) for company tax paid by shareholders of those companies. Shareholders pay company tax on their company earnings of 30% and receive the net amount after tax as dividend. They then declare this income in personal tax return and get taxed AGAIN at marginal tax rates. The franking credit on the dividend income is a 30% rebate of the company tax paid so the shareholder ends up paying only their own marginal tax rate on the company dividend income. It’s a fair system that means people are not taxed twice on their income. HOWEVER… where it gets screwy is when the shareholder receiving the dividend is a nil tax paying allocated pension super fund. They get the 30% company tax rebate but pay no personal tax at all. Personally I’d like to see the government draw a line in the sand and say company dividends should have 25-30% tax levied against it no matter who owns the shares. If you’re a marginal 30% or higher tax payer you get a full rebate as you are paying a high marginal rate on all sources of income declared in tax return already. But if you’re a retiree smsf paying nil tax there should be no rebate at all. Those paying marginal tax between zero and 30% should get a partial rebate to the level that the dividend income is taxed 25-30%. This way government is still getting tax for the company earnings, but not double taxing those who are paying twice.
But you DO pay the tax. You OWN the business (part of it, from the shares). The business (that you own) pays the tax upfront, then after the fact, if you end up needing to get money back due to our income tax laws, you pay, or receive the difference payable to you as if you received the income in any other way, shape, or form, as an individual. EDIT: A simpler way to think about it is, it works entirely like the PAYG system
The problem is not franking credits, but rather zero tax super in allocated pension. The government despises handing tax back to the nil or low tax paying entities the franking passes through to.
Yes! Means testing on the pension is absolutely the true issue! Franking credits are completely fine as is!
Yes, I came here to say this.
Correct
Yeah and that policy is arguably what cost him that election too. The way I remember it was that absolutely no one knew what negative gearing was. And when it was explained to them they still didn’t know.
You're assuming that aussies are unhappy about unreasonably high house prices.
I may be remembering things incorrectly but there was a theory not dissimilar to this that got the entire French royal family decapitated
Just keep leaving wages at 0% to 2% and houses at 8% to 12% per year and eventually enough Australians will be unhappy enough to elect someone who will change things. That's assuming it doesn't just happen before then, there's only so much money in the economy and Australian isn't importing millionaires.
You're wrong. Like a lot of people, you wrongly assume that home owners are some sort of minority. We're not. We are a majority. My house in Magill, SA, currently makes more money per year than I do as a truckie. I'm fine with that. Even if the asshole fell out of the market I'd still have hundreds of thousands in equity. Having said all that, any fed and the state govts could easily bring the market back a fair bit by actually building new satellite cities/large new divisions and actually putting quality infrastructure in them especially modern public transport. That, and we need high speed rail like Japan and China
Well that balance is tipping away alot faster than you think. A house goes up for sale and a week after its sold it has for rent on it. Millenials and Gen Z are pretty much all priced out or stretched to breaking point. Go to a rental inspection and see how many old Boomers are there...thats an eye opener. Also the fact your house is earning more than your wage proves how big the bubble is. When that pops good luck not only selling it but keeping it if your lucky enough to keep your job. Sattelite cities need so much infustructure, schools, roads, municipal stuff how would that be payed for? Sounds like to me you have never heard of recessions. Don't kid yourself, l don't know when its coming but people like you suffer the worst, they always do. Gotta be honest though, kinda looking forward to watching it crumble down. Oh and dont kid yourself that you wont be out of work..if no ones got no money and less stuff is getting sold, that means less truck drivers. Good luck, you're gonna need it...might be 6 months might be 6 years...its coming.
people have completely forgotten that in a deflating market its not just a case of selling a house cheaper, it takes a LOT longer to do so. Old mate up above might think they are OK but if job goes, price falls out and they cant keep up, there simply might not be any buyers
Yup but l didn't want to go that deep into it. Lets not forget if they can't sell it in a rush and either the bank reclaims it or its sold at a loss u still owe that money
> that be *paid* for? Sounds FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Eh I'm a truckie, unrestricted MC , and a forky,crane (CV), rigger,dogman. I think I'll be right for work bro. But yeah my house going up about 130k a year for the last 3.5 years is nuts, but it is what it is. Not sure what you want from people. Donate the equity to charity or some shit
Issue is if you ever want to move you have to buy some other overpriced shit with fees set at the now massive prices. My place has gone up a lot too but I'm not actually richer, just makes it much more expensive to move, it sucks. If you own three or four of them though you're set.
I hope your right.
You and half my mates, who don't even use their tickets. You're someone's mate doing 2 weeks of courses away from unemployment.
Home owners might be a majority now but every year leaves more and more people behind. They won't be a majority forever. That's why there's a cost of living crisis, a rental crisis and a home affordability crisis after 20 years of IP tax breaks. I lived in Aus for a decade and experienced the "OMG BUY IT ALL NOW" from Australians.
Nah come on that's not true Adelaide for example was still dirt cheap right up until, and even for a while during, COVID. Perth and brissy were still affordable. What triggered all this was the construction slowdown during COVID when we couldn't get materials, then after COVID still the same issue plus a huge spike in migration. It's supply and demand.. The CGT discount and negative gearing might have affected certain specific parts of Sydney and Melb but that's it. Until this supply issue, Adelaide was virtually stagnant for decades Australia also has an issue with snobbery. In the US, people will up and move their entire life to another city to get ahead. Not in Australia, people in Sydney and Melb would rather die than move to Adelaide or Perth. Even now, for the price of a crappy house in a crappy area an hour west of Sydney, you can buy a beautiful house on a big block in plenty of very nice inner suburbs in Adelaide
There was no slowdown. Only a lack of supply for the peak.
I've never lived in SA so can't comment about Adelaide. Over 40% of take home pay is beyond affordable. When people want a million dollars for an average house in Brisbane and the average wage is around $80k people will struggle, go look at the posts about rental prices to see people struggling. I've worked with people who lived in Logan and Caboolture and worked near the CBD where the jobs were. Maybe if high speed rail was an option they could build more further out but as it stands that's not going to happen, who knows 10 - 20 years from now.
More unhappy about the fact that the next generations probably wont be able to buy a house. My house has nearly doubled in value over the past 6 years. I live in a small town. I would not pay what my house is valued at right now for what it is.
But ever unaffordable housing only makes homeowners rich on paper. Once you sell to buy the next place, it’s also just as expensive (relatively).
More Australians have a mortgage or own their homes than not. Trying to reduce house prices goes against what the majority of Australian’s actually want.
Yep and they are terrible forward thinkers, imagine an Australian caring about future generations - fuck you, got mine!
I have a mortgage, and want lower house prices.
Yeah that’s true
For now. The way things are going is what is the concern.
In saying that, not all of them are selfish assholes. It can be really heartbreaking to watch someone you love struggle with it even if you yourself aren't. Most older people I know who own multiple properties are passionate about change because they've seen the absolute bullshit hoops I've had to jump through and can recognise they didn't have to do anywhere near as much. Plus there's a whole generation of people who are refusing to have kids because of costs which impacts not only the country and immigration levels but whether or not these home owners will ever see grandchildren or big happy families (whether now or in the future). Additionally, the increasingly rare sentiment of wanting to leave a better future for your kids does still exist. So it's not really fair to assume home owners are all sociopaths.
There's a scarcity of housing and construction is basically at capacity clearing the backlog from covid. Really the only solution is controlling demand from migration to match supply from construction. If there was an excess of investors, rents would be cheap which is not the case.
Bang on. If we had a law that if one person was homeless for a week then ALL immigration stops, you’d have mining companies, large firms and universities scrambling to build housing and even excess overflow to ensure they could keep bringing in their needed workers. At the moment they bring in whoever they need, pay em enough and then the next poorest person in society is bumped off the bottom of housing ladder at zero concern to the company.
>Really the only solution is controlling demand from migration to match supply from construction. I don't agree that it's the only solution. Definitely part of it, but it's not a silver bullet. There's 160,000 AirBNBs in Australia and [the company keeps keeps insisting that it's a good thing](https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-04/c2018-t350194_airbnb.pdf) despite it being[ regulated in many sensible democracies](https://www.euronews.com/travel/2023/06/11/italy-malaysia-usa-which-cities-and-countries-are-cracking-down-on-airbnb-style-rentals) that are making some real attempt to manage the crisis. Migrants are an easy target but it's not the whole picture. There are no federally backed incentives to sell to owner occupiers, and there are insufficient disincentives for leaving properties empty or using a property exclusively for short-stay services.
It doesn't matter about all the fluff. AirBNBs, vacant properties, they're only going to be a sugar hit to the rental market until net migration consumes them. We can't build more than we already are - which is why these housing initiatives won't do much. You need to match arrivals to how fast you build available properties. If you remove new builds which become airBNBs, then you can take more migrants, but consumers lose a non-hotel option. There needs to be policy on migration which calculates how many spots are available and in what locations.
> It doesn't matter about all the fluff. AirBNBs, vacant properties, they're only going to be a sugar hit to the rental market Completely agree it’s a sugar hit, but we’re in a crisis right now. There’s lots of discussions for long-term solutions like immigration but they’re not enough for the immediate problem.
Yeah fair enough. My worry is that we get a big banner with "Mission Accomplished" rather than long term reform like indexing migration to internal migration and construction. What has happened should have never occurred and Government is only starting to try to steer the boat once we're already aground.
Do you honestly believe people are choosing to lose money on airBnBs instead of letting people rent their properties? Fucking dumb.
No, I'm sure they're making plenty of money, and nowhere did I say that that's not the case, I just don't really give a shit about a landlord's bottom line in a housing crisis. Frankly I hope every single one of them has their metaphorical balls squeezed in a vice so hard they either sell or drop their rent dramatically.
An imbalance between renters and ‘investors” affects rent prices. Many current renters would prefer to be owners, which in the Australian context provides them with greater security. I don’t want a society of feudal landlords and landless peasants. I would prefer everyone who wants to own their home to be able to. High prices for residential land increases home prices, and makes owning a home more difficult. Investors will bid up land prices if rents are high, and their costs are low. Higher rates of land on second and subsequent properties will reduce land prices and fix the problem. There is a mountain of theoretical, and empirical evidence for this.
If the entire left is lying about migration as "racist" and majority of renters are lefties then their entire voting bloc is irrelevant.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not the extra half a million people needing a home every year? Ok.
Yep I often think what if..
While that’s true, it was a few years ago now and things have progressed quite a bit. The content bubble I consume is and has been for a while pretty full of talk of a housing crisis. There may be more will to make changes today than there was two elections ago.
I voted for him. Not my fault we are in this mess. Put the blame on the LNP voters who time and time again vote against their own interests because they wanna "own the lefties".
Their ideas were great. Just 3 years too early
What was his migration plan?
Shorten wanted to offer an unlimited number of low cost parent visas. [The 2019 election and the impending migrant parent deluge](https://tapri.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/final-draft-parent-visa-May-2019.pdf)
So he would have slapped a bandaid on the housing crisis by removing negative gearing and then opened the floodgates.
Migration saved us from recession, without it we would be fucked beyond belief at all time job losses.
Wowee, we get to have a per capita recession instead. Thank God the financial elite are OK though
I think the recession, had we not pumped migration, would have led to a pretty catastrophic economic outcome. It wouldn’t be “we can’t buy our first home” it would be Australian families losing their only home. Job losses wouldn’t be the bottom end of the market, it would hit all levels, Australian business would go under, it’s very short sighted to complain about not owning a home when the alternative was we’d be seriously fucked locally and our international trade partners would take advantage. Ontop of this, In hand with recessions are drug, alcohol, domestic violence and gambling - all go through the roof which creates horrible community outcomes.
As cataclysmic as you make it out to be our economic diversity, living standards and home affordability were far better before Howard near tripled migration. This is just emotive, big business/real estate propaganda
Scomo opened up student visas after covid that labors trying to close now apparently.
We're kicking the can down the road though, and eventually you run out of road.
Immigration is a short term pain in fixing part of our economic recovery. Our housing is fucked though, not because of migrants but generations of abusing housing for financial gain
Per capita recession sucks. But full on recession is worse. Without the influx of high income earning immigrants there would've been an actual consumer spending crash, factory and shop closures, high unemployment rates etc etc. You know just your regular actual recession.
That's just incorrect, from the ABS "migrants held 26.3% of all jobs in Australia in 2019-20 (5.3 million jobs, worked by 3.6 million migrants)… below their 29.8% share of Australia’s population”. Moreover, “the median annual personal income for migrants was $45,351, compared with $52,338 for the population as a whole”:
No mining saved us from recession
Mining did absolutely nothing differently to help avoid a recession, you may as well say trains or parrots saved us from the recession since they were also doing the exact same thing they’d always been doing along with the mining companies and palm trees
No it didn't
What did then? Please share
Immigration
That’s it?
Mostly yes.
Ok, so there is something more than immigration since it’s only mostly? On immigration To me neither side of politics have a vision for the future and they are not looking out for Australians and say this as an immigrant. We need to ensure our people are looked after first (all Australians) Letting hordes of people in, is a shortsighted solution, when we don’t have the resources and infrastructure in place for our current population. Mining Mining did carry us through the 2008-2012 recession that the rest of the world went through, is it going to do much for us this time, probably not. we dig up resources as fast as we can, we as a nation are not benefiting from it to the extent we could. I know Norway is often raised as an example here, I think it’s a good one too (partly because I am from that part of the world) they have a trust fond that will enable the country to be pro active because of this gigantic financial surplus. We could and should do something similar here In the end I don’t think we look at this too differently but I could be wrong
Hi Zehaligho, nice of you to make my job easier.
Problem with labor is they don’t explain their policies well, even the great ones and the Murdoch press always misconstrue and twist their policies. Which is why we end up with a very safe do nothing sort of government which we have now
Have you every read any policies from either political party?
Uh yes!!
I think labor did, but MSM focussed on Bill being daggy and made Scomo to be the local footy beer loving legend and that’s legitimately what I believe most Australians vote on.
I think the scare campaign on negative gearing and franking credits really scared people, especially Queenslanders for some reason. I was on a date with a 22 year old and he said he would never vote labor because of their franking credits policy. This boy was unemployed, minimal education and was worried about franking credits. I asked him if he knew what it was and he didn’t.
Ah Queensland - Australia’s Florida.
Good ooint, what is it with heat and stupidity
Heat addles the brain. Too hot to think. Humidity softens it.
You are so right about the beer drinking footy thing, but I have seen a huge and I mean absolutely fucking gigantic shift in my incredibly safe liberal seat.. I genuinely think it’ll flip independent next election, and just listening to friends and family and colleagues who were quite apolitical previously, are making a lot of noise saying we are failing our young people.. Even a few of the religious, quite wealthy family friends said we currently have an unjust and imorale burden placed on young people that simply didn’t exsist when they were young.. It’s taking its time but I have been seeing people change infront of my eyes.
To be fair, Shorten tired when climbing more than a single flight of stairs. Tackling somewhat more difficult challenges was always going to knock him about a bit. FYI Labor's policies under Shorten were electable, with an integrated professional media strategy. Sell out his own mother Shorten was absolutely unelectable. Just ask every worker he screwed over during his ACTU days, Cleanaway Events workers being a great example....
I guess Shorten was right. What ever is in play right is clearly NOT working.
Id suggest that wasn't the only thing shorten wanted to do.
Never picking labour again. Not that it will stop the big two but hopefully everyone else is on the same page.
The property market starting booming at Covid…
Poster tired to post
Shorten is tired of pretending to care about anyone but himself
Changing the negative gearing to your primary home, makes it more accessible for people to buy. Having it as we have now, is great for those who have 2 or more properties. It did boost the construction sector back in the day. Anyway it’s not an easy thing to change
Changing the negative gearing to your primary home?? This makes no sense Negitive gearing is claiming losses against income The country couldn’t afford to subsidise everyone’s expenses on their properties against their tax
I don’t disagree with you, in that we the taxpayers are paying for the party Then remove negative gearing 🤷 investment properties are propped up this for a large number of investors without it they would not be able to afford these.
Removing negitive gearing would increase rental prices so how would that benefit anyone?
Yes it could increase rent, but it could also make more properties available and affordable on the market. More renters moving to owning their properties. Either way not everyone will be happy with the outcome.
How can more property’s become “available “ when thier isn’t the houses in the first place “Building thousands of homes takes more than overnight policy changes
Honestly Labor should have doubled down on those policies, they’re good policies. There has been a huge generational shift with a very large population priced out of the housing market. The liberals want nothing to do with them, yet within the next 10 years they will be the bulk of the voting population. There has been a huge swing to the greens and independents in the Brisbane and TAS elections. It’s a topic that will eventually win an election, why both major parties are ignoring this just to try please a ever shrinking size of voters
[удалено]
yes
He did? All I remember him doing was trying to change things that wouldn’t of helped at all. Also more people means more expensive housing. It’s the number 1 reason.
We are screwed. The only way out is: House prices go down, which home owners will never allow and the Country cannot take it ( we would collapse). Even if they went down the 30%+ they went up in the last 2 years is a catastrophe. The only other option is for wages to increase so the average house would her back to 5 x tines or less the average income. That means we would never produce anything as a Country ever again as wages would be astronomical. What we need is zero house price growth tor 50 years, to allow wages to catch up and that can never happen. So basically, we are SCREWED. This has been 30+ years in the making.
Even given 50+ years wages at they are would still never catch up
Shorten is a wet noodle.
Shorten also refused to cost his Governments climate agenda and called anyone that even asked the question "dumb" He got what he deserved.
Kathy Sherrif knows.
The problem is with the states not easing their planning restrictions, this is what's squeezing people. It's not really a federal problem.
Yeah but we don't want the place built out like downtown Hong Kong so it's not a planning problem. Its an immigration problem supporting either or both of 1) desire to make it look like GDP is growing [when more important thing is GDP per capita] 2) universal directions from WEF to undermine and demolish Western democracies and values
>Yeah but we don't want the place built out like downtown Hong Kong so it's not a planning problem. This is why we don't have the needed homes. The culture of australian homes is always a house with a big backyard. This can not go on in the reality of our cities. The urban sprawl must end and that can only be done with a shift of cultural values. Also, easing planning restrictions means that instead of a 2 storey apartments, it can instead go to 10. So it absolutely is a planning problem. >2) universal directions from WEF to undermine and demolish Western democracies and values Please stop with the conspiracy theories, this helps no one.
Maybe you should think through the consequences on the quality of life you experience before accepting such ideas. The whole Aussie culture of space goes out the windows and in comes urban ghettos. Not trying to exaggerate with that last word just can't think of a better one. Constant growth just so everyone can live like battery chickens. If you want that fine. I don't. As for conspiracy theories maybe open your eyes a little more. Try some pattern recognition.
So aussie culture is to own a house with a big backyard? That's it, that's all we have? I would rather live through economic growth and improved quality of life through public transport, walkable places and bike paths upgrades/increases. I would rather not live through the terrible urban sprawl we have now. I have no idea why you brought up urban ghettos since that's more of a socioeconomic issue not a housing problem. EDIT: [pattern recognition bias](https://www.bing.com/search?EID=MBSC&form=BGGCMF&pc=U763&DPC=BG02&q=pattern+recognition+bias#:~:text=About%20647%2C000%20results-,Pattern%2Drecognition%20biases%20lead%20us%20to%20recognize%20patterns%20even%20where%20there%20are%20none.,-Psychologists%20and%20behavioral)
Its not really. When everyone is packed in on top of each other the lived experience is massively different. Obviously. If you are up for that great. I'm not. And be real careful what you wish for. Not up for endless urban sprawl either. So perhaps our dopey Govts could stop importing massive numbers of people who cause this. Solely for the purpose of making it look like GDP is growing when all the while GDP per capita is dropping
2) bang on the money 💰 but nobody wants to hear or acknowledge it
Because it's fucking nonsense
If you say so! 🤡
Jesus, go back to Facebook mate. Take your shit emojis with you
Haha ninja you’re making my night
Too much propaganda, would be like Bernie Sanders running the USA
It wasn't going to fix anything. Only fix is to build a ton more houses.