53
What you need to know about why house prices aren't coming down (www.abc.net.au)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/australia@aussie.zone
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 24 points 1 year ago (13 children)

nimbies, real estate agents and land lords are running the show

everyone else, like 95% of the population, embraces house affordability

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Let’s say that housing prices come down back in line with historic (pre-2000s) trends, as honestly - they damn well should; how do we not fuck over the millions of otherwise innocent owner-occupiers who suddenly find themselves severely underwater on their mortgages, due to no fault of their own?

    This is the needle we need to thread as a nation, and it’s a bloody hard one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    We take those Stage 3 tax cuts that the wealthy gobbled up (leave the ones for the lower earners) and use them to pay off the banks.

    Then write legislation to prevent this shit happening again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    It’s a good idea to start with, but flooding banks with that much money will likely have a massive down-side (think post-COVID19 levels of inflation), and it would be difficult to determine the right amount for each house, given that prices would still be in flux/freefall.

    My initial thoughts were about providing income tax deductions for losses on primary residence (eg. If your $900K townhouse in the ‘burbs devalues to $400K, you can claim the $500K over however many years it’s take you), as long as you continue to service your mortgage, after the initial refinance to determine eligibility.

    But I’m sure a tonne of people would be able to immediately spot loopholes or other reasons why my idea wouldn’t work either.

    It’s not actually all that easy, unfortunately - otherwise you’d think we’d already have had a politician put forward a proposal by now.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Yes and no. There are a lot of owner-occupiers in Australia now who on paper are Millionaires, and they like being Millionaires. They are not going to like it if/when that status is stripped from them.

    If houses nationally suddenly dropped in value by 50%, even if people's mortgages were halved at the same time, I expect the change would still be met with hostility. It's the unspoken truth of housing affordability: far too many Australians are happy with the present housing prices. They're outnumbered by the rest of us, but they are a large enough voting block to decide any election.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (6 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Because the rest of us don't have houses and aren't set to lose half our net worth by such policy changes. So, we have a variety of election policies that we prioritise.

    When Labor propose making changes to the status quo, even with mild changes, they have historically lost the election.

    It might be different next time, but it'd be a huge political risk to propose changes again after previous rejections.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    Because they own the media. Or they are the ones the media wants to please.

    Seeing TV on the gym always make me wonder who the hell makes that content and who the hell is meant to consume it.

    Are all the viewers real estate agents, house owners paying for renovation or people on yatch trips? I don't see a single normal person on those shows.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I'm not old but do old people actually want expensive housing? All my friends (zoomers) just want houses to be cheaper. I literally could not care less if that would theoretically make me less wealthy. I just want to afford things

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Unfortunately, it matters less what people want than what these people want

    Of the 227 sitting MPs and senators, only 12 declared no property ownership.

    Several senators are on the list, although we cannot be sure this provides an exhaustive picture because the property holdings of senators’ spouses are not published.

    Some in this group declared a financial interest in trusts but were not required to disclose any property held in those trusts.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (16 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Your opinion is very popular on reddit. You should check it out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (4 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I mean you'll see more people resonating with your opinion there. Here you will be bashed. Potentially with good reasons.

    I believe in supply and demand yes, and I don't believe real estate follows that. It's a game and those who know how to play and have better resources win.

    As mentioned here, there is the COVID example. I don't find your explanation credible. "People" (if I can use the term for those who benefited from the pandemic) didn't get rich so quickly for your explanation to make sense.

    What I do remember, not what I think, was people complaining everywhere that they couldn't find workforce. I remember a lot of chaos that happened directly because the immigrants were gone.

    Other than that, I'm not an "investor" and I would never be. So I can't debate that. I do know that investors (I know quite a few of them) are the cancer of society and their death would directly benefit everyone, probably also solving the real estate issue and I would be able to buy a house since anyone wanting to profit from that would worry about being murdered.

    That's my personal opinion on the subject. After all investors are killed, then we can start checking if immigrants are a problem and try to solve it. But it's probably a somewhat radical opinion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I didn't say that. I said that after all investors are dead, then we can start looking into immigration. But it's quite possible that the real estate issue would be solved and I would have a house and we would find out that immigration was not a problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Is it important for you that people who currently invest die, or that the seizing of properties doesn't work anymore?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    It's kind of a joke. Their behaviour is predatory and in a decent society that would not be allowed.

    I think profit from real estate should be illegal. At the very least from the land you bought. Not sure about what was constructed. But probably not either.

    No one should be allowed to sell a land for more than they paid, considering inflation, etc. No one should be allowed to get land to profit. You may b profit from the use of the land maybe, but NEVER from the land itself, be it renting, selling, whatever. Land is not a product you make. It's limited and existed before you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    And your rationale for huge growth during COVID when there was little no to immigration?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It's always people with fuckass usernames like "TruePatriot" saying shit like this. Like okay bro we get it you're trying really hard to be cool and taken seriously.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •