It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give.

** WARNING: false economy in motion!

what are you doing death? now you'll get nail started again  >:( >:( >:( >:(

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 6:03pm:

It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion!

Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here.

And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is. 

Only in the major cities

SOB

The housing bubble is a myth.

The housing myth is a bubble....

I predict revolution....

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 9:40am:

The housing myth is a bubble.... I predict revolution....

Aussies revolt, that'll be the day. We are talking about the most submissive defeatist people on earth. The poor dumb Aussie actually celebrates these high prices, and ironically the only people who profit (apart from banks and realtors) from them are those that sell up and leave.

Swagman wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 9:22am:

The housing bubble is a myth.

Yeh but the debt isn't :D Who's paying the interest bill on this lot ?

http://www.australiandebtclock.com.au/

---

John Smith wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 6:10pm:

what are you doing death? now you'll get nail started again  >:( >:( >:( >:(

BTW did you watch 4 corners on Monday night ?

How China Fooled the World

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/03/31/3972864.htm

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:51am:

John Smith wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:10pm: what are you doing death? now you'll get nail started again  >:( >:( >:( >:( BTW did you watch 4 corners on Monday night ? How China Fooled the World http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/03/31/3972864.htm

I did. We always knew that the Chinese economy would bust, the fallout will be catastrophic for us.

They said the property bubble was a myth in the US, Spain and Ireland too, oh but....oh but....but we have mining.

Actually, what we have is successive governments backing the real estate bubble and cashed up Chinese buyers, neither of those forces will be able to hold out for much longer.

How is it in the long term interest of Australia to rely on overseas investors to sustain the housing market?

GA wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 9:46am:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:40am: The housing myth is a bubble.... I predict revolution.... Aussies revolt, that'll be the day. We are talking about the most submissive defeatist people on earth. The poor dumb Aussie actually celebrates these high prices, and ironically the only people who profit (apart from banks and realtors) from them are those that sell up and leave.

Never a truer word was spoken.

GA wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 9:16am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.

:o

Our house was only worth $17,000!!!

1/2 the price of the car!!!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 11:14am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 10:51am: John Smith wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:10pm: what are you doing death? now you'll get nail started again  >:( >:( >:( >:( BTW did you watch 4 corners on Monday night ? How China Fooled the World http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/03/31/3972864.htm I did. We always knew that the Chinese economy would bust, the fallout will be catastrophic for us. They said the property bubble was a myth in the US, Spain and Ireland too, oh but....oh but....but we have mining. Actually, what we have is successive governments backing the real estate bubble and cashed up Chinese buyers, neither of those forces will be able to hold out for much longer. How is it in the long term interest of Australia to rely on overseas investors to sustain the housing market?

And what happened to all of those UK expats who bought a joint in Spain to retire ?

And what happened to all of those UK property investors who invested in property in Ireland before the bubble burst ?

Sure the housing bubble won't burst because you have all of these foreigners coming in and buying property. :D

We've heard it all before !!

King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 11:40am:

GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!!

Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville?

GA wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 12:36pm:

King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 11:40am: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!! Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville?

Tactical change of issue....

I hope you are prepared for Hockeystick Joe's deemed value in assets including home when you want a pension..

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 1:49pm:

GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 12:36pm: King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 11:40am: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!! Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville? Tactical change of issue.... I hope you are prepared for Hockeystick Joe's deemed value in assets including home when you want a pension..

I fought 'e was sayin' 'e's 'ouse would be valued at only $17,000 if it were only 1/10th of what its actually market value is (I'd said home prices were 10 time, is some instances, what they're really worth).

GA wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 12:36pm:

King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 11:40am: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!! Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville?

Naww did i make you stupid comment on house prices sound stupid?

Bridsville!!

No good slinging an "insult" with such a hefty dose of ignorance, just makes you look like a tool.

I live in a small town 100 meters from the banks of the Murray river, 500 meters from the 2012 Tourism Australia Pub of the year and 500 meters from the primary school that was est. 1890. And just for added convenience there is a 24/7 BP servo/supermarket 2k's down the road.

The streets are so wide and quiet with center plantations all the way along. The air is clean and the neighbors are like old mates.

I pass about 8 road side stalls selling fruit and veggies on the way home from work.

The house is solid as a rock early 1980's brick, 3 bedroom, massive kitchen with 2 dining areas and big lounge. It has a double carport, there is also a double lock up shed and a garden shed in the back yard as well.

The house is on 1/4 of an acre, fully fenced and we have planted an Apple, Cherry and a Lime tree so far and the veggie patch is ready for the next planting.

Central to the back yard is a massive old Plane tree, next to a Desert Ash of similar vintage that gives us so much shade and is perfect in he hot weather.

The front garden in now planted to natives (mainly Grevillia).

It's 10'ks to the main town and work. And 15 to the air port.

30k's west and you're at the confluence of the Murray/Darling rivers, another 20k's to the Great Anabranch of the Darling River and another 50 past that at the magnificent Lake Victoria.

If you want to do some driving, north you can visit the ancient Mungo and Willandra lakes national parks. Or a bit further west the Menindee Lakes that hold 9 times the water of Port Jackson (Sydney Harbor)

150's east to the Murrumbidgee, Edwards and Warkool rivers.

That's where i live, that's what $170K can get you in my country.

I dare you to ask me if i'm happy.... ;)

King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 2:58pm:

GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 12:36pm: King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 11:40am: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!! Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville? Naww did i make your stupid comment on house prices sound stupid? Birdsville!!

That's how far 'out' you have to be content to live if you 'expect' to pay a reasonable price for an 'ouse in Aussieland.


Quote:

No good slinging an "insult" with such a hefty dose of ignorance, just makes you look like a tool.

Anyone who for any reason defends the prices of 'ouses in Aussieland is being offensive to all of those young couples contemplating buying their first 'ome 'ere.

As for me, I 'ave to be offensive when dealing wiff Aussies. Why? Because make any concessions, then the Aussies complacent nature will once again resume control, they will fall right back down the well again is what I'm sayin'.


Quote:

I live in a small town 100 meters from the banks of the Murray river, 500 meters from the 2012 Tourism Australia Pub of the year and 500 meters from the primary school that was est. 1890. And just for added convenience there is a 24/7 BP servo/supermarket 2k's down the road. The streets are so wide and quiet with center plantations all the way along. The air is clean and the neighbors are like old mates. I pass about 8 road side stalls selling fruit and veggies on the way home from work. The house is solid as a rock early 1980's brick, 3 bedroom, massive kitchen with 2 dining areas and big lounge. It has a double carport, there is also a double lock up shed and a garden shed in the back yard as well. The house is on 1/4 of an acre, fully fenced and we have planted an Apple, Cherry and a Lime tree so far and the veggie patch is ready for the next planting. Central to the back yard is a massive old Plane tree, next to a Desert Ash of similar vintage that gives us so much shade and is perfect in he hot weather. The front garden in now planted to natives (mainly Grevillia). It's 10'ks to the main town and work. And 15 to the air port. 30k's west and you're at the confluence of the Murray/Darling rivers, another 20k's to the Great Anabranch of the Darling River and another 50 past that at the magnificent Lake Victoria. If you want to do some driving, north you can visit the ancient Mungo and Willandra lakes national parks. Or a bit further west the Menindee Lakes that hold 9 times the water of Port Jackson (Sydney Harbor) 150's east to the Murrumbidgee, Edwards and Warkool rivers. That's where i live, that's what $170K can get you in my country. I dare you to ask me if i'm happy.... ;)

It sounds nice. But the typical Aussie is 'appy wif any form of roof over 'e's 'ead, and believes if 'e pays less than 'alf a 'mil' 'e's got a bargin. And what would be 'appening to your 'ouse price if every couple wanting to buy, buys an 'ouse there. So shss! (unless you're are planning to leave Aussieland and hope to get a million for your place, that is).

These are the kinda prices ovvers are payin': 'What a steal', old 'Fibro' miners cottage located in Captains Flat (I'm currently staying in Queanbeyan, and it's often referred to as being the 'arsehole' of Canberra, being slightly south of the capital, which would make Captains Flat Canberra's hemorrhoids).

http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-captains+flat-106733226

Note: I've used 'Cockney' pronunciations to make it easier for the average Aussie to read. So don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be funny, or even slightly 'sarcastic'. 

Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:28am:

Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert.

Marble Bar (the hottest town on earth):
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-wa-boodarie-116076007

I definitely was far from funny and more spastic than sarcastic.

Anyway, i'll go home to my "only worth $17,000" home.

Makes the double lock up shed worth about $100

::)

;D ;D

:D :D :D

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:28am:

Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert.

In Arizona:

Mortgage repayments $209 month.

(Go to street view)

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/681-N-41st-Dr-Show-Low-AZ-85901/8409103_zpid/

GA wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:48am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. In Arizona: Mortgage repayments $209 month. (Go to street view) http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/681-N-41st-Dr-Show-Low-AZ-85901/8409103_zpid/

Yep! cheap houses, they had them for $50 at the height of the gfc.

$53,000 -36.9%

We have that 'correction' to look forward to......ouch!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:28am:

Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert.

According to John Smith it is worth millions no matter where in Australia it is. Even if there are no job prospects it is still worth millions or as much as the bank is willing to allow you to borrow :D

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 9:40am:

The housing myth is a bubble.... I predict revolution....

The world does turn they say  :D

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 1:49pm:

GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 12:36pm: King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 11:40am: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!! Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville? Tactical change of issue.... I hope you are prepared for Hockeystick Joe's deemed value in assets including home when you want a pension..

Money is getting funnier by the day... Tap and go is now tentacling it's way thru the dodgy metro sexuality of the mobile phone fantasia the mob have learnt to love. Your balance doesn't even update for days I am told....

Revolution probably ain't far off cos I certainly don't like the smell of things now!!  :-?

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 4:35pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 1:49pm: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 12:36pm: King FriYAY II wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 11:40am: GA wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 9:16am: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:03pm: It's all a bubble built on environmental subsidy that simply isn't available to give. ** WARNING: false economy in motion! Aussieland is a tiny little nation with a massive population, so we've got to expect housing to be expensive here. And, It's not a 'bubble', what we've go is a Hindenburg of housing price inflation. Our house prices are as much as ten times higher than what their real value is.  :o Our house was only worth $17,000!!! 1/2 the price of the car!!! Your house is worth $170,000? Where do you live, Birdsville? Tactical change of issue.... I hope you are prepared for Hockeystick Joe's deemed value in assets including home when you want a pension.. Money is getting funnier by the day... Tap and go is now tentacling it's way thru the dodgy metro sexuality of the mobile phone fantasia the mob have learnt to love. Your balance doesn't even update for days I am told.... Revolution probably ain't far off cos I certainly don't like the smell of things now!!  :-?

Aussies celebrate high prices, it's one of the reasons we pay so much. Nationalism has forced up prices on just about everything. The price of lamb (a British favorite) since 'Aussies' became the dominate culture have become even pricier than (the more expensive to produce) beef for example. Buy 'Aussie' pay 'Aussie prices', it's as simple as that.   

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 12:19pm:

GA wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:48am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. In Arizona: Mortgage repayments $209 month. (Go to street view) http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/681-N-41st-Dr-Show-Low-AZ-85901/8409103_zpid/ Yep! cheap houses, they had them for $50 at the height of the gfc. $53,000 -36.9% We have that 'correction' to look forward to......ouch!

Aussie nationalism sustains itself in part by generating myths, one of those is that Americans are actually poorer than us. Or that house prices are only low there now due to the deflation of the housing bubble.

http://www.jparsons.net/housingbubble/phoenix.html

So do you feel like revolting against our high prices? No, of course you don't, instead it's off putting to see low prices being paid by other people. We feel in some sort of way like blaming the Americans for their reasonable prices instead. But they aren't to blame and in fact they are part of a solution, but unfortunately, due to nationalism, we aren't all that interested in solutions. Because these are just too much at odds with our denials. 

Nationalism,... maybe! We are a dickhead nation that's for sure!!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 7:34pm:

Nationalism,... maybe! We are a dickhead nation that's for sure!!

We don't need to take it too personally, I mean if it wasn't for the fact that we are one of the few nations in the world that arose from a penal colony, then we would have to be blaming ourselves. But if 'we' the politically minded thinking people don't make at least an attempt to rectify the problem, then we should be blaming ourselves. Because we sure can't expect the poor dumb Aussie to suddenly decide to make a difference, when it is his 'culture' that's responsible for our situation in the first place. 

The housing bubble might just be the gas prelude to a big blowout that empties the bowels of the market.

The A$ is being buoyed by the gas.

a thread on real estate started by DRAH.
i certainly see why the government needs to regulate the quality of financial advice being given to the public.

its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works.

These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance.

Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea.
Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market.
Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;)

aquascoot wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 4:16pm:

its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;)

How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 11:28am:

Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert.

seen the prices of property in Vegas ....  ;D ;D

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 10:51am:

John Smith wrote on Apr 1st, 2014 at 6:10pm: what are you doing death? now you'll get nail started again  >:( >:( >:( >:( BTW did you watch 4 corners on Monday night ? How China Fooled the World http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/03/31/3972864.htm

no

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2014 at 12:30pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. According to John Smith it is worth millions no matter where in Australia it is. Even if there are no job prospects it is still worth millions or as much as the bank is willing to allow you to borrow :D

you'll have no problem pulling up my quote then? resorting to outright lying now nail?  ;D ;D  ;D

sure sign of desperation

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 5:54pm:

aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better.

or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 7:24pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. seen the prices of property in Vegas ....  ;D ;D

Yeah - but buoyed up by water and power from the Hoover dam and a gambling economy.

Australia should just give up on industry and become one big casino..

Igor - add 'casinos' to the GAIA study paper....

aquascoot wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 4:16pm:

its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;)

When I moved to Queanbeyan NSW in 2000, the price of single bedroom units were between $20,000 - $30,000, with some under $20,000. Now these same units sell for over $100,000. The price was low due to there being an oversupply of housing in the region. Since then this situation has been reversed. So don't believe that the bottom can't be made to drop out of the market.

And I consider it as being my duty as a patriot to help bring an end to this disastrous situation. Housing prices have to be brought back down to reasonable levels. High prices destroy societies, they contribute nothing, in the end, to anybody.

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 5:54pm:

aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better.

It's our culture that's responsible for high prices, not government or market forces.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 11:55pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:24pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. seen the prices of property in Vegas ....  ;D ;D Yeah - but buoyed up by water and power from the Hoover dam and a gambling economy. Australia should just give up on industry and become one big casino.. Igor - add 'casinos' to the GAIA study paper....

irrelevant ... just because a property is in the 'desert'it does not mean it is for free ... some deserts cost more than others

aquascoot wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 4:16pm:

its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;)

I generally disagree with most post I read written by you but it think you correct in this post.. I do however reckon between the banks, the larger home building companies and developers they do are good job of driving the pricing to favour them.

Rubin wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 1:50pm:

aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) I generally disagree with most post I read written by you but it think you correct in this post.. I do however reckon between the banks, the larger home building companies and developers they do are good job of driving the pricing to favour them.

It's the 'shortage' of housing that creating the high prices more than anything else. And why should there be this shortage in such a big but underpopulated country? Answer, Aussies need to huddle together to overcome their fear of standing out in the crowd, and at the same time avoid to close a contact with their neighbors, resulting in a situation where most people live in big but sprawling cities. It's primary effects that relate to our psyche that have led to the urban sprawl problem that results in so much wasted space and the monotonous eye-sore that is typical of Aussie suburbia.

John Smith wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 1:42pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 11:55pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:24pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. seen the prices of property in Vegas ....  ;D ;D Yeah - but buoyed up by water and power from the Hoover dam and a gambling economy. Australia should just give up on industry and become one big casino.. Igor - add 'casinos' to the GAIA study paper.... irrelevant ... just because a property is in the 'desert'it does not mean it is for free ... some deserts cost more than others

Point is the massive infrastructure required to make it high priced and worth pursuing.

(Freudian key-stroke for the day:-  Infrastricture - strangling a country with its own umbilical cords)...

John Smith wrote on Apr 4^th, 2014 at 7:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 5:54pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better. or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists

Ok the reality of the situation then

Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ?

And do you know of any business that continuously makes a loss each year but at the end is usually worth more than what you payed for it ?

Please let me know because I want to negatively gear it so I can sell it for more than what I payed for it ;)

John Smith wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 1:42pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 11:55pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:24pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. seen the prices of property in Vegas ....  ;D ;D Yeah - but buoyed up by water and power from the Hoover dam and a gambling economy. Australia should just give up on industry and become one big casino.. Igor - add 'casinos' to the GAIA study paper.... irrelevant ... just because a property is in the 'desert'it does not mean it is for free ... some deserts cost more than others

well I don't see you running out to the dessert to invest. How come ?

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 8:43pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:29pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 5:54pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better. or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists Ok the reality of the situation then Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ? the reality is that there isn't ... as to why? ask whoever controls these things And do you know of any business that continuously makes a loss each year but at the end is usually worth more than what you payed for it ? continuously makes a loss? where you pull that out of? the only reason why negative gearing continuously makes a loss is because as soon as it starts to make a profit, its no longer called negative gearing ... sooner or later all investment properties make a profit Please let me know because I want to negatively gear it so I can sell it for more than what I payed for it ;)

it's been explained to you countless times  .... some people are just to thick

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 9:18pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 1:42pm: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 11:55pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:24pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Apr 3rd, 2014 at 11:28am: Any house in the middle of the desert isn't worth more than $50,000. It's in the desert. seen the prices of property in Vegas ....  ;D ;D Yeah - but buoyed up by water and power from the Hoover dam and a gambling economy. Australia should just give up on industry and become one big casino.. Igor - add 'casinos' to the GAIA study paper.... irrelevant ... just because a property is in the 'desert'it does not mean it is for free ... some deserts cost more than others well I don't see you running out to the dessert to invest. How come ?

as if you'd have a clue what / where my investments are  ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 9:33pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 8:43pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:29pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 5:54pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better. or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists Ok the reality of the situation then Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ? the reality is that there isn't ... as to why? ask whoever controls these things And do you know of any business that continuously makes a loss each year but at the end is usually worth more than what you payed for it ? continuously makes a loss? where you pull that out of? the only reason why negative gearing continuously makes a loss is because as soon as it starts to make a profit, its no longer called negative gearing ... sooner or later all investment properties make a profit Please let me know because I want to negatively gear it so I can sell it for more than what I payed for it ;) it's been explained to you countless times  .... some people are just to thick

Quote:

Opponents of negative gearing say,     It encourages over-investment in residential property, an essentially "unproductive" asset, which is an economic distortion.     Investors inflate the residential property market, making it less affordable for first home buyers or other owner-occupiers.     In Australia in 2007, 9 out of 10 negatively geared properties are for existing dwellings, so the creation of rental supply comes almost entirely at the expense of displacing potential owner-occupiers. Thus, if negative gearing is to exist, it should only be applied to newly constructed properties.     It encourages speculators into the property market, inflating for instance the Australian property bubble that began in the mid-1990s, partly the result of increased availability of credit that occurred following the entry of non-bank lenders into the Australian mortgage market.     Tax deductions and overall benefits accrue to those who already have high incomes. This will make the rich investors even richer and the poorer population even poorer, possibly creating and prolonging a social divide between socioeconomic classes.     Tax deductions reduce government revenue by a significant amount each year, which either represents non-investors subsidising investors, or makes the government less able to provide other programs.     A negatively geared property never generates net income, so losses should not be deductible. (Deductibility of for example business losses when there was a reasonable expectation of gaining income is well-accepted, the point against negative gearing is that it will never generate income. Opponents of full deductibility would presumably at least allow losses to be capitalised into the investor's cost base.)

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5^th, 2014 at 10:14pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 9:33pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 8:43pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:29pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 5:54pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better. or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists Ok the reality of the situation then Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ? the reality is that there isn't ... as to why? ask whoever controls these things And do you know of any business that continuously makes a loss each year but at the end is usually worth more than what you payed for it ? continuously makes a loss? where you pull that out of? the only reason why negative gearing continuously makes a loss is because as soon as it starts to make a profit, its no longer called negative gearing ... sooner or later all investment properties make a profit Please let me know because I want to negatively gear it so I can sell it for more than what I payed for it ;) it's been explained to you countless times  .... some people are just to thick Quote: Opponents of negative gearing say,     It encourages over-investment in residential property, an essentially "unproductive" asset, which is an economic distortion.     Investors inflate the residential property market, making it less affordable for first home buyers or other owner-occupiers.     In Australia in 2007, 9 out of 10 negatively geared properties are for existing dwellings, so the creation of rental supply comes almost entirely at the expense of displacing potential owner-occupiers. Thus, if negative gearing is to exist, it should only be applied to newly constructed properties.     It encourages speculators into the property market, inflating for instance the Australian property bubble that began in the mid-1990s, partly the result of increased availability of credit that occurred following the entry of non-bank lenders into the Australian mortgage market.     Tax deductions and overall benefits accrue to those who already have high incomes. This will make the rich investors even richer and the poorer population even poorer, possibly creating and prolonging a social divide between socioeconomic classes.     Tax deductions reduce government revenue by a significant amount each year, which either represents non-investors subsidising investors, or makes the government less able to provide other programs.     A negatively geared property never generates net income, so losses should not be deductible. (Deductibility of for example business losses when there was a reasonable expectation of gaining income is well-accepted, the point against negative gearing is that it will never generate income. Opponents of full deductibility would presumably at least allow losses to be capitalised into the investor's cost base.)

thats because once it generates income it stops being negatively geared and becomes positively geared , the same house, the same loan , the same rent, the same people  ... the only thing that changes is the name .... imagine that.

John Smith wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 9:39am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 10:14pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 9:33pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 5th, 2014 at 8:43pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 7:29pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 5:54pm: aquascoot wrote on Apr 4th, 2014 at 4:16pm: its funny how the people who always offer up these wild speculations and whacko ideas , would seem to be the people with the least basic business skills and understanding of how an economy works. These sort of crazy articles are written every day of the year with NO substance. Will the market crash, oh it could go off 20 % possibly, but the numpties on here who think THEY understand the reasoning behind this statement simply have no idea. Its as complex a system as the weather . i doubt a super computer could model all the factors that feed into the property market. Trying to guess what might happen is as loony as trying to guess whether its going to rain on christmas day 2014.  ie, youre just guessing ;) How about the government stop meddling in real estate and let the market forces take their course and then we will understand the economics better. or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists Ok the reality of the situation then Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ? the reality is that there isn't ... as to why? ask whoever controls these things And do you know of any business that continuously makes a loss each year but at the end is usually worth more than what you payed for it ? continuously makes a loss? where you pull that out of? the only reason why negative gearing continuously makes a loss is because as soon as it starts to make a profit, its no longer called negative gearing ... sooner or later all investment properties make a profit Please let me know because I want to negatively gear it so I can sell it for more than what I payed for it ;) it's been explained to you countless times  .... some people are just to thick Quote: Opponents of negative gearing say,     It encourages over-investment in residential property, an essentially "unproductive" asset, which is an economic distortion.     Investors inflate the residential property market, making it less affordable for first home buyers or other owner-occupiers.     In Australia in 2007, 9 out of 10 negatively geared properties are for existing dwellings, so the creation of rental supply comes almost entirely at the expense of displacing potential owner-occupiers. Thus, if negative gearing is to exist, it should only be applied to newly constructed properties.     It encourages speculators into the property market, inflating for instance the Australian property bubble that began in the mid-1990s, partly the result of increased availability of credit that occurred following the entry of non-bank lenders into the Australian mortgage market.     Tax deductions and overall benefits accrue to those who already have high incomes. This will make the rich investors even richer and the poorer population even poorer, possibly creating and prolonging a social divide between socioeconomic classes.     Tax deductions reduce government revenue by a significant amount each year, which either represents non-investors subsidising investors, or makes the government less able to provide other programs.     A negatively geared property never generates net income, so losses should not be deductible. (Deductibility of for example business losses when there was a reasonable expectation of gaining income is well-accepted, the point against negative gearing is that it will never generate income. Opponents of full deductibility would presumably at least allow losses to be capitalised into the investor's cost base.) thats because once it generates income it stops being negatively geared and becomes positively geared , the same house, the same loan , the same rent, the same people  ... the only thing that changes is the name .... imagine that.

read the rest of it.

and the other question

Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ?

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 10:44am:

Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ?

1) Because you cant live in a share portfolio
2) You only need $1000 to enter the share market which is significantly less than that required to enter the property market.
3) Because the first home owners grant was only for owner occupied, it didn't apply to investors.
4) Because building a new house has flow on benefits to other areas of the economy.

The_Barnacle wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 11:06am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 10:44am: Why is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ? 1) Because you cant live in a share portfolio 2) You only need $1000 to enter the share market which is significantly less than that required to enter the property market. 3) Because the first home owners grant was only for owner occupied, it didn't apply to investors. 4) Because building a new house has flow on benefits to other areas of the economy.

But whom did the first home buyers grant benefit ? Don't tell me you believe it was the first home buyers :D LOL


Quote:

First home buyers weren’t locked out by the ending of the first home vendors’ grant: they were locked out by the impossibly high prices that this grant has helped generate over the 30 years since it was first invented. And its purpose has never been to give first home buyers a helping hand: it has always been used as a way of giving the economy the economic equivalent of a steroid injection. First home buyers have instead been the sacrificial lambs of an asset-price-inflation route to apparent national prosperity.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/1/21/national-affairs/built-backs-first-home-buyers

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 10:44am:

read the rest of it.and the other questionWhy is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ?

I did read the rest of it and its more bollocks. Sounds like something you would write

As for no first share buyers grant, what a stupid argument. A house costs peole many times their annual income ... you can buy a share for .05c ....  what would you like the grant set at? .01c?

I'll petition my local MP on your behalf for it.   ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 2:50pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 10:44am: read the rest of it.and the other questionWhy is there no such thing as a first share buyers grant for mums and dads investors ? I did read the rest of it and its more bollocks. Sounds like something you would write As for no first share buyers grant, what a stupid argument. A house costs peole many times their annual income ... you can buy a share for .05c ....  what would you like the grant set at? .01c? I'll petition my local MP on your behalf for it.   ;D ;D ;D

Of course the scammers never see the scam they perpetrate on others.

And of course there should be no first share buyers grant for the same reason there should be no first home buyers grant simply because the grant only benefits speculators and house hoarders and not the people it is targeted at. All this is proof that the government has been meddling in the housing market.

You greedy house hoarding parasites only want to treat housing as a necessity for the needy when it suits your distorted point of view. But when it comes to the bottom line profits that you can extract from the gullible then all of a sudden housing becomes a commodity to trade like corn and beef :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 3:06pm:

All this is proof that the government has been meddling in the housing market.

IS that what you've been trying to prove?  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Alll you had to do was ask ... I don't think anyone has denied that the govt. has meddled in it.


Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 3:06pm:

You greedy house hoarding parasites only want to treat housing as a necessity for the needy when it suits your distorted point of view

and you've got that from where? I at the moment only own one house, the one I live in. I guess that proves what a load of crap your argument really is .... ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 3:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:06pm: All this is proof that the government has been meddling in the housing market. IS that what you've been trying to prove?  ;D ;D ;D ;D Alll you had to do was ask ... I don't think anyone has denied that the govt. has meddled in it. Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:06pm: You greedy house hoarding parasites only want to treat housing as a necessity for the needy when it suits your distorted point of view and you've got that from where? I at the moment only own one house, the one I live in. I guess that proves what a load of crap your argument really is .... ;D ;D ;D

and you wrote


Quote:

or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists

which I did and now you deny it.

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 4:21pm:

John Smith wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:29pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:06pm: All this is proof that the government has been meddling in the housing market. IS that what you've been trying to prove?  ;D ;D ;D ;D Alll you had to do was ask ... I don't think anyone has denied that the govt. has meddled in it. Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:06pm: You greedy house hoarding parasites only want to treat housing as a necessity for the needy when it suits your distorted point of view and you've got that from where? I at the moment only own one house, the one I live in. I guess that proves what a load of crap your argument really is .... ;D ;D ;D and you wrote Quote: or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists which I did and now you deny it.

no you didn't ... your comment started with the word YOU which means you were referring to me. The reality of it is I at the moment have no investment properties. Your comment is meaningless.

John Smith wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 4:26pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 4:21pm: John Smith wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:29pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:06pm: All this is proof that the government has been meddling in the housing market. IS that what you've been trying to prove?  ;D ;D ;D ;D Alll you had to do was ask ... I don't think anyone has denied that the govt. has meddled in it. Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 3:06pm: You greedy house hoarding parasites only want to treat housing as a necessity for the needy when it suits your distorted point of view and you've got that from where? I at the moment only own one house, the one I live in. I guess that proves what a load of crap your argument really is .... ;D ;D ;D and you wrote Quote: or alternatively , you could try to comment on the reality of the property market as it exists which I did and now you deny it. no you didn't ... your comment started with the word YOU which means you were referring to me. The reality of it is I at the moment have no investment properties. Your comment is meaningless.

WTF are you talking about.

I said the government medals in the property market and that is the reality.

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6^th, 2014 at 10:28pm:

I said the government medals in the property market and that is the reality.

http://www.medalsofservice.com.au/images/medals-timor-un-adm.jpg

Frances wrote on Apr 7^th, 2014 at 9:33am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Apr 6th, 2014 at 10:28pm: I said the government medals in the property market and that is the reality. http://www.medalsofservice.com.au/images/medals-timor-un-adm.jpg

I have one over my front door courtesy of the govt! ;D ;D ;D