Australian Politics Forum - Housing Remains Unaffordable

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #105 - Feb 19^th, 2013 at 7:25pm

John Smith wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 7:09pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

hadrian_now wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 1:59pm:

It seems to me that it is both incumbent on a society from an ethical view and necessary for social cohesion that housing should be available to those for whom the market does not provide the solution.
The market does a good job allocating housing to those with various levels of income sufficient to purchase or rent according to their means. But we have many people in this country who will always be unable or at certain times will be unable to get into that market.
That is one reason we have a state. Unfortunately the state has for several decades concerned itself all too often with allocating resources to those who in all truth don't need it's assistance. We call it middle class welfare, which may be in the form of direct grants or over-generous tax relief.
For that and other reasons the state has defaulted on the housing responsibility, not that it has ever been a strong priority in this country.
PM Rudd made a promise to tackle this issue but we all know what happened to that. But this has been the only serious attention paid to the issue in a long long time.
At some point, a government will have to address it because it will only get worse. Access to reasonable housing is the first essential step to ensuring that the underbelly doesn't take over the whole social body.

so your idea is that if you cant afford a house then the govt should give you one? so the rest of use have to pay for two homes instead of one?

I don't disagree with that ... everyone should have a roof over their head.

What the govts. need to do is get rid of the tenants in dept. of housing as soon as they are in a position to join the free market and leave dept. housing free for those that need it. As it is you get lifetime tenants no matter how well off they are. I remember one house in particular i worked in, he had a new 4x4 for the wife, a newish merc for himself, he worked as General Manager of a club, wife worked in a legal office ... very good income, no kids, and lived in housing commission. Meanwhile the single mum had to wait 10 yrs.

and THERE is the problem with the management of public housing. those who need it cant get it often because those that no long need it wont get out and the govts wont push them.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #106 - Feb 19^th, 2013 at 7:29pm

John Smith wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 7:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 7:05pm:

John Smith wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 2:47pm:

hadrian_now wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 2:17pm:

rusty, I was referring to his promise for a large scale public housing program.
Something like that would have been a much better GFC response than any of the cash splashes or the BER which was such a rip-off.

The BER was again designed to help out the property sector by giving building companies more corporate welfare. It had no effect of building any education revolution. Had they used that money to fix a whole lot of public schools in desperate need of repairs then you could argue it was a good use of money.

Labor are a bunch of f.cking idiots who are bad at managing money and making the poor become poorer Sad

The BER was designed to help out the building sector, not the property sector. There is a difference.

perhaps they could have had them building things that were actually value for money and not just one thing - school buildings. its like the insulation fiasco. 100 industries to support and Rudd picks on just ONE. and then ruins it for years to come.

such as? I know, how about an airport for the miners, or a railway exclusively for Palmers use.

no matter where they spend the money someone will always whinge. BER and insulation programmes did what they set out to do. They were a sucess in every way measurable in over 90% of cases.

the point I am making is the stimulus was amateur hour. $4B into INSULATION??? not $1B into insulation and $3B into 6 other industries. that woudl require too much effort and too much actual thinking. no, all went to ONE industry. and the BER... exactly why was $16.7B spent on ONE industry? how abotu spreading it around... but no. that would require thinking. not thinking outside the box but just actual thinking. You could use that money to build roads, fix hospitals, put money into training, build dams, do a whole lot of things but no.. JUST ONE.

small thinking but with massive dollar amounts.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

hadrian_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1041
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #107 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:31am

so your idea is that if you cant afford a house then the govt should give you one? so the rest of use have to pay for two homes instead of one?

No longie, that's not my idea. I didn't canvas the economics of it but since you ask.
The first point is that the occupants would be either on a long term purchase plan or an affordable rent.
The second point is that it should not be beyond the ability of a capable govt (obviously does not include the present one) to manage a large scale procurement of public housing achieving economies of scale and discounts from suppliers.
The combination of the two should ensure a manageable cost to the taxpayer which in turn would be offset by lower social costs in the community, not to mention economic gains from the stimulus to the building & supply industries.
It's time this country got moving with some worthwhile projects.

Back to top

Disclosure: anything I write may be deemed to be extremist, particularly if it is critical of the ALP or Greens. Look away now if squeamish.
Life may be too short, so have a laugh & enjoy.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #108 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 8:01am

hadrian_now wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 7:31am:

so your idea is that if you cant afford a house then the govt should give you one? so the rest of use have to pay for two homes instead of one?

No longie, that's not my idea. I didn't canvas the economics of it but since you ask.
The first point is that the occupants would be either on a long term purchase plan or an affordable rent.
The second point is that it should not be beyond the ability of a capable govt (obviously does not include the present one) to manage a large scale procurement of public housing achieving economies of scale and discounts from suppliers.
The combination of the two should ensure a manageable cost to the taxpayer which in turn would be offset by lower social costs in the community, not to mention economic gains from the stimulus to the building & supply industries.
It's time this country got moving with some worthwhile projects.

are you aware that any govt project costs 2-4 times that which a private contractor can provide? Witness the BER where when private schools managed the money got excellent value but when run by the education departments had those $600000 canteens the size of a carport with $110,000 for PLANS!

govt housing will always be mega expensive because govt is involved.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

hadrian_now Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 1041 Gender:	Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling. Reply #109 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:18am You're talking about an incompetent govt and Labor mates. I'm talking about a sensible govt which would harness the power & expertise of private enterprise, overseen by leading achievers.
Back to top	Disclosure: anything I write may be deemed to be extremist, particularly if it is critical of the ALP or Greens. Look away now if squeamish. Life may be too short, so have a laugh & enjoy. IP Logged

John Smith Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 75424 Gender:	Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling. Reply #110 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.
Back to top	Our esteemed leader: I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus. IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30117
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #111 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:25am

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 10:12am:

Its horses for courses Lastnail.

I had a mortgage in Australia of $4,500 per month.
It wasn't nice but it was the going rate for borrowing half a mill off of the bank at the time - it's about $1,000 per month cheaper now but still a lot.

I could afford it as a 28 year old.
I couldn't have afforded less than half that as a 22 year old so I rented.
If I had wanted to buy in those years, then I would have done so in a much different suburb and also would have got 2 less bedrooms.

My brother in law in Townsville bought a place for $90k by the way only 3 years ago, so I know they are still around.

By the way, place that house of $90k in my suburb of Armadale where I bought mine and it's a $900k house.

Them's the breaks - I am not understanding what the rage about this is from?
It's obvious - buy what you can afford, where you can afford?

but on the flip side you whinge about the price of a loaf of bread in australia compared to everywhere else !!

Them's the breaks I guess. You get ripped of on housing here as well as on everything else !!

Maybe the penny will finally drop and the average punter will see the housing sector just as it now sees the retail sector as being one big ripoff !!

My "rage" about property is that the government should stop medaling in it and stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators. Surely that can't be a difficult concept for you to understand after all I have said it about a hundred times !!

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30117
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #112 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:31am

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

NO IT SHOULDN'T !! IT SHOULD STOP MEDALING IN IT PERIOD !!

What you are suggesting is just like the first home buyers scam which just serves to push up house prices as people borrow more to pay more for the same old rubbish.

The simple solution is that the government should stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators !!

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 75424
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #113 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:36am

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:31am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

NO IT SHOULDN'T !! IT SHOULD STOP MEDALING IN IT PERIOD !!

What you are suggesting is just like the first home buyers scam which just serves to push up house prices as people borrow more to pay more for the same old rubbish.

The simple solution is that the government should stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators !!

you need to get it out of your head that the first home buyers scheme pushes up prices .. it doesn't ...consumers do. If you see a house worth $300 000 you offer $300 000 ..... if the govt. gives you $10 000 and you offer $310 000 for the same house than you are an idiot.

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30117
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #114 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:50am

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:31am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

NO IT SHOULDN'T !! IT SHOULD STOP MEDALING IN IT PERIOD !!

What you are suggesting is just like the first home buyers scam which just serves to push up house prices as people borrow more to pay more for the same old rubbish.

The simple solution is that the government should stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators !!

you need to get it out of your head that the first home buyers scheme pushes up prices .. it doesn't ...consumers do. If you see a house worth $300 000 you offer $300 000 ..... if the govt. gives you $10 000 and you offer $310 000 for the same house than you are an idiot.

a real estate agent told me years ago that government grants were useless because every time the government doled out money to buyers the sellers would increase it by at least that much because they new the sellers had that much extra to spend Wink

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/property-housing-first-home-b...

Quote:

So the real beneficiaries of the first home vendors’ grant weren’t the poor first home buyers, but those selling their first homes to them – which is why I call it the 'vendors grant' – and the banks, who took the extra deposit the first home vendors’ grant gave first home buyers, and ladened them up with initially three and ultimately over ten times as much more debt.

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #115 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:51am

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

why?

that low/no interest funding has to come from somewhere - taxpayers. and it will be just like public housing. people will get these loans when they are young with low incomes and then keep them when they have two high-paid jobs while everybody else subsidises their unneceesary cheap loans.

I dont mind helping legitimately poor but i have great objection to helping lazy people or those that were ONCE poor but no longer. and means testing seems to only apply when it can harm liberal voters rather than applied in cicurmstances like public housing etc.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #116 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:53am

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:31am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

NO IT SHOULDN'T !! IT SHOULD STOP MEDALING IN IT PERIOD !!

What you are suggesting is just like the first home buyers scam which just serves to push up house prices as people borrow more to pay more for the same old rubbish.

The simple solution is that the government should stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators !!

you need to get it out of your head that the first home buyers scheme pushes up prices .. it doesn't ...consumers do. If you see a house worth $300 000 you offer $300 000 ..... if the govt. gives you $10 000 and you offer $310 000 for the same house than you are an idiot.

he just hates home-owners and that is the sum of his argument. He thinks govt should assist manufacturing then criticises that very assistance. he is dumber than snot.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30117
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #117 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 12:08pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:53am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:31am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

NO IT SHOULDN'T !! IT SHOULD STOP MEDALING IN IT PERIOD !!

What you are suggesting is just like the first home buyers scam which just serves to push up house prices as people borrow more to pay more for the same old rubbish.

The simple solution is that the government should stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators !!

you need to get it out of your head that the first home buyers scheme pushes up prices .. it doesn't ...consumers do. If you see a house worth $300 000 you offer $300 000 ..... if the govt. gives you $10 000 and you offer $310 000 for the same house than you are an idiot.

he just hates home-owners and that is the sum of his argument. He thinks govt should assist manufacturing then criticises that very assistance. he is dumber than snot.

and you believe that only foreign car companies should get government assistance and no one else !!

and there is a big difference between these asset classes although you still have a hard trouble understanding it.

investment in manufacturing produces a productive asset whereas investment in in a non productive asset such as housing produces nothing but debt otherwise you would be receiving a dividend cheque every year for your house.

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30117
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #118 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 12:13pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:51am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

why?

that low/no interest funding has to come from somewhere - taxpayers. and it will be just like public housing. people will get these loans when they are young with low incomes and then keep them when they have two high-paid jobs while everybody else subsidises their unneceesary cheap loans.

I dont mind helping legitimately poor but i have great objection to helping lazy people or those that were ONCE poor but no longer. and means testing seems to only apply when it can harm liberal voters rather than applied in cicurmstances like public housing etc.

and who subsidizes negative gearing tax rorts which cost between 4-5 billion in uncollected tax ?

The people who hoard property and expect to receive special tax concessions as well as capital gains whilst tenants pay them off for them are just as much a parasite on the system as those lazy people you always complain about but somehow you have never mentioned this once ever !!

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Housing Remains Unaffordable - Many Struggling.
Reply #119 - Feb 20^th, 2013 at 12:15pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 12:08pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:53am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:36am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:31am:

John Smith wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 9:29am:

The govt. should simply provide low deposit, low or no interest loans to first home buyers (I would limit it to homes under $400 000 for syd residents, and $300 000 elsewhere). No fee's, no exorbitant charges. Just give people a chance to get a start and pay it back.

NO IT SHOULDN'T !! IT SHOULD STOP MEDALING IN IT PERIOD !!

What you are suggesting is just like the first home buyers scam which just serves to push up house prices as people borrow more to pay more for the same old rubbish.

The simple solution is that the government should stop providing corporate welfare in the form of tax breaks to property hoarders and speculators !!

you need to get it out of your head that the first home buyers scheme pushes up prices .. it doesn't ...consumers do. If you see a house worth $300 000 you offer $300 000 ..... if the govt. gives you $10 000 and you offer $310 000 for the same house than you are an idiot.

he just hates home-owners and that is the sum of his argument. He thinks govt should assist manufacturing then criticises that very assistance. he is dumber than snot.

and you believe that only foreign car companies should get government assistance and no one else !!

and there is a big difference between these asset classes although you still have a hard trouble understanding it.

investment in manufacturing produces a productive asset whereas investment in in a non productive asset such as housing produces nothing but debt otherwise you would be receiving a dividend cheque every year for your house.

you LIVE in someones investment. What would losers like you do if it werent for investors in housing?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged