# First home owner's grant



## craigj (28 April 2009)

does the grant officially end june 30 or is it still being discussed

does the june 30 date apply for signing the contract or full setlement


----------



## weird (28 April 2009)

*Re: 1st home grant*



craigj said:


> does the grant officially end june 30 or is it still being discussed
> 
> does the june 30 date apply for signing the contract or full setlement




It is only the "boost" which is coming to an end then, not the overall 1st home owners grant, which I don't believe has a specified end date ?


----------



## Nyden (29 April 2009)

*Re: 1st home grant*

It's a difficult one to answer, really. Although Rudd would appear to be back flipping, and accused of manipulation should he extend it - I can honestly still envision him doing so.

Something along the lines of, "In these uncertain times, first home buyers need all the help they can get". He'll probably further spout off nonsense on job creation, etc.

Sorry, I know my crystal ball wasn't very helpful :


----------



## Green08 (29 April 2009)

*Re: 1st home grant*

The NSW government will have an extra $3,000 available until Nov 9th 2009.

View attachment nsw addition.pdf


----------



## Ghetto23 (29 April 2009)

When are they going to reduce the $14K+ extra that houses under $500K are selling for due to people rushing to use the first home owners grant?


----------



## Struzball (29 April 2009)

The sad part is, if I wanted to buy a block of land as an investment property that I can actually afford, the land price would be inflated $21,000 for the new home building grant, and I wouldn't get a cent because I don't plan on living in it.

I wouldn't mind in the end, I'd still be better off living within my means than all these people jumping at houses just to get a grant.

The sooner this grant is gotten rid of the better.


----------



## MrBurns (29 April 2009)

This only helps Vendors get rid of their property at good prices.

Does nothing for the FHB except suck them into an inflated market.


----------



## ands (29 April 2009)

I work in the construction industry and $21000 on new homes is doing a great job at keeping the new housing industry going. They should just drop the $14000 back to $7000 on established homes (this seems pointless).


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

ands said:


> I work in the construction industry and $21000 on new homes is doing a great job at keeping the new housing industry going. They should just drop the $14000 back to $7000 on established homes (this seems pointless).




If there was no $21000, then wouldn't homes still be built, it is just that the cost of the house would have to decrease to make it more affordable ?

Why should the housing industry, and hence earnings in the housing industry which, for subcontractors are obscene, be subsidised, and hence lead to increased housing costs for the consumer ?


----------



## ands (29 April 2009)

It gives FHO's confidence. It gives them a reason to build a house, rather then just buying an established one.


----------



## kincella (29 April 2009)

lets think outside the square.....keeping builders and tradies in work...is helping the economy....they spend...you might keep your job.....bet those  Bunnings employees are pretty happy they are busy....and have a job...
due to builders, the tradies and home renovators


----------



## MrBurns (29 April 2009)

kincella said:


> lets think outside the square.....keeping builders and tradies in work...is helping the economy....they spend...you might keep your job.....bet those  Bunnings employees are pretty happy they are busy....and have a job...
> due to builders, the tradies and home renovators




You cannot subsidise peoples lobs at the expense of others forever, it just doesnt work.

What makes their jobs any more important than the people who were sacked because the company they worked for had taxes increased to pay for the others ?


----------



## Struzball (29 April 2009)

MrBurns said:


> You cannot subsidise peoples lobs at the expense of others forever, it just doesnt work.
> 
> What makes their jobs any more important than the people who were sacked because the company they worked for had taxes increased to pay for the others ?




In turn if the only people in jobs are builders, it will force the builders out of a job as there is nobody left to build a house for..  Delaying the inevitable, no matter how much fake cash you through at the people.


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

kincella said:


> lets think outside the square.....keeping builders and tradies in work...is helping the economy....they spend...you might keep your job.....bet those  Bunnings employees are pretty happy they are busy....and have a job...
> due to builders, the tradies and home renovators




Sure let's think outside the square

Let's pay 40000 per house less then the consumer has more money to spend to help the economy.

Tradies are paid too much, and it is because the government is subsidising their income.

If they were unemployed then I could understand it, but they are charging too much because they are in demand and they know it.


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> Tradies are paid too much, and it is because the government is subsidising their income.
> 
> .




Hey don't rag on us. 

Materials have been going up leaps and bounds with no relief in the down turn. Your idiot designs in houses take up a lot of time. We take a massive risk and often have to put our houses up as collateral. Long, long hours.Insurances are a killer, and OHS is a massive pain. The fact that experienced trades are leaving in droves says that the pay isn’t that good. So there are a few reasons why it’s expensive. It will only become more expensive as there is a large skill shortage for experianced trades.

If you think we get paid so much become a trade, then get a shock.


----------



## MrBurns (29 April 2009)

Dont mind too much about what tradies charge but i do care about if they know what they're doing and half the time they dont, who teaches these nongs and gives them qualifications ?

It 's much the same as cab drivers they have their license but cant speak English, drive or know where anything is.


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

moXJO said:


> Hey don't rag on us.
> 
> Materials have been going up leaps and bounds with no relief in the down turn. Your idiot designs in houses take up a lot of time. We take a massive risk and often have to put our houses up as collateral. Long, long hours.Insurances are a killer, and OHS is a massive pain. The fact that experienced trades are leaving in droves says that the pay isn’t that good. So there are a few reasons why it’s expensive. It will only become more expensive as there is a large skill shortage for experianced trades.
> 
> If you think we get paid so much become a trade, then get a shock.




There is a difference between the risks that a builder takes and a tradesman takes, please don't confuse them.

I know electricians, plumbers and painters who are on ridiculous hourly rates.

Stop trying to cry poor to protect wages ( and in the case of builders, margins ). There will still be work for houses if the government gets rid of the FHBG and the market stops being propped up, you will just have to work for a reasonable wage, returning back to pre-government subsidised rates.

This will help housing affordability, reduce rents and improve living conditions for all Australians in the long term, rather than lining the pockets of developers, builders and tradesmen, who have been the recipients of the geared contributions of the FHBG for a lot longer than it should have been present.


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Dont mind too much about what tradies charge but i do care about if they know what they're doing and half the time they dont, who teaches these nongs and gives them qualifications ?
> 
> It 's much the same as cab drivers they have their license but cant speak English, drive or know where anything is.




Yes that’s my point, a lot of the good ones have left or retired. The apprentices are often just used as cheap labor by shonks, which then turns out more inexperienced shonks. The trades that are good are usually booked solid. Or if the make the mistake of trying to please everybody they get stretched to thin. More often then not the cowboys don't know how to fix your job.


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> There is a difference between the risks that a builder takes and a tradesman takes, please don't confuse them.
> 
> I know electricians, plumbers and painters who are on ridiculous hourly rates.
> 
> ...





BS is all I can say, you seem to be confusing wages with a sole trader set up. Let me ask are the people you know on wages paid into a sole trader business that has its own abn?


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

moXJO said:


> BS is all I can say, you seem to be confusing wages with a sole trader set up. Let me ask are the people you know on wages paid into a sole trader business that has its own abn?




nope, wages.

The Painter is on $35 per hour, said that 5 years ago was on around $20 per hour.  The electrician apprentice is paid $30 per hour, and the plumber is on $45 per hour.

My ABN friend gets - Plumber - charges out at $80 per hour.


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> nope, wages.
> 
> The Painter is on $35 per hour, said that 5 years ago was on around $20 per hour.  The electrician apprentice is paid $30 per hour, and the plumber is on $45 per hour.
> 
> My ABN friend gets - Plumber - charges out at $80 per hour.




Plumber sounds rightish, painter might be stretching the truth a bit (or was earning during the boom), sparky gofer would have to be a good 4th year or in the mines.

They all sound a bit $touched up for not having an abn. They would have to be good at their jobs to be pulling that. And it roughly works out to $60k (isn’t that the average wage?) a year anyway, that’s if they were lucky enough to get a years worth of consistent work. And that’s a big if.

They using their own tools, transport etc?


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

moXJO said:


> Plumber sounds rightish, painter might be stretching the truth a bit (or was earning during the boom), sparky gofer would have to be a good 4th year or in the mines.
> 
> They all sound a bit $touched up for not having an abn. They would have to be good at their jobs to be pulling that. And it roughly works out to $60k (isn’t that the average wage?) a year anyway, that’s if they were lucky enough to get a years worth of consistent work. And that’s a big if.
> 
> They using their own tools, transport etc?




Not sure on tools and transport.

No touching up and no mines.  The apprentice is 2nd year, but is 27y/o

$35 x 38 x 52 = $75k per year

$45 x 38 x 52 = $89k per year


----------



## MACCA350 (29 April 2009)

I remember when tradies earned less than the average and drove around beat up older cars or maybe a new stock work ute. Now it seems they're earning more than many doctors and drive around hotted up SS utes and have a flash collectable car in the third garage of their slick house with a bunch of cash invested. This change seems to coincide with the property bubble.

I mean the last place I worked for I was there for six years and ended up as a foreman of an assembly section of a manufacturing plant(where I left just last year) yet only earned a meagre $40k a year not including overtime. 

My father has been a principle and teacher of private schools all his life and now at 59yo is earning around $60k a year(the most he has earned all his life). How in the he!! can a 2nd year apprentice earn the same as this 

Sorry guys but this is BS, houses shouldn't cost that much to build it's all been inflating over the last decade or so. I remember reading an article that our current housing affordability problem stems from the government not releasing enough land for residential purpose, ie supply and demand, and the developers seem to buy it all up and slow the release even further and set their prices as high as possible since there are only a few big residential developers.

All IMHO.......Rant over
cheers


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> Not sure on tools and transport.
> 
> No touching up and no mines.  The apprentice is 2nd year, but is 27y/o
> 
> ...




Lol I won't let my employees see this. It’s possible but there are a lot of 'if factors' in there to be able to sustain those types of wages across a whole year. Plumber about right due to the shortage. 

I find it a bit sus for paying that much in wages and not into an abn, unless its through a recruitment agency, or its part time. Or perhaps they are just good at what they do and the company is short trades.

Sorry the App sparky wage sounds dodge just off that. And so does the painter.

As for us all earning mega bucks, and money raining from the sky. Well its TRUE!!! come and join the tradie millionaires club. Massive overpaid wages for all
:jump:


----------



## robots (29 April 2009)

hello,

and goodluck to everybody, i hope you can earn plenty in your chosen careers

thankyou
robots


----------



## Mr J (29 April 2009)

Tradesmen wouldn't work a paid 35-40 hours though? They spend a lot of time travelling, and given the nature of their work (appointment-based) it's relatively inefficient compared to having just the one job and employer. Which of course some tradesmen might have if they're not self-employed?


----------



## Struzball (29 April 2009)

I think possibly alot of tradies exaggerate their earnings as well.
They say 'I earnt $50 an hour this week, 40 hours, $2k/wk, $100k/yr'.

Meanwhile they probably earnt $25 an hour and the $50 was when they had to come into work on a Saturday for a few hours and get double time.

I wouldn't be surprised, I've known alot of mindless idiot egotistical tradies (not that they're all like that just the ones I've had the misfortune of sharing a house with)


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

You go through cycles with work. When times are good you charge at a higher rate, so that when it turns down you can survive through it. You can go through months-year with no work at all. Some tradies might make good money for a month on wages, but if they can't cut it they are shown the door and settle for a less pay.

 People on normal wages think its money time 24/7 if you’re a trade. But it takes a lot of hard yards and little money before you get to decent wages.

If you don't like how much you are getting paid then go change jobs. Even better start a small business and see if you become rich or another statistic.

Trying to explain the ups and downs of something you have lived since 14 is a little hard. Even more so to someone that has a job that they just turn up to.

If you are good at what you do you will make money no matter what profession
PS Alot of tradies are shonky rip offs with no knowledge, and there is a lot out there. Don't think I excuse those numbnuts for doing that

PPS go check the average wage for plumbers, carpenters, sparkys
even better heres a link 
http://content.mycareer.com.au/salary-centre/trades/plumbing


----------



## weird (29 April 2009)

Random thought, even though this thread has gone off track, but believe it has been answered ... and this is a random thought ... I spend too much time in elevators ... I thought to myself would I rather be making lifts or fixing them  ... probably the latter, even during an economic down-term people expect lifts to be working.


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

moXJO said:


> PPS go check the average wage for plumbers, carpenters, sparkys
> even better heres a link
> http://content.mycareer.com.au/salary-centre/trades/plumbing




I did, and from the industries I know very well, there is obvious shonky reporting, plus trades are obviously skewed down due to a high proportion of subcontractors and apprentices, the first of which would be not represented whilst the second would drag the average down.

as to the previous posts. 

There are an awful lot of jobs, especially professions for which there is unpaid work "for the love of the job" too, it is not just tradespeople that have this.

The tradespeople I know are never out of work, once again probably confusing subcontractors with wage earners.

I have no problems with them asking, earning and receiving what they can on an open market. I understand that they have a skillset which is in demand, and which they ( well the good ones anyway ) have taken time to develop, and are very professional.

What I have a problem with is that the demand is being driven by taxpayer dollars, when clearly the rate of pay is just being inflated by it.  Open it up to a real market, and if the wages remain high, I can easily live with it.


----------



## moXJO (29 April 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> What I have a problem with is that the demand is being driven by taxpayer dollars, when clearly the rate of pay is just being inflated by it.  Open it up to a real market, and if the wages remain high, I can easily live with it.




Then you might be targeting the wrong factor in wage rise. The commodities boom was a bigger effect on wages, as that’s where we all ran to for better pay (flow on effect to everyone elses wages). The housing boom back in 2003-4 or whenever, was when the big pay days were being thrown around. Right now you should get decent prices for quotes if you shop around.

I thought those wages were a little high in that link.


----------



## aleckara (29 April 2009)

Tradies do get paid a lot, but it depends on where you were. I know quite a few. Most of the time they get paid really badly during their apprenticeships, but afterwards the ones that make their own business and have these skills can make a fortune. A lot of employers I would imagine don't want to take on apprentices simply because in reality they are training the eventual competition.

And they get home at a reasonable hour as well. Of course these are mainly plumbers and sparkies. A lot of them have paid off houses very early in their life. However a lot of them have been commenting how a lot of work comes from developers and when they do tough the tradies (who get paid a lot) lose work. There's just less of them.

The overall FHBG is a big ripoff - I think the best thing for FHB is to wait for it to go.


----------



## So_Cynical (29 April 2009)

ands said:


> I work in the construction industry and $21000 on new homes is doing a great job at keeping the new housing industry going. They should just drop the $14000 back to $7000 on established homes (this seems pointless).




I saw somewhere that this is being considered...it makes good sense.


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> I saw somewhere that this is being considered...it makes good sense.




How about dropping established to zero and new homes to $7000 ?

yeah, I think that I have got the balance right, and it will save rudd and swan millions.


----------



## robots (29 April 2009)

hello,

lets total the $ given to the car industry, manufacturing, farmers and any others,

pure jealousy from those who dont have the $ in life, man plenty of choice out there

dont buy a house if you think it is expensive, easy 

thankyou
robots


----------



## Glen48 (29 April 2009)

The total ecomony is breing driven by First Home Bribe, Bankcard and Government funding including the stimilus package. Once that stops we will find out how badly of we are and have a sudden depression on out hands.


----------



## Soft Dough (29 April 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> lets total the $ given to the car industry, manufacturing, farmers and any others,
> 
> ...




Car industry = exports ( albiet now gone, and hence let it fold ) = ROI for australia
manufacturing = exports  = ROI for australia
farmers = exports  = ROI for australia.

residential housing = non-productive use of mining boom proceeds = 0 ROI for australia.

If housing was productive for australia, and it generated a ROI for the government, then I would support it.

All we have done over the past 10 years is plough horrendously huge amounts of money, which was derived from the mining boom into unproductive assets ( residential houses ) 

with no regard for generating a return in the future. With a reckless attitude regarding the future and the challenges it poses ( eg ageing population )


btw, financially I go alright, I can make a lot greater ROI owning businesses than houses


----------



## Mr J (29 April 2009)

ands said:


> I work in the construction industry and $21000 on new homes is doing a great job at keeping the new housing industry going. They should just drop the $14000 back to $7000 on established homes (this seems pointless).




Perhaps it shouldn't be kept going? Artificially propping up an industry is not a sensiblea action.

Why should I subsidise an industry if it can't support itself, and help others buy a home that they probably can't afford?


----------



## sam76 (3 May 2009)

No suprises here..... 

RISING house prices in Melbourne's most affordable suburbs have effectively wiped out the Federal Government's cash hand-outs to first home buyers, new figures show.

House prices have risen by at least $7000 in more than half the lower-priced suburbs attractive to first home buyers since the grant was boosted in October from $7000 to $14,000 for existing homes, and to $21,000 for new houses.

At the same time, house values fell elsewhere around the city, indicating that the grants have distorted the market for buyers struggling to afford their first home.

The distortion is fuelling concerns that buyers could see the value of their homes drop as demand cools after the June 30 deadline for the grant to be cut.

New figures from property analysts Residex, obtained by The Sunday Age, show that 57 per cent of suburbs with average house values below $350,000 experienced a price increase of more than $7000 in the six months to March.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/first-home-buyers-slugged-20090502-aqup.html


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

http://www.theage.com.au/national/first-home-buyers-strike-before-grant-ends-20090502-aqv1.html

big up to this guy and partner, well done man and you helping out the family

securing a residence for many years to come bro 

thankyou
robots


----------



## MrBurns (3 May 2009)

KRudd can be the honorary head of the REIV, the agents friend, he's up there with Alan Bond and every other real estate con man.


----------



## Largesse (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/national/first-home-buyers-strike-before-grant-ends-20090502-aqv1.html
> 
> ...





Two points from that article:

"Mr Limco, a customer service consultant at a telecommunications company," 

*Why do people persist with trying to bignote their jobs? It just looks so ridiculous. The word consultant should at least be reserved for someone with a degree in the relevant field of work. *

"...said he hoped to move in by the end of the year, along with his partner, parents, two siblings and grandfather.

His first home will house most of his family."

*LOL, anyone else seeing what i'm seeing here? *


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

should he wheel the grandfather off to a "retirement" village to sit around in a circle in the living room with a blanket over his legs?

nah man, pops is living it large with the family

thankyou
robots


----------



## Largesse (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> should he wheel the grandfather off to a "retirement" village to sit around in a circle in the living room with a blanket over his legs?
> 
> ...





wasn't a comment on family dynamics, more, seeing if anyone else saw the connection with the $42k freebie and the purchase of a 'family home' by a 'qualifying first home owner'.

'family home' is the key term


----------



## kincella (3 May 2009)

hmmm...think you will find that is the position description...ii is provided by most big companies today.....for their call centre people
you consult them....when I was on the phone to telstra a week ago....they kept transfering me over to another consultant...most were in the Philipinnes with very bad english....and no they could not figure out how to fix the problem...so I sent their wireless modem back...ended the deal

Ps with all his family living under the same roof....he will have their help in contributing to the costs of the mortgage....
note he said he was sick of having to move....ie renting


----------



## Largesse (3 May 2009)

you've totally my point(s)

also, using that logic, when i go to the sports store down the road, and ask, 
"which soccer ball is cheaper?" 
"uhhh the black one is a dollar cheaper" 
this suddenly makes the store attendant a consultant because i asked him a question and he could give me a basic answer.
This could be applied to any basic attendant job.
riiiight....

customer service is NOT a profession, its just a crumby admin job, and thus the customer service employees are not worthy of consultant status.


And my point re: the family home, maybe its not really him buying the home..... it may be in his name temporarily... i dunno... for say... the 12 month minimum?


----------



## MACCA350 (3 May 2009)

What, is this the new 'Australian Dream'..........'Home ownership(but you'll need your extended family to help you pay it off)'

Does this show a shift away form 'the kids move out and stay out' ............depending on how common it becomes this would certainly reduce(or at least slow) housing demand

'Australia - The(slightly less) Lucky Country' :

cheers


----------



## Soft Dough (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/national/first-home-buyers-strike-before-grant-ends-20090502-aqv1.html
> 
> ...




Darn, I wish I knew where it was in Tarneit, as I would probably be able to buy it for $300k in 6-12 months.


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

yawn, more predictions

same ones made 3yrs ago softie, you should check:

"house prices to stagnate for years", it got so embarrassing for many it got closed down

sorry, i know i know, no one is going to have a job, it takes 12mths after the stock market for housing to tank, interest rates are going to be 5000%

anybody got a graph of house prices for the past 30yrs?

thankyou
robots


----------



## Mr J (3 May 2009)

Largesse said:


> *Why do people persist with trying to bignote their jobs? It just looks so ridiculous. *




True, but "gambler" just doesn't sound as impressive as a Fund Manager that specialises in Securities, Derivatives and Currency Markets. The more fancy words used the better, especially if most people have no idea what they mean.


----------



## Soft Dough (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> yawn, more predictions
> 
> ...




Not 30.  

but I have this
http://www.ampcapital.com.au/K2DOCS...stralia's-Achilles-heel_12-11-2008.pdf?DIRECT

and the thing is that this was done before unemployment started to rise, and not having the figures where people have shifted to casual work instead of full time work.

The fact is that we have the most expensive housing in the world, that we are geared at ridiculous levels and that our real incomes are falling and our unemployment is rising.  There is no guarantee that house prices will fall, but it is more likely that they will, than it is that they will rise.


----------



## sam76 (3 May 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> Not 30.
> The fact is that we have the most expensive housing in the world, that we are geared at ridiculous levels and that our real incomes are falling and our unemployment is rising.  There is no guarantee that house prices will fall, but it is more likely that they will, than it is that they will rise.




good post.


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> Not 30.
> 
> but I have this
> http://www.ampcapital.com.au/K2DOCS...stralia's-Achilles-heel_12-11-2008.pdf?DIRECT
> ...




hello,

gee looks like a non issue in the last recession,

"our real incomes are falling" really? maybe for some but not for others

thankyou
robots


----------



## Soft Dough (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> gee looks like a non issue in the last recession,
> 
> ...




Well if you think that people receiving cuts in hours, moving to part time and casual from full time and losing jobs is not affecting real incomes, then you have some really whacked notion of what is going on in the real world... do you work for the government?


----------



## micasp (3 May 2009)

All this talk of huge plumbers salary seems ridiculous. My dad has been a plumber for over 35 years. Up until 3 years ago he was earning 38k a year, now he has gone up too 44k.
woopdeedoo
He used to work for someone who only had 3 employees, his boss was obviously doing well with a couple of houses and more than 4 cars for himself.
That link said before the average was about 55k, which means at least HALF of plumbers are on less than that and it also accounts for people like my fathers previous employer who are making ridiculous money. Also the wages in capital cities such as Sydney and Melbourne are always a lot higher than regional cities like Newcastle.

http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/AB...ensus Tables&method=Place of Usual Residence&

The 2006 census data shows the average gross weekly income for trades is between $600-$1000, a far cry from the $2K stated earlier.


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

no, just a battler from the streets 

thankyou
robots


----------



## Largesse (3 May 2009)

your father shouldve grown some balls and started sub contracting


----------



## Soft Dough (3 May 2009)

micasp said:


> All this talk of huge plumbers salary seems ridiculous. My dad has been a plumber for over 35 years. Up until 3 years ago he was earning 38k a year, now he has gone up too 44k.
> woopdeedoo
> The 2006 census data shows the average gross weekly income for trades is between $600-$1000, a far cry from the $2K stated earlier.




A plumber earning $22 per hour is not getting anywhere near market rates.  It seems weird.  Or does he work 19 hours per week ?

I have put reasons as to why tradesmen's wages artificially look low, and it is very logical.


----------



## MrBurns (3 May 2009)

Largesse said:


> your father shouldve grown some balls and started sub contracting




Maybe you should grow some of your own and stop insulting people who cant punch you in the face like you deserve.

Ok I shouldnt have said that but you dont say that about someones father without consequences, where I come from anyway.


----------



## ROE (3 May 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> Well if you think that people receiving cuts in hours, moving to part time and casual from full time and losing jobs is not affecting real incomes, then you have some really whacked notion of what is going on in the real world... do you work for the government?




No his notion is it has to affect 100% of the population for it to have an real effect .... even majority is not good enough  he's getting a pay rise the rest of the population doesn't still doesn't count


----------



## Wysiwyg (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> yawn, more predictions
> 
> ...




Got a question I need to know the answer to robots.

Is it common knowledge that house prices double `on average` every 8 to 10 years? If this is so, would a $500k house be *realistically affordable* at $1mil. in 10 years?


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

yes

thankyou
robots


----------



## moXJO (3 May 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> A plumber earning $22 per hour is not getting anywhere near market rates.  It seems weird.  Or does he work 19 hours per week ?
> 
> I have put reasons as to why tradesmen's wages artificially look low, and it is very logical.




Not everyone works in a capital city. You are trying to blanket all plumbers into the same wage rate and discounting a lot of factors. Per hour earnings are not always a guarantee over the year. The wage range would more than likely be from $25k to $100k^.
And there would be a lot out there working a full week (10-12 hours a day) and earning under $50k


----------



## Soft Dough (3 May 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Is it common knowledge that house prices double `on average` every 8 to 10 years? If this is so, would a $500k house be *realistically affordable* at $1mil. in 10 years?




my 5c 

Very unlikely as these 3 factors are required :

1. Wages growth continues at historical levels ( unlikely )
2. Credit growth continues to grow much faster than historical levels ( almost impossible )
3. Bank access to greater credit at low rates ( unlikely )


----------



## Wysiwyg (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> yes
> 
> ...




ooooohhh :aufreg:


----------



## Wysiwyg (3 May 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> my 5c
> 
> Very unlikely as these 3 factors are required :
> 
> ...




hello, 

Yes there has to be a slowdown.

thankyou
wysiwyg


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

you asked is it realistically affordable? many will afford it, many wont just like the situation today

thankyou
robots


----------



## Wysiwyg (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> you asked is it realistically affordable? many will afford it, many wont just like the situation today
> 
> ...




No I don`t think so. I just don`t see the average wage per year being $100,000 in 10 years.


----------



## moXJO (3 May 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> hello,
> 
> Yes there has to be a slowdown.
> 
> ...




Don't forget hyperinflation


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> No I don`t think so. I just don`t see the average wage per year being $100,000 in 10 years.




hello,

whats average wage got to do with it?

you asked:

is it realistically affordable? yes, see above details

a great initiative I introduced on the other thread was Q & A, a bit like that show on ABC, i guess we can kick it off in this thread as well

next question

thankyou
robots


----------



## Soft Dough (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> whats average wage got to do with it?




And with that I think we should really go onto the next question....


----------



## Dowdy (3 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> whats average wage got to do with it?
> 
> ...





Your logic makes no sense. Average wage has everything to do with it. How can you afford a 1mil house with todays average wage?!


----------



## robots (3 May 2009)

hello,

you would need a lot of savings ie. cash, shares, money boxes 

dont get so wound up on average wages, its irrelevant

thankyou
robots


----------



## Julia (3 May 2009)

Soft Dough said:


> ... do you work for the government?



The above quote re Robots:

LOL, that is just so funny!


----------



## Beej (3 May 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> No I don`t think so. I just don`t see the average wage per year being $100,000 in 10 years.




On this point, as of Feb 2009 the average full-time adult earnings are $1214.50/week = ~$63k/year. (Source: ABS; http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0)

So I think it's totally conceivable that in absolute terms the average wage could hit $100k in 10 years time. A decade is a long time!

Cheers,

Beej


----------



## Stan 101 (4 May 2009)

MrBurns;429431stop insulting people who cant punch you in the face like you deserve.
[/QUOTE said:
			
		

> Burns, I'm willing to have you take me on in the ring for charity. You name the place.
> 
> Say a dollar figure to every punch landed. Knock me out and the charity gets a bonus.


----------



## aleckara (4 May 2009)

Beej said:


> On this point, as of Feb 2009 the average full-time adult earnings are $1214.50/week = ~$63k/year. (Source: ABS; http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0)
> 
> So I think it's totally conceivable that in absolute terms the average wage could hit $100k in 10 years time. A decade is a long time!
> 
> ...




Inflation has not really been working itself into wages in the past few years (for selected industries it has at the expense of others). On average income hasn't appreciated nearly as fast as housing and other assets. I'm not so sure if wages will ever catch up to house prices where they are now. The usual money created by RBA inflation targeting is being used increasingly in the global wage arbitrage and imports (exporting the inflation elsewhere). If money inflates anymore probably all we are going to find is that more jobs leave the country. That's my opinion only. America is trying to inflate, but as it has been said this has bid up the prices of housing and assets more so than wages before with globalisation there is wage competition.


----------



## Calanen (4 May 2009)

Dowdy said:


> Your logic makes no sense. Average wage has everything to do with it. How can you afford a 1mil house with todays average wage?!




You can't afford it with today's above average wage.

And then, again, not everyone wants to lock up $250,000 in a deposit and pay a $750,000 loan. That's $5000 a month in loan repayments, when you could rent the same house for half that. Maybe the house is worth 800k in 12 months. Maybe you don't have a job in 12 months, and have to sell at the bottom of the market to carry around a debt of 200-300k on a personal covenant as to the mortgage while you still pay rent.

Makes the idea of owning a home, a pretty risky proposition, at least for that price. If people can afford it, better off buying a unit - to be buying million dollar properties, you either need to have of balls of steel or so much money it doesnt matter what you buy.


----------



## MrBurns (4 May 2009)

Stan 101 said:


> Burns, I'm willing to have you take me on in the ring for charity. You name the place.
> 
> Say a dollar figure to every punch landed. Knock me out and the charity gets a bonus.




Only a goose tries to engage someone they've never met and have no idea of what they're dealing with.


----------



## ROE (4 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> yawn, more predictions
> 
> ...





You should hang around the property group more often 

this is a stock market forum
we are always bear in property even if people here
own their home and have some  holiday properties ....

don't understand why a property person are so keen to hang around
stock market forum for so long? try to pick up some trading tips
for flipping properties for profit ? 

Here we learn about Uncle Warren and Gordon Gecko from Wall Street
some where else they may learn from Trump  so maybe you should find your own group
else you feel lonely here.

you have a weird ways learning your trade ...if i want to learn about property or bull on property
i go to property forum...if i want to learn about stock market I go here...

but you seem to go here to learn about property  and justify your property cause... Justify to property group they love it there, they give you free beer and say..Well done mate 
here we are very savage, we cut our lost and we let the profit run.


----------



## Stan 101 (4 May 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Only a goose tries to engage someone they've never met and have no idea of what they're dealing with.





No, I have a relatively good idea who I'm up against. Would you like me to elaborate? I have a feeling my profile of you would cut just a little too close to the bone. I only need to look at your post count and the amount of time you've been a member here to realise that. 
The offer stands.


----------



## kincella (4 May 2009)

roe, we hang around here cause they also cater for a general forum...and in case you did not check there are 2 property threads been going on here for years...
oh and if there was more chatter on the dedicated property forums we would depart...quick just like that....
some do not even have one post per day....
unless you mean the houseprices gonna crash sites  ??? where all the kids go to get their research papers...and waiting for their dreams to come true  u know waiting for the 40-50% crash.....


----------



## cooper1308 (4 May 2009)

Anyone looking to buy as a FHO, and hoping they cut the grant??

Surely it's just creating an artficial demand in which sooner or later it will catch up with everyone.....Those home buyers that were looking 3-4 years forward are coming to the market now, leaving a big buying gap down the track


----------



## investorpaul (4 May 2009)

cooper1308 said:


> Anyone looking to buy as a FHO, and hoping they cut the grant??
> 
> Surely it's just creating an artficial demand in which sooner or later it will catch up with everyone.....Those home buyers that were looking 3-4 years forward are coming to the market now, leaving a big buying gap down the track




I hope they cut the grant, although I will not be looking to buy for at least 12 to 18 months.

I believe any gov policy that involves subsidizing property purchases is flawed


----------



## MrBurns (4 May 2009)

From Crikey, looks like Vendors were the only ones to benefit from the KRudd bribe - 



> First home owners grant must go
> Adam Schwab writes:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ROE (4 May 2009)

kincella said:


> roe, we hang around here cause they also cater for a general forum...and in case you did not check there are 2 property threads been going on here for years...
> oh and if there was more chatter on the dedicated property forums we would depart...quick just like that....
> some do not even have one post per day....
> unless you mean the houseprices gonna crash sites  ??? where all the kids go to get their research papers...and waiting for their dreams to come true  u know waiting for the 40-50% crash.....




I never said it going to crash by 40-50% I like to say it house price double every 7 years except it didn't go up this year or the year before  and 
the classic buy now before you are price out FOREVER  

I have a crappy home which I don't own any money on it so if it's crash maybe I ask the banks pretty please lend me a few dollar to upgrade to a better property  .. If not I just buy banks stocks


----------



## ROE (4 May 2009)

investorpaul said:


> I hope they cut the grant, although I will not be looking to buy for at least 12 to 18 months.
> 
> I believe any gov policy that involves subsidizing property purchases is flawed




Never fear let value guide your way 

The more they pump the harder it fall and the more fear and chaos will reign when thing fall apart 

just like the stock market when it screaming pass the 6000 mark with borrowed money... I just drink coffee each day and watch it streaming past 

...then suddenly this year I never bought stocks so cheap in Jan and Feb in my entire life ...much like the time I bought a property in 1998-1999  

when people just accept any offer as most deal didn't go through


----------



## ROE (4 May 2009)

MrBurns said:


> From Crikey, looks like Vendors were the only ones to benefit from the KRudd bribe -
> 
> 
> The entire FHOG principal is based on the flawed notion that higher property prices are better. In actual fact, there isn’t anything wrong with property prices falling. Unless you are forced to sell your property the actual value of the asset is not particularly relevant to the owner’s standard of living (and most people do not benefit when the price of an asset appreciates above its intrinsic value)




take note of the word *intrinsic value* 
intrinsic value is EVERYTHING in this world, business, stocks oh may not apply to housing cos they double every 7 years so out the door intrinsic value


----------



## robots (6 May 2009)

hello,

look at that:

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25438925-5005961,00.html

a return on investment,

i didnt realise the government owned all farmers, car makers, manufacturing plants, intellectual property/services etc etc

fantastic

thankyou
robots


----------



## ROE (6 May 2009)

robots said:


> hello,
> 
> look at that:
> 
> ...




Great Success!!! as Borat would said it
Buy a couple more else you missed out on the next boom....I know I'm heading down to Victoria before 1st July and get one...

I can be sure I double my money 7 years from now ... My aim is 10 properties in 2 years  then i can retire and living off equity while capitalise on my interest ... Life is BEAUTIFUL


----------



## Mr J (6 May 2009)

> I can be sure I double my money 7 years from now




And then adjust results for inflation. Result? Break-even :.


----------

