- Joined
- 25 July 2006
- Posts
- 987
- Reactions
- 0
tech/a said:So why rent?
Why not purchase and keep ahead of capital growth?
Think about it a 5% growth in a 400K property means you have to put away $20000 a year just to keep ahead of Capital appreciation.
or $200/week at 2.5%.
This really isn't a good thing though. A bunch of my friends moved over east because a) they couldn't afford to live here and b) no-one was prepared to let a young person rent... which is rubbish. In the end, it's not healthy for the long term.Freeballinginawetsuit said:As tenancy's are ending in investment properties you can virtually name your price (within reason) to prospective tenants, screen hords of them for the best candidate
forexgame said:I bought last year a house and rented my apartment. Both of them are grew up in value. I think real estate is a great investment.
chops_a_must said:This really isn't a good thing though. A bunch of my friends moved over east because a) they couldn't afford to live here and b) no-one was prepared to let a young person rent... which is rubbish. In the end, it's not healthy for the long term.
STCStop_the_clock said:BUT I MUST SAY THIS:
I will make myself quite clear...discussing housing/rents affordability is a very touchy area for many, so be careful what you say, as I have been directly affected by some of the comments discussed on this forum. I am quite shocked at the lack of respect some are showing towards those that have very little, or live in unstable housing environments for whatever reason.
...Just a few words of advice...to those that want or feel the need to jack up rents, who are you hurting? Your sons, and daughters!
Why do you want to hurt your own flesh and blood...its downright disgusting?
GOYCO said:Rents are way too low...removing negative gearing has been tried before and nearly crippled the tenants. The government realised that they would have to provide a lot more housing for people who could not afford the rent. That is why it was brought back in..expect the rents to be 30% higher in 3 years time.
cheers
Couldn't agree more Coyotecoyotte said:If I remember correctly , the period you are referring to ( nil neg gearing ) housing over that period would have become the most affordable ever -- Prices stagnated whilst incomes grew --- Rents where dear relative to the value of the property BUT the property value was low, making it fare easier for young families to jump in and buy their first home ---- what buggered it up was when neg gearing was reintroduced and land values tripled in as many years.
given a chance (nil neg gearing) all our kids would now probably have their own homes.
and no this is not sour grapes as during that period i aquired a few rentals myself.
Cheers
Realist said:If rents are the same as mortgage repayments, which they certainly are not in Sydney. Then buying would seem logical...
However, you need to be sure you are not paying too much for your house. Capital gains are not a certainty, I have alot of friends that have made captial losses recently.
If you have $50K, and you put it towards a $400K place and it goes up 5%. That sounds great! But....
You've paid 8% on $350K in interest, which is $28K
You've paid body corporate fees, rates, water, insurance of at least $6K
Repairs, paint, maintenance etc. of a conservative $2K
So you've paid $36K to make $20 in a capital gain - not good is it? A $16K loss.
And if you make a 5% capital loss - you just lost yourself $56K.
Sure if you don't buy you need to rent, but you can invest your $50K in shares!! And with some good mangement it may very well pay for you to rent for a year.
Rushing in to buy a house so recently after a property boom is not wise.
tech/a said:So why rent?
Why not purchase and keep ahead of capital growth?
Think about it a 5% growth in a 400K property means you have to put away $20000 a year just to keep ahead of Capital appreciation.
or $200/week at 2.5%.
Havent got a deposit---Either join with someone who can help.
Friend if not married or Partner and get one as soon as possible.
Its even worth looking at a low doc loan when you really look at the figures.--IE 5% deposit.
If you buy a house you can even rent out a room.
There was a story here about a guy who rents rooms to air hostie who are away more often than home at $150 a week---he wins they win.
FIND A WAY.
We all had to and it wasnt/isnt easy AT FIRST.
coyotte said:If I remember correctly , the period you are referring to ( nil neg gearing ) housing over that period would have become the most affordable ever -- Prices stagnated whilst incomes grew --- Rents where dear relative to the value of the property BUT the property value was low, making it fare easier for young families to jump in and buy their first home ---- what buggered it up was when neg gearing was reintroduced and land values tripled in as many years.
given a chance (nil neg gearing) all our kids would now probably have their own homes.
and no this is not sour grapes as during that period i aquired a few rentals myself.
Cheers
tech/a said:So why rent?
Why not purchase and keep ahead of capital growth?
Think about it a 5% growth in a 400K property means you have to put away $20000 a year just to keep ahead of Capital appreciation.
or $200/week at 2.5%.
Havent got a deposit---Either join with someone who can help.
Friend if not married or Partner and get one as soon as possible.
Its even worth looking at a low doc loan when you really look at the figures.--IE 5% deposit.
If you buy a house you can even rent out a room.
There was a story here about a guy who rents rooms to air hostie who are away more often than home at $150 a week---he wins they win.
FIND A WAY.
We all had to and it wasnt/isnt easy AT FIRST.
Agree,tech/a said:Err thats my point.
Find away out of the trap.
Of course the other alternative is simply
slosh around in it and complain.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?