I'm talking median prices, you'll find 115k pretty close to the median for 20 years ago.
cheers
Doubt it, we're talking build. 115k for a 20sq 4br home on a 600m2 block.Yes but the "median" house is about 50% bigger/better than the median house back then. For $250k in Melbourne today you should be able to get something that is about the same as that $115k median house 20 years ago.
And based on this in Melbourne it was around 140kPS: In 1989 the median house price in Sydney was over $200k......life went on.....
Like Burnside heights or Doreen.........they are the outskirts and they're the places I used for land quotes.Question for Burnsie....what on earth would you advise the young ones today wanting to get into their own home.....????
as for Macca....there are plenty of new houses on the outskirts for the prices I quoted....Vic govt with faster trains and the new freeways and tollways...mean 30-60 mins travel to the city...but not everyone works in the city...affordable houses, but not at 400k's.....you need to have a life, not be silly and pay all your money into housing...
the govts not going to do anything too fast about the housing problem...and then its going to the outer suburbs...
if you must go to the inner city...then its an apartment thats affordable...
I say there is affordable housing out there for everyone...
Question for Burnsie....what on earth would you advise the young ones today wanting to get into their own home.....????
...
Keystart Govt loan 2% deposit. Start at what you can afford then work your way up as lifestyle improves. Other option is to buy block first and pay off as much as you can whilst interest rates are LOW.
That's a very good question, and I'd expect people who have achieved success in any field have asked themselves a similar question.instead of this thread being a great big whinge, and the ridiculous idea of prices dropping suddenly...how about some ideas on how to get into a house within the next 5 years.....knowing the contraints with state govts releasing more land in the outer suburbs....
Get rid of negative gearing for investors so that their fellow taxpayers didn't subsidise their lifestyle, and pay their share of the tax burden. Tax breaks only for building new houses or units.
It's pretty simple really - migrants & investors (with the backing of the banks) are the causes of housing unaffordability for the incumbent population.
If every migrant was self sufficient in creating housing and not competing with the existing population then housing would be more affordable and migrants wouldn't be such a burden on society ie their real cost wouldn't be hidden? Every new house built would get a certificate from the local council. These certificates would then be bought by migrants as part of their requirement to settle here. It would then be up to them where or how they lived, but a new dwelling would have been built regardless.
Get rid of negative gearing for investors so that their fellow taxpayers didn't subsidise their lifestyle, and pay their share of the tax burden. Tax breaks only for building new houses or units.
In normal business, there must be an intention to make a trading profit. You have to be profitable 2 years out of 7 (IIRC).Get rid of it for residential property, for commercial it's quite legitimate.
If a residential investment is made with the intention of making a "trading" profit soon, then I think the tax deduction is legit.
.
In normal business, there must be an intention to make a trading profit. You have to be profitable 2 years out of 7 (IIRC).
If a residential investment is made with the intention of making a "trading" profit soon, then I think the tax deduction is legit. However if there is no prospect of profit anytime soon, the deduction should be disallowed. That's how the rest of business operates and see no reason why the business of supplying long term residential accommodation should be any different.
Of course there is the law of unintended consequences though. It could force prices down to economically legitimate levels, but it could equally force rents up.
I can't see how property investors who buy existing properties contribute to supplying residential accom? Their aim is capital appreciation while reducing income tax? Society needs to make it more attractive for people to build more dwellings to bring prices down, and make it less attractive for speculators who contribute to inflating prices?
Glen Stevens has said as much yesterday, saying funds are being mis-directed into unproductive existing housing instead of building new dwellings.
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?