The future of Australian property prices

[sptrawler]

I'm starting tot hink any changes should be held off till the slow down / recession impact is fully felt.

If APRA does start to limit I/O loans, or NG is quarantined to new builds, any fall in property prices will be blamed on the changes, rather than the unsustainable fundamentals of falling yields while unemployment increases.

We are between a rock and a hard place. It isn't going to end well without a brilliant balancing act. I don't think we can pull it off. Anyway I'm looking to buy a bike before they go up.lol

 

[banco]

Government won't be doing anything about interest only loans to investors. RBA will muscle APRA into doing this:-



http://www.apra.gov.au/MediaReleases/Pages/14_30.aspx

:sleeping:

That is remarkably weak stuff even for the piss weak financial regulators that Australia is burdened with.

 

[Mrmagoo]

Allowing foreign institutional investors would actually be a good thing as they'll invest for the yield (if you set it up right) and will want long term tenants. They also won't play the control freak power mind games that private land lords play. Many kick tenants out just for the power of it because they can and enjoy seeing a struggling family having to move on. They are sick individuals.

 

[waterbottle]

I remember reading something on macrobusiness (an economics blog) about the long-awaited macroprudential finally being introduced by the end of 2014. Doesn't look like it has

 

[DB008]

Allowing foreign institutional investors would actually be a good thing as they'll invest for the yield (if you set it up right) and will want long term tenants. They also won't play the control freak power mind games that private land lords play. Many kick tenants out just for the power of it because they can and enjoy seeing a struggling family having to move on. They are sick individuals.

Wow. The amount of BS you write is comical.

So what your saying is, landlords kick out tenants, just for the sake of it. Yeah right! Can you provide a source to back up your outrageous claims?

A person with an IP would kick out a tenant, not get a good return on their investment (not maximized), for $hit's and giggles.

I have a feeling from your past posts that you got booted out or had a bad experience with property and it left your with a bitter taste in your mouth.

Simple as that.

 

[lesm]

Allowing foreign institutional investors would actually be a good thing as they'll invest for the yield (if you set it up right) and will want long term tenants. They also won't play the control freak power mind games that private land lords play. Many kick tenants out just for the power of it because they can and enjoy seeing a struggling family having to move on. They are sick individuals.

What a load of rubbish. A good long term tenant is what a lot of landlords would prefer.
Kicking tenants just as part of a power game is not in a landlord's interests.

There are tenants that deserved to be kicked that don't pay rent or meet their lease obligations and become constantly on breach of the lease.

Agree with the previous poster's comment regarding the potential that you have had a bad experience and now appear to tar all landlords with the same brush.

There are good and bad landlords and tenants.

 

[Mrmagoo]

Wow. The amount of BS you write is comical.

So what your saying is, landlords kick out tenants, just for the sake of it. Yeah right! Can you provide a source to back up your outrageous claims?

A person with an IP would kick out a tenant, not get a good return on their investment (not maximized), for $hit's and giggles.

I have a feeling from your past posts that you got booted out or had a bad experience with property and it left your with a bitter taste in your mouth.

Simple as that.

You are probably from QLD or something where the situation is similar. I worked in an office with property investors and the discussions they had about their tenants were saddening.

The reason they can do it is because the next day they will have had 40 people lining up desperate for the place.

That is what happens when you have a housing shortage. People suffer. Something you rich people never seem to understand.

 

[Mrmagoo]

What a load of rubbish. A good long term tenant is what a lot of landlords would prefer.
Kicking tenants just as part of a power game is not in a landlord's interests.

There are tenants that deserved to be kicked that don't pay rent or meet their lease obligations and become constantly on breach of the lease.

Agree with the previous poster's comment regarding the potential that you have had a bad experience and now appear to tar all landlords with the same brush.

There are good and bad landlords and tenants.

Money corrupts people. Turns them into something they're not. It brings out the evil in everyone. Tenants are just collateral damage in the property boom. Most Australians are horrid people. They are anti slavery, but given the chance would sell their neighbor into slavery to make a quick buck. Tell me it is not true. You can't.

 

[Julia]

Magoo, I really feel for you. It must be quite awful to go through life thinking in such a way.

Have you ever considered focusing on all there is for which to be grateful? There's so much.

 

[tech/a]

Money corrupts people. Turns them into something they're not. It brings out the evil in everyone. Tenants are just collateral damage in the property boom. Most Australians are horrid people. They are anti slavery, but given the chance would sell their neighbor into slavery to make a quick buck. Tell me it is not true. You can't.

Try telling the benificiaries of this group that!

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_Pledge

Your view is one commonly held by the lower socio- economic groups.
Their laziness extends to armchair observation.

There are bad apples everywhere.
Hop over to a third world country and view corruption on STEROIDS!

 

[luutzu]

Magoo, I really feel for you. It must be quite awful to go through life thinking in such a way.

Have you ever considered focusing on all there is for which to be grateful? There's so much.

I don't think it's awful to think that way - it may very well be how the world is.

I think you think it's awful because you assume that those who see the world like that are automatically bitter and hateful and just angry and not happy in general. That might be possible, and if that is the case, then it is awful.

But it could very well be that Mr Magoo see that that's how most people are and sadden by it but are not bitter or hateful - just... philosophical.

He might very well try to be a better person seeing the kinda things people do and the misery it cause others. Maybe even try to help more people from seeing that that's how the world often is.

 

[Julia]

I think you think it's awful because you assume that those who see the world like that are automatically bitter and hateful and just angry and not happy in general. That might be possible, and if that is the case, then it is awful.

In the case of Magoo, luutzu, no one needs to assume anything. Just read a few of his posts. They make clear that despite his earning over $100K p.a., he feels deprived and is indeed full of bitterness and anger.

That's up to him. It was foolish of me to waste a skerrick of sympathy on his personal choice to look just at what he dislikes.

 

[Mrmagoo]

If you think 100k is a lot then you are the fortunate one, because anything less these days pretty much excludes you from the property market as a FHB.

 

[Mrmagoo]

100k is peanuts. compared to cost of living australian wages are very low. we have working poor all over the place now. they run up their credit cards then they live even worse.

 

[tech/a]

100k is peanuts. compared to cost of living australian wages are very low. we have working poor all over the place now. they run up their credit cards then they live even worse.

It's not how much you earn--- it's how you make it work for you.

To someone who squanders their $100k on consumables trying to look like a millionair
Then it's peanuts.
Someone who makes it work for them it's more than adequate.

 

[waterbottle]

It's not how much you earn--- it's how you make it work for you.

To someone who squanders their $100k on consumables trying to look like a millionair
Then it's peanuts.
Someone who makes it work for them it's more than adequate.

Not everyone can be a winner.

Some food for thought:
In NSW, an above-average salary of $100k (before tax) will allow you to take out a mortgage of $675 167. This figure is according to the CBA home loan calculator and assumes no other monthly expenses, is a 30 year loan and assumes that record low interest rates remain low for the duration of the mortgage.
The average dwellingprice in NSW is $681,900 (likely higher in Sydney, moreso for houses).

The average salary in NSW is actually $75 868
. Assuming a two-person household, the average household income becomes $151 736. According to the CBA loan calculator, this allows you to borrow $1 020 661 - again, assuming record low interest rates, $0 monthly expenses and a 30 year mortgage.

 

[Julia]

It's not how much you earn--- it's how you make it work for you.

To someone who squanders their $100k on consumables trying to look like a millionair
Then it's peanuts.
Someone who makes it work for them it's more than adequate.

+1.

100k is peanuts. compared to cost of living australian wages are very low. we have working poor all over the place now. they run up their credit cards then they live even worse.

If $100K is peanuts, how on earth can it be that people on the average wage, worse still, those on government benefits, somehow manage to be content with their lot. They maybe find an extra job, work additional hours, decline to have a $10 take away lunch every day etc, save discretionary income instead of clubbing it away every weekend.

Find a low priced property as first investment. Build from there. Most of us have done that, along with mattress on the floor, second hand furniture etc as a start up.

Easier, though, to do no such thing and just keep whining.

 

[Mrmagoo]

+1.


If $100K is peanuts, how on earth can it be that people on the average wage, worse still, those on government benefits, somehow manage to be content with their lot. They maybe find an extra job, work additional hours, decline to have a $10 take away lunch every day etc, save discretionary income instead of clubbing it away every weekend.

Find a low priced property as first investment. Build from there. Most of us have done that, along with mattress on the floor, second hand furniture etc as a start up.

Easier, though, to do no such thing and just keep whining.

Because they bought pre-boom. The ones that rent, they don't survive. They run up credit card debts and end up screwed for life.

You are being deliberately very ignorant because you do not want to accept reality. There are no low priced properties for people on low incomes to purchase anymore.

Most of you bought cheap properties, yes. I agree. Because back then property was cheap.

 

[sptrawler]

Because they bought pre-boom. The ones that rent, they don't survive. They run up credit card debts and end up screwed for life.

You are being deliberately very ignorant because you do not want to accept reality. There are no low priced properties for people on low incomes to purchase anymore.

Most of you bought cheap properties, yes. I agree. Because back then property was cheap.

Obviously you want a property in an area you can't afford.

On $100k/PA there will be areas you can afford, it may be a one bedroom or two bedroom flat, but it will be shelter.
Then you pay it down as quickly as possible, then sell it and upgrade, interest rates at this level give great opportunities.
In a capitalistic system, there will always be inflation, you say it is a boom but when wages etc re balance the price now becomes the norm.

Houses in the 70's were 3 years wages, now they are 7 years wages. But that is only in capital city sought after areas.
Also in the 70's a car was 2 years wages, now they are 1/4 of a years wages, a Black and Decker drill in the 70's was $30 a weeks wages now they are $20 pi$$ money.

Get over it, find an area you can afford, buy a place. Get of your ar$e and fix it up, sell it and move further up the ladder.
Otherwise you will find yourself 60 years old without a house and rents triple what they are know.

Or do you think, the world will stop till you catch up?

 

[Mrmagoo]

Obviously you want a property in an area you can't afford.

On $100k/PA there will be areas you can afford, it may be a one bedroom or two bedroom flat, but it will be shelter.
Then you pay it down as quickly as possible, then sell it and upgrade, interest rates at this level give great opportunities.
In a capitalistic system, there will always be inflation, you say it is a boom but when wages etc re balance the price now becomes the norm.

Houses in the 70's were 3 years wages, now they are 7 years wages. But that is only in capital city sought after areas.
Also in the 70's a car was 2 years wages, now they are 1/4 of a years wages, a Black and Decker drill in the 70's was $30 a weeks wages now they are $20 pi$$ money.

Get over it, find an area you can afford, buy a place. Get of your ar$e and fix it up, sell it and move further up the ladder.
Otherwise you will find yourself 60 years old without a house and rents triple what they are know.

Or do you think, the world will stop till you catch up?

bla bla bla bla bla.

Life is going to be **** because of deteriorating economic conditions. There is very little if anything that can be done about it outside of major reforms.

Buy a one bedroom unit for 300k add in the all the fees and **** and you might as well just buy a house.