The South Australian Political Landscape

[Trader]

As for housing affordability. Its simple provable math. To argue otherwise is to argue against fundamental logic.

Who is glass half empty now?

We've had this discussion before.

1990, housing prices of 3.3 times the average wage, at 17% interest rates = 56.61% of your salary went to a mortgage (30 years, principal + interest).
2017, housing prices of 6.0 times the average wage, at 5% interest rates = 39.03% of your salary goes into a mortgage (30 years, principal + interest).

Even got a nice graph of it:


Source: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-03/h ... io/8586524

Simply put, modern generations do not want to sacrifice for the things they want, so complain there is an affordability crisis!!!

[tipper]

And no, its not because you worked harder or whined less, the current working generation are working longer hours than ever before as well.

wait, you realise your error in that real estate search right? or are you seriously expecting to find a property, for $175k, in the cbd of adelaide?

i highly doubt that property in the cbd has EVER been as low as 3 times the average wage in this state, or any state of the country. if however you widen the search to the whole of the state (and i realise that there would be a lot of properties in the country, and therefore not necessarily near employment) the search returns 1870 results (i also excluded empty blocks). there are still options out there, people just need to be willing to live a bit further out and commute like the rest of us.

[Jimmy_041]

Gen Millennials don't want to live in the outer burbs to start in the real estate market

They are entitled to get a $1m house in the CBD so they can enjoy the Hutt St strip

[morell]

Who is glass half empty now?

Not me, still an amazing place to live.

We've had this discussion before.

We have. You didnt listen last time, maybe this time you will!

You're looking at this like an Engineer. Picking an arbitrary moment in time (which just happens to be a high point for nominal interest rates - they weren't anything like that for term of the loans) and ignoring the reality of how people pay off loans. Whilst interest rates were high so was inflation and thus so was wage growth. Having wages grow rapidly meant people could pay off the principle much quicker - thus the higher interest rates were not financially damaging as the term was able to be dramatically reduced.

In essence, you're using nominal rates instead of real rates. Real rates = nominal rates minus inflation.

If you think that you're better off with a higher principle and lower interest rate than a lower principle and higher rate in a high inflation economy, then please, for your sake, stay away from the banks and any financial institution - but I have some money to lend you. Since you're an engineer and you like once off numbers, I'll prove it to you, even with your ridiculous cherry picking of dates and rates:

Average income in 1990 - $24k
Average house price in 1990 - $100k
Average income in 2017 - $55k
Average house price in 2017 - $480k
1990 loan of 17% over 30 years will cost you - $513,243.12
2017 loan of 5% over 30 years will cost you - $888,976.61

And thats ignoring the fact that wage growth enabled the term to be reduced. The average loan term now is much longer than it used to be. Due. To. Wage. Growth.

Simply put, modern generations do not want to sacrifice for the things they want, so complain there is an affordability crisis!!!

Absolutely pure unadulterated rubbish with absolutely no basis other than anecdotal biased experience.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/a ... bt/8667672

[morell]

And no, its not because you worked harder or whined less, the current working generation are working longer hours than ever before as well.

wait, you realise your error in that real estate search right? or are you seriously expecting to find a property, for $175k, in the cbd of adelaide?

i highly doubt that property in the cbd has EVER been as low as 3 times the average wage in this state, or any state of the country. if however you widen the search to the whole of the state (and i realise that there would be a lot of properties in the country, and therefore not necessarily near employment) the search returns 1870 results (i also excluded empty blocks). there are still options out there, people just need to be willing to live a bit further out and commute like the rest of us.

You do realise that realestate.com.au uses spatial techniques to search for surrounding suburbs don't you? Thats effectively an Adelaide metro search

And no, I dont expect to find a house in metro adelaide for 180k, that was my entire point. 180k is 3.3x the average wage. You could back in Psyber's, day though.

[Dogwatcher]

Gen Millennials don't want to live in the outer burbs to start in the real estate market

They are entitled to get a $1m house in the CBD so they can enjoy the Hutt St strip

I live out north. I play cricket and talk to a lot of young lads who all went to my private school. I don't know any among them who have this expectation.
I've watched two buy houses out here in the past six months.
Maybe you're making a gross generalisation? Maybe millennials are smarter than some give them credit for?

[tipper]

And no, its not because you worked harder or whined less, the current working generation are working longer hours than ever before as well.

wait, you realise your error in that real estate search right? or are you seriously expecting to find a property, for $175k, in the cbd of adelaide?

i highly doubt that property in the cbd has EVER been as low as 3 times the average wage in this state, or any state of the country. if however you widen the search to the whole of the state (and i realise that there would be a lot of properties in the country, and therefore not necessarily near employment) the search returns 1870 results (i also excluded empty blocks). there are still options out there, people just need to be willing to live a bit further out and commute like the rest of us.

You do realise that realestate.com.au uses spatial techniques to search for surrounding suburbs don't you? Thats effectively an Adelaide metro search

And no, I dont expect to find a house in metro adelaide for 180k, that was my entire point. 180k is 3.3x the average wage. You could back in Psyber's, day though.

sigh, no it isnt an adelaide metro search. it is adelaide cbd and surrounds. ie, parkside, north adelaide, kent town, hackney etc. i would have thought the average house price in those suburbs would be over a mil. not exactly a fair comparison surely.

open your search for just "south australia" and you will find heaps of properties. might have to go out to paralowie, or elizabeth, or smithfield to find one, but they are there, and believe it or not, the metro area extends all the way north to gawler! shock horror. give it a go, i did and it returned nearly 2000 properties (with undeveloped blocks filtered out). and while a number of them would be country, there were still many metro ones to be found.

and sorry, but bullshit. when has any property been priced at 3.3 times the average wage in the cbd or surrounding suburbs. those properties have always been pricey, and always will be (at least till after the apocalypse)

[Jimmy_041]

Gen Millennials don't want to live in the outer burbs to start in the real estate market

They are entitled to get a $1m house in the CBD so they can enjoy the Hutt St strip

I live out north. I play cricket and talk to a lot of young lads who all went to my private school. I don't know any among them who have this expectation.
I've watched two buy houses out here in the past six months.
Maybe you're making a gross generalisation? Maybe millennials are smarter than some give them credit for?

Correct again Dogwatcher. That's twice today

[Jimmy_041]

https://www.realestate.com.au/buy/between-0-175000-in-adelaide%2c+sa+5000%3b+/list-1?source=location-search

With respect to the CBD, just hang around for a while and you'll have plenty of choice of CBD apartments for under $175,000

It is ludicrous that this State Govt financially encourage people to buy them when the financial sector are actively discouraging them in the rest of Australia

[morell]

sigh, no it isnt an adelaide metro search. it is adelaide cbd and surrounds. ie, parkside, north adelaide, kent town, hackney etc. i would have thought the average house price in those suburbs would be over a mil. not exactly a fair comparison surely.

Of course it's not.

You're arguing the same point I am. That it's impossible to buy a house for 3.3x your salary within cooee of the CBD.

But of course the expectations are that one is gainfully employed with a good salary to make those mortgage payments. Know of many jobs going at Keith at the moment?

Abolish negative gearing
Increase land parcels (in good areas)
Restrict foreign ownership
Allow for more urban infill and development
Investment tax reform

Of course, that will impact on house prices all the old peoples equity and thus retirement - which they dont want.

[morell]

https://www.realestate.com.au/buy/between-0-175000-in-adelaide%2c+sa+5000%3b+/list-1?source=location-search

With respect to the CBD, just hang around for a while and you'll have plenty of choice of CBD apartments for under $175,000

It is ludicrous that this State Govt financially encourage people to buy them when the financial sector are actively discouraging them in the rest of Australia

Which of course means you dont own any land, which is what we know holds value over time and isn't as susceptible to market fluctuations.


The baby boomer generation had the red carpet laid out for them, fair enough, but just as they're about to welcome the next generation onto said carpet they're quickly rolling it up and slamming the door.

[Jimmy_041]

https://www.realestate.com.au/buy/between-0-175000-in-adelaide%2c+sa+5000%3b+/list-1?source=location-search

With respect to the CBD, just hang around for a while and you'll have plenty of choice of CBD apartments for under $175,000

It is ludicrous that this State Govt financially encourage people to buy them when the financial sector are actively discouraging them in the rest of Australia

Which of course means you dont own any land, which is what we know holds value over time and isn't as susceptible to market fluctuations.


The baby boomer generation had the red carpet laid out for them, fair enough, but just as they're about to welcome the next generation onto said carpet they're quickly rolling it up and slamming the door.

That's because you are not entitled to any of it. Go and get your own

Here's a start for you

[tipper]

sigh, no it isnt an adelaide metro search. it is adelaide cbd and surrounds. ie, parkside, north adelaide, kent town, hackney etc. i would have thought the average house price in those suburbs would be over a mil. not exactly a fair comparison surely.

Of course it's not.

You're arguing the same point I am. That it's impossible to buy a house for 3.3x your salary within cooee of the CBD.

But of course the expectations are that one is gainfully employed with a good salary to make those mortgage payments. Know of many jobs going at Keith at the moment?

Abolish negative gearing
Increase land parcels (in good areas)
Restrict foreign ownership
Allow for more urban infill and development
Investment tax reform

Of course, that will impact on house prices all the old peoples equity and thus retirement - which they dont want.

ok, ill type slowly so you can keep up.

you initially said that you cant get one in the metro area.

i proved you wrong by just opening up the search.

there are heaps of properties, for that price, in the metro area. just because you cant find one in the cbd, or parkside, doesnt mean they dont exist.....

[morell]

https://www.realestate.com.au/buy/between-0-175000-in-adelaide%2c+sa+5000%3b+/list-1?source=location-search

With respect to the CBD, just hang around for a while and you'll have plenty of choice of CBD apartments for under $175,000

It is ludicrous that this State Govt financially encourage people to buy them when the financial sector are actively discouraging them in the rest of Australia

Which of course means you dont own any land, which is what we know holds value over time and isn't as susceptible to market fluctuations.


The baby boomer generation had the red carpet laid out for them, fair enough, but just as they're about to welcome the next generation onto said carpet they're quickly rolling it up and slamming the door.

That's because you are not entitled to any of it. Go and get your own

K

Abolish negative gearing
Increase land parcels (in good areas)
Restrict foreign ownership
Allow for more urban infill and development
Investment tax reform

Here's a start for you

$250k is still more than 3.3x income innit

And those areas have low unemployment, right?

So you want people to pay more than your generation did (as has been proven) more further away than you did (as has been proven) AND you want them to travel longer to their job too.

Gee whizz.

[morell]

ok, ill type slowly so you can keep up.

you initially said that you cant get one in the metro area.

i proved you wrong by just opening up the search.

there are heaps of properties, for that price, in the metro area. just because you cant find one in the cbd, or parkside, doesnt mean they dont exist.....

I was responding to Psyber and you've interjected and misunderstood, so quit being a smarmy **** and put your manners back in.

Where do you reckon Psyber's house for 3.3x his income was?

[Booney]

[tipper]

ok, ill type slowly so you can keep up.

you initially said that you cant get one in the metro area.

i proved you wrong by just opening up the search.

there are heaps of properties, for that price, in the metro area. just because you cant find one in the cbd, or parkside, doesnt mean they dont exist.....

I was responding to Psyber and you've interjected and misunderstood, so quit being a smarmy **** and put your manners back in.

Where do you reckon Psyber's house for 3.3x his income was?

ill be willing to bet it wasnt in the cbd or parkside. where do you think it was? im sure the man himself can clear it up for us when he returns.

dont like being proven wrong do you? my manners are right where they should be. ill start using them when you do

for the record, before you start having a go at me. i dont own any investment properties, am paying off a tiny house in the same areas i am talking about, and commute to the cbd for work every day. so im not suggesting that "young people" should be doing anything that i am not already doing. not that im even that old!

[morell]

The only thing you've proven is your ineptitude. Go back and have a read. Or look at Jimmy's map if you like.

There are no houses within living distance of the Adelaide CBD for less than 3.3x the average income. 180k.

That was not the case when Psyber bought his house.

You can try and argue where metro begins and ends if you like, but again, you're completely missing the point.

[tipper]

The only thing you've proven is your ineptitude. Go back and have a read. Or look at Jimmy's map if you like.

There are no houses within living distance of the Adelaide CBD for less than 3.3x the average income.

That was not the case when Psyber bought his house.

You can try and argue where metro begins and ends if you like, but again, you're completely missing the point.

so elizabeth isnt within living distance of the cbd? or it isnt it metro? im confused, which is it? or is it just that you are too good for those areas?

anyway, the people i work with in the cbd and some of whom live as far out as willaston or lobethal will disagree. they commute here every day. elizabeth is closer than both of those, and there are several houses for the advertised price you are quoting available there.

just because it might be a little too far for you to ride your scooter in, doesnt mean it isnt metro, nor does it mean it isnt within living distance. try the search again, and dont limit it to postcode 5000. see what you get returned.

[Jimmy_041]

$250k is still more than 3.3x income innit

And those areas have low unemployment, right?

So you want people to pay more than your generation did (as has been proven) more further away than you did (as has been proven) AND you want them to travel longer to their job too.

Gee whizz.[/quote]

Yep, but think of all that time you can spend on your phone
AND they have built a new extension of the O Bahn for you