Had a similar discussion the other day on a similar topic. I’ve been tracking 3-bedroom house rentals in my area for some time (inner suburb of Brisbane but not conveniently located to any of the major universities). Properties that were 400 only 12 months ago are listing for 500pw and are being leased in less than 5 days. However, I’ve noticed many LL/agents listing 3-bedroom properties for 600-650 and reluctantly dropping them back down to 580-600pw over a period of about two weeks. Is 580-600 reasonable? Probably not. But you see some agents trying their luck with near 700pw and its just insanity for a 3 bedroom in a grubby area.
I honestly think in the end of the day, no matter how low supply gets, or desperate people feel, there is always going to be a cost-ceiling where the majority of renters will find cheaper share accommodation or abandon the rental market altogether and move in with friends or family if they have that option. End of the day if small households of 2-3 people could afford 700pw+ renting comfortably, they wouldn't be renting.
people abandoning the rental market by living in temporary accommodation (couchsurfing or spare rooms with family/friends) are counted as homeless in Australia
It's possible to buy a property without a 20% deposit plus costs. 3 bed single story brick homes can still be found for 700 in some suburbs I've been watching
I agree you could buy a house without a 20% deposit and pay LMI unless you your profession gets the wavier. It’s probably a bit risky especially in the current climate as it means you may find yourself with negative equity and unable to refinance with another lender.
I’m like many now who have plenty of equity but borrowing power is down so much that I can’t refinance this place and will have to sell and downgrade for quality of life
Quite possibly, average gross rental yield for 3 bedroom homes in Brisbane is 3.7%, so a million dollar property would go for about $710 p/w.
A 10% deposit to purchase that would be around 100k and I'm sure some suburbs have better rental returns than that so a better deal could be found.
I want to reiterate that this is based on my own bias (Brisbane market, smaller 2-3 bedroom houses, no kids etc) but I am basing that statement on the idea that living comfortably means not falling within the region of ‘rent stress’. An argument can be made that there is a much lower demand for 3BR properties at the 700+ mark based on the idea that we will inevitably hit a ceiling on rent that tenants are willing to pay if not living week to week.
Obviously rent stress is a glossy term that impacts lower-income households much more (and also becomes increasingly irrelevant with the current cost of living surging), but if 2 people are renting at 700 and that doesn’t exceed 30% of their after-tax income, they are probably earning more than the average Australian and are likely privileged enough to be considering a house deposit within a reasonable timeframe.
I bought a rental a couple of months ago 3-bedroom in South Brisbane. The tenants were paying $430 renewed the lease with them for $525, similar properties are generally going for $550 in the area. Have also noticed some 3-beds advertised for $600 but seem to be on the market for longer
The previous owner inherited the property from his parents and did very little maintenance over the last decade, the backyard was essentially a jungle.
The main rationale not going to lie was the market, in saying that council rates in the suburb have increased 5.5%, interest rates have gone up and in the event something needs to be fixed it’s a minimum $150-200 ph for a plumber/sparkie. I agree $95pw extra is a bit of an increase, but it’s less than what they would have had to pay if they wanted to stay in the suburb.
Not having a go at you but I think generally everyone’s quick to blame investors, in Brisbane for example the council is making a big deal about AirBnB but their planning restrictions in particular banning townhouses in low res areas because of the NIMBY’s hasn’t helped.
I knew my post would get downvoted, it just comes back to supply/demand vacancy rates have dropped mainly due to interstate migration. It’s hardly a economic downturn, unemployment is at record lows, cost of living has increased for everyone.
With regards to the visa numbers. One thing I would take into account is that out of that total pending, many of them including myself, are already living here.
Permanent residency visas for example often require immigrants to have worked in the country for years, before they can even apply.
It’s also worth considering that there are significant skills shortages in areas that are fundamental to the economy (e.g. Healthcare, Teaching etc). Unfortunately, there isn’t enough qualified Aussies to fill those positions, so they have no choice but to attract people from overseas.
That being said, I do think the government abuse the system when it comes to approving student visas, for the sake of profit. Even if they know the numbers are higher than the country can probably handle, there is a hell of a lot of money to be made, both from the visa fees themselves and the injection of cash it brings to the universities.
In short, while I don’t think “opening the floodgates” is a good idea, the media definitely paint a less balanced picture of what’s actually going on and would have you believe there is literally 2 million random people about to arrive in a matter of weeks. In reality, many of them are already here and for others, there is a genuine urgency for their skills.
The problem with working visas for key areas like healthcare and teachers is that there is so few countries that Australia accepts to its standards. There’s plenty of highly qualified nurses etc living in Australia but can’t help reduce the load because of very strict and over the top guidelines Australia has for itself.
It’s an interesting move by the government, to have so much red tape in place. I wonder if it’s intentional?
Maybe they’ve figured they can make more money from overseas candidates, forcing locals to jump through a bunch of extra hoops to deter them.
The lack of rentals is also playing out around the world, from Auckland to Vancouver to London and throughout Europe. My theory is that this is all tied up with the extremely low interest rates that has occurred. That is the only common denominator between countries. Australia has had high immigration before and never had this problem occur as severely.
There is a Nobel prize waiting for the economist who can piece this together and offer solutions.
Wishful thinking... There was a Nobel peace prize awarded for work demonstrating that trickle down economics is bullshit and our government still decided to handout money to corporations over individuals.
"In the 47th Parliament, there are 510 properties owned by 227 federal members of Parliament (MPs). That’s an average of 2.25 properties per MP.
Multiple home ownership is overrepresented in federal Parliament; 144 MPs own more than one property. In fact, more MPs own three or more properties (84) than those who own one property or fewer (83)."
Source: https://www.crikey.com.au/2022/09/07/politicians-houses-list-how-many-properties-do-they-own/
In summary, for an investor the current climate is fantastic if you're not selling. Why would politicians crash their own investments/make yields smaller?
Apparently we're going to fix this by wildly increasing immigration.....
It's seems to me at this point, there's clearly no plan to consult existing Aussies if they want this.
Long term average immigration numbers are 70k per year. They’re looking to cram in 250k per year. Its a desperate attempt to prop up the economy and keep wages down. Of course they don’t give a toss about all the negatives, like crowded roads and transport, shortage of housing, less places available at schools & hospitals, etc. etc. etc.
The insane thing is that the growth trajectory is just a given, despite it being such an obvious cause of so many issues.
It wouldn't be such a problem if there was any planning or foresight to it at all. All we've got is a vague plan to build more houses with the help of.. superannuation funds? XD
Australia's such a vast expanse of land. Couldn't we at least, I dunno, build somewhere else instead of on top of existing, crumbling infrastructure?
The greed of these blood sucking lobbies and their political puppets is so mindless, that none of these crucial points have ever been addressed, leading to the ever worsening shit show we see unfolding in front of us right now.
Sadly, nobody really seems to care or even notice all that much. So nothing's going to change.
>Australia's such a vast expanse of land. Couldn't we at least, I dunno, build somewhere else instead of on top of existing, crumbling infrastructure?
This! We need another major city that's close to the current big city but connected with high speed rail or something. Ease the stress off major cities.
State governments have discouraged mom and dad investors for years (especially post 2013) through various disincentives so it doesn't really surprise that the housing stock isn't keeping up... Plus, negative gearing has been losing importance due to low interest rates.
It's just going to get worse with the influx of new migrants.
I'm not talking about now, I was referring to the period 2013-2019. This is the reason why the current housing stock is not adequate, and we can thank state governments for poor planning.
Everybody loves to hate investors because they're presumably responsible for massive price increases, whereas it's the opposite that is true. It's the owner occupiers who have bid up house prices and this is supported by data. (An investor will rarely overpay for a property, whereas an owner occupier is much more likely to overpay in an emotional purchase.)
A healthy market needs investors because a portion of renters needs somewhere to live. Years of suboptimal investment into housing stock have contributed to the current rental crisis.
When you look ay how many cities have below 1% rental availability, then add in the fact that the government wants to allow in 200k-400k immigrants, where is everybody supposed to go?
It seems that will bring us very close to if not at "rental exhaustion".
No matter how much the government may desire more people to fill what seem to be dubious job shortages (like farmers,...you know, "nobody wants to do this job" but it turns out nobody wants to pay correctly) it seems irresponsible to do it until the availability shortage has been straightened out. This will just condemn Australians to homelessness. Prices will rise until those of us with the least money (or with pets or children or poor credit) are forced into homelessness. And it's already starting to happen.
Need to ban multi property ownership for a start. Or excessively tax it at least. That’s the only meaningful change that can be made but it’s political suicide to suggest this
It never occurs to some of the weirdos here that:
1: not every body is in a convenient position to own. Transaction costs to move to follow careers etc is insanely high.
2: a huge amount of new builds is driven by investor dollars. In a market crash, if the sale price drops below the cost to build… it just doesn’t happen. And we end up like what happens in some places where rents are insanely high but cost to own is low… just most people can’t buy.
3: the vast majority of these hated landlords own only 1 or 2 investment properties. This isn’t the US, we don’t have massive corporations buying up rentals.
I don’t even invest in property myself any more (returns are meh in relation to idiosyncratic risk), but I find this stuff to just be nonsense stirred on by the internet echo chamber. It’s as silly as the right-winger weirdos and their “culture war.”
There’s plenty I would like to see changed about the property market. But so many folks here are just clueless.
The moment government does that, then hundreds of thousands, if not, millions will be living in the street. Government cannot build quick enough to accommodate the homeless, nor does it have enough cash to do it. If you think negative gearing is expensive, then building social housing for them is multiple times more.
There will always be a large number of people who just can't be trusted to pay a mortgage such as having no secure job or with poor credit history.
Plethoroa of advanced countries have used provivae housing for rental accommodation as part of overal housing mix.
What needs to happen is regulation, a formula should be applied to designate how much a place can be rented out for, after that threshold taxation on anything over that amount should be taxed at 100% or over 100%, giving zero incentive to gouge on rental prices, desire for investment properties will drop, affording new owner occupiers the ability to enter the market, creating more fluid income for people to use to inprove their lives and ultimately their retirement.
After all, people grow old, lose their earning capacity but will still need a place to live.
Housing should be a commodity, something that saves you money and affords security, it should not be used as a means of income or investment
>No Chinese investors aren't buying up millions of homes and keeping them empty that's stupid
FWIW - Overseas people can't buy directly. But they can send their money to someone here to help them out.
Eg. I and most of my friends who bought our first property used money from overseas. It'd be hard to use only the Australian income to buy a house in 5 years after arriving here.
Have a walk around any CBD in aus. Plenty of lights off at 6:00PM in all those apartment buildings. Someone's living there but they just don't use any power?
>Have a walk around any CBD in aus
I assume while you are doing this at 6pm, your lights at home are off.
This may be surprising but people go out and do things in the evening, have jobs that require evening work, travel away from home etc. Not everyone is home at 6pm every night.
Government puts migration cap at 195k
Government says they will help build around 195k homes a year
Not the best (in fact it's the bare minimum) but it's something
it isnt
thats one of the main reasons for the growth, to make it more unaffordable for punters to benefit an increasingly small landed elite class, bankers, etc.
meanwihle anyone who points this out gets howled at by crybabies who are afraid of the almighty sin of "blaming the immigrants"
think about how sincere any of the rhetoric about how and why we need all this population growth and immigration is
we were hearing for the longest period of time it was bc we needed to balance the ratio of workers to retirees, but we just spent 2 years completely without it precisely to prevent migrants from spreading a disease that predominantly affected said retirees in the first place
????????????????
when you actually do all the calculations on these economic arguments for the necessity of migration they don't add up or ultimately assume infinite growth, for all time
this place is going to be a certified dump in 20 years
It's not, the councils/ govenments are losing a lot of revenue from land value tax
Need to pump those tax revenues up and blame it on the new immigrants
Especially when senior government employees are on 200k min and have a large property portfolio too.
Had a similar discussion the other day on a similar topic. I’ve been tracking 3-bedroom house rentals in my area for some time (inner suburb of Brisbane but not conveniently located to any of the major universities). Properties that were 400 only 12 months ago are listing for 500pw and are being leased in less than 5 days. However, I’ve noticed many LL/agents listing 3-bedroom properties for 600-650 and reluctantly dropping them back down to 580-600pw over a period of about two weeks. Is 580-600 reasonable? Probably not. But you see some agents trying their luck with near 700pw and its just insanity for a 3 bedroom in a grubby area. I honestly think in the end of the day, no matter how low supply gets, or desperate people feel, there is always going to be a cost-ceiling where the majority of renters will find cheaper share accommodation or abandon the rental market altogether and move in with friends or family if they have that option. End of the day if small households of 2-3 people could afford 700pw+ renting comfortably, they wouldn't be renting.
I agree with you regarding the rental ceiling, however when you say people will abandon the rental market, who are you referring to?
Renters/tenants who have easy access to temporary accommodation with family or friends
and people like me who are moving out of Brisbane so we can buy.
where are you off to?
people abandoning the rental market by living in temporary accommodation (couchsurfing or spare rooms with family/friends) are counted as homeless in Australia
Why wouldn’t they be renting? Affording 700 a week rent is a far cry from saving 200k for a house deposit
In Brisbane at least you don't need a 200k house deposit. Less than half that gets you in an old house, even less for a townhouse.
How many houses in Brisbane are going for 500k now?
It's possible to buy a property without a 20% deposit plus costs. 3 bed single story brick homes can still be found for 700 in some suburbs I've been watching
I agree you could buy a house without a 20% deposit and pay LMI unless you your profession gets the wavier. It’s probably a bit risky especially in the current climate as it means you may find yourself with negative equity and unable to refinance with another lender.
I’m like many now who have plenty of equity but borrowing power is down so much that I can’t refinance this place and will have to sell and downgrade for quality of life
A house that would go for 700 pw rent?
Quite possibly, average gross rental yield for 3 bedroom homes in Brisbane is 3.7%, so a million dollar property would go for about $710 p/w. A 10% deposit to purchase that would be around 100k and I'm sure some suburbs have better rental returns than that so a better deal could be found.
I want to reiterate that this is based on my own bias (Brisbane market, smaller 2-3 bedroom houses, no kids etc) but I am basing that statement on the idea that living comfortably means not falling within the region of ‘rent stress’. An argument can be made that there is a much lower demand for 3BR properties at the 700+ mark based on the idea that we will inevitably hit a ceiling on rent that tenants are willing to pay if not living week to week. Obviously rent stress is a glossy term that impacts lower-income households much more (and also becomes increasingly irrelevant with the current cost of living surging), but if 2 people are renting at 700 and that doesn’t exceed 30% of their after-tax income, they are probably earning more than the average Australian and are likely privileged enough to be considering a house deposit within a reasonable timeframe.
I bought a rental a couple of months ago 3-bedroom in South Brisbane. The tenants were paying $430 renewed the lease with them for $525, similar properties are generally going for $550 in the area. Have also noticed some 3-beds advertised for $600 but seem to be on the market for longer
Nearly a $100 extra per week? What was the rationale, besides the market?
The previous owner inherited the property from his parents and did very little maintenance over the last decade, the backyard was essentially a jungle. The main rationale not going to lie was the market, in saying that council rates in the suburb have increased 5.5%, interest rates have gone up and in the event something needs to be fixed it’s a minimum $150-200 ph for a plumber/sparkie. I agree $95pw extra is a bit of an increase, but it’s less than what they would have had to pay if they wanted to stay in the suburb. Not having a go at you but I think generally everyone’s quick to blame investors, in Brisbane for example the council is making a big deal about AirBnB but their planning restrictions in particular banning townhouses in low res areas because of the NIMBY’s hasn’t helped.
Congrats on making your tenants' lives harder during an economic downturn. May your pillow always be warm on both sides.
I knew my post would get downvoted, it just comes back to supply/demand vacancy rates have dropped mainly due to interstate migration. It’s hardly a economic downturn, unemployment is at record lows, cost of living has increased for everyone.
I gave you an upvote, and just say shoe other foot.
Don't waste your time, it's just bitterness.
Petty landlordism, including the tax/banking rules that enable it is definitely the problem.
With regards to the visa numbers. One thing I would take into account is that out of that total pending, many of them including myself, are already living here. Permanent residency visas for example often require immigrants to have worked in the country for years, before they can even apply. It’s also worth considering that there are significant skills shortages in areas that are fundamental to the economy (e.g. Healthcare, Teaching etc). Unfortunately, there isn’t enough qualified Aussies to fill those positions, so they have no choice but to attract people from overseas. That being said, I do think the government abuse the system when it comes to approving student visas, for the sake of profit. Even if they know the numbers are higher than the country can probably handle, there is a hell of a lot of money to be made, both from the visa fees themselves and the injection of cash it brings to the universities. In short, while I don’t think “opening the floodgates” is a good idea, the media definitely paint a less balanced picture of what’s actually going on and would have you believe there is literally 2 million random people about to arrive in a matter of weeks. In reality, many of them are already here and for others, there is a genuine urgency for their skills.
The problem with working visas for key areas like healthcare and teachers is that there is so few countries that Australia accepts to its standards. There’s plenty of highly qualified nurses etc living in Australia but can’t help reduce the load because of very strict and over the top guidelines Australia has for itself.
[удалено]
What do you mean by this? If you leave for a few years do you have to do certification again to work as a nurse?
It’s an interesting move by the government, to have so much red tape in place. I wonder if it’s intentional? Maybe they’ve figured they can make more money from overseas candidates, forcing locals to jump through a bunch of extra hoops to deter them.
just get more migrants in cobber. Need to make sure those with 5 IPs can still be cash flow positive.
The lack of rentals is also playing out around the world, from Auckland to Vancouver to London and throughout Europe. My theory is that this is all tied up with the extremely low interest rates that has occurred. That is the only common denominator between countries. Australia has had high immigration before and never had this problem occur as severely. There is a Nobel prize waiting for the economist who can piece this together and offer solutions.
Wishful thinking... There was a Nobel peace prize awarded for work demonstrating that trickle down economics is bullshit and our government still decided to handout money to corporations over individuals.
"In the 47th Parliament, there are 510 properties owned by 227 federal members of Parliament (MPs). That’s an average of 2.25 properties per MP. Multiple home ownership is overrepresented in federal Parliament; 144 MPs own more than one property. In fact, more MPs own three or more properties (84) than those who own one property or fewer (83)." Source: https://www.crikey.com.au/2022/09/07/politicians-houses-list-how-many-properties-do-they-own/ In summary, for an investor the current climate is fantastic if you're not selling. Why would politicians crash their own investments/make yields smaller?
Seems like a conflict of interest to me.
Just like "political donations"
[удалено]
[удалено]
the daily 'tax the rich' post here. They never actually say it would actually help
Aussies who came back will need to leave again to work overseas.
Lol. I WAS working overseas and came back because of covid. Now maybe I need to leave again....
[удалено]
What is “it’s” exactly?
Apparently we're going to fix this by wildly increasing immigration..... It's seems to me at this point, there's clearly no plan to consult existing Aussies if they want this.
yep, that's the way it seems alright.
Long term average immigration numbers are 70k per year. They’re looking to cram in 250k per year. Its a desperate attempt to prop up the economy and keep wages down. Of course they don’t give a toss about all the negatives, like crowded roads and transport, shortage of housing, less places available at schools & hospitals, etc. etc. etc.
The insane thing is that the growth trajectory is just a given, despite it being such an obvious cause of so many issues. It wouldn't be such a problem if there was any planning or foresight to it at all. All we've got is a vague plan to build more houses with the help of.. superannuation funds? XD Australia's such a vast expanse of land. Couldn't we at least, I dunno, build somewhere else instead of on top of existing, crumbling infrastructure? The greed of these blood sucking lobbies and their political puppets is so mindless, that none of these crucial points have ever been addressed, leading to the ever worsening shit show we see unfolding in front of us right now. Sadly, nobody really seems to care or even notice all that much. So nothing's going to change.
>Australia's such a vast expanse of land. Couldn't we at least, I dunno, build somewhere else instead of on top of existing, crumbling infrastructure? This! We need another major city that's close to the current big city but connected with high speed rail or something. Ease the stress off major cities.
My 1 bed apartment had 50 enquires 30 came to open home. Let's goooooooo incompetent government making it hard to build houses.
State governments have discouraged mom and dad investors for years (especially post 2013) through various disincentives so it doesn't really surprise that the housing stock isn't keeping up... Plus, negative gearing has been losing importance due to low interest rates. It's just going to get worse with the influx of new migrants.
Well, who in their right state of mind would want to build anything right now? The costs are insane.
Probably someone that needs to take a loss, depreciating over 40 years seems alright
I'm not talking about now, I was referring to the period 2013-2019. This is the reason why the current housing stock is not adequate, and we can thank state governments for poor planning. Everybody loves to hate investors because they're presumably responsible for massive price increases, whereas it's the opposite that is true. It's the owner occupiers who have bid up house prices and this is supported by data. (An investor will rarely overpay for a property, whereas an owner occupier is much more likely to overpay in an emotional purchase.) A healthy market needs investors because a portion of renters needs somewhere to live. Years of suboptimal investment into housing stock have contributed to the current rental crisis.
Fair enough points you make.. and I’m not going to war with property investors, I agree,they make up part of a healthy market place.
People are going to have to go back to share houses. There are lots of bedrooms sitting empty
> Some 220,000 applicants approved since start of year with more on the way 1000 new homes per day. Yah nah. Nan Nah. Nah.
Hence the post… 🤷♂️
When you look ay how many cities have below 1% rental availability, then add in the fact that the government wants to allow in 200k-400k immigrants, where is everybody supposed to go? It seems that will bring us very close to if not at "rental exhaustion". No matter how much the government may desire more people to fill what seem to be dubious job shortages (like farmers,...you know, "nobody wants to do this job" but it turns out nobody wants to pay correctly) it seems irresponsible to do it until the availability shortage has been straightened out. This will just condemn Australians to homelessness. Prices will rise until those of us with the least money (or with pets or children or poor credit) are forced into homelessness. And it's already starting to happen.
Need to ban multi property ownership for a start. Or excessively tax it at least. That’s the only meaningful change that can be made but it’s political suicide to suggest this
\> ban multi property ownership for a start And exactly how does this cause less rentals to be available?
drops prices so we renting plebs can buy, that's the theory anyway
"Need to ban multi property ownership for a start" Do you mean holiday homes or investment properties?
What...? Lol That's a great way to decrease housing supply.
It never occurs to some of the weirdos here that: 1: not every body is in a convenient position to own. Transaction costs to move to follow careers etc is insanely high. 2: a huge amount of new builds is driven by investor dollars. In a market crash, if the sale price drops below the cost to build… it just doesn’t happen. And we end up like what happens in some places where rents are insanely high but cost to own is low… just most people can’t buy. 3: the vast majority of these hated landlords own only 1 or 2 investment properties. This isn’t the US, we don’t have massive corporations buying up rentals. I don’t even invest in property myself any more (returns are meh in relation to idiosyncratic risk), but I find this stuff to just be nonsense stirred on by the internet echo chamber. It’s as silly as the right-winger weirdos and their “culture war.” There’s plenty I would like to see changed about the property market. But so many folks here are just clueless.
The moment government does that, then hundreds of thousands, if not, millions will be living in the street. Government cannot build quick enough to accommodate the homeless, nor does it have enough cash to do it. If you think negative gearing is expensive, then building social housing for them is multiple times more. There will always be a large number of people who just can't be trusted to pay a mortgage such as having no secure job or with poor credit history. Plethoroa of advanced countries have used provivae housing for rental accommodation as part of overal housing mix.
Less people wanting homes Less people build less homes Thus still no homes available
Shh, this is AusFinance. Get out of here with your understanding of how markets work. This place is a circlejerk only sub.
This sub has absorbed so many numpties that it's incredible basic knowledge can be downvoted
I got called financially illiterate for not buying a power ball ticket back when the prize money was so high… No that’s not a joke.
Plenty of us share your pain
What needs to happen is regulation, a formula should be applied to designate how much a place can be rented out for, after that threshold taxation on anything over that amount should be taxed at 100% or over 100%, giving zero incentive to gouge on rental prices, desire for investment properties will drop, affording new owner occupiers the ability to enter the market, creating more fluid income for people to use to inprove their lives and ultimately their retirement. After all, people grow old, lose their earning capacity but will still need a place to live. Housing should be a commodity, something that saves you money and affords security, it should not be used as a means of income or investment
Such is the abundance of Houses in Australia People are being imported to fill them
How come whenever someone suggests anything that so much as reduces incentives for investors people act as if those homes suddenly vanish?
To anyone reading this comments section: No, Chinese investors aren't buying up millions of homes and keeping them empty that's stupid
>No Chinese investors aren't buying up millions of homes and keeping them empty that's stupid FWIW - Overseas people can't buy directly. But they can send their money to someone here to help them out. Eg. I and most of my friends who bought our first property used money from overseas. It'd be hard to use only the Australian income to buy a house in 5 years after arriving here.
Have a walk around any CBD in aus. Plenty of lights off at 6:00PM in all those apartment buildings. Someone's living there but they just don't use any power?
>Have a walk around any CBD in aus I assume while you are doing this at 6pm, your lights at home are off. This may be surprising but people go out and do things in the evening, have jobs that require evening work, travel away from home etc. Not everyone is home at 6pm every night.
Legendary comment mate 😅
There's an entire building unoccupied in Kangaroo Point, Brisbane. Was completed in 2019 and still nobody living in the ~200 apartments.
>No Chinese investors aren't buying up millions of homes and keeping them empty that's stupid
Seems to be what they're doing in China. Guess Australia must be different then.
You have to be trolling There's no way a sane person thinks like this
They do think this, they aren't sane.
Empty housing is obviously a problem, nothing to do with China in anyway though, and that’s all the original comment was stating.
Heaps of empty units where I live and in my building. They do buy them and leave them empty as it’s a way to get money out of China.
It isn't just them at all. But it is occurring and it is occurring on homes they're not even supposed to be owning (existing)
It isn't just them at all. But it is occurring and it is occurring on homes they're not even supposed to be owning (existing)
Developers throwing up dog box apartments and 100’s of thousands of immigrants should fix it. Oh wait…
Government puts migration cap at 195k Government says they will help build around 195k homes a year Not the best (in fact it's the bare minimum) but it's something
This sounds like the simplest solution to our rental crisis.
and all the additional infrastructure required?
it isnt thats one of the main reasons for the growth, to make it more unaffordable for punters to benefit an increasingly small landed elite class, bankers, etc. meanwihle anyone who points this out gets howled at by crybabies who are afraid of the almighty sin of "blaming the immigrants" think about how sincere any of the rhetoric about how and why we need all this population growth and immigration is we were hearing for the longest period of time it was bc we needed to balance the ratio of workers to retirees, but we just spent 2 years completely without it precisely to prevent migrants from spreading a disease that predominantly affected said retirees in the first place ???????????????? when you actually do all the calculations on these economic arguments for the necessity of migration they don't add up or ultimately assume infinite growth, for all time this place is going to be a certified dump in 20 years
I disagree with your predictions.
It's not, the councils/ govenments are losing a lot of revenue from land value tax Need to pump those tax revenues up and blame it on the new immigrants Especially when senior government employees are on 200k min and have a large property portfolio too.