Recent content by listoffallacies

That image is pretty out of date. New one:

-Making up figures when they are already available. Most people who own property ARE negatively geared, and overall, the landlord industry makes a loss.

If they are there for their economic interests, it's not in their economic interest to not be there.

-Extrapolating your anecdotes onto the broader market when the statistics for the broader market are already available. Rents are dropping after inflation. http://www.somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70321

-You equate new with average. Compare: "You can't make a new sedan for less than $15,000 so it's impossible the average sedan is worth less than $15,000" -You are ignoring the option of EVERYTHING dropping. New construction prices, wages, rents, existing prices, everything. This would be...

This is not what happens at all. Rent is set by supply & demand of the rental market. Because of high expectations of capital growth, the landlord paid a higher price for the property than would be justified by rental income alone. There is a big difference - in your model: -Prices are...

Why not just read the article? "Higher rents, combined with lower prices, are lifting rental yields for landlords"

Oh wait, we can't run with that title. How about "Renters squeezed by property shortage"? Yeah. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/money/affordability-sees-renters-hit/story-e6fredkc-1226035082007

Household income is already available, there is no need to make one up, especially using formula where a single mum & kid are assumed to be on 130k a year because there are 2 of them.

This didn't happen in a US Style crash. -A large proportion of housing demand was speculative demand, which evaporated. -Credit bubble inflated wages and pushed unemployment down, the unwinding of which reduced incomes and decreased rental demand. Retail rates did not fall to 1%. In many...

Instead of using comparable income/price percentiles (ie traditional measures such as average person/average house) you are stating everything is ok because someone on average income can buy the worst house. This is changing the goalposts by removing the 50% of the population who are below...

These were introduced at the peak of their housing bubble in the 1980s. Interest only loans are actually worse than these nasty loans (in the sense of giving more borrowing power and feeding the bubble) The Japanese housing bubble has since deflated, and so these are no longer necessary...

Australian houses are extremely expensive relative to wages, rents, historical values and other countries.

You are acting as if the number 3 in "affordable is when median house < 3 * median wage" has some special properties, and if you can just redefine the criteria to get the number down, then that will fix things. It's a rule of thumb. If you want to redefine the calculations of incomes to only...

-Don't change the goalposts, this is not done in other markets. The point of Demographia is to compare cities across the world. -These people have to live somewhere. They DO live somewhere - probably low end housing that likely correlates with their incomes. The fact that they can afford to...