$170K family priced out of Perth

Not quite true.....the trouble is Australians have very high salaries and their expectations are way out of step with the rest of the world.

There are plenty of 200-300k jobs ..where after tax you have 145-180k...

The trouble is people's lifestyles seem to grow as their incomes grows. The trick is not not increase spend. Usually they are spending it on unnecessary stuff buying a top of the line E-class Merc instead of C-class Merc.

Whilst cities London, Singapore, Dubai may offer hight wages people can save similar amounts as Australia...because the cost of housing in these countries is very high. So that east away into savings. Increasingly employers in these countries give what sound to be a high way - i.e. A$250-300k. But you are paying for housing, medical insurance, etc out of these costs. So the savings are comparable. Whilst tax rates are low in Singapore and Dubai ....the rent can be as much as 5-10k month.

However, if you look at it on an international scale - there is a point. Perth, as a place to move to, is unaffordable - regardless of a high salary. Our taxes, add our housing costs, eat up a massive % of salary.

Presumably this individual could earn similar salary in other parts of the world, and live a much higher standard than what he can in Perth. However, with that comes other sacrifices.

As an Australian overseas, we are often overlooked for roles, as we are too expensive. Our rates range between 20-50% more than those of Americans and Brits, for the same role.

I know a number of people who took roles in Australia for a few years, and were attracted by the high $$ salary, however, only lasted a few years there because it wasn't worth their time - they just couldn't get ahead as fast as in other parts of the world.

Blacky
 
Presumably this individual could earn similar salary in other parts of the world, and live a much higher standard than what he can in Perth. However, with that comes other sacrifices.

Exactly.
On a domestic level it seems ridiculous that he wouldn't be able to afford a property in close proximity to the city with a 170k salary. However, think about it from an American perspective.

Cliffs-
Earning 65k in America gets you a much better lifestyle than 100k will get you in Australia.

" So this is going to be a long post from me but couldn?t help sharing my side of the story. For someone who has stayed as a migrant in both countries (9 years in US & 3 years in AU ) I feel that if you are a low income earner or someone on a minimum wage then Australia is definitely a better place to be in, than US because here you have access to free healthcare, almost free access to learn new skills and take up new courses e.g.TAFE , traineeships, apprenticeships. Home ownerships for low-income owner in both countries is difficult.

But if you are someone working in a white collared job earning more than average wage. e.g. a university professor , a research scientist in a biotech firm, Software developer, Business Analyst, Data analyst ,a Banker, lawyers, doctor etc, jobs which require a professional qualification (MBA,Masters, Phd) you are better off in US than here. You get more bang for your money.I have never lived in the bigger cities like LA, New York, SFO, Seattle in US nor am I living in the big cities like Melbourne, Sydney or Perth here so I won?t compare cost of living for these cities. I have stayed in smaller cities like Denver & Salt lake city in US and Geelong in Australia both comparable cities in terms of population and land area.

To give you an example of cost of living in the 2 cities, in 2010 when I was leaving US to come here I sold my 2-year-old Honda Civic automatic car for $7000. But when I tried to buy a similar 2year old Automatic Honda car here they were all priced at 16k+ (I was expecting around 10k here assuming how everything is more expensIve here than in US). Finally I ended up buying a 2001 Honda civic automatic which already had more than 100k km,for $9550 and that?s when I realized its going to be tough here, I knew that prices of car in Australia will be more than in US but more than twice and that also for second hand car phew.

I rented a 2BHK unit in Denver (again not a big city but a capital city) and I was paying around $800pm (in decent neighborhood) and the rental place came with a dishwasher, double door refrigerator, a washer, dryer and water bill included. Here I stay in Geelong (a regional town) paying $1330pm for a 2bed unit in a comparable neighborhood to the one in Denver where I stayed which is an average neighborhood and not some expensive locations like highton, waurnponds, newtown or the waterfront which command some really high rent here. Except for gas stove the rental unit had nothing included. I had to buy a refrigerator; washer just bought the dishwasher few months back. So definitely more bang for the rent.
I pay there than I pay here.

Now my salary here is more than what I was earning in Denver but after paying taxes, utilities, rent and covering other daily expenses I end up saving almost same if not more and my lifestyle has taken a backseat so that I am able to save that same amount of money. We used to eat out 2-3 times a week in US, now only once a week.It was cheaper to go on a vacation there than it is here. Over here we only go for day trips and carry lunch and other munching items with us. Holidays are expensive here and we learnt it the hard way when we went on our first vacation for 3 days to Gold coast. It cost us a fortune and from that time onwards vacations are day trips with homemade food. And going out for movies don?t even get me started something that was done once every fortnight since coming here and seeing the ticket prices we have actually given up going to movie theatres. Just once in 3-4 months.Also in US you always had the option of dollar theatres for movies for which you did not feel like spending $10.

In US my health insurance was paid by my employer, which included my family and me and it covered dental insurance .Here we have Medicare but that is not free I pay for it during tax time and again I have to pay part amount for any doctor visit so its not entirely free. But I am happy with the medicare system here as it gives people on low-income access to health services without any heavy bills.

At the end of the day when I compare my lifestyle there and here for me I had a much better lifestyle on a 65k salary in Denver than I am having on 100k salary here and this in a regional city like Geelong , can?t even imagine what it is like to stay in big cities like Melbourne & Sydney. But all said and done we like Australia especially Geelong, you get more sunny days here, winter not too severe,have made some wonderful friends here, love the work I am doing so at the moment we are happy here. How long we will be here not sure but definitely looking at moving back to US in long term.".
 
Look at his job title.

I reckon he is just trying to get traction for his ideas.

Obviously getting the publicity :)
 
this continual rolling out of the ol' "more high density housing" routine is getting a bit old. the inner suburbs can't handle the traffic congestion as it is. the answer is more cities, look at WA... kind of a big place huh?
 
this continual rolling out of the ol' "more high density housing" routine is getting a bit old. the inner suburbs can't handle the traffic congestion as it is. the answer is more cities, look at WA... kind of a big place huh?

I live in the inner suburbs and have for years, congestion is minimal, what are you talking about? Endless sprawl is silly and completely unsustainable.

The inner suburbs have the infrastructure and public transport and it's exactly the place we should be having increased density. Stop being such a typical western suburbs nimby pls
 
It's a big country, sprawl is normal unless geographically restrained. Looking at some places in Europe where you are living on top of each other do nothing for me, however it's where we will eventually head, long gone are the 1/4 acre blocks of our youth
 
It's a big country, sprawl is normal unless geographically restrained. Looking at some places in Europe where you are living on top of each other do nothing for me, however it's where we will eventually head, long gone are the 1/4 acre blocks of our youth

Sprawl is not normal, not to the extent that we have it. Perth metropolitan area is massive and the problem with that is that it is impossible to properly service these suburbs. It costs a fortune and is a huge reason for the traffic problems we've started to see in perth

It is a 119km drive from our southern most tip mandurah to eglinton in the north and that is ridiculous for a city of 2m
 
Sprawl is not normal, not to the extent that we have it. Perth metropolitan area is massive and the problem with that is that it is impossible to properly service these suburbs. It costs a fortune and is a huge reason for the traffic problems we've started to see in perth

It is a 119km drive from our southern most tip mandurah to eglinton in the north and that is ridiculous for a city of 2m

I think Adelaide is at around 100 km ?

How do other major Australian cities compare?

Why do cities still sprawl?

Is there such a thing as good urban sprawl?

What are the benefits of infill housing etc?
 
I think Adelaide is at around 100 km ?

How do other major Australian cities compare?

Why do cities still sprawl?

Is there such a thing as good urban sprawl?

What are the benefits of infill housing etc?

All that info is easily available online by people much more capable and highly qualified than me to explain
 
I live in the inner suburbs and have for years, congestion is minimal, what are you talking about? Endless sprawl is silly and completely unsustainable.

The inner suburbs have the infrastructure and public transport and it's exactly the place we should be having increased density. Stop being such a typical western suburbs nimby pls

tried driving down stirling hwy in claremont at 8.30am? they are talking (!) about sinking the railway line and running a road above it, or sinking stirling hwy etc, all huge costs and wont happen for decades. there is nowhere for the traffic to go. meanwhile they keep plonking in new apartments and postage sized lots in places like Claremont football grounds and no doubt the show grounds. there is nothing clever or sustainable about throwing more and more people into areas that were never designed for that sort of population. they stuck that new ugly triangle shaped building on railway tce in Subiaco there - walkable to nowhere but the hospital which is great if you need to give birth that day, otherwise an eyesore in a b grade location. then go over to Swanbourne, quite nice suburb with one random high rise being constructed... seriously wtf is that about? maybe someone got lucky in SAT that day who knows.
 
It is a 119km drive from our southern most tip mandurah to eglinton in the north and that is ridiculous for a city of 2m

and there it is... with proper decentralisation it shouldn't matter how far it is from Mandurah to Eglinton (? that's a new one, never even heard of that). People in Mandurah should work in Mandurah
 
Yes the traffic is bad there for an entire 30 mins a day boo hoo. If I recall correctly you seemed to feel that infrastructure funding should have gone towards claremont unsteady of light rail so I don't think you are being in any way impartial.

Claremont is what 8km from cbd, has schools, hospitals, shops and everything you need in addition to train and buses, if that suburb isn't ripe for more density then where is? Honest question because on just about every single metric claremont is appropriate for it
 
and there it is... with proper decentralisation it shouldn't matter how far it is from Mandurah to Eglinton (? that's a new one, never even heard of that). People in Mandurah should work in Mandurah

Yes decentralisation does need to happen, along with increased density because what's happening right not simply is stupid
 
I'm also genuinely curious about your comment that it isn't sustainable to put apartments in claremont yet you're advocating more of eglingtons etc? I can't think of a single metric where what you're proposing is in any way more sustainable. What am I missing?
 
Yes the traffic is bad there for an entire 30 mins a day boo hoo. If I recall correctly you seemed to feel that infrastructure funding should have gone towards claremont unsteady of light rail so I don't think you are being in any way impartial.

Claremont is what 8km from cbd, has schools, hospitals, shops and everything you need in addition to train and buses, if that suburb isn't ripe for more density then where is? Honest question because on just about every single metric claremont is appropriate for it

not saying I have the answers, to be honest I think it's too late,just go build a new city somewhere else. Geraldton, there you go.

If they want density, god help us, there is IMO plenty of unused space around, south of South Beach feels like a holiday camping area. don't get me started on naval base... some of the most prime and scenic waterfront property left to heavy industry, but those dunes in coogee look as if they have mountain goats running freely. The best idea of course is places like, is it Baldivis central?... the one down there built around a trains station.oodles of land down there. my mate has 12 acres down there and he runs sheep on it, at least he did till his tenant slaughtered and ate them all. ashfield seems to be awash with large lots. channel 7 is being bulldozed soon?

other than new communities around train station tho I am not sure if any of th areas can handle that sort of development.

the question we all have to ask is, why are we doing this? I read a recent study that suggested - on a larger consideration - that immigration added little or no value to existing residents. however we do suffer declining living standards. the traffic has become unbelievable over the last couple of decades.
 
I'm also genuinely curious about your comment that it isn't sustainable to put apartments in claremont yet you're advocating more of eglingtons etc? I can't think of a single metric where what you're proposing is in any way more sustainable. What am I missing?

I can't advocate more eglintons as I have never heard of it before...I imagine it is 4x2's in a sand pit with some 200sqm lots thrown in to make it marketable as eco friendly? I am not advocating that. My understanding was that midland, Mandurah, Joondalup were to be hubs, or has that all gone out the window now, along with the canal?
 
I can't advocate more eglintons as I have never heard of it before...I imagine it is 4x2's in a sand pit with some 200sqm lots thrown in to make it marketable as eco friendly? I am not advocating that. My understanding was that midland, Mandurah, Joondalup were to be hubs, or has that all gone out the window now, along with the canal?

Those suburbs are also good for hubs, cockburn/success has also been a huge success but ultimately it is a load that has to be spread.

Your attitude just seems to be build it anywhere as long as it doesn't concern me and that is pretty irresponsible imo. Look at the amount of increased density in say north perth or leederville over the last decade, has that ruined the suburb? I'd argue it's made them better if anything.

Ultimately like it or not people are estimating significant population growth in perth to continue over next few decades so it would be irresponsible for the state govt and local councils to do nothing in terms of planning on how to handle it.
 
Ultimately like it or not people are estimating significant population growth in perth to continue over next few decades so it would be irresponsible for the state govt and local councils to do nothing in terms of planning on how to handle it.

that's the problem, they aren't being responsible. Densify the western suburbs if you must but they need to come up with a traffic solution for starters - I'm not seeing it.
 
At the end of the day when I compare my lifestyle there and here for me I had a much better lifestyle on a 65k salary in Denver than I am having on 100k salary here and this in a regional city like Geelong

Having lived 7 years in the USA myself, I can fully concur with the observations you made in your post comparing the cost of living in both countries.

The great thing about Australia is that your cost of living goes down quite significantly once you own your own place (hence the associated Aussie obsession to get there) and you keep your car costs low by continuing to buy second hand and keeping cars for longer before upgrading. Medicare is great as you say, and it gets even cheaper the less you earn.

In short, once you identify and work to reduce the major cost of living cost drivers in any country, you can markedly improve your financial position. Unfortunately, for someone coming from the USA to live here only for a few years, there is not enough time to reduce these aforementioned cost drivers hence I can understand why the subject visitor feels the way they do about Perth.
 
I find the car situation here really frustrating, why is it I can buy a $5m boat and pay zero stamp duty and no "luxury tax" vs. a landcruiser that gets slugged to the hilt by the distributors and govt, everyone has their face in the trough when it comes to cars... are boats less of a luxury than a car?

pretty much everything else is about 3 times the price...consumer junk stuff I mean, toys, clothes, watches etc
 
Back
Top