Big demographic changes ahead

Well the key is the amount of yard maintenance.

The modern 3x2x2 can be lower maintenance if well built...though larger in floor space.


Also, 3 brm x2 units are also popular.

Our idea for them was low maintenence (husband is a Landscaper), but the garden has since evolved into high maintenence with it's big vegie patch, fruit trees, vines, lush green tropical patio area, lawns, etc :rolleyes:.

To them low maintenence meant NEW house. The one they left was looking tired and they didn't want to be doing constant, and major renovations and repairs, well into old age.

Another elderly couple I know did this for that reason also.

I think younger people might do it as well :D.

I agree larger units might be popular, but I can't see the elderly going into something small and unlike what they're used to, unless they're close to immobility and a decline in physical health.
 
Thought some of you might find this chart interesting/relevant to this discussion:

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/d3310114.nsf/home/Population Pyramid - Australia

Cheers patto... This graph paints the picture..
Its the relative size of BB compared to their previous generation that makes them very relevant. As a percent BB are probably 200% bigger then the previous gen, but the following gen is only 30%? bigger then BB (I dont know the exact numbers but there is a order of magnitude difference). So they have and will need 200% more things than their previous generation, and the following generation will only need 30% more things than BB.

In 1950-70s during their schooling age they prob needed twice as many schools. During their working and family phase they needed twice as many houses, transport etc. Going forward they will require twice as many medical facilities. Whereas the generation following BB will only need 30% more things than BBs, as they pass the same phases.

E.g. in 70-00s they were in working and asset acquiring age the financial and associated sectors as well as certain assets and property markets grew at exponential rates. Each person had individual decision and situation but collectively they were working, raising families and financially speaking acquiring assets. Going forward they will again have different situations, make different decisions, etc but collectively they will do similar things (which i think is the big tide).

The well-off top 10-15%, among them many from the forum, will be rich and savvy enough to make whatever decision (travel, live off diyys and rents, keep accumulating assets for their children etc).

However the remaining 85% who dont have enough super, savings, and the biggest asset is their house, will be faced with lower incomes and a single prime asset. Either they will have to keep working, work part-time, or live off the pension. Health etc may be the prime drivers.

Agree with sash, for many of this 85% necessity may force the decisions, rather than choice.

So i think generally speaking the trend will be, sell the big house, buy a smaller cheaper and easier to maintain place, pocket the ~200k. Combine with super, put into stable yielding fund / deposit bond. Use the yield plus pension to live a modest lifestyle.
 
I'm a pre-boomer and all my friends are boomers. I really don't know how any of you "know" what they are going to do "as a group". I don't.

I doubt Gen Y have actually talked to boomers much and even if they asked they wouldn't be told much. My generation play their cards close to their chest and DO NOT discuss their finances with others. (I'm the exception. :D) The GFC effected many of them pretty badly because they had more to lose than a wage slave with a mortgage and one (the plumber) is still working after he had expected to retire.

My mates live modestly and, as far as I know, none plan to change much. One plans to go back to Cairns and I'll miss him but anyone waiting for them to sell out of a heap of property will be disappointed. I doubt I've ever met a boomer who thought -ve gearing a good idea so none I know will be selling out of desperation.

I'm virtually retired and have moved into a bigger house and then added a fifth b'room. LOL Obviously I'm not an empty nester .... you just can't pigeonhole people. How many "oldies" are looking after their dumba$$ kids' kids?
 
mmmmm.......it certainly is interesting.

remember that as the banks pull funding from BBs as they retire, they need to at least maintain the status quo for deposits and lending interest.

it could actually signal easier credit for "the rest of us" which would fuel the credit based growth in this country again until its ultimate demise mid 2020's.

in which case it woild actually be a good time to be in property. on the other hand, i dont think anyone should be buying outside cbd/transport/lifestyle corridors.

i honestly think the suburbs are a bad investment by comparison, especially considering the high (and continuing upward) cost of personal movement.

this is why im bullish property in these areas, and relatively negative others. it may seem confusing, but it works in my head....!

yeah thats an interesting point.. the IR and bond cycles are definitely displaying this pattern..

Also forgot to add more pensions to hand out relative to workers to collect tax from. So govt may have to "adjust" the budget, less spending on some areas, more on hospitals beds and nurses??? Thats probably why the govt has been recruiting workers from oseas at a record rate for the last 10 years, and now there is a big social backlash.

So to mitigate that going forward either bring in more workers to collect tax and offset the pensions, increase tax rates from existing workforce, or reduce budget in other areas..

sheesh.. when this commodity boom is over lookout...
interesting times..though as always with this change will come great opportunities. Now just have to understand the change and then find the right opportunities.
 
I'm a pre-boomer and all my friends are boomers. I really don't know how any of you "know" what they are going to do "as a group". I don't.

I doubt Gen Y have actually talked to boomers much and even if they asked they wouldn't be told much. My generation play their cards close to their chest and DO NOT discuss their finances with others. (I'm the exception. :D) The GFC effected many of them pretty badly because they had more to lose than a wage slave with a mortgage and one (the plumber) is still working after he had expected to retire.

My mates live modestly and, as far as I know, none plan to change much. One plans to go back to Cairns and I'll miss him but anyone waiting for them to sell out of a heap of property will be disappointed. I doubt I've ever met a boomer who thought -ve gearing a good idea so none I know will be selling out of desperation.

I'm virtually retired and have moved into a bigger house and then added a fifth b'room. LOL Obviously I'm not an empty nester .... you just can't pigeonhole people. How many "oldies" are looking after their dumba$$ kids' kids?

hi Sunfish,

you're right, i for one dont know exactly what each and every one of them will do, but collectively there will be similar things / trends arising. From financial / asset perspective just need to understand the macro changes.
 
I was discussing this thread with Hubby this morning. We are currently trying to sell my Pre-war Mum's family home and get her a lowset villa, as she doesnt do stairs any more and her precious garden is too much to maintain. Fair enough.

In Brisbane it is very difficult to find lowset villas, the majority of medium density homes are two story. We realise it is cheapest to build new stock adjoining each other, hence the difficulty finding a place that is not claustrophobic.

This is something for developers to consider. There will be many more BBs like us with the same desire for a modest 3 bedroom house, but are there enough of them being built? The current trend seems to be to build massive high-set four bedroom homes on skinny blocks of land, which are more suited to the younger households who still do stairs.

We are happy to move into a place that is on less land than we had before, but we dont want to be crammed up in a building with several properties all in a line, like typical townhouses and units. Even complexes with mostly lowset homes are attached to each other.

quote[It's not expensive if you sell your quarter acre block of land in the suburbs. My own Melbourne CBD apartment building has a significant proportion of baby-boomer age residents. They live here for the convenience and lifestyle (theatre etc nearby) plus who wants to clean a 4 bedroom house when all your kids have moved out? ]

Good points Aaron C, but your demographic is not the norm. it is part of the demographic who want to live in the city. The majority of us do not attend the theatre every week, and we already walk to our local cafes and restaurants. We cant make any money selling quarter acre blocks because the only people buying them are investors who pay low prices. BTW there aren't any more QAB in Brissie, the investors already bought them and subdivided them all. My property is on 650 m2, same as everyone else I know (The McMansions around here are on 850m2).

A four bedroom home suits empty-nesters. For one, we pay a cleaner, and secondly we need one room for the grandkids to sleep over, one for His hobbies and another one for Her hobbies. No problem with too much space!
 
This is something for developers to consider. There will be many more BBs like us with the same desire for a modest 3 bedroom house, but are there enough of them being built? The current trend seems to be to build massive high-set four bedroom homes on skinny blocks of land, which are more suited to the younger households who still do stairs.

We are happy to move into a place that is on less land than we had before, but we dont want to be crammed up in a building with several properties all in a line, like typical townhouses and units. Even complexes with mostly lowset homes are attached to each other.

Fair point Angel. What if the townhouse had a lift? Would that change your mind about terrace houses?
 
Lifts equal higher body corporate fees! You could still convince me , I guess.

I did love the three days I recently spent exploring your part of Melbourne. It was like visiting a different planet after what i am accustomed to here in the peanut state.

PS, I adored the photos of your upcoming development, I just dont have the $2m. I would be a total fish out of water in it, no matter how hot i could look in a LBD with diamond necklace.
 
Melbourne's inner-city suburbs are very beautiful indeed! I ask you about the lift because baby-boomers/retirees are my target market for my own development. Lifts are basically necessities these days and they only cost about $50,000 to put in. Not a huge amount of money.
 
Do you think the majority of baby boomers will have enough superannnuation or health insurance to retire in luxury?

Or will many continue to work because they have to and eventually ease into the aged pension?

Will downsizing be a choice or a necessity as rates, utlity charges, food, fuel etc prices all continue their northerly trend?

There was concern some time ago that there would be more people pulling money out of super funds than people actually contributing to them

“if the government doesn’t have enough tax revenue to fund baby boomer’s in retirement then all hell breaks loose… and our cities breakdown”.

"Not only will the baby boomers demand more from the tax base, but they will also be coming out of the workforce and will stop paying tax,".

"It is a demographic tsunami, building up, building up and then crashing ashore."

Bernard Salt
 

Attachments

  • Baby Boomer.jpg
    Baby Boomer.jpg
    10.3 KB · Views: 102
With the first of the oldest baby boomers reaching the "official" retirement age next year, what do you guys think will be the impact on various assets, and in particular the various property markets in australia? Which asset and prop markets will benefit and which will loose out ?


What is all the fuss about? I don't understand why this is an issue? There will be a steady flow of baby boomers moving into retirement over 20 years, not some great big rush that starts next year. Then the gen X's start retireing. And our high immigration rate fills in the base of the pyramid.


as-2010.png



See ya's.
 

Wow. By the looks of that graph, men don't age particularly well. From what I have seen many end up working for so long they don't function particularly well when they stop. Combine that with alcohol, poor diet and a lack of physical activity and the results are there to be seen.

Time to get moving blokes! Can't have the ladies beating us! :eek:

As for the demographics, I agree with TC. We have the capacity to compensate for any of these issues through immigration policy, as we have throughout our history. Just need to keep the necessary infrastructure up to the task. Might need some mining royalty revenue for that...
 
Do a search on why women live longer than men.

That didn't work as well as I'd hoped. click on "images" and you'll see what I meant.
 
What is all the fuss about? I don't understand why this is an issue? There will be a steady flow of baby boomers moving into retirement over 20 years, not some great big rush that starts next year. Then the gen X's start retireing. And our high immigration rate fills in the base of the pyramid.


See ya's.

TC, A steady flow over 20 years is exactly the tidal impact i am worried about when combined with other factors.

I am currently looking to get some IPs and have negotiated some goods deals. Though back in my mind I am concerned, as I think there are two big changes when combined will cause a negative feedback loop and push australia into a very deep recession.

One is ageing demographics and second is negative china impact. First has already started and cannot be stopped. The second I am an unsure when will happen. When these two factors combine it will be like GFC for australia, US style. This wasnt our GFC, but ours is coming and in my opinion will have different catalysts.. I am thinking I may have enough time to buy and sell out completely before then... but not sure hence hesitant...

Demographics: more retirees, less workers per retirees leading to higher taxes, lower budget (or mix of both). Already the asset trend is in motion, sell risk/growth assets buy income streams. Income super at highest level and will continue to gain market share. Sell any negative gear assets, no point with no income. Sell volatile assets. Many from World Bank, IMF to Matsuik and Yardney have also commented on this trend. I genuinely believe there will be more supply of houses for sale, in certain areas, as retirees (many who bought IPs since 2000) look to sell. Antedotal evidence (though very very small) seems like it has already started. Negative geared prop makes no sense at all with 0 income to offset losses against. It would be interesting to see the ABS stats about what proportion of IPs are owned by the to-be retiring age groups and how many claim losses.

The only way out of this in interim is higher population growth, immigration to boost taxes and demand. Based on current circumstances in OZ it seems completely viable. However immigration is only effective in growing economy with lower unemployment. This is where the combination with second catalyst comes in.

China: when (not if) china slows down the impact on australia will be drastic. In fact china doesnt even need to slow down much, their demand for australian exports needs to slow down.

China is the biggest producer of coal and iron ore, i think it produces as much as the next three countries combined. It imports about as much as it produces.... If china growth does slow down from 10% to even 6-7% one would assume they will drop the imports first..

Also china has good relations with iran, many african countries and russia. Much of china's commodity and energy needs can be met by these regions and internal supply. Also they are / have already invested many billions in these regions with long term (10/20 year )projects. Pretty sure the prices for the off-market long term contracts are well below the spot rates. There was a BBC documentary on China investments in Africa, and it was astounding... I think soon when these projects come to fruition the supply will increase and demand for australian exports will drops.

I have been big believer in this commodity boom and invested from 2004 through to late 2007, and then back in again in dec 2008 when oil was 35 USD (too bad its so hard to buy commodity futures in OZ, had to stick with shares) and out again in May 2011. This commodity boom is 11 years in already and I really do think we are nearer the top, rather than middle or bottom.. Supply will soon be more than demand thus crushing prices. Energy (oil / gas) will be ok, as it isnt as elastic, minerals not so...

Conclusion: Demographics are not good and will be a tailwind for property. One way out is immigration. But when china slows combined with demographics a negative feedback loop will start and in my opinion that will be the great OZ recession:

Bad demographics
China slows down
Commodity prices and AUD drops, inflation starts, trade goes into deficit
Unemployment rises
RBA reduces rates, AUD drops further, further inflation, trade deficit grows
Govt cuts immigration, to stop unemployment rising even further
Govt receipts drop, workers per retiree drops, budget deficits start
Govt cut spending but still cannot meet expenditure
Govt goes into deficit very quickly.
Govt raises debt to try stimulatye economy and cut the negative loop..
Ratings downgrades, higher funding costs for govt and companies.. and so on...

Some areas will do ok, others will get smashed... Hence i am in two minds about going ahead with my deals.. Although the deals are good and i am keen, i wonder if its better to hold and wait for this "better" opportunity from property investing perspective. Go with the head or the heart.. hmm...
 
Last edited:
Depends on age.

If you're over 40, go with the head.

If you're under 40, go with the heart.

At 40 you don't have much time left if you lose it all.
 
The retirement age is going to have to rise, and possibly sharply. I'd expect to see more projects along the lines of BMW's support for older workers.

The trouble is that this is politically difficult. Newspapers complained about the cost of raising the pension age for women (in the UK), leading to a climb down.

This was considered a victory for pensioners. But, at a billion pounds, was it a good deal for the wider taxpayer?

Boomers hold 80% of the wealth in the UK (this might be down to saving habits), and I'd expect a similar skew in Australia. If they can't afford retirement, then it's going to be a lot tougher for Generations X and Y.

I agree with Trendsta that the above could lead to demographic headwinds.
 
I have to agree with Redwing, tax revenue will not be enough to fund BB's pensions. Imigration might not be an answer simply because of the political pressure that results every time we look like being under some sort of economic pressure.

In order to increase imigration we would need to create infrasctructure, which successive governments have been slow to do. Also all those imigrants will need homes close to their jobs, BB's will be moved out of their homes gradually, as prices/rates increase faster than inflation


Do you think the majority of baby boomers will have enough superannnuation or health insurance to retire in luxury?

Or will many continue to work because they have to and eventually ease into the aged pension?

Will downsizing be a choice or a necessity as rates, utlity charges, food, fuel etc prices all continue their northerly trend?

There was concern some time ago that there would be more people pulling money out of super funds than people actually contributing to them

“if the government doesn’t have enough tax revenue to fund baby boomer’s in retirement then all hell breaks loose… and our cities breakdown”.

"Not only will the baby boomers demand more from the tax base, but they will also be coming out of the workforce and will stop paying tax,".

"It is a demographic tsunami, building up, building up and then crashing ashore."

Bernard Salt
 
Back
Top