Homes officially out of reach for under 35's

The article below was in The CourierMail today (06 April). What are people's thoughts on this?


I disagree with the article. I believe property is still affordable for someone under 35.


True nature of Australia's housing supply crisis exposed in new report, Homes for All

Melbourne and Perth are building twice the amount of new homes as Sydney is.

Report advises stricter tax regime
Houses cost triple that of 30 years ago
Sydney building supply half that of Melbourne
SEVENTY per cent of under 35s in Sydney will be excluded from the housing market, a UK housing expert says.

The figure makes up part of a new report, Homes for All, which found that Australia's housing market is in crisis, with only half of the supply needed to meet demand.

Co-author Dr Tim Williams says governments need to reconsider tax incentives and policies that encourage investors to push house prices higher.

"Seventy per cent of 35-year-olds and younger cannot afford to buy any kind of home at this point in time, on average," Dr Williams told AAP.

"At the same time we find 22 per cent of Australians own 55 per cent of residential development."

The Homes for All report is an action plan released by the McKell Institute, a new independent body that aims to develop policy ideas and encourage public debate.

It recommends that negative gearing and untaxed capital gains be reconsidered by the government in an effort to drive down house pricing for first-time buyers.

"We've been giving more and more money effectively to people who are in homes," he said.

"We're squeezing younger people out but at the same time we seem to be enabling people to buy two, three and four."

Mr Williams said Australians were building 14,000 to 15,000 homes a year when the figure should be more like 40,000.

"We're way off, tens of thousands behind. No wonder there's a pressure on prices," he said.

He said that about 30 years ago it took three times the median salary to buy a house in Sydney, whereas it now took nine times.

This is a higher ratio than London or New York, the report said.

"We're constraining supply, and shovelling up demand to people who already have money, and making it more difficult for their children to access home ownership," he said.

"No wonder people are staying home at 28; they can't afford to rent, let alone buy."

Dr Williams blamed a lack of supply in Sydney mainly on poor planning processes by the government, making it difficult to get planning approval for new developments.

He said compared to other cities such as Melbourne and Perth, Sydney was producing less than half the number of homes per 10,000 people.

"Sydney produces 43 homes per 10,000 people, while Melbourne produces 103," he said.

The report also cited the "knock on consequences".

"Rents in Sydney are rising four times faster than inflation," Dr Williams said in the report.

"The squeezed middle which used to be able to afford to buy now has to rent, pushing lower income renters to find the fewer remaining cheaper lettings and again further out of Sydney to places with the fewest jobs."

This adds to pressure on public housing waiting lists, with not enough money to house those is need - "let alone build enough new stock".

Dr Williams is advocating good public policy to fix the problem.

NSW Opposition Leader John Robertson said the state was in the grip of a housing affordability crisis.

"It's time for bold thinking and honesty about the supply and demand factors that lock so many people out of housing," he said.

"... No parent wants a society where children are forced to rent for the rest of their lives or be forced interstate, separating them from their grandkids."
*
 
Lots of generalisations in the article. Sure times are changing and the 'great Aussie dream' will look a bit different
 
What are people's thoughts on this?

This is the same left wing 'poor woe is me' bleating that our fellow forum member Nathan Birch experienced in a big dose about 3 years ago when he was invited onto that ABC program discussing exactly the same topic.

A room full of left wing "everyone is equal" dreamers, whinging about how tough life was for the youth and how it wasn't fair. Fortunately Nathan wasn't infected with their philosophy, although they all attacked him with intelligent arguments.

The professional whingers had a bag full of statistics to prove why they couldn't possibly afford anything, and there he was at the ripe old age of 23 sitting there saying he had accumulated 8, and intended on buying a heap more with hard work and application.

Throughout the course of the show, it became evident that almost no-one was prepared to sacrifice their drinking, their partying and their clubbing to knuckle down and accumulate a deposit. Simple priorities it boiled down to. You can hear in the background the whingers laughing and mocking Nathan as he drops golden hints of how he did it.....they simply aren't interested in learning how, they simply want to have a bleat.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=377-iNt8yrQ


Roll forward 2 years, and he's got over 25 at 25 under his belt, and they are all still sitting there bleating and moaning about how hard it is to afford 1 house, still bringing up the same old arguments, and how they are waiting for the Govt to fix "the problem".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-f6ecaE5P4&feature=relmfu

No doubt, in another 2 years, some highly qualified economist with a Dr tag in front of her name will be complaining in some newspaper article, supported by ample statistics, about how the youth of today are finding it a struggle to purchase a home.


Good onya Nathan !!! One guy who refused to listen to the experts...
 
Last edited:
No doubt, in another 2 years, some highly qualified economist with a Dr tag in front of her name will be complaining in some newspaper article, supported by ample statistics, about how the youth of today are finding it a struggle to purchase a home.

Top post Dazz. That certain percentage of people (which must be a high percentage?) will continue to blame others for their seemingly lack of ability. It is easy to take the easy route and believe owning your own home is futile.

It all boilos down to perspective, or attitude rolled amongst some hard work and dedication to get started.
 
The professional whingers had a bag full of statistics to prove why they
Throughout the course of the show, it became evident that almost no-one was prepared to sacrifice their drinking, their partying and their clubbing to knuckle down and accumulate a deposit. Simple priorities it boiled down to. You can hear in the background the whingers laughing and mocking Nathan as he drops golden hints of how he did it.....they simply aren't interested in learning how, they simply want to have a bleat.

Great post Dazz !

many on SS put down the notion of sacrificing for a few years, as if would be too much of a burden.

The generation that don't want to scrimp, or get a better paying job, will need to rent until they inherit their parent's house. Here's to the parents living to be 110 yrs old.
 
Well, if until Australia gives up its obsession with living in capital cities, don't expect anything to change. We have one of the highest percentages of urbanization in the world. If everyone wants to live in the same small space, of course things are going to get expensive.

If people don't like it, they should consider moving. It's a pretty big country. You can have a great lifestyle in some of our bigger regional centres.

And as far as the government goes, rather than getting rid of negative gearing and FHOG, they could help by relocating government departments to regional centres and giving tax breaks for companies that relocated from the city to regional areas.

Create middle class jobs in regional areas and people will move. Even if they move with the intention of returning to the city some day, it will still help reduce pressure on city prices. Or that's my theory anyway.
 
Great post Dazz !

many on SS put down the notion of sacrificing for a few years, as if would be too much of a burden.

The generation that don't want to scrimp, or get a better paying job, will need to rent until they inherit their parent's house. Here's to the parents living to be 110 yrs old.

i think that many young people look at what their parents have, and the lifestyle they can afford and believe they should be able to too. they either weren't alive or too young to remember the first 5-10 years of their parents buying a house and the sacrifices they made to get there.

then there's the lifelong renters who have indoctrinated their kids with the housing in unaffordable mantra.
 
i think that many young people look at what their parents have, and the lifestyle they can afford and believe they should be able to too. they either weren't alive or too young to remember the first 5-10 years of their parents buying a house and the sacrifices they made to get there.

then there's the lifelong renters who have indoctrinated their kids with the housing in unaffordable mantra.

I agree.
I also think this happens in every generation.
 
Needs and wants are completely different,

perceived/realistic needs are different as well

I still consider the annual overseas holiday, Ipad, 2 gaming machines, that every adult and kid seems to have and needs to be a complete luxury

many would disagree with me

just like the 'need' for a newish, 3 bdr with a backyard, within 20 mins of the CBD, and a brand new commodore in the drive way

live within your means and anybody can afford a decent property in Sydney
 
.... anybody can afford a decent property in Sydney

A few recent examples of our purchases in Sydney:

Paid $950K for a 2brm terrace house in serious need of new floors downstairs that were so unsupported they were "trampolining". :eek: But $40K later all fixed and probably worth around $1.05M. Location: Birchgrove.

Paid just under $800K for a double storey Victorian that was termite infested. (I put my foot through the upstairs floor). But a $200K reno later and the property is brilliant and worth around $1.2-1.3M. Location: Summer Hill.

There are plenty of other examples, but $1M does not buy you much in the inner areas of Sydney.

But Sydney is a big place. There are many properties for example in the Blacktown LGA around the $350K mark. There are many under $300K if you want to go further west (but I'll leave these to Nathan & Co. ;)). It is simply wrong to say that Sydney is "unaffordable".
 
A room full of left wing "everyone is equal" dreamers,

And ............ "The world owes me a living and I will collect that living in the easiest way I know how" or "How unjustly life has dealt with me" or "Why should that person have more than me - I am just as good as they are"

Amazingly these seemingly intelligent folk can't make that small mental shift to comprehending the reality. Everyone has equal opportunity and all are responsible for their results. Maybe it would be too wise to train young folk that sacrificing partying pleasures, status/image symbols of new cars, trendy gadgets and clothing, and putting effort into progressing ones skills, responsibilities and work ethic may lead to more lasting satisfaction and opportunities - such as owning their own home perhaps?.

If these poor young souls want a house but don't have the motivation to change in any way then how can they expect things to be different from the results they are getting.
 
The article below was in The CourierMail today (06 April). What are people's thoughts on this?

Ignorance. Trimming branches again instead of dealing with the roots.

NSW Opposition Leader John Robertson said the state was in the grip of a housing affordability crisis.

"It's time for bold thinking and honesty about the supply and demand factors that lock so many people out of housing,"

This isn't "bold thinking"? Can't people think for themselves? The solution is in every individual.
 
NSW Opposition Leader John Robertson said the state was in the grip of a housing affordability crisis.

"It's time for bold thinking and honesty about the supply and demand factors that lock so many people out of housing," he said.

"... No parent wants a society where children are forced to rent for the rest of their lives or be forced interstate, separating them from their grandkids."

Hahahaha.....cracks me up.

This, coming from a guy who was recently Minister for Public Sector Reform, Minister for Commerce and Special Minister of State, as part of a Labor NSW State Govt that had complete control of the Sydney housing market for 16 looong years from April 1995 under Bob Carr thru to the Keneally disaster of March 2011.

After 16 long years in power with the time and authority to do something about it, it's not right to then stand there 1 year after the carnage unfolds, point to it and say...."That's not right, when are the Liberals going to fix that ??"
 
As a person within that age group, I think the comments are quite ridiculous. My husband and I are both 26 years old and we've had to work with a much more difficult situation than most young people our age. My husband will be getting his permanent residency in the next 1-2 months (moved here from Canada) but getting there was an extremely expensive process. We've had to pay 5-10k for immigration costs, a huge amount in overseas student fees plus he has had a lower selection of jobs available to him over the last 4 years due to not having PR. He is still studying atm and will be for a few more years. I am studying part time (post-grad) and will be finished at the end of the year.

Despite this, after me working full-time for much less than a year, we were able to save a deposit for a 435k OTP property and we are aiming to buy two IPs this year. This is while paying a third of our after-tax income in rent. However, we have made some "sacrifices" such as not having a car (we live walking distance to both our jobs and short bus ride to my husband's uni), bringing our lunch to work and we don't spend huge amounts on going out etc. If we save well, we might even be able to go overseas at the end of the year.

I think it's great what Nathan's done and I wish him the best. However, travelling is important to me so I'll be happy if we have 6-8 IPs by the time I'm 30 which is a lot more than most :)
 
Has anyone else actually read the report?

Barring the removal of negative gearing and capital gains treatment of IPs, and the fact it recycles housing cost figures from the Demographia report, there's nothing controversial in it. In fact, it acknowledges that reforming the tax treatment of property is difficult, if not impossible.

Personally, I'm sick of all the whinging about the whingers. :D

Property prices have risen at a faster rate than incomes in Australia for a long time. In his interview, Jingo gave figures for a property he bought in North Melbourne. In 2001 it was $227K, and by 2012 it's risen to $630K.

I'm estimating that the median Victorian household income back then would have been around $50K to $55K, versus something like $75K or $80K now. In just over a decade that house has gone from being just about affordable by a family with an average income to being well out of their reach. Relative to wages the price has nearly doubled.

Most posters on Somersoft are in their late thirties or older, and bought into the property market during the early years of the boom. There also seems to be a complete lack of awareness of how prices rises at 7% to 10% per annum will screw up affordability if incomes are rising by 3% to 4%.

Hence the comments in the report that the overall dip in homeownership rates across Australia masks a collapse in the numbers of those under 35 who actually own.

Lastly I want to make two more points: Nathan is a corner case, he's worked hard to build his portfolio, and was able to live at home and reduce his outgoings until fairly recently. And people buying ten or more years ago didn't have to put up with the same sort of sacrifices that are necessary now.
 
What sacrifices? I don't think anything we've done (as an example, we're far from the best example too) is extreme. For me, not having to drive to work is a luxury not a sacrifice as I hate long commutes and being stuck in traffic. Last year, we also had a 3 week (slightly delayed) honeymoon in the US.

35 years is a very long time. I don't see how a person, especially one who is 35 now, is not able to have even 1 property. I'm sorry but they're definitely doing something wrong
 
35 years is a very long time though. I don't see how a person, especially one who is 35 now, is not able to have even 1 property. I'm sorry but they're definitely doing something wrong

Of course they are.
They are buying cars, taking trips,take away, buying whatever they want at the grocery store,have the most expensive rental they can afford,new furniture, big TV,....

They will always make excuses why they couldn't.
 
Maybe the report envisages the first home as something like the below?

images


images
 
Back
Top