Sydney is turning into a ghetto as poor are trapped by fewer jobs and rising housing

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sydney-is...and-rising-housing-costs-20150509-ggwyj0.html

I simply don't think this is accurate at all, reason being is that most of the working group in these suburbs are tradies and lets be honest, they only declare income at around $30k-$38k pa unless they need a loan than their declared income will go up to $70k-$80k.

In Fact, these people have WAY more cash reserve than those that live in the premium suburbs. they are the ones that are less likely to get affected by and kinds of GFC, their only issue is they can't really get a loan even when they have millions in their bank account lol.
 
People need to move to places where they can afford and I don't mean just moving out further west. Move states head to smaller capital cities or head regional. The lifestyle and bang for your buck is much better.

In terms of increasing inequality that has been the case ever since the GFC for states all around Australia and the world. The rich have got richer while the poor, young, and unskilled have languished as the competition for entry level jobs has left the economy with an employers market.
 
If Sydney becomes unaffordable to people outside the upper decile of the income spectrum then who's going to do all the important, but not necessarily well paid, jobs? For example, teachers, police, fire fighters, nurses, and paramedics.

And where will you find a barista to make your coffee, or someone to serve you in a shop? Or a tradie to fix your million dollar investment properties?

It's all very well saying that these sorts of people can move out to rural NSW or beyond, but it'll eventually stop the city from functioning. Drive out all the artists, creatives and the like, and it'll become a distinctly boring place to live.
 
If Sydney becomes unaffordable to people outside the upper decile of the income spectrum then who's going to do all the important, but not necessarily well paid, jobs? For example, teachers, police, fire fighters, nurses, and paramedics.

And where will you find a barista to make your coffee, or someone to serve you in a shop? Or a tradie to fix your million dollar investment properties?

It's all very well saying that these sorts of people can move out to rural NSW or beyond, but it'll eventually stop the city from functioning. Drive out all the artists, creatives and the like, and it'll become a distinctly boring place to live.
They can rent close to the city, or buy and commute from further afield. That's how it works in most big cities.
 
They can rent close to the city, or buy and commute from further afield. That's how it works in most big cities.
is there any point where you think high prices become bad for the city overall?

personally i think sydney is in that range now imo.
 
is there any point where you think high prices become bad for the city overall?

personally i think sydney is in that range now imo.
What's good for one person is bad for another, so I don't really get involved in debates about the 'morality' of rising (or falling) house prices. I just call it as I see it. The fact is that in Manhattan, Central London, Paris, HK, Singapore, Monaco etc., people on low wages simply don't buy houses close to the city centre - they rent or they commute from outside the city. That's just the inevitable result of a growing city. As the population increases, the number of wealthy people also increases, but the number of dwellings close to the city centre remains fairly constant - hence prices in the most desirable areas rise beyond the reach of less wealthy citizens. That's just how it is.
 
What's good for one person is bad for another, so I don't really get involved in debates about the 'morality' of rising (or falling) house prices. I just call it as I see it. The fact is that in Manhattan, Central London, Paris, HK, Singapore, Monaco etc., people on low wages simply don't buy houses close to the city centre - they rent or they commute from outside the city. That's just the inevitable result of a growing city. As the population increases, the number of wealthy people also increases, but the number of dwellings close to the city centre remains fairly constant - hence prices in the most desirable areas rise beyond the reach of less wealthy citizens. That's just how it is.
Exactly, the law of supply and demand.

Yet we have the entitlement crowd trying to change this natural occurrence.:rolleyes:
 
They can rent close to the city, or buy and commute from further afield. That's how it works in most big cities.
When we lived in the USA, we often visited the city of Santa Barbara (approx 1.5hr drive up the PCH north of L.A).

Santa Barbara as a city is in the more wealthy and highest income level demographic residents overall.

We saw a docco about it while we lived over there, and it had arrived at the point where the "average wage" earner who worked in the City could not afford to buy there any longer - Police, Teachers, Nurses, Retail and Hospitality, Cleaners and so on.

They all lived out of town; some in other smaller satellite towns not far away, and commuted to SB to work.

Same at Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Beverly Hills where my wife worked; many of the nurses commuted from miles away to work there - if they had families and owned their own homes in particular.

You could buy apartments etc nearer in, but free-standing houses on their own decent block of land - no hope on a nurses' wage.

Also too; there is no NG in the USA.
 
Last edited:
is there any point where you think high prices become bad for the city overall?

personally i think sydney is in that range now imo.
I know many people in the 150+ income range who have turned down employment opportunities in Sydney for this exact reason, the small 20-30k pay rise for a new or similar role just doesn't stack up unless you want to become a renter. Some actually commute from BN
 
The fact is that in Manhattan, Central London, Paris, HK, Singapore, Monaco etc., people on low wages simply don't buy houses close to the city centre - they rent or they commute from outside the city. That's just the inevitable result of a growing city. As the population increases, the number of wealthy people also increases, but the number of dwellings close to the city centre remains fairly constant - hence prices in the most desirable areas rise beyond the reach of less wealthy citizens. That's just how it is.
What's "the most desireable areas" though? In Sydney, people are paying like 800k or more to live 1 hour away from the CDB. In Manhattan, commuting just over one hour by train takes you to Philadelphia - a completely independent city and economy. From London, you can commute to Oxford in that time - again a pretty self contained city, and from Monaco, you can commute well past (and over) the Italian border. It's just absurb. We're talking about most of the metropolitan area here - not just a 5km radius around the CBD.
 
What's "the most desireable areas" though? In Sydney, people are paying like 800k or more to live 1 hour away from the CDB. In Manhattan, commuting just over one hour by train takes you to Philadelphia - a completely independent city and economy. From London, you can commute to Oxford in that time - again a pretty self contained city, and from Monaco, you can commute well past (and over) the Italian border. It's just absurb. We're talking about most of the metropolitan area here - not just a 5km radius around the CBD.
True, but what's the population that has actually squeezed into a 5km radius in New York/London as opposed to Sydney? 5 x more possibly? I guess dwelling owners in Oz just prefer less apartment style cramped living then say people in London or New York....but we are a young country in comparison.....give it time
 
exactly, majority of people living in capital city around the world is renting...

We will be seeing more and more renter especially in the next generation.

+ Rent prices hasn't really gone up, instead some area you can see decline in rent prices.
 
don't raise your blood pressure worrying about it, the market will sort this one out. There is no shortage of people working for terrible wages in the centre of London
 
What's "the most desireable areas" though? In Sydney, people are paying like 800k or more to live 1 hour away from the CDB. In Manhattan, commuting just over one hour by train takes you to Philadelphia - a completely independent city and economy. From London, you can commute to Oxford in that time - again a pretty self contained city, and from Monaco, you can commute well past (and over) the Italian border. It's just absurb. We're talking about most of the metropolitan area here - not just a 5km radius around the CBD.
In New York, people are paying like USD $2M or more to live 1 hour away from Manhattan.

In London, people are paying GBP 3M+ to live one hour away from the city centre.

In Sydney, commuting just over one hour by train takes you to Woy Woy, where you can buy a 3-bedroom freestanding house for the equivalent of USD $400K.
 
I'm taking about average houses here, not big estates in the Hamptons. There are two bedroom apartments in central Manhattan for ~500k USD. A small apartment is what most people there would be living in. Living somewhere far (and luxurious) by choice (i.e. you can afford to live anywhere but choose to live there) is different from living somewhere because it's the best you can afford.

I was just looking this up the other day - for that price you are walking distance to several subway stops, close to Central Park etc and lots of amenities. There are people on here asking for advice and being told they *may* be able to buy a house in some non-descript suburb in western Sydney (with a 1 hour+ commute) for 600k if they're lucky. Totally different lifestyle and town planning.
 
Top