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

This is certainly the situation where I live, yield would be about 3.5%

The strata is > $2000 quarter.

We love having the landlord pay the strata for us :)
Correct.

(My post before was a subliminal dig at those anti-NG sooks who reckon all their houses are being devoured by investors).
 
I don't believe it. 500k for TWO bedrooms in central Manhattan? Show me a *non-coop* apartment for that price. Link please. And I do stress NON-COOP! In fact I think you'd struggle to find a co-op one at that price too.

And people not familiar with NY real estate don't realise it's an apples and oranges comparison - coop vs. condo for example. Also did you know that body corporate fees in NYC are an order of magnitude higher than they are here? People complain about 3k p/a in BC fees here, try 3k per month. And we're not talking about luxury condos either. You'll see BC fees that'll make your eyes pop out of your head. Again I'd like to see this link, I'd buy it in a heart beat if it were true.

I said ~500k, not exactly 500k but the links are below. Just the first few I found in a 2 minute Google search.

http://www.trulia.com/property/3150397341-227-E-87th-St-C-New-York-NY-10128#photo-1
http://www.trulia.com/property/3190021920-303-E-57th-St-8J-New-York-NY-10022
http://www.trulia.com/property/3200801413-415-E-85th-St-ND-New-York-NY-10028

It's Manhattan by the way, who cares what category it is and whether it's a "luxury" condo. Even the best suburb in Sydney doesn't come close but to make a comparison, would you rather live in St Clair or in the above areas? It makes me laugh to even put them in the same sentence.

Body corporate is high because most apartment buildings have services that are rare here such as doormen, live-in superintendent and the like. People would have a lower cost of living in general as well because the infrastructure and amenities are so good. If work/visas weren't an issue, I'd have moved there yesterday.

I also can't believe people are using Woy Woy as an example. 400k? Are you serious? That's absolute highway robbery. I'd prefer to live in a 25sqm studio in a proper city compared to almost half a million to live in a house there. Not to mention the ridiculous cost of living you'd have as you probably need to run two cars to be able to do anything and have no amenities to speak of. Plus a min 3 hour commute every day - i.e. your commute is the equivalent of working 2 extra days every week for free. Yeah, what a bargain that is. I'm signing the contract now. Actually, I'll take two thanks :rolleyes:
 
It's Manhattan by the way, who cares what category it is and whether it's a "luxury" condo.

All three are coops, just as I predicted.

And category does make a difference. "Condo" isn't just a more luxurious way to describe an apartment. There are hard legal / investment differences between a coop and condo. For starters, a lot of coops won't even let foreign investors buy. Some of them have the most ridiculous rules - one I inspected, they said parents were not allowed to buy on behalf of their kids...they wanted to keep out spoiled brats. You need Sydney prices to compare condo prices, it's the closest apples to apples comparison you can get with Australian real estate. Comparing it with coops is meaningless since we have no comparative investment type.
 
I also can't believe people are using Woy Woy as an example. 400k? Are you serious? That's absolute highway robbery. I'd prefer to live in a 25sqm studio in a proper city compared to almost half a million to live in a house there.

Woy Woy - clean air, plenty of green space, large homes, large blocks, awesome beaches, plenty of space for kids to play.

Versus a 25sqm shoebox in a grimy city centre.

Yes, I think I know what I'd prefer...
 
Woy Woy - clean air, plenty of green space, large homes, large blocks, awesome beaches, plenty of space for kids to play.

Versus a 25sqm shoebox in a grimy city centre.

Yes, I think I know what I'd prefer...

I'm not talking about investment types. I'm talking about a place to live and quality of life. Also what you get for the price you pay. Not just in terms of the house itself but what makes up most of the value which is the location and quality of amenities in the area.

Yes, I'd rather have a big block than be walking distance to multiple subway stops that can take me anywhere in the city for $2 each way and that runs 24 hours a day (in effect freeing up thousands of dollars in car expenses for me to spend elsewhere). I'd rather have a yard than live walking distance to Central Park, one of the biggest urban parks in the world, with many facilities and activities on offer. I'd rather have kids I don't actually get to see until 7.30pm on a weekday so they can have a "kids retreat " and a theatre room compared to arriving home when the sun is still up and having valuable time to spend with them visiting the many and varied amenities close to my home or even just relaxing at home. I'd rather spend 15-20 hours commuting every week rather than a couple of hours on the weekend to go to the beach, if I was so inclined. Not to mention that the kids are actually happier and healthier as they can get out and about easier rather than being stuck in their room in front of the computer because they have nothing else to do.

New York City gets about 50 million tourists every year. Big cities around the world are all the most popular places for people to visit on holiday. They must be doing something right. I wonder how many are lining up to visit the likes of Woy Woy or the western suburbs of Sydney?
 
I'm not talking about investment types. I'm talking about a place to live and quality of life. Also what you get for the price you pay. Not just in terms of the house itself but what makes up most of the value which is the location and quality of amenities in the area.

so you're arguing for personal preferences rather than economic model comparison?
 
I'm not talking about investment types. I'm talking about a place to live and quality of life. Also what you get for the price you pay. Not just in terms of the house itself but what makes up most of the value which is the location and quality of amenities in the area.
Amenities is an objective thing.

Younger folks and professional folks who like nightclubs, lots of action and so on look at Cities as a place with better amenities.

Older folks - or even just plain old 30 year olds with 2 kids have a different set of amenities in mind -

A hospital, a good doctor practice, a dentist, good schools, a bit of a yard and/or access to parks and possibly the beach, a pool and so on.

They don't necessarily need nightclubs or restaurants any longer; maybe now and again.

I'd rather have kids I don't actually get to see until 7.30pm on a weekday so they can have a "kids retreat " and a theatre room compared to arriving home when the sun is still up and having valuable time to spend with them visiting the many and varied amenities close to my home or even just relaxing at home. I'd rather spend 15-20 hours commuting every week rather than a couple of hours on the weekend to go to the beach, if I was so inclined. Not to mention that the kids are actually happier and healthier as they can get out and about easier rather than being stuck in their room in front of the computer because they have nothing else to do.
It is possible to have a house and yard type set-up without a commute as well, and all the amenities you need.

I have that scenario - my commute is 1 minute. My wife's is 20 mins.

New York City gets about 50 million tourists every year. Big cities around the world are all the most popular places for people to visit on holiday. They must be doing something right. I wonder how many are lining up to visit the likes of Woy Woy or the western suburbs of Sydney?
Cities are certainly exciting places to be.

I find Melb exciting; but I prefer to live in a much quieter and less crowded environment - with the option to go and see the excitement in Town when I want.
 
That would be terrible.

But it says "by the end of the century, Sydney's climate will be more like Brisbane's is today".

I wonder if I will still be around in the next 50 years at least. If that happens, I'm moving to Queenstown NZ.

lol it's all what you are used to.

I've got -5% body fat so I don't mind the warm days up in Brisbane. There are a few days here or there where it can be humid, but I hardly notice it.

In my job I speak to people all around Australia, and the weather comes up from time to time. I'll have people from Melb and Sydney telling me how freezing they are this winter, and then I'll let them know I actually had the aircon on in the car on the way to work :)

I have had to wear a jumper twice so far this year. And during summer I had the air con on at home for less than 10 days all up. For me that's perfect weather.
 
lol it's all what you are used to.

I've got -5% body fat so I don't mind the warm days up in Brisbane. There are a few days here or there where it can be humid, but I hardly notice it.

In my job I speak to people all around Australia, and the weather comes up from time to time. I'll have people from Melb and Sydney telling me how freezing they are this winter, and then I'll let them know I actually had the aircon on in the car on the way to work :)

I have had to wear a jumper twice so far this year. And during summer I had the air con on at home for less than 10 days all up. For me that's perfect weather.
I remember being in Cairns back in the '80's playing in a golf Pro-Am...in August.

On one of the tournament-free days, a group of us "Mexicans" got together for a bit of "frisbee rugby" and copious beer guzzling on one of the Cairns beaches.

We were having a ball in our bare chests and boardshorts in the winter sun; meanwhile there were the odd sightings of locals wandering along the foreshore...wearing jumpers.

Quite amazing how us humans get "climatised".
 
lol it's all what you are used to.

I've got -5% body fat so I don't mind the warm days up in Brisbane. There are a few days here or there where it can be humid, but I hardly notice it.

In my job I speak to people all around Australia, and the weather comes up from time to time. I'll have people from Melb and Sydney telling me how freezing they are this winter, and then I'll let them know I actually had the aircon on in the car on the way to work :)

I have had to wear a jumper twice so far this year. And during summer I had the air con on at home for less than 10 days all up. For me that's perfect weather.

I prefer cooler climates simply because I can train longer and faster. Otherwise I will need to stay in an arctic airconditioned gym because my metabolism is so fast I will overheat easily.
 
Most third world countries live in tropical-subtropical areas.
Brisbane Is not even close to tropical, anyway what has this got to do with investing?

It's close to the Tropic of Capricorn. At current records, it's close to tropical. It feels like southeast Asia sometimes.

Anyway. Tropical/ subtropical = more diseases, more cyclones, more flooding, more destruction. And incomes are low anyway, why live there if you can get higher income in Sydney?
 
Last edited:
For the average worker bee I would suggest that they are at a considerable disadvantage living there with little hope of owning their own home let alone investing. I would rather have the best of both with a relatively high income and a much lower cost of living , but each to there own I suppose:)
 
Not to mention that the kids are actually happier and healthier as they can get out and about easier rather than being stuck in their room in front of the computer because they have nothing else to do.
I highly doubt the average kid growing up in a 25sqm shoebox in New York is happier than a kid living in a big house by the beach in Australia.
 
I highly doubt the average kid growing up in a 25sqm shoebox in New York is happier than a kid living in a big house by the beach in Australia.

I highly doubt it's common for 25sqm shoeboxes to have families with kids in them.

This back and forth argument is ridiculous

Comparing Woy Woy to new York?

$3m homes vs $400k ones?? What exactly is the point of this?
 
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.

Very good point regarding the essential service jobs you listed.

My other half works in one of these occupations and has amassed many years of experience. We live in a large regional town of NSW where we are able to give our family a very nice lifestyle on an income that is considered high for the area. People always ask why hubby doesn't take a promotion - and the reason is because it would involve a move to Sydney and would see us go backwards financially given the cost of housing and general living expenses, travelling costs, school fees, etc. No way! No promotion/pay increase within his govt job would ever work out big enough to justify moving to Sydney.

No wonder the level of experience of people in such jobs in Sydney is low compared to other coastal and regional areas of NSW.
 
Back
Top