We have all been called #$&+'s

[jaycee]

Depends what the mental condition is, and to what extent. Yes, there are some that can't help it, thus why i specifically said "mostly their problem".

Does that actually make sense ?

Were you just stating the obvious, the mental problem belongs to the person who has the mental problem ?

Sorry, no idea what you mean, but your first post did sound to me like you said most homeless people only have themselves to blame, sounds like that's not what you meant, but I dont get your above explantion.

 

[jaycee]

i read the article and I thought I had laughed


then I read the 1st comment and was reminded what laughing really was....

 

[joeExpat]

a classic blog unearthed in the comments
http://thingsboganslike.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/85-residential-property-investment/

 

[Michael2000]

If a person is homeless, it's mostly their problem they're homeless! Whether there was property investors or not, they wouldn't be able to afford it because many are too busy spending it on drugs!

Comments like these make me cringe, especially the "too busy spending it on drugs" part!! Makes me wonder if Jack Marx has a point...

 

[Lil Skater]

Does that actually make sense ?

Um, no. Now that i read it back it didn't. I guess what i was trying to say is that many people who are homeless can help it, but there are also many that can't.

Comments like these make me cringe, especially the "too busy spending it on drugs" part!! Makes me wonder if Jack Marx has a point...

The thing is, i see many homeless people sitting on the side of the road with a 50 pack of ciggs and a bottle of vodka. They can afford these but beg for food. Just doesn't add up for me. I never said they were necessarily illegal drugs.

 

[steveadl]

Just curious; are you talking about the linked article, or this thread...?

The comments below the article James.

You don't want to have a go at people when you don't know what situation they're in and what life has thrown at them. But on the same token - I've seen people with a lot of $h!t experiences in their lives who haven't let it sour them, and only makes them more determined to live a happy fulfilling life and not turn them bitter. A good attitude can make a huge difference in life, and some of the thinking in that linked page is sad to see and not a nice way to live your life.

 

[Savanna100]

Great!
as for Jack Marx himself is just an A$$ who is the one creating absolutely nothing. We create housing and employment in exchange for hocking our lives to the banks. Jack would not have the balls to do it obviously.

Well put !!!!!

Also, this sentence from one of the comments in reply to that article made me think...
"We’re the only country on earth where rental yields are a fraction of mortgage interest rates"

I've often thought that the rents we get here are much lower than those I've heard about from overseas. Can anyone please tell me more about overseas rental yields compared to ours ? I've already noticed the "$100 plus" difference between my Melbourne IP and what the very same house placed on a block here in Canberra in an average suburb would get in rent ($345/w in Melb and probably $480 up here).

 

[alexlee]

I've often thought that the rents we get here are much lower than those I've heard about from overseas. Can anyone please tell me more about overseas rental yields compared to ours ? I've already noticed the "$100 plus" difference between my Melbourne IP and what the very same house placed on a block here in Canberra in an average suburb would get in rent ($345/w in Melb and probably $480 up here).

Difference in tax laws plays a big part. In the US, for example, ppor mortgage interest is tax deductible. So there is much less demand for IPs to reduce tax, because people can get the same effect just by buying their own home (this can even apply to second / holiday homes). In Australia, most IP owners only own one IP. i.e. small investors who are partly out to reduce their tax. For your average employee, an ip is one of the few ways they have of reducing tax.

The costs of property ownership in the us are very different. Low or non-existent stamp duty, but high local taxes (compared to our council rates). Largely because their local governments pay for police, emergency services, in some cases public schools, utilities, etc, and all the admin that goes with it. For us, this is largely done at a state level, which gets its budget from state taxes like stamp duty and via federal taxes. One effect is that Australian income tax is higher, but we don't pay state income taxes.

Imagine if owning an ip meant paying 3% of the market value in council rates every year. What would happen? Most likely, higher yields (probably from lower prices, depending on rental demand) on ips.

It's far too simplistic to just say 'US yields are higher than Australian yields so Australia is over-priced'. It's a patchwork of laws, tax, government systems, history and so on.

 

[coastymike]

Unless you have worked with the homeless and understand the challenges that they are confronted with then it is difficult to make such a comment.

Most homeless people prior to entering into homelessness are either

1. suffering from a mental illness;
2. suffering from a chronic illness which means they cannot work;
2. suffering severe abuse where they used to live and need to escape sometimes for their own safety;
3. suffered a severe financial difficulty such as bankruptcy.

It is very easy to say well just go to the local hospital and they will give you some drugs and then head off to centrelink and away you go. While homeless Centrelink will require a fixed place of address. So what does the homeless person do when they have no fixed place of address ? Family members frequently abandon a lot of these people because their illnesses sometimes make it near impossible to look after them in their own family homes. Particularly if the family member has children and they are worried about the safety of the children. So in the end many have nowhere to go.

Many homeless people have lost hope. Imagine Lil Skater that you were raped by your father and 2 uncles at age 7 up until age 13. They forced you to unspeakable acts and the images are burned into your mind. You finally run away from home living on the streets and find work as a prostitute allows you to earn an income to support yourself. How do many of these people escape the thought of having had sex with over 200 men. Some using condoms and others not. Some ripping of their condoms during the sex act and having the woman wondering whether they will get pregnant or not or whether they will end up with a veneral disease. Simple they turn to drugs and alcohol. Some of the stories of the homeless are tragic and show the depth of human depravity. Talk to some of them instead of judging them and you might be surprised how incredible that they even have any will left to live. Weaker people would have killed themselves a longer time ago.

 

[natmarie73]

Guy obviously has a problem lol, perhaps he's homeless with a mental illness

When things don't go your way it seems to always be about shifting the blame. I see similar sort of rubbish on both sides of the fence:
http://www.tic.com.au/Petition/RBARally/HowtheRBABreachedtheircharter/tabid/803/Default.aspx

Nah - his landy must be putting the rent up or evicting him.

 

[natmarie73]

Regarding homeless people, I watched a show not all that long ago about a lady who had started a mobile library for homeless people because she found that many were quite educated and liked to read. One particular fellow it turns out was a very talented artist who had once entered the Archibald Prize and due to illness or some other circumstances beyond his control was not able to work and subsequently became homeless. Thanks to this lady he was able to get back on his feet and is now working and painting again. It really made me think differently about homeless people in general.

 

[sash]

LMAO......hilarious.....blame someone for all the ills in life...what about some personal accountability!

Sadly I hear all about the greedy landlords....is the Mr Marx related to Karl Marx???

In anycase.....there is a saying ....which goes...."money talks bs walks"....

 

[Amadio]

What an idiot, without investors some people would never be able to afford to live in a property,

If you really think about it, what would happen to housing prices if there were no investors, just home owners?

 

[skater]

If you really think about it, what would happen to housing prices if there were no investors, just home owners?

If there were no investors, then where would those that can't afford, or are too financially illiterate to purchase a home live? Or are you suggesting that the Government supply housing for the masses?

 

[Amadio]

If there were no investors, then where would those that can't afford, or are too financially illiterate to purchase a home live? Or are you suggesting that the Government supply housing for the masses?

It's a question that I find really interesting. No, imo, the govt should never supply housing en masse any more than they do now.

If IP tax benefits were to be suddenly withdrawn, and therefore IP investors started selling up and leaving the market, housing prices would most likely drop and a lot more people would be able to afford their own homes. I don't think many people are that financially illiterate that they can't buy a house - it's just that the prices are beyond affordability.

It's all theoretical - I guess what I'm curious about is just how much investors drive property prices upwards. Is it measurable?

 

[rugrat]

Amadio - What about those people who just are not in a position to buy no matter how cheap said property was. ie, uni students, bankrupt people, anyone on a centrelink payment, people who have not been employed long enough in the one position, anyone who doesn't have parents they can live too until they are 30, single parents, casual employees (hell I couldn't even get a mobile phone plan because I am casual), etc, etc.
If none of these people had access to a rental property due to a lack of investors, there would be significantly more homeless.

 

[RumpledElf]

My tenants earn more than we do and they are renting not buying. Their rent is considerably higher than mortgage payments would be on the house - wildy higher if they get the FHOG. The house was for sale when they rented it. They like it and want to live there for several years. I can't think of any reasons at all they couldn't buy the house - BUT they are perpetually broke with a trail of debt collectors behind them. They smoke. They probably drink. So that does explain it

I'm not lucky for having two houses. I'm unfortunate. I'd really really really prefer to have sold my old house not rented it out. The fact it happens to pay the mortgage twice over is just a coincidence.

When we get the third house it isn't luck, it was money that did it. The previous owner was a drug addict and it didn't occur to him that getting a loan for $10,000 could subdivide the block and then sell the other half for $40,000 - which would have left him debt free. And its not like he couldn't get a loan - he got a loan for almost $10k to reroof the house and spent it on drugs instead of a roof.

 

[Piston Broke]

What caostymike said.
There are people out there who are in geniune need and should be helped out as much as possible.
They are not an expense but a social investment.

 

[skater]

If IP tax benefits were to be suddenly withdrawn, and therefore IP investors started selling up and leaving the market, housing prices would most likely drop and a lot more people would be able to afford their own homes. I don't think many people are that financially illiterate that they can't buy a house - it's just that the prices are beyond affordability.

Obviously you are young and don't remember the time this actually happened for a small amount of time. It caused so much upheaval that they quickly re-introduced it at a higher level than before.

For what it's worth, it is not investors that drive the market, it is home owners who get emotional about their "perfect home" and will buy at any price (so long as they can get the finance). A savvy investor will stay unemotional and not buy unless a property stays within their criterior.

There are many, many investors out there that choose houses with little to no tax benefits, prefering to have something that pays for itself. An older home has little in the way of depreciation too.

If what you say is true, then there are many low income suburbs that would be considerably cheaper than they are now. Lets take Western Sydney, for example. A place I know well. Most of the houses are around 40-50 years old, at a guess, meaning no depreciation unless they have been upgraded. The yields are much higher than closer to the city and you can easily afford a home here if you are on an average income. Yet, I know many people/families that rent by choice rather than own. My ex-neighbours, for example, earn a 6 figure income, yet rent (and spend all disposable income) a small ex-commission home.

Anyway, during the last boom most of the investors had already left the market (at least the ones that knew what they were doing) while prices kept moving steadily upwards. This price was fuelled by people wanting to buy their home, because they thought that prices would continue the upwards trend endlessly.

After prices pulled back, the investors returned. Especially when the interest rates were low. Heck, you could get a home with an 8% yeild and a loan of 4.99%. Prices where CHEAPER, yet the owner occupiers were hardly anywhere to be seen.

AGAIN, please note, it was actually cheaper to buy than to rent.

There are many places that offer better yeilds than Western Sydney. Just tune into some of Nathan's posts and you will again see many examples of homes that are cheaper to buy than to rent, yet people rent them by choice.

 

[RumpledElf]

There are many places that offer better yeilds than Western Sydney. Just tune into some of Nathan's posts and you will again see many examples of homes that are cheaper to buy than to rent, yet people rent them by choice.

This really does get me. Especially in September with the full FHOG.

Someone could have bought my house for $57,000 after the grants at that time. Less if you had your own deposit too. That's barely $70 a week for a house that needs no repairs. The lowest rent you could pay out there for a much worse house is $100 a week - for most places you'd be paying $150ish. Did it sell? Of course not!