what makes property price in Australia (Sydney in particular) overpriced ?

[Rolf Latham]

I'm not sure comparing our accomodation costs with those of a country with more than 7000 people per square km and the third highest population density on earth falls into the "perspective" category.

the density is an interesting one : )

Take the METRO areas of our cities, and do the sums, Id guess while not HK Like, its going to be quite high compared to many cities.

Ps,, im too lazy to do the sums, but Im sure some analyst will have it done before the weekend is out


ta
rolf

 

[exsyd]

I wonder when they will realise that they should probably stop reproducing themselves?

Humans really are pretty stupid at times. I often look at how the population is increasing and can't help seeing the image of the two mice in the tank....

We'll cop our right whack sooner or later.

Singapore's fertility rate is one of the lowest in the world at < 1.2, lower than Japan's, and well below the replacement rate of 2.1. I'd say they're aware of it, but maybe not in the way you might imagine.

 

[tom32]

the density is an interesting one : )

Take the METRO areas of our cities, and do the sums, Id guess while not HK Like, its going to be quite high compared to many cities.

Ps,, im too lazy to do the sums, but Im sure some analyst will have it done before the weekend is out

I think for Australia you have to factor in a very high incompetance factor as well around government.

There are in Australia 0.15 useless politicians / public servants per sq.km in this country making things very difficult for people wanting to get stuff done.

Singapore even for it's smaller land mass and higher population density has a lower ratio of useless politicians and NIMBY's per square km.

 

[Belbo]

Singapore even for it's smaller land mass and higher population density has a lower ratio of useless politicians and NIMBY's per square km.

Singaporean NIMBYs must be an extremely upset bunch of people.

 

[Deltaberry]

Yea they are

They don't get much publicity. Lock-down.

Very good place to be.

 

[Graingrower]

Skyscrapers will be built for food production one day. Only a matter of time before the economics make it worthwhile.

I've seen this feel good idea about growing food on the rooves and walls of skyscrapers. At the end of the day a city can only collect the sunlight that fell on the ground before that city was built. The CBD of melbourne is approx 1 square mile = 640 acres. 640 acres will not produce enough food to feed the people in 1 skyscraper. But if it makes the city people feel good then go for it.

 

[charlieandkath]

I've seen this feel good idea about growing food on the rooves and walls of skyscrapers. At the end of the day a city can only collect the sunlight that fell on the ground before that city was built. The CBD of melbourne is approx 1 square mile = 640 acres. 640 acres will not produce enough food to feed the people in 1 skyscraper. But if it makes the city people feel good then go for it.

640 acres of broad acre farming you won't feed the people of a skyscraper. Highly intensive farming of 640 acres would feed 640 skyscrapers of people easy.

You use every floor of the skyscraper. Not just the roof and walls. The World Trade Centres were apparently one acre each floor (happy to be corrected on that one). God is not making any more land but we can and I firmly believe it will be happening one day soon and probably already is.

 

[Graingrower]

how do you get the sunlight into each floor?

 

[charlieandkath]

how do you get the sunlight into each floor?

Direct sunlight is not needed. There are many methods of creating light to produce plants.

 

[Graingrower]

Really? Anything I can apply on a commercial scale? If you could light up my farm at night then we could double our wheat yields.

 

[locko24]

Really? Anything I can apply on a commercial scale? If you could light up my farm at night then we could double our wheat yields.

Glow-worms

 

[JohnHenry]

Hi Everyone,

I am wondering what reason or factor that makes the housing or property always increasing in price especially in Sydney ?

Feel free to discuss here ;-)

Yes, simply because most people here in Australia (in particular) exploiting the Government rule of Negative gearing.

I can't imagine if one day the Government listen to what ANZ boss said to the media (Property is for living not for investment), there will b no more negative gearing and the real estate bubble burst, then it is time for buy real house in Sydney for a bargain pricing, but now the question is when ?

this housing price bubble can't last forever I'm sure it has to end somewhere like in the US during GFC.

 

[VYBerlinaV8]

this housing price bubble can't last forever I'm sure it has to end somewhere like in the US during GFC.

We're seeing it correct right now, and will for some time. With Australia's fundamentals the way they are, it likely won't get much more exciting. If you're hoping for a spectacular crash, I suspect you're going to be disappointed.

 

[The Fence]

this housing price bubble can't last forever I'm sure it has to end somewhere like in the US during GFC.

...are you really sure? Somewhere like....?

Just as you can't compare Singapore with Sydney, you surely shouldn't compare US with Aus...

 

[Deltaberry]

Yes, simply because most people here in Australia (in particular) exploiting the Government rule of Negative gearing.

I can't imagine if one day the Government listen to what ANZ boss said to the media (Property is for living not for investment), there will b no more negative gearing and the real estate bubble burst, then it is time for buy real house in Sydney for a bargain pricing, but now the question is when ?

this housing price bubble can't last forever I'm sure it has to end somewhere like in the US during GFC.

That's an interetsing one... exploiting government rule of negative gearing?

Are you exploiting the government rule of taxes, my taxes?

 

[JohnHenry]

That's an interetsing one... exploiting government rule of negative gearing?

Are you exploiting the government rule of taxes, my taxes?

no mate, I pay my taxes for sure, but what I'm thinking is that if one day the Negative Gearing policy is abolished then the property investor will be impacted heavily.

 

[BV]

no mate, I pay my taxes for sure, but what I'm thinking is that if one day the Negative Gearing policy is abolished then the property investor will be impacted heavily.

Sure and your rent will have to rise to compensate us for providing you with a roof over your head

Look mate, negative gearing mostly benefits individuals on the higher tax brackets (eg politicians? )and those who hold low yielding properties such as the ones close to the city and new developments in general.

If this incompetent government took away negative gearing the housing shortage in the cities will become so severe that you'll be putting your name on the rental list as soon as you are born hoping to get a rental by the time you're 20 yo

 

[CHam]

Yes, simply because most people here in Australia (in particular) exploiting the Government rule of Negative gearing.

I can't imagine if one day the Government listen to what ANZ boss said to the media (Property is for living not for investment), there will b no more negative gearing and the real estate bubble burst, then it is time for buy real house in Sydney for a bargain pricing, but now the question is when ?

this housing price bubble can't last forever I'm sure it has to end somewhere like in the US during GFC.

So are you able to quote me the percentage of people with Negatively Geared properties compared with other home owners? I am willing to bet that it is not a huge percentage out of the total population. And what about developers buying properties to knock down and build units to sell for profit? Do we include them? Or first home buyers who receive a government handout. Surely this has to create competition. Maybe overseas investors purchasing homes create increased prices? People who get a pay increase and want to upgrade their PPOR? Or maybe that immigration has increased and outstripped supply. Or simply that we all need to live where the work is - ie. in capital cities such as Sydney or Melbourne.

Surely it is a little simplistic to state that only 1 factor such as Negative Gearing is creating increasing house prices.

And if NG is legal how how are people expoiting it?? That is like me saying that I am exploiting the tax system by claiming legal work deductions!

 

[Token Funder]

So are you able to quote me the percentage of people with Negatively Geared properties compared with other home owners? I am willing to bet that it is not a huge percentage out of the total population. And what about developers buying properties to knock down and build units to sell for profit? Do we include them? Or first home buyers who receive a government handout. Surely this has to create competition. Maybe overseas investors purchasing homes create increased prices? People who get a pay increase and want to upgrade their PPOR? Or maybe that immigration has increased and outstripped supply. Or simply that we all need to live where the work is - ie. in capital cities such as Sydney or Melbourne.

Surely it is a little simplistic to state that only 1 factor such as Negative Gearing is creating increasing house prices.

And if NG is legal how how are people expoiting it?? That is like me saying that I am exploiting the tax system by claiming legal work deductions!

More than 2/3 of investment properties are negatively geared.

Negative gearing (be it property or other asset classes) is essentially a subsidy paid by workers and savers to borrowers and speculators and is bad tax policy.

 

[CHam]

More than 2/3 of investment properties are negatively geared.

Negative gearing (be it property or other asset classes) is essentially a subsidy paid by workers and savers to borrowers and speculators and is bad tax policy.

Token Founder,
My question was not what percentage of investment properties are negatively geared, but what percentage of property in total is negatively geared. This will then demonstrate that a minority cannot solely drive property prices.