The Housing Crisis

[abc]

an acquaintance from Sydney was in Adelaide over the weekend and remarked at the visible number of homeless people in Adelaide CBD

[Jaymz]

an acquaintance from Sydney was in Adelaide over the weekend and remarked at the visible number of homeless people in Adelaide CBD

I have to agree with this. I've visited Sydney multiple times over the past 18 months, staying in the CBD. There is, at least visibly, many more homeless ppl in Adelaide CBD than Sydney. The difference really surprised me,.

[rev]

I've been saying for a while that homelessness has increased significantly in Adelaide, you now see them in the suburbs too even during daylight hours. Where's the government support for these people?
Instead of wasting billions on fake migrants here to exploit the country, how about the government support our most vulnerable?

https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy ... 998a2160d8

Another example. That's just the tip of the iceberg and just a stunt by the Albanese government to show they're doing something when in reality the problem is much larger then what they've touched so far.
They should also be going after the dodgy migration agents by the thousands.

[claybro]

I've been saying for a while that homelessness has increased significantly in Adelaide, you now see them in the suburbs too even during daylight hours. Where's the government support for these people?
Instead of wasting billions on fake migrants here to exploit the country, how about the government support our most vulnerable?

https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy ... 998a2160d8

Another example. That's just the tip of the iceberg and just a stunt by the Albanese government to show they're doing something when in reality the problem is much larger then what they've touched so far.
They should also be going after the dodgy migration agents by the thousands.

Could not agree more. That the homelessness issue is so bad around Australia is a reflection of our society in general, and state governments in particular, who in the last 5 years have largely gaslighted on the problems. Yes, the housing market is a mess, but this problem has existed well before the housing shortage became so dire and much of the homelessness comes down to social issues in general. Mental health, substance abuse, and sometimes people just opting out of society. It should not be legally possible to just camp in the streets. Those found in such a situation, should be given a place to stay, triaged as to their particular problem, and then put into a program, to sort out the mess. Everyone in society has an obligation to participate by whatever means they can. But the system has to be in place to provide a space for the homeless to participate. Allowing some to roam the streets, harrass others going about their business sometimes violently should not not be tolerated, but only the various levels of government can resolve this. In one of the wealthiest per capita nations on earth, this should not be an issue.

[Jaymz]

I really find it quite sad that S.A is about to build its second $3 billion plus medical hospital, and yet mental health services are grossly underfunded. How about a nice new $1 billion mental health facility to be built, with 200 beds. Just goes to show how Governments at all levels pay lip service to this type of care. It's blindly obvious that many of the people clogging up the public health system are in psychological distress, but they really have very little option other than to do this.

Some people are in this situation by choice and others not, it doesn't matter. There should be options for these people, it really is a sad indictment on our society.

[SBD]

I really find it quite sad that S.A is about to build its second $3 billion plus medical hospital, and yet mental health services are grossly underfunded. How about a nice new $1 billion mental health facility to be built, with 200 beds. Just goes to show how Governments at all levels pay lip service to this type of care. It's blindly obvious that many of the people clogging up the public health system are in psychological distress, but they really have very little option other than to do this.

Some people are in this situation by choice and others not, it doesn't matter. There should be options for these people, it really is a sad indictment on our society.

Lyell McEwin Hospital has a fairly new Mental Health section in the ED, and is building a bigger mental health facility across the road I think. Not $1b but multiple tens of millions.

[rev]

[Bobski]

So essentially: "young people might want housing to be affordable for them but that's not the view of our government".

Oh dear.

[rev]

Pretty much. And the Coalition wont do anything better either. He's right we're no better with housing then the Americans are with health care.

Further in that video, they talk about public housing or lack of.

How about governments build more public housing, with the view of rent to own in a subsidized way particularly for the most vulnerable and those in desperate need?
I think something like that would be a good option.
Perhaps something like a young family who can't find housing, but the parents are working. In a situation like that, they can move in to public housing, pay rent, and have some sort of agreement where after say 20 or 30 years, they can buy the house less the rent they've paid.
Get's them off the government support system and on standing on their own feet entirely. That is surely a better outcome then having people stuck on welfare or stuck needing government support for a life time, which then often becomes a generational thing.

[Bobski]

Agreed. How about looking overseas to see what is working there, e.g. Norway. And it's not just young people/low income/welfare recipients who can't afford to buy. Single income households, especially those with children, are also screwed.

First home buyers need to be given some kind of advantage that's not just another grant, which only ever push prices up. As was discussed in the video, (partial) solutions to the crisis are known, but neither major party is willing to implement them.

Yes, Bill Shorten tried to introduce changes and got smashed, but things have spiraled wildly out of control since then, and even many older homeowners/landlords, benefiting from the current arrangement, acknowledge how unfair the situation is.

IMO,"we put it to the electorate and they didn't want it" is well past it's use-by date as an excuse. And the LNP's only suggestion seems to be to "allow" people to raid their super. That's not going to cut it. We need bold government action, and fast.

[Norman]

House prices shouldn't drop, because we have inflated the bubble so much now that any significant lowering will be devastating to the economy as a whole.

The best we can hope for is a flat lining or stabilisation of hour prices.

[Bobski]

That's exactly the point made in the video.

He isn't arguing for house prices to drop, rather highlighting that the housing minister just admitted the government "wants to see sustainable price growth" (as opposed to flat lining or stablisation). She also at no point defines "sustainable".

As an aside, Clare flippantly shrugging off the concerns of young people/renters/aspiring first home owners like that, when millennials are going to be the largest cohort of voters at the next election, does not seem to me like very smart politics.

Edit: To clarify, I agree with you that the best we can hope for is price stabilisation, but considering the government have here – by their own admission – made it clear they don't want that (and nor it seems do the opposition) the outlook remains bleak.

[abc]

the richer these politicians get from their personal property investment portfolios, the more arrogant they become

[Bobski]

Speaking of which, I'll just leave these here...

Source


Editing to add this from the newly-unsealed 2004 cabinet documents, via ABC news.

Home ownership is becoming increasingly unaffordable, and the states should work to release more land and speed up development approvals. Sound familiar?

You would be forgiven for thinking this was a cabinet discussion in 2024, but it has been the case for 20 years, as newly unsealed documents from the time reveal.

It was the year 2004. The median nominal capital city house price in Australia was just short of $400,000 — or the equivalent of 6.5 years of annual family income.

That might seem a bargain by today's standards, but housing affordability was firmly in the sights of the Howard government.

In June, the Howard cabinet considered its response to a Productivity Commission's report on first home ownership.

That report made a series of findings, including that negative gearing rules and capital gains tax concessions combined to make investing in residential property more attractive, adding to demand and therefore prices in the process.

It recommended a review of those tax settings as soon as practicable:

"Other aspects of the personal taxation regime — including negative gearing rules, 'capital works' deductions, the 1999 change to capital gains tax, and high marginal income tax rates — have combined to magnify the attractiveness of investing in residential property during the recent upswing in house prices, thereby adding to price pressures."

A cabinet minute from June 21 detailed the government's response, including its opposition to the recommended review.

It did however support states to move away from stamp duties and improve land release and development approval — something still being pursued by today's government, with Treasurer Jim Chalmers detailing a $900 million fund to encourage states to reduce red tape.

Deemed the interest rate election, the 2004 poll came as interest rates and household debt rose.

"This election will be about trust. Who do you trust to keep the economy strong, and protect family living standards? Who do you trust to keep interest rates low?" then prime minister John Howard told reporters after calling the election.

He would go on to win his fourth and final term in government.

In the wash-up, Tim Gartrell, the then Labor Party secretary (now Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's chief of staff) said "seats with the highest proportion of mortgagees were generally those which recorded the biggest swings against the ALP".

Source

[abc]

Speaking of which, I'll just leave these here...


Screen Shot 2024-12-31 at 7.27.02 pm.png

Screen Shot 2024-12-31 at 7.27.39 pm.png

Source


Editing to add this from the newly-unsealed 2004 cabinet documents, via ABC news.

Home ownership is becoming increasingly unaffordable, and the states should work to release more land and speed up development approvals. Sound familiar?

You would be forgiven for thinking this was a cabinet discussion in 2024, but it has been the case for 20 years, as newly unsealed documents from the time reveal.

It was the year 2004. The median nominal capital city house price in Australia was just short of $400,000 — or the equivalent of 6.5 years of annual family income.

That might seem a bargain by today's standards, but housing affordability was firmly in the sights of the Howard government.

In June, the Howard cabinet considered its response to a Productivity Commission's report on first home ownership.

That report made a series of findings, including that negative gearing rules and capital gains tax concessions combined to make investing in residential property more attractive, adding to demand and therefore prices in the process.

It recommended a review of those tax settings as soon as practicable:

"Other aspects of the personal taxation regime — including negative gearing rules, 'capital works' deductions, the 1999 change to capital gains tax, and high marginal income tax rates — have combined to magnify the attractiveness of investing in residential property during the recent upswing in house prices, thereby adding to price pressures."

A cabinet minute from June 21 detailed the government's response, including its opposition to the recommended review.

It did however support states to move away from stamp duties and improve land release and development approval — something still being pursued by today's government, with Treasurer Jim Chalmers detailing a $900 million fund to encourage states to reduce red tape.

Deemed the interest rate election, the 2004 poll came as interest rates and household debt rose.

"This election will be about trust. Who do you trust to keep the economy strong, and protect family living standards? Who do you trust to keep interest rates low?" then prime minister John Howard told reporters after calling the election.

He would go on to win his fourth and final term in government.

In the wash-up, Tim Gartrell, the then Labor Party secretary (now Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's chief of staff) said "seats with the highest proportion of mortgagees were generally those which recorded the biggest swings against the ALP".

Source

7 of the 10 are Labor

and the true believers still think they're sticking up for the little guy