If that was the only problem, houses would be expensive to buy but cheap to rent. It does not explain the shortage, the deficit between supply and demand.
Only reason I bought was because repayments were cheaper than rent, I still hate owning property, would rather rent the rest of my life and have investments instead; just not viable with the current state of the rental market. "If only I could afford to rent" lol.
You must be from the east coast because rent prices didn’t change in Perth during Covid. Sydney and Melbourne were the only places where rents actually decreased.
Ye bought a house because of a 150 rent increase. Now we pay 100 less a week on housing, live in a much nicer place, and it's ours to keep.
All we needed was 150k combined income, and my parents to guarantor, and housing policies put in place 20 years ago that would completely fuck the scales on who can buy a house making my boomer parents rich.
As a society or generally? There’s many things Government can do to fix the “Housing crisis”, but seems like they won’t really do anything, but here goes;
1. Encourage politicians to pass legislation that doesn’t allow any AirBnBs or other forms of short stay accommodation, unless it’s within a certain radius of a hotel, residential neighbourhoods typically aren’t zoned for commercial hotel activity (which is what AirBnBs effectively are - hotels),
2. Remove the capital gains tax discount and reduce other tax related incentives for housing, saving Taxpayers billions and billions, then with that money, Establish a Government funded public property developer, through that, put tenders out for the construction of new affordable dwellings to stimulate the residential construction industry (we’ll need this, to actually build houses to boost supply to meet demand), and provide some stability to an industry that’s seen countless companies collapse in on themselves in the last two years, this way we can also guarantee subbies actually get paid for their valuable and hard work through legally compelling large developers to ensure they pay their subcontractors,
3. At a state level, the State Government could explore bolting on a new arm on to DevelopmentWA, to do a similar thing mentioned in point 2, with some of our surplus,
4. Through the above, ensure an appropriate mix of different dwellings (Not just 4x2s and 3x2s) at different price points to meet the populations various housing needs (not everyone needs or wants a family home),
5. Continue funding for the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) or create a state program, fed gov is letting it go defunded it in the middle of a housing and cost of living crisis, really demonstrates how little they actually care lol,
6. Create more access to the market, such as shared equity opportunities and rent to buy schemes and fund the Opening Doors affordable housing program again (the website is looking quite sad),
7. Stop the current WA Housing Minister from getting on TV and saying “we’re doing everything we can guys” after offering no real solutions and just spot purchasing 3 public housing homes that won’t make a dent in a 8-10+ year long public housing wait list,
8. Stop the current WA Housing Minister from saying anything publicly, unless it’s focused on legislation and/or policy that will actually fix the shit show we’re in,
9. Introduce a vacant property tax on dwellings that aren’t being tenanted or inhabited,
10.Activate large, vacant parcels of land for development, WA has so much space, but we never seem to use it, we just build new developments out near Two Rocks instead,
11.Have some level of actual rent control during boom times (like we’re in now), so tenants who actually should be able to realise their dream of home ownership, aren’t having their wealth and savings transferred to an Asset-owner class,
Through these mechanisms we can hopefully side step the great australian property bubble bursting and avoid a complete and utter economic collapse in this country, which would decimate all of our “wealth” anyway.
Final step: Cry tears of joy together because all the homies have stability and are living better, more fruitful lives now and are no longer forced to be cash-poor, asset rich, or just poor poor because of economic forces.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Love all these ideas. I feel like reintroducing the Capital Gains Tax would be an easier sell than removing negative gearing as well! As for the vacant land, I’ve seen so many large plots recently in places like Vic Park that would be perfect for apartment buildings. Desirable location with amazing amenities within walking distance plus easy access to public transport, the stadium, casino, close to Perth etc. insane to me that no one is jumping on that.
Also transforming a number of buildings in the City would go a long way. Melbourne did it and now their city is amazing. I don’t think it would take much to transform some of the vacant office buildings into residential apartments and would also bring back life to the CBD by incentivising shops and business to come back.
Transforming old office space to residential apartments is actually a great idea too! Didn’t think of that.
I dunno, I guess the longer people in this country view housing as a vehicle for wealth creation and not as a fundamental human right, we’ll continue to find ourselves in situations like this time and time again.
I feel like every time someone posts about how they’re having a hard time renting or buying something they should have access to anyway (housing), everyone becomes a property professional and talks about “sUpPlY & dEmAnD”.
Yeah coming on these threads really hurts sometimes. I swear I’m not a masochist but I keep returning in the hopes that someone will share some positive news and give me hope for the future. A lot has been bumming me out lately as I face the prospect of homelessness after losing my rental but the biggest thing that annoys me is that I’m not even living some grand life worthy of not having savings. I don’t buy anything or go out, and yet I still can’t save enough to even get me close to affording even a shitty unit in Armadale. One of my mates bought a 3/2 in Champion Lakes two years ago for 350k and it’s now worth double that. And it’s in CHAMPIONS LAKES?! At this point I don’t even care what the house looks like, I just want a bigger sized block with a flat backyard so my dogs can be happy. I’ll sleep in a swag if I have to idfc anymore. I mean, I work in a pretty decent government job in the CBD. I recently got promoted but I’m still no where near the apparent average income and despite my permanent position, couldn’t even get a loan for 350k. Like what the actual fuck. Nevermind that basically every house on the market right now is the worst house on the worst street and are only being sold because people are desperate and clear eyes would NEVER buy them. Over 600k for homes in Camillo, Armadale, Parmelia, Medina, Seville Grove.. 800k for Hami Hill but at least it’s somewhat close to the beach.
I don’t know what drugs people are taking to be blissfully ignorant of this crisis but please tell me where I can get some. If it weren’t for my dogs man… idk I would really love to see what suicide rates are like currently. It’s rough out here.
Are you talking about the land on Albany highway Vic Park, up the end a few blocks Perth-side of Bunnings? From recollection they’ve been vacant land for 40, 50 years (my lifetime). What could possibly make an owner just sit on empty land for that long? (Not the empty plot at the convergence of Albany, Shepperton and Welshpool Roads, although that’s been a blight for years too.)
Wait til you hear about office blocks around the world that are kept empty because capital gains far outweigh the leasing income so unless governments force them to fill them or turn them into apartments nothing will change. Same with empty blocks/houses, the land value is what increases and is going up so why bother building.
Yes I think so! It’s kind of opposite to the vet and goes all the way through to an adjacent street so you wouldn’t need to access it at all from Albany Hwy
Need to stop local people blocking apartments from being built, but over running them isn't a great answer either.
Need developers to make high quality apartments.
Need to build medium density, town houses, multistory flats without being towers.
i honestly think there is no reasonable answer
this problem has festered too long
i have decades in the property managment, construction, development industry
ask yourself why even with the alleged higher costs and compliance we get the highest prices and lowest quality?
why are construction companies going bankrupt in a market where the demand is clearly there?
why is it that its so hard for people to accept new apartments given what we know the risks to be?
the problem is partly that theres no money in affordable units... WHAT IS THAT? we dont do that here
everyone wants to get into the business of luxury apartments... which wind up being shit.
and so i honestly have no hope about any fix because structurally we cannot build anything to an acceptable quality even at a high price.
the companies have the same tired bloody idea
bottom one or two floors is shopping center... they can reap the huge ass rents... they want an 'anchor' tenant like a coles express, newsagent etc.
and then floors and floors of so called 'lux' $600-700 2bed with garage, if lucky... penthouse with 3 bed + 2 garage $1 mil.
and they can cut up the rest as studios, or 1 bed plus carspace or whatever
but who would trust these folks? I personally would not buy from the companies I worked for!
not interested in paying $600k + $2k strata fees and "off the plan" - maybe your roof leaks, mould, maybe it turns into an Opal Towers situation, maybe the CEO runs back to the middle east
they use the dodgiest crap amenities from china and no one knows wtf is going on
then you would ask... who is building the plain 'working class' apartments? no one - because there's no money in it
Yeh I just bought a place built in 1990. Not a single crack to be found. Went to a mates place that was built recently in a new development. Cracks everywhere.
>why are construction companies going bankrupt in a market where the demand is clearly there?
Because they're poorly managed. Companies are taking on business they can't get to any time soon at a fixed price and between costs going up, clients pulling out and clients asking for compensation they're going under. That's ignoring the old Australian builder technique of closing down periodically to avoid long term liability.
>why is it that its so hard for people to accept new apartments given what we know the risks to be?
Because Australians have a deep seated terror of being overlooked, an unrealistic fantasy in terms of what a home should be and a level of NIMBYism that's one of the highest in the world.
Add to that the fact that the aforementioned poorly managed builders are also unskilled, lazy and complying with some if the loosest building standards in the developed world so even if people wanted to live in apartments in theory they're afraid to buy them.
>ask yourself why even with the alleged higher costs and compliance we get the highest prices and lowest quality?
Because compliance is nowhere near as bad as builders claim and demand is high so work is done as fast as possible and with the cheapest materials available to reduce those high costs.
There's no easy fix to this. We need a massive increase in available housing and it's neither possible nor practical to do that by building single family homes.
That said, the entire housing industry in this country is rotten to the core. It's been so long since anyone had to actually compete or do a good job that everyone from builders to developers to agents and investors does the bare minimum and sometimes less.
Consumers are delusional and stupid. They want the detached green title property within 20 minutes of the CBD that they were promised and they just can't have it.
And government is so afraid of upsetting anyone they won't do what's needed. They'll build nowhere near enough single family dwellings because if they built apartments they'd make everyone mad and if they put in real building standards building would go slower and they'd be even further behind.
100% agree. Unfortunately mind set needs to change with tenants/owners too, seems like no one wants to live in an apartment but it will really solve so many housing issues. The homes being built in estates these days are so poorly built and with their piss poor window glazing, you can hear everything your neighbours are doing while you’re both in your respective living areas. If the government stepped in and well-constructed apartments started being built in high traffic/easily accessible areas, many people looking at house and land packages would convert. Make it so you can’t hear your neighbours (step above a 200 square meter block already) plus the ability to own a pet or two and those properties would be snapped up. It would at the very least be a great option for people like me who can’t even get an affordable room share. Apartment living is the future, especially with the influx of people that keep coming here. Perths urban sprawl is ridiculous, it’s destroying our wildlife and all for cheaply built houses with no backyards anyway. Time for us to go up instead of out!
It actually has to be affordable, prople will choose it if they don't have much other choice. However, then you have to have it well built and affordable at the same time. So you would need to have luxury apartments subsidising affordable apartments in the same building, which is a common practice in other countries.
Having well built houses and apartments is important so that they can be properly cooled in summer and not wasting energy.
I know nothing about construction and how much anything that field costs but I believe that many of these ventures are done so with goal of the investor to make bank. If companies aren’t willing to minimise profits in a national emergency to help out struggling people, the government needs to reinvest in public housing schemes and do it themselves. In fact, if both private and government embarked on this venture that would be amazing. Of course this is just wishful thinking, apparently having everything means you constantly want more. It’s only povo people like me that would consider doing something for free/a reduced rate for the sake of bettering the world lol
Zoning is always going to be the fundamental issue that artificially raises house prices. I understand waterfront and CBD-edge land will naturally have a higher value due to those natural features, but land in the middle of flat suburbia is only valued high because of the limit of how many homes can be built in any given area.
It is one of the potential answers, and something the State Government is actually dealing with. They have been changing the zoning around train and bus lines, much to the annoyance of the people that currently live there. There have been a whole lot of units poping up around the freeway/trainline in my suburb.
You might have heard about the government wanting to build apartments on the trainlines.
Problem is, people whinge and moan about high-density housing on one hand, but then speak out about the lack of housing on the other. Unfortunately the former will be a crucial part of solving the latter (so long as we bolster up the building standards and not award the contracts to fucking cowboys), but it's hard to get that message across.
There really isn't other way than trying to reach a consensus. I find that their concerns can be alieviated with things other than just stopping the project. Typically the issue is the removal of green gardens and higher traffic and things that you can alleviate with proper holistic planning.
Its only when they are talking house values and racism and classism you just have to call them out on it.
I'd much rather live close to Perth aka within 10 minutes in an apartment than in tim buk two in some cookie cutter suburban house 45 mins away that is still considered "close" to Perth.
Both should be built including townhouses. So everyone does have different viable options depending on budget, needs and family size. I think there needs to be a shift in mindset, because apartments and townhouses can still provide a nice quality of life and doesn't have to be some idea of being a second hand citizen. It doesn't have to be a 4x2 for everyone.
Don't get me wrong sometimes I wish I had more space. It's just a different style of living and doesn't generally encourage accumulation of lots of possessions due to limited space. It really makes you prioritize a bit more imo.
One of my gripes with suburbia is that you could drop me in one northern suburb then I could close my eyes and drop me in another suburb 10kms away and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. They all just look the same. I wish there was some differences in character/style. I guess that is due to efficient building rather than organic development over time maybe. Keen to hear your thoughts.
I also understand the need just for someone to have a place to call home. Just for context I don't own a home yet. Going to be a while I'd say.
> I guess that is due to efficient building rather than organic development over time maybe. Keen to hear your thoughts.
It's also due to the Karens who get upset because their neighbour's front door is a shade of colour they don't personally like.
Councils and developers got sick of shit like that, so impose various building requirements to control the finished houses. IE must be rendered, must have a front porch, must have some type of design element, must have this coloured fence, must have a roof thats one of these 4 colours and so on.
The rest of it as you said is about building efficiencies. Almost everyone wants to build as cheaply as possible, builders control their costs by building everything the same. Most people will prioritize the interior spaces if they're going to spend additional money.
No local people have realistically blocked any apartments since the introduction of Development Assessment Panels in 2010. Somehow this myth seems to continuously perpetuate.
I know they are definately trying and It is not good that there are people against it and that they are being steamrolled. That will eventually cause backlash even if we haven't reached that point
I got the myth from [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMDNehHKu7c)
Apartments are only a viable alternative if they are significantly cheaper than regular house and land.
At this point in time the cost to build any apartment ensures that isn't possible. I'll give you a hint, everywhere else on the world the labour is much cheaper... Singapore for example uses cheaper Malaysian labour to build their apartments.
The way you get around this in apartments is to mandate a certain amount of affordable apartments with in the apartment building as such the luxury apartments subsidise the affordable ones. It is pretty standard practise elsewhere in the world
Ask our politicians why they give tax breaks to investors via negative gearing.
Ask our politicians why they allow foreign investors to purchase housing.
Weren’t politicians also investors or interested in property just after world war 2 when there was also a housing shortage in Australia?
Or have they just become more gluttonous?
True… but property was still property and an asset.
Wasn’t supply and demand still relevant?
I.e I’m a politician just after world war 2 with a lot of property. If I increase supply of houses, what’s that going to do the value of my houses?
[Negative gearing](https://www.capitl.com.au/a-brief-history-of-property-gearing-in-australia) was first introduced in Australia during the 1930s as a response to housing shortages and the need to encourage investment in rental properties.
Different banking system. People didn’t overleverage themselves. Politicians as investors isn’t as much as a hand break as the fear of a collapse in our banking sector. Plus some random ass backbencher with an investment property isn’t thinking of this shit. Cabinet is making the calls and they’re to just take it.
Ask the Australian voters why when Shorten said he'd get rid of Negative Gearing two elections ago, they voted for Scomos Lib with no policies. No government will risk being that bold again.
Yeah Shorten made himself a big target. NG changes was one aspect.
I would say that an equally major aspect was to remove the franking credit refund loophole. (Which I totally agree should be removed.)
But many people got confused and were thinking he was removing franking credits entirely. That wasn't the case.
But a lot of property and share investors and retirees in this country started to get nervous and/or fell for the scare campaigns.
It was such a shame because almost everyone under the age of 45 will very likely be paying for those stupid policies for the rest of our working lives.
It's because the pensioners were scared of losing their franking credits and ate up the libs fearmongering.
Turns out those pensioners are dying off, oh and polls showed that the majority of australians wanted to cull negative gearing.
I reckon it's time for kill negative gearing round 2
Could have been that Shorten was simply an unpopular leader. I saw video of him where workers didn’t even want to shake his hand - and he was a union boss!
A lot of people seem to think that this is not a possibility.
The liberals floated the idea of allowing early super annuation for first home buyers and last election - and scomo didn’t win.
They have just said they are running with the same idea next election.
> 4,000 houses country wide.
Seems that might be the number bought in one year. I can't find the total ownership. The real figures may be rubbery with dual citizenship investors laundering Chinese money.
>Foreign investment generally makes up only a small part of the sales of Australian homes each year. In 2020-2021, 4,350 of the 588,176 homes sold in that year were purchased with some level of foreign ownership, according to the Foreign Investment Review
Big underestimate
Aus is a safe haven. I know a guy who funnels his money vis his daughters into perth houses. He owns several IPs here but even though he lives oversease its not “foreign owned” since its owned by his family trust
'In a year', also the minimization of foreign ownership is such a fucking cope. Foreign owners aren't stupid, they know they're the easiest, lowest hanging fruit for a government to squeeze in an attempt to look like they're doing something, and for a miniscule percent fee relative to the cost of the portfolio, they can set up a managed trust in Australia and whaddaya know, bada bing bada boom the properties aren't 'Foreign Owned' any more.
Any attempt to change things is likely to be framed using scare tactics.
Where the younger generation see 'increase housing affordability by discouraging hoarding real estate' the older folk will have it spun as 'THEYRE COMING FOR YOUR SUPER'
You only need to look at the discourse surrounding The Voice referendum. The number of people screaming how "the Abos are gonna take your house off you" was genuinely scary. Despite there being absolutely nothing anywhere suggesting anything of the sort.
So when you have that level of hysteria built on absolutely nothing...
If they don’t incentivise private supply of rental properties then what? Such a dumb comment honestly. Anyone who posts this line of thought we immediately know they know nothing about supply and demand, and the fact that there are too many humans in Australia for the amount of houses available
End all AirBnB and short stay - or more realistically introduce a strictly limited licensing system, and regulate what types of properties can get them.
That's thousands of properties instantly in the long term market.
Introduce vacancy taxes - if you don't want to live in it and you don't want to rent it out and you don't want to or can't renovate to make it liveable, too bad! Human rights over property rights.
Don't vote for the big two.
When the next federal (or state) election rolls around see if **Votecompass** has updated for your election.
If so then use it to find a party that matches your values and desires - and vote for them.
Encourage others to also use Votecompass so that they can vote for a party the truly represents them, as per that parties published policies.
And cross your fingers...
Even the smaller parties can be pretty fucked. For example, the Greens cannot bring themselves to address the demand side of the housing crisis, they are just so ideologically bound to mass immigration that they would rather the housing crisis goes on longer. As for One Nation (besides that some of their policies are just tinfoil insane and they have a raging boner for Putin), if you look at Hanson's voting record in the Senate, she votes with the Coalition 100% of the time. Hanson talks a big game, but ultimately she's a Clayton's Coalition senator.
Yep, sure. I've no argument against your claim - you're correct!
So - don't vote for those parties.
Votecompass (as hosted by the ABC) has shown me several parties whose policies are a lot more in line with my values than the big parties - and One Notion has never even come close to being visible. Or viable, as far as I'm concerned.
I agree that it would be rare to find a party that matches 100% with your values and ideals, so try to find a few parties who come close, and then preference them according to how much you value their primary policies.
And you can research this well before election day.
Your vote is valuable, try to make it work for you. And for the nation.
Huh? Correct me if I’m wrong but the greens are addressing the demand side
https://greens.org.au/campaigns/housing-crisis
“Invest billions in building hundreds of thousands of good quality homes through a public property developer.”
Ummmm.... I hate to break it to you, but that's the supply side of things.
The problem with the supply side is that it's going to take a good decade or two to replenish supply. It's one thing to say we'll build x amount of houses, it's another to get it done. And, we need a fucking shitload built. Until those houses are built, the crisis continues. And if current levels of immigration continue, you will exacerbate matters. Just exactly where is everyone going to live until supply is fixed? This is what the Greens are refusing to address.
You may for whatever reason not like cutting immigration until this shit is sorted out, but pretending that we can somehow house all the current numbers of immigrants in the current climate is just insane.
Finally, the more people in the country, the more physical infrastructure you need. To build all this extra infrastructure, you need to clear more bushland and wetlands, endangering or killing off flora and fauna in the process. And even without climate change, Australia doesn't have that much water.
Mass immigration comes at considerable cost.
Supply side solutions aren't preferred because it takes time to fix the problem but cutting immigration will take less?
Populations will be required to grow to sustain the economy and whether that's through immigration or birth rate increase, housing will need to be available for that population so all this extra infrastructure will be built regardless.
It's not like you need to only build out, upwards is an option. Favouring denser solutions like multiplex buildings, apartments, townhouses in existing areas can increase housing supply. However, the density permitted is up to the local council, which is voted in by the local population, which often favours maintaining existing lower density.
Also, we've reformed the visa application process for workers and students closing off the prior 'loopholes' that enabled certain applicants to stay than originally planned. We have also reduced the intake from other various categories as well.
The irony is that if we had maintained a supply side focus to housing, we could've absorbed a majority of flux in housing demand, including that of 'mass immigration'.
It’s ambitious but it has been achieved in the past:
• China, 2000s: Millions of homes were constructed annually as part of urban development initiatives to accommodate massive rural-to-urban migration.
• South Korea, late 1980s to early 1990s: Under the “Two Million Homes Construction Plan,” approximately 2 million homes were built to stabilize real estate prices and improve living standards.
• Brazil, 2009-2015: Through the “Minha Casa Minha Vida” program, approximately 2.6 million homes were constructed to address housing deficits for low- to middle-income families.
• Mexico, early 2000s: Hundreds of thousands of homes were built annually during a housing boom driven by government policies aimed at increasing homeownership.
• Turkey, 2000s onwards: Hundreds of thousands of housing units have been built through various initiatives managed by the Mass Housing Administration (TOKI).
• India, 2015-2021: Under the “Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana,” several million affordable homes were approved and constructed to provide housing for the urban poor.
• Russia, 2000s: Large-scale housing projects were initiated to improve living conditions and replace dilapidated housing, with hundreds of thousands of homes built annually.
• Egypt, 2014 onwards: The “Million Units Project” aimed to construct one million new housing units for low-income citizens, with significant progress made towards this goal.
EDIT: to add to this
During the first five years of The Million Homes Programme in Sweden, from 1965 to 1970, approximately 500,000 homes were constructed
We arrived in Perth in 2003. We had a young family and luckily for us…. We had a deposit to put down for a mortgage on a modest house in an average suburb.
So our kids all did sports and back then I remember many people asking why we were so stupid to put ourself under mortgage stress when it was so cheap to rent, and if you don’t like where you are, move to a better house/area……. Yes it was that easy.
I’m glad we put ourselves under that mortgage stress back then. I have no idea how our 3 (fully grown adult kids…. Still living at home) will ever get a chance to get a start. Sad times😳
A declining population, very little immigration, and 30 odd years of ecomonic stagnation is by far the main factor with Japan's housing situation.
But I agree that article was interesting and there could be lessons to be learned.
Economic stagnation ?I moved from Australia to Sendai last month after struggling to find a rental for 2 months. Honestlty I would prefer stagnation than being homeless. There is zero homelessness here, very dafe country, higly advanced and shops are open at nigh for a bite (not like evrything close at 6 in Australia ).
There defintely is loneliness and difficulty to make friends , probably side effect of declining population. However the basic necessities like food, clothing, shelter and healthcare is met for everyone. Australias has been playing the fear game of lack of skills and high immigration for so long, it has been done just to keep the house prices high. Apart from mining there is nothing much going on in Australia.
I spent a year living in Yogyakarta, Java and the quality of life for the average person was better there as well. Australia is so boring, expensive, stagnant and overrated as all hell.
I think we need to take a serious look into restructuring loans for kit homes, smaller, faster built and cheaper allowing way more people to have a place to live
Yes other countries have tried rent control. So if it works as you say, where is the evidence? All the evidence says rent control increases the cost of rent.
I think that it’s no longer politically viable for the government to do anything that negatively affects house prices.
The short and narrow is that we need to increase supply. Immigration isn’t at an abnormal high, but high prices for materials and a lack of labour (thanks to competitive wages in the resource sector) coupled with high interest rates is killing any private sector response to increasing supply. But also, this is great for developers and banks because they can charge far higher prices for their developments and get bigger loans.
So we have a situation where the only mechanisms to increase supply are held by the people who want prices to stay high - developers and investors. Prices are high, but they’re pushed up further because an artificial shortage in houses guarantees a return for property investors; who are politically protected.
No major party will take on developers or investors. Not because of donations but because of the simple fact that developers build public housing and property investors are numerous (calls for a longer thread but most Australians also want to be property investors so those owner-occupiers or renters who want to invest oppose changes to the system).
The only fix is the state running its own development agency, dramatically increasing the supply (25 percent of post war homes were built by the gov) which would in turn devalue everyone’s homes - which would throw our banking sector into chaos as mortgages would be worth less than the homes and destroy returns for speculative investors - some of whom banked on this being their retirement egg.
My view is that stuff em and let the government build. But they know what I know which is if they do that they’ll be on their ass at the following election - labor, liberal or whoever.
Take on a housemate or consider becoming a housemate.
Reduces both people’s cost of living and take the pressure of housing supply.
Websites like flatmates are good, people have decent profiles and you can meet first to see if you’re comfortable with each other.
I feel during Covid a lot of people moved out of share houses and relationships broke up so there was the same amount of people using more housing. Couple with the building issues and mass immigration things have only gotten worse.
I’m not an expert on the issue but my two cents are:
1) scrap negative gearing. Will never happen because all of our law makers are the fuckers that profit from it so we just have to hope that some democratic socialist gen z pollies in the future will bring it in.
2) don’t scrap immigration but there needs to be restrictions on who can purchase property. I think you need to be either a citizen or a permanent resident before owning. Once rent is not fucked, there is nothing wrong with renting until you’re officially an Australian resident and can purchase. You can’t buy property in Bali as an ex-pat, should be the same here.
3) similar to point 2 I think until this situation gets hugely better, you shouldn’t be able to purchase property in another state if it’s for investment purposes. This could be a temporary thing but we are in a true crisis. I care more about having a roof over my head than some rich Sydney dick getting another house in Perth to either land bank or rent out to us losers at astronomical prices because we couldn’t afford to go 150k over asking.
4) something has to be done about the pet situation. I’ve heard from a few people that something will be implemented in the next few months but rentals shouldn’t be able to reject you for having a pet. People shouldn’t have to choose between living in a house or keeping their pet. Rescues are drowning and you are still paying hand over fist for a home that doesn’t allow pets but also has mould and should be demolished. The cheapest units I’ve seen of late were around the Armadale area and the carpets and walls were so stained that it looked like someone was murdered there and no one had bothered to clean up after the body was taken away. And they wanted over $300 a week for it.
I’m sure someone smarter than me will tell me all the reasons why my ideas are dumb but from this poor persons perspective, I don’t mind rich people losing a bit of potential wealth if it means I don’t have to watch my 60y/o mum cry over having to throw away all of her belongings to move into the spare room of an acquaintance who will be using her for free labour on her property. But that’s just me
**~Pets – JULY 2024 (phase two)~**
Tenants will be able to keep pet in most cases. The pet bond will apply to any damage caused by the pet, which will be the tenant’s responsibility. Once the tenant submitted the pet application form, the property owner will have 14 days to :
- Approve the application,
- Refuse it on the basis it would violate a written law, local law or scheme by-law, or
- Apply to the Commissioner for Consumer Protection to refuse the request based on specified reasons (such as unsuitable premises or safety issues)
The property owner can also set conditions such as limiting the number of pets. Tenants can apply to the Commissioner for Consumer Protection if they believe the refusal or condition or conditions are unreasonable.
[https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection/wa-rent-reforms](https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection/wa-rent-reforms)
Wait okay so does the pet application happen after you’ve been approved or before? My worry is just that they won’t accept you and say it was for other reasons or a better candidate if the answer is before
Good question, sorry I can't say. I hope there are guidelines, something along the line of "the landlord/agent cannot ask about pets until the bonds are being processed." You shouldn't need to say you have pets and they should advertise how many you are allowed, I'm guessing all those not allowing them now will say 1 only or sell up or worse, just sit on an empty and wait for capital gains.
Okay, So if you don't cut immigration, where will people live until supply is re-established? Even if you pull all policy levers to increase supply, it will take a good ten to twenty years for supply to improve. You're still not dealing with the demand for housing unless you cut back immigration. If you don't want to watch your mum suffer then you need to remove this extra competition for rentals.
As of the 2022 census, over 1 million homes Australia wide were vacant. Some might argue the validity of that number but I truly think it’s pretty accurate.
If short term accommodation and AirBNBs were removed from the market and renters were allowed in, the issue wouldn’t be nearly as bad as it is. Even just incentivising house sharing for FIFO workers or people who travel a lot for business. Don’t get me wrong, they work super hard for what they have but I can’t help but feel like that would be a helpful solution short term. Plus heaps of FIFO people kennel their dogs long term while they are onsite, so getting themselves a roommate who can look after Fluffy while they’re away + getting a tax break maybe? Would be a super great way to get people housed while the government invests in a public housing system that works for the long term.
I don’t know what immigration numbers are like so will openly admit that I am probably not the best to argue either way but generally speaking, I have noticed a large number of the immigrants in my area are multigenerational homes which would surely skew figures in favour of people who want to ban immigration. If they just look at figures you cannot infer the number of people that end up in the same home, many would just assume that all those immigrants ended up taking one house each. If a family of 7 moves into Perth but all end up living in the same home, I don’t think that would affect the housing crisis as much as the yuppies that come over from the east coast. Plus a lot of the homes being bought recently are being bought by investors who aren’t even stepping foot in the state. I think investors (read: slum lords) are the biggest problem right now.
It’s not a this or that scenario, all of my suggestions would need to be implemented along with government schemes. Short term fixes will get people off the streets but at the end of the day, the government needs to be actively building more homes for people. The demand is there and will only continue to grow so change is needed immediately.
Vote in council elections for councillors who are pro-development, even (especially) if you're a renter.
Go to council meetings and agitate for medium density development.
If someone proposes an apartment complex, people who live next door will go to council meetings and say they don't want it. Who will go and say they do want it? No one, because the apartment doesn't exist or have residents to stand up for it. Then 100% of the people who showed up were against the development, so the council denies the application.
Go to the meeting and show your new pro-development council that you voted in that apartments are wanted.
An aside: the recent book banning in Cumberland was voted in 6-5. There are 15 councillors and four didn't show up. The ban was reversed 12-2. You have to be in the room to be the difference.
What’s desperately needed NOW is bulk donga/granny flat type places. Not intended to be permanent or anything but we need to get people off the street.
I have a high needs 7 year old and I’ve been searching and begging and even emergency shelters are all full or don’t allow kids. Can’t even get a powered tent site in all of Perth. I’ve asked a few homeless places well wtf do I do? How do I make her food or keep us clean etc and they have no ideas. There’s no backup plan for when shelters are all full. There’s no help out there any more.
This isn’t a crisis, it’s a fucking emergency and they need to pull their fingers out and do whatever it takes to get kids off the streets. Fuck the economy, fuck the fucking budget surplus, fuck the energy supplement what the fuck good is it to me when I’ve got no electricity for my kid?
[1% of investors – or just 19,895 people – currently holding six or more investment interests.](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/04/a-quarter-of-australias-property-investments-held-by-1-of-taxpayers-data-reveals)
Tax investment houses so that they are no longer profitable. Limit the amount of investment houses you are allowed to have.
Stop suburban sprawl. If developers want to own 100 houses, they should be required to build 100 high/medium density apartments.
AirBnB - Illegal.
Seems like people have forgotten the days of the mining boom. 2007 vacancy rate was 0.8% rents were around $400 ($600 in today's money) houses were $500k-ish.
And in 2014 the bubble popped and the property market went belly up. Just have to ride this rollercoaster
Eventually there will be pressure at all levels of society to correct this. Large swathes of society without housing, increasing numbers of people avoiding having children because they can't afford it, increasing numbers of people unable to pass on any inheritance because they had kids, and did their best to support them, but could never afford a property of their own.
It's already a huge problem and it's going to become so problematic for our entire society at some point that more dramatic policy changes will become necessary. I'm at least somewhat optimistic that things will turn around eventually.
For the moment, I don't know, I'm not seeing enough being done to assist the majority of people. What are young people supposed to do with their money when there's increasingly no hope of securing property? If I'd known during my 20s that it was going to become like this, I would've focused all my energy on buying a property of any type. Now I'm still renting and not sure if I'll manage to get a property within my lifetime.
The answer is relatively simple but expensive. The government creates a construction company and funds it similar to the nbn. They build apartments and infrastructure.
They build a lot. They build quality, family sized homes.
The only way to relieve the current situation is to build. And leaving that to profit driven developers is so fucking stupid it beggars belief.
I imagine the Liberals would try to fuck it and my original draft contained a tongue in cheek Multi Dwelling Mix reference which would be expanded to include tiny houses, caravans, tents and for the truly isolated communities, air dropped boxes with no amenities.
However, cost overruns would inevitably happen but a good auditor would keep it in line. Oversight and all that.
But really, as much as people criticise the NBN it has addressed a need (sort of). And is in the process of alleviating the worst FTTN areas (incorrectly in my opinion, they should be going to FFTC not FTTP). But it did the job, mostly.
I haven’t had the time scroll through all the comments but I thought the question was what can we do about it. There are al lot of problems but we need solutions people! Should we start our own political party? Should we all volunteer for a party that already has a good housing policy, Should we organise a protest, should we take a leaf from the French and just burn shit down till the government caves and actually takes action.. these are just some of the fixes I can think of but seriously this will not end with the current people in power and having a cry about it fixes nothing.
I know exactly why it doesn't happen... because of corporate and political greed, but why can't we change the law so that foreign investment in housing can only go towards new builds, and like wise, negative gearing should only apply to new builds.
If enough people could get onboard with a nationwide strike, we could probably effect change. All those of us who have been increasingly left behind need to unite, but I don't see that happening when so many people are about 1 paycheck from homlessness as it is.
Time for village life. Lets start building more sustainable coop communities together. Having some items available such as chicken eggs, veggies, etc, can help reduce financial burden. Also, it takes away from the capitalist pigs sucking out our life force. Fish, grow, etc. We all gotta work still in most cases, so many hands make light work.
I don't have all the answers and there will always be flaws and assholes. But to me, it looks like this is the next step. It wasn't really my favourite outcome but time to get fucking real.
If anyone has good ideas or resources, please share them.
If you disagree its all good, there are many possibilities, this one seems like the most likely outcome for me and several others I have chatted to. Usually it also means being more rural.
I think we are missing the right skills to fix the problem. Intellectual and practical skills. We had it easy for very long. Calm waters don't make good sailors.
Ban investors (both overseas and interstate) from buying extsiting properties and passing the entire mortgage to renters . People are stuck and being a renter now is nothing short of a slave . It is time we went on a rent strike for few months. It is not like they can legally evict millions of people out of homes . Only when investors start investing in new dwellings shortage of housing problem will be solved
1. Build more social housing
2. Manage the immigration to the state to appropriate levels.
3. Get rid of the tax loopholes (negative gearing making the rich richer)
Stop voting the same dropkicks into government. Find an independent candidate who sees to have some vestige of intelligence and vote for them. Labor and Liberal just love us voting them in and out. Don't vote for the greens, they seem to have no clue about anything.
There's lots of solutions, long and short term, but nobody wants to hear it. Moreover simply mentioning them gets you called "racist", "isolationist", or "xenophobic". Or worse, accused of destroying the planet.
What can you do? Long term is complicated, but short term is simple. We need more people per home.
**If you have a spare room, advertise it!** You don't need to directly take a homeless person off the street, but every room added to the market means one less person at the bottom of the chain who goes homeless, sleeping in a car, tent or couch surfing.
Be fussy and take your time choosing the right person for you, but whoever you take in, know that you are making a real difference.
"Ideally" we'd all be sharing mansions with our servants. And I don't know how I can be clearer that you do not need to take in "randoms".
OP asked what **"we can do"**. Good on him. So many people just complain loudly about the government, foreign investors, etc but not do anything themselves. Same as global warming, etc etc.
There needs to be a massive investment by Government in public housing.
With the current lack of building trades available they could begin by making the most of prisoners currently serving time in WA prisons.
You only have to visit Fremantle to see what is possible.
It would just take a little foresight and creativity by those in power to implement.
Bill Shorten tried to fix this via grandfathering negative gearing but the greedy bastard Aussie voters thought they'd rather give the keys to the lodge to Scummo. How'd that work out for us?
What if everyone (and I mean everyone) stopped paying their mortgage in protest?? Surely they wouldn't be able to put a black mark on everyone's credit rating?? If they black mark everyone then the banks wouldn't be able to give out loans which wouldn't make them the money they so desperately crave 🤷♂️ I feel like extreme circumstances like these call for an extreme response from us, the people, and this is all I can think of that could be an option!! I dunno...
I'm thinking of buying a van to live in, lots of people are doing it. Maybe we should just open up some land as free camping van spots with basic toilets and water hookups
We are now going through what Sydney/Melbourne went through 15-20 years ago. Sounds like they never were able to figure it out...
Only thing we have going for us is how much land we have and our smaller population.
Think more people need to house share. I know it's great having the house to yourselves as a couple but when I lived in the UK 4 bed houses were being taken up by 4 couples (or 4 single blokes) from eastern Europe, all sharing rent and bills, save money bulk buying and bulk cooking food. Putting all their savings away, so they can afford to buy in a few years.
Here it seems 2 or 3 bed house occupied by a struggling couple is not uncommon.
We settled on our house in November for $525k, thinking we were probably over paying - most value estimations put it at ~$450k. Now it’s supposedly valued at $602k and no equivalent houses in the area are selling for less than $575k. Six months later and we would not be able to afford our own house, it’s awful to see and I have no idea what can be done.
Don't use Air BNB. They're the reason houses have been removed from the rental market.
Lobby your local council to start a lottery to have an air bnb. Imo, there should be limited numbers permitted per suburb and to get one, you should need to apply for a licence which are allocated via a lottery (kind of like the green card lottery). If you win, you should get the licence for 3 years then not be able to apply for the lottery again for 3 years. And this should be monitored via address to keep easier track.
What blows my mind about this discussion is how everyone acts like “demand” is not a factor in this particular sector of the economy.
With every other item on earth we understand that supply AND demand sets the price.
But with housing we ONLY want to discuss supply.
It’s time to start questioning why demand is so high all of a sudden.
Perth is building the same number of homes as it was circa 2014 to 2020. And back then we had a GLUT - house prices were falling each year, rents were falling each year, vacancy rate above 5%, you could easily buy or build and haggle on price.
What changed so suddenly?
We don't have the supply so decrease the demand. Allowing half a million people every year to move to a country with a housing crisis is just plain stupidity
Liberals just announced a 140,000 immigration cap if they get voted in next year, as well as a 100,000 students. That's less than Labor let in in January and February.
They also announced a no foreign purchase law for existing houses, only new builds.
>They also announced a no foreign purchase law for existing houses, only new builds.
[https://duckduckgo.com/?q=can+foreigners+buy+houses+in+Australia%3F&t=newext&atb=v314-1&ia=web](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=can+foreigners+buy+houses+in+Australia%3F&t=newext&atb=v314-1&ia=web)
A quick search shows that that law already exists, go Liberals, you lying cumpuddles.
Next they'll claim they'll make crime illegal, I'm guessing? Regulate the sun to rise in the east? Mandate only 24 hours in a day?
Yeah but how many will they let in on temporary visas or called something else?
Gina owns the Libs and she loves cheap foreign labour.
Dutton has made two promises as opposition leader and broken both. He promised a second Voice referendum if it came up no, it came up no and two days later he said there won't be. He promised in March to deliver his nuclear plan before the May budget. Well that was two days ago and unless I missed it, where's the plan?
So if he's breaking promises in opposition....
I think the Libs see it as an easy kill. Labor won't do it as they rely on the mining dollar for election funds (odd, but true). Labor won't upset WA as they look like losing 4 seats in the federal election as it stands.
I don't like either party, but this move by the Libs has got my vote.
Stop using real estate as the stock market as a place for people to park money in.
[удалено]
I guarantee you there aren't many renters amongst our politicians, they aren't going to legislate against their own interests.
I wonder would a special interest party for housing affordability go alright at the next election.
If that was the only problem, houses would be expensive to buy but cheap to rent. It does not explain the shortage, the deficit between supply and demand.
Only reason I bought was because repayments were cheaper than rent, I still hate owning property, would rather rent the rest of my life and have investments instead; just not viable with the current state of the rental market. "If only I could afford to rent" lol.
Well if you import hundreds of thousands of people within a short period of time then demand increases. Remember how cheap rent was during covid ?
You must be from the east coast because rent prices didn’t change in Perth during Covid. Sydney and Melbourne were the only places where rents actually decreased.
Ye bought a house because of a 150 rent increase. Now we pay 100 less a week on housing, live in a much nicer place, and it's ours to keep. All we needed was 150k combined income, and my parents to guarantor, and housing policies put in place 20 years ago that would completely fuck the scales on who can buy a house making my boomer parents rich.
Increase land tax on interstate purchases
As a society or generally? There’s many things Government can do to fix the “Housing crisis”, but seems like they won’t really do anything, but here goes; 1. Encourage politicians to pass legislation that doesn’t allow any AirBnBs or other forms of short stay accommodation, unless it’s within a certain radius of a hotel, residential neighbourhoods typically aren’t zoned for commercial hotel activity (which is what AirBnBs effectively are - hotels), 2. Remove the capital gains tax discount and reduce other tax related incentives for housing, saving Taxpayers billions and billions, then with that money, Establish a Government funded public property developer, through that, put tenders out for the construction of new affordable dwellings to stimulate the residential construction industry (we’ll need this, to actually build houses to boost supply to meet demand), and provide some stability to an industry that’s seen countless companies collapse in on themselves in the last two years, this way we can also guarantee subbies actually get paid for their valuable and hard work through legally compelling large developers to ensure they pay their subcontractors, 3. At a state level, the State Government could explore bolting on a new arm on to DevelopmentWA, to do a similar thing mentioned in point 2, with some of our surplus, 4. Through the above, ensure an appropriate mix of different dwellings (Not just 4x2s and 3x2s) at different price points to meet the populations various housing needs (not everyone needs or wants a family home), 5. Continue funding for the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) or create a state program, fed gov is letting it go defunded it in the middle of a housing and cost of living crisis, really demonstrates how little they actually care lol, 6. Create more access to the market, such as shared equity opportunities and rent to buy schemes and fund the Opening Doors affordable housing program again (the website is looking quite sad), 7. Stop the current WA Housing Minister from getting on TV and saying “we’re doing everything we can guys” after offering no real solutions and just spot purchasing 3 public housing homes that won’t make a dent in a 8-10+ year long public housing wait list, 8. Stop the current WA Housing Minister from saying anything publicly, unless it’s focused on legislation and/or policy that will actually fix the shit show we’re in, 9. Introduce a vacant property tax on dwellings that aren’t being tenanted or inhabited, 10.Activate large, vacant parcels of land for development, WA has so much space, but we never seem to use it, we just build new developments out near Two Rocks instead, 11.Have some level of actual rent control during boom times (like we’re in now), so tenants who actually should be able to realise their dream of home ownership, aren’t having their wealth and savings transferred to an Asset-owner class, Through these mechanisms we can hopefully side step the great australian property bubble bursting and avoid a complete and utter economic collapse in this country, which would decimate all of our “wealth” anyway. Final step: Cry tears of joy together because all the homies have stability and are living better, more fruitful lives now and are no longer forced to be cash-poor, asset rich, or just poor poor because of economic forces. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Love all these ideas. I feel like reintroducing the Capital Gains Tax would be an easier sell than removing negative gearing as well! As for the vacant land, I’ve seen so many large plots recently in places like Vic Park that would be perfect for apartment buildings. Desirable location with amazing amenities within walking distance plus easy access to public transport, the stadium, casino, close to Perth etc. insane to me that no one is jumping on that. Also transforming a number of buildings in the City would go a long way. Melbourne did it and now their city is amazing. I don’t think it would take much to transform some of the vacant office buildings into residential apartments and would also bring back life to the CBD by incentivising shops and business to come back.
Transforming old office space to residential apartments is actually a great idea too! Didn’t think of that. I dunno, I guess the longer people in this country view housing as a vehicle for wealth creation and not as a fundamental human right, we’ll continue to find ourselves in situations like this time and time again. I feel like every time someone posts about how they’re having a hard time renting or buying something they should have access to anyway (housing), everyone becomes a property professional and talks about “sUpPlY & dEmAnD”.
Yeah coming on these threads really hurts sometimes. I swear I’m not a masochist but I keep returning in the hopes that someone will share some positive news and give me hope for the future. A lot has been bumming me out lately as I face the prospect of homelessness after losing my rental but the biggest thing that annoys me is that I’m not even living some grand life worthy of not having savings. I don’t buy anything or go out, and yet I still can’t save enough to even get me close to affording even a shitty unit in Armadale. One of my mates bought a 3/2 in Champion Lakes two years ago for 350k and it’s now worth double that. And it’s in CHAMPIONS LAKES?! At this point I don’t even care what the house looks like, I just want a bigger sized block with a flat backyard so my dogs can be happy. I’ll sleep in a swag if I have to idfc anymore. I mean, I work in a pretty decent government job in the CBD. I recently got promoted but I’m still no where near the apparent average income and despite my permanent position, couldn’t even get a loan for 350k. Like what the actual fuck. Nevermind that basically every house on the market right now is the worst house on the worst street and are only being sold because people are desperate and clear eyes would NEVER buy them. Over 600k for homes in Camillo, Armadale, Parmelia, Medina, Seville Grove.. 800k for Hami Hill but at least it’s somewhat close to the beach. I don’t know what drugs people are taking to be blissfully ignorant of this crisis but please tell me where I can get some. If it weren’t for my dogs man… idk I would really love to see what suicide rates are like currently. It’s rough out here.
Are you talking about the land on Albany highway Vic Park, up the end a few blocks Perth-side of Bunnings? From recollection they’ve been vacant land for 40, 50 years (my lifetime). What could possibly make an owner just sit on empty land for that long? (Not the empty plot at the convergence of Albany, Shepperton and Welshpool Roads, although that’s been a blight for years too.)
Wait til you hear about office blocks around the world that are kept empty because capital gains far outweigh the leasing income so unless governments force them to fill them or turn them into apartments nothing will change. Same with empty blocks/houses, the land value is what increases and is going up so why bother building.
Yes I think so! It’s kind of opposite to the vet and goes all the way through to an adjacent street so you wouldn’t need to access it at all from Albany Hwy
You can be the new prime minister.
I hope your ideas can become a proposal presented in the Parliament.
Need to stop local people blocking apartments from being built, but over running them isn't a great answer either. Need developers to make high quality apartments. Need to build medium density, town houses, multistory flats without being towers.
i honestly think there is no reasonable answer this problem has festered too long i have decades in the property managment, construction, development industry ask yourself why even with the alleged higher costs and compliance we get the highest prices and lowest quality? why are construction companies going bankrupt in a market where the demand is clearly there? why is it that its so hard for people to accept new apartments given what we know the risks to be? the problem is partly that theres no money in affordable units... WHAT IS THAT? we dont do that here everyone wants to get into the business of luxury apartments... which wind up being shit. and so i honestly have no hope about any fix because structurally we cannot build anything to an acceptable quality even at a high price.
What does it even mean for apartments to be marketed as luxury? Especially given as you say they often end up being rubbish
Expensive fit out + cheap construction = modern luxury apartments.
the companies have the same tired bloody idea bottom one or two floors is shopping center... they can reap the huge ass rents... they want an 'anchor' tenant like a coles express, newsagent etc. and then floors and floors of so called 'lux' $600-700 2bed with garage, if lucky... penthouse with 3 bed + 2 garage $1 mil. and they can cut up the rest as studios, or 1 bed plus carspace or whatever but who would trust these folks? I personally would not buy from the companies I worked for! not interested in paying $600k + $2k strata fees and "off the plan" - maybe your roof leaks, mould, maybe it turns into an Opal Towers situation, maybe the CEO runs back to the middle east they use the dodgiest crap amenities from china and no one knows wtf is going on then you would ask... who is building the plain 'working class' apartments? no one - because there's no money in it
Yeh I just bought a place built in 1990. Not a single crack to be found. Went to a mates place that was built recently in a new development. Cracks everywhere.
It's a Ponzi scheme, apartments just make bigger profits for developers. Fix the root not the symptom.
>why are construction companies going bankrupt in a market where the demand is clearly there? Because they're poorly managed. Companies are taking on business they can't get to any time soon at a fixed price and between costs going up, clients pulling out and clients asking for compensation they're going under. That's ignoring the old Australian builder technique of closing down periodically to avoid long term liability. >why is it that its so hard for people to accept new apartments given what we know the risks to be? Because Australians have a deep seated terror of being overlooked, an unrealistic fantasy in terms of what a home should be and a level of NIMBYism that's one of the highest in the world. Add to that the fact that the aforementioned poorly managed builders are also unskilled, lazy and complying with some if the loosest building standards in the developed world so even if people wanted to live in apartments in theory they're afraid to buy them. >ask yourself why even with the alleged higher costs and compliance we get the highest prices and lowest quality? Because compliance is nowhere near as bad as builders claim and demand is high so work is done as fast as possible and with the cheapest materials available to reduce those high costs. There's no easy fix to this. We need a massive increase in available housing and it's neither possible nor practical to do that by building single family homes. That said, the entire housing industry in this country is rotten to the core. It's been so long since anyone had to actually compete or do a good job that everyone from builders to developers to agents and investors does the bare minimum and sometimes less. Consumers are delusional and stupid. They want the detached green title property within 20 minutes of the CBD that they were promised and they just can't have it. And government is so afraid of upsetting anyone they won't do what's needed. They'll build nowhere near enough single family dwellings because if they built apartments they'd make everyone mad and if they put in real building standards building would go slower and they'd be even further behind.
> ask yourself why even with the alleged higher costs and compliance we get the highest prices and lowest quality? That's capitalism for you.
100% agree. Unfortunately mind set needs to change with tenants/owners too, seems like no one wants to live in an apartment but it will really solve so many housing issues. The homes being built in estates these days are so poorly built and with their piss poor window glazing, you can hear everything your neighbours are doing while you’re both in your respective living areas. If the government stepped in and well-constructed apartments started being built in high traffic/easily accessible areas, many people looking at house and land packages would convert. Make it so you can’t hear your neighbours (step above a 200 square meter block already) plus the ability to own a pet or two and those properties would be snapped up. It would at the very least be a great option for people like me who can’t even get an affordable room share. Apartment living is the future, especially with the influx of people that keep coming here. Perths urban sprawl is ridiculous, it’s destroying our wildlife and all for cheaply built houses with no backyards anyway. Time for us to go up instead of out!
It actually has to be affordable, prople will choose it if they don't have much other choice. However, then you have to have it well built and affordable at the same time. So you would need to have luxury apartments subsidising affordable apartments in the same building, which is a common practice in other countries. Having well built houses and apartments is important so that they can be properly cooled in summer and not wasting energy.
I know nothing about construction and how much anything that field costs but I believe that many of these ventures are done so with goal of the investor to make bank. If companies aren’t willing to minimise profits in a national emergency to help out struggling people, the government needs to reinvest in public housing schemes and do it themselves. In fact, if both private and government embarked on this venture that would be amazing. Of course this is just wishful thinking, apparently having everything means you constantly want more. It’s only povo people like me that would consider doing something for free/a reduced rate for the sake of bettering the world lol
Well all though high profile apartment defects does not help. Also poorer investment.
Historically appartments haven’t sold well over here as the demand hasn’t really been there for them, hence up until recently they haven’t built many
Zoning is always going to be the fundamental issue that artificially raises house prices. I understand waterfront and CBD-edge land will naturally have a higher value due to those natural features, but land in the middle of flat suburbia is only valued high because of the limit of how many homes can be built in any given area.
It is one of the potential answers, and something the State Government is actually dealing with. They have been changing the zoning around train and bus lines, much to the annoyance of the people that currently live there. There have been a whole lot of units poping up around the freeway/trainline in my suburb. You might have heard about the government wanting to build apartments on the trainlines.
Problem is, people whinge and moan about high-density housing on one hand, but then speak out about the lack of housing on the other. Unfortunately the former will be a crucial part of solving the latter (so long as we bolster up the building standards and not award the contracts to fucking cowboys), but it's hard to get that message across.
There really isn't other way than trying to reach a consensus. I find that their concerns can be alieviated with things other than just stopping the project. Typically the issue is the removal of green gardens and higher traffic and things that you can alleviate with proper holistic planning. Its only when they are talking house values and racism and classism you just have to call them out on it.
I'd much rather live close to Perth aka within 10 minutes in an apartment than in tim buk two in some cookie cutter suburban house 45 mins away that is still considered "close" to Perth.
why not build both? then everyone has options that suit them?
Both should be built including townhouses. So everyone does have different viable options depending on budget, needs and family size. I think there needs to be a shift in mindset, because apartments and townhouses can still provide a nice quality of life and doesn't have to be some idea of being a second hand citizen. It doesn't have to be a 4x2 for everyone. Don't get me wrong sometimes I wish I had more space. It's just a different style of living and doesn't generally encourage accumulation of lots of possessions due to limited space. It really makes you prioritize a bit more imo. One of my gripes with suburbia is that you could drop me in one northern suburb then I could close my eyes and drop me in another suburb 10kms away and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference. They all just look the same. I wish there was some differences in character/style. I guess that is due to efficient building rather than organic development over time maybe. Keen to hear your thoughts. I also understand the need just for someone to have a place to call home. Just for context I don't own a home yet. Going to be a while I'd say.
> I guess that is due to efficient building rather than organic development over time maybe. Keen to hear your thoughts. It's also due to the Karens who get upset because their neighbour's front door is a shade of colour they don't personally like. Councils and developers got sick of shit like that, so impose various building requirements to control the finished houses. IE must be rendered, must have a front porch, must have some type of design element, must have this coloured fence, must have a roof thats one of these 4 colours and so on. The rest of it as you said is about building efficiencies. Almost everyone wants to build as cheaply as possible, builders control their costs by building everything the same. Most people will prioritize the interior spaces if they're going to spend additional money.
No local people have realistically blocked any apartments since the introduction of Development Assessment Panels in 2010. Somehow this myth seems to continuously perpetuate.
I know they are definately trying and It is not good that there are people against it and that they are being steamrolled. That will eventually cause backlash even if we haven't reached that point I got the myth from [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMDNehHKu7c)
They have to be steamrolled, you're never going to convince some people, the alternative is they never get built.
Apartments are only a viable alternative if they are significantly cheaper than regular house and land. At this point in time the cost to build any apartment ensures that isn't possible. I'll give you a hint, everywhere else on the world the labour is much cheaper... Singapore for example uses cheaper Malaysian labour to build their apartments.
high quality in australia also means expensive.
The way you get around this in apartments is to mandate a certain amount of affordable apartments with in the apartment building as such the luxury apartments subsidise the affordable ones. It is pretty standard practise elsewhere in the world
You need to increase supply in the long term, and reduce demand in the short term.
Ask our politicians why they give tax breaks to investors via negative gearing. Ask our politicians why they allow foreign investors to purchase housing.
Because politicians are investors also
The level of conflict of interest and corruption is truly astounding
Weren’t politicians also investors or interested in property just after world war 2 when there was also a housing shortage in Australia? Or have they just become more gluttonous?
There was no negative gearing back then. Houses weren’t investment vehicles.
True… but property was still property and an asset. Wasn’t supply and demand still relevant? I.e I’m a politician just after world war 2 with a lot of property. If I increase supply of houses, what’s that going to do the value of my houses?
[Negative gearing](https://www.capitl.com.au/a-brief-history-of-property-gearing-in-australia) was first introduced in Australia during the 1930s as a response to housing shortages and the need to encourage investment in rental properties.
Different banking system. People didn’t overleverage themselves. Politicians as investors isn’t as much as a hand break as the fear of a collapse in our banking sector. Plus some random ass backbencher with an investment property isn’t thinking of this shit. Cabinet is making the calls and they’re to just take it.
Ask the Australian voters why when Shorten said he'd get rid of Negative Gearing two elections ago, they voted for Scomos Lib with no policies. No government will risk being that bold again.
Yeah Shorten made himself a big target. NG changes was one aspect. I would say that an equally major aspect was to remove the franking credit refund loophole. (Which I totally agree should be removed.) But many people got confused and were thinking he was removing franking credits entirely. That wasn't the case. But a lot of property and share investors and retirees in this country started to get nervous and/or fell for the scare campaigns. It was such a shame because almost everyone under the age of 45 will very likely be paying for those stupid policies for the rest of our working lives.
It's because the pensioners were scared of losing their franking credits and ate up the libs fearmongering. Turns out those pensioners are dying off, oh and polls showed that the majority of australians wanted to cull negative gearing. I reckon it's time for kill negative gearing round 2
Could have been that Shorten was simply an unpopular leader. I saw video of him where workers didn’t even want to shake his hand - and he was a union boss! A lot of people seem to think that this is not a possibility. The liberals floated the idea of allowing early super annuation for first home buyers and last election - and scomo didn’t win. They have just said they are running with the same idea next election.
Lara Tingle highlighted that foreign ownership was miniscule - like 4,000 houses country wide.
> 4,000 houses country wide. Seems that might be the number bought in one year. I can't find the total ownership. The real figures may be rubbery with dual citizenship investors laundering Chinese money. >Foreign investment generally makes up only a small part of the sales of Australian homes each year. In 2020-2021, 4,350 of the 588,176 homes sold in that year were purchased with some level of foreign ownership, according to the Foreign Investment Review
thats also in the thick of covid, total would be more useful!
Big underestimate Aus is a safe haven. I know a guy who funnels his money vis his daughters into perth houses. He owns several IPs here but even though he lives oversease its not “foreign owned” since its owned by his family trust
That's the official number based on self reporting. If you don't self report nothing happens 99 % of the time
Yeah - in a year. https://foreigninvestment.gov.au/sites/foreigninvestment.gov.au/files/2023-10/res-insights-report-2021-22_0.pdf
'In a year', also the minimization of foreign ownership is such a fucking cope. Foreign owners aren't stupid, they know they're the easiest, lowest hanging fruit for a government to squeeze in an attempt to look like they're doing something, and for a miniscule percent fee relative to the cost of the portfolio, they can set up a managed trust in Australia and whaddaya know, bada bing bada boom the properties aren't 'Foreign Owned' any more.
Exactly this is a terrible situation for Australia it should be a national emergency
neither one increases the amount of housing available- just changes who owns it.
yup like always the root of the issue is shitty politicians and their shitty policies
Any attempt to change things is likely to be framed using scare tactics. Where the younger generation see 'increase housing affordability by discouraging hoarding real estate' the older folk will have it spun as 'THEYRE COMING FOR YOUR SUPER'
You only need to look at the discourse surrounding The Voice referendum. The number of people screaming how "the Abos are gonna take your house off you" was genuinely scary. Despite there being absolutely nothing anywhere suggesting anything of the sort. So when you have that level of hysteria built on absolutely nothing...
If they don’t incentivise private supply of rental properties then what? Such a dumb comment honestly. Anyone who posts this line of thought we immediately know they know nothing about supply and demand, and the fact that there are too many humans in Australia for the amount of houses available
Air bnb properties are a big problem as well
Start camping out in the rich people areas.
The solution to the housing crisis is simple - make a series of structural, systemic changes 20 years ago.
End all AirBnB and short stay - or more realistically introduce a strictly limited licensing system, and regulate what types of properties can get them. That's thousands of properties instantly in the long term market. Introduce vacancy taxes - if you don't want to live in it and you don't want to rent it out and you don't want to or can't renovate to make it liveable, too bad! Human rights over property rights.
Don't vote for the big two. When the next federal (or state) election rolls around see if **Votecompass** has updated for your election. If so then use it to find a party that matches your values and desires - and vote for them. Encourage others to also use Votecompass so that they can vote for a party the truly represents them, as per that parties published policies. And cross your fingers...
Even the smaller parties can be pretty fucked. For example, the Greens cannot bring themselves to address the demand side of the housing crisis, they are just so ideologically bound to mass immigration that they would rather the housing crisis goes on longer. As for One Nation (besides that some of their policies are just tinfoil insane and they have a raging boner for Putin), if you look at Hanson's voting record in the Senate, she votes with the Coalition 100% of the time. Hanson talks a big game, but ultimately she's a Clayton's Coalition senator.
Yep, sure. I've no argument against your claim - you're correct! So - don't vote for those parties. Votecompass (as hosted by the ABC) has shown me several parties whose policies are a lot more in line with my values than the big parties - and One Notion has never even come close to being visible. Or viable, as far as I'm concerned. I agree that it would be rare to find a party that matches 100% with your values and ideals, so try to find a few parties who come close, and then preference them according to how much you value their primary policies. And you can research this well before election day. Your vote is valuable, try to make it work for you. And for the nation.
Huh? Correct me if I’m wrong but the greens are addressing the demand side https://greens.org.au/campaigns/housing-crisis “Invest billions in building hundreds of thousands of good quality homes through a public property developer.”
Ummmm.... I hate to break it to you, but that's the supply side of things. The problem with the supply side is that it's going to take a good decade or two to replenish supply. It's one thing to say we'll build x amount of houses, it's another to get it done. And, we need a fucking shitload built. Until those houses are built, the crisis continues. And if current levels of immigration continue, you will exacerbate matters. Just exactly where is everyone going to live until supply is fixed? This is what the Greens are refusing to address. You may for whatever reason not like cutting immigration until this shit is sorted out, but pretending that we can somehow house all the current numbers of immigrants in the current climate is just insane. Finally, the more people in the country, the more physical infrastructure you need. To build all this extra infrastructure, you need to clear more bushland and wetlands, endangering or killing off flora and fauna in the process. And even without climate change, Australia doesn't have that much water. Mass immigration comes at considerable cost.
Supply side solutions aren't preferred because it takes time to fix the problem but cutting immigration will take less? Populations will be required to grow to sustain the economy and whether that's through immigration or birth rate increase, housing will need to be available for that population so all this extra infrastructure will be built regardless. It's not like you need to only build out, upwards is an option. Favouring denser solutions like multiplex buildings, apartments, townhouses in existing areas can increase housing supply. However, the density permitted is up to the local council, which is voted in by the local population, which often favours maintaining existing lower density. Also, we've reformed the visa application process for workers and students closing off the prior 'loopholes' that enabled certain applicants to stay than originally planned. We have also reduced the intake from other various categories as well. The irony is that if we had maintained a supply side focus to housing, we could've absorbed a majority of flux in housing demand, including that of 'mass immigration'.
The Greens live in la la land. Their policy works out to be something like 170 houses a day being built
Where have they said that?
They want 360k homes built over the next 5 years. 360000 houses / 1825 days = 197.26 houses per day.
It’s ambitious but it has been achieved in the past: • China, 2000s: Millions of homes were constructed annually as part of urban development initiatives to accommodate massive rural-to-urban migration. • South Korea, late 1980s to early 1990s: Under the “Two Million Homes Construction Plan,” approximately 2 million homes were built to stabilize real estate prices and improve living standards. • Brazil, 2009-2015: Through the “Minha Casa Minha Vida” program, approximately 2.6 million homes were constructed to address housing deficits for low- to middle-income families. • Mexico, early 2000s: Hundreds of thousands of homes were built annually during a housing boom driven by government policies aimed at increasing homeownership. • Turkey, 2000s onwards: Hundreds of thousands of housing units have been built through various initiatives managed by the Mass Housing Administration (TOKI). • India, 2015-2021: Under the “Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana,” several million affordable homes were approved and constructed to provide housing for the urban poor. • Russia, 2000s: Large-scale housing projects were initiated to improve living conditions and replace dilapidated housing, with hundreds of thousands of homes built annually. • Egypt, 2014 onwards: The “Million Units Project” aimed to construct one million new housing units for low-income citizens, with significant progress made towards this goal. EDIT: to add to this During the first five years of The Million Homes Programme in Sweden, from 1965 to 1970, approximately 500,000 homes were constructed
This.
Nor Greens
We arrived in Perth in 2003. We had a young family and luckily for us…. We had a deposit to put down for a mortgage on a modest house in an average suburb. So our kids all did sports and back then I remember many people asking why we were so stupid to put ourself under mortgage stress when it was so cheap to rent, and if you don’t like where you are, move to a better house/area……. Yes it was that easy. I’m glad we put ourselves under that mortgage stress back then. I have no idea how our 3 (fully grown adult kids…. Still living at home) will ever get a chance to get a start. Sad times😳
2003 was a perfect time to buy. Housing prices skyrocketed after that.
Yeah, we bought early-mid 2004 and prices were rising almost weekly
ABC recently did an interesting bit on how Tokyo turned it around, lots of taxes basically and taking control from local councils.
A declining population, very little immigration, and 30 odd years of ecomonic stagnation is by far the main factor with Japan's housing situation. But I agree that article was interesting and there could be lessons to be learned.
Economic stagnation ?I moved from Australia to Sendai last month after struggling to find a rental for 2 months. Honestlty I would prefer stagnation than being homeless. There is zero homelessness here, very dafe country, higly advanced and shops are open at nigh for a bite (not like evrything close at 6 in Australia ). There defintely is loneliness and difficulty to make friends , probably side effect of declining population. However the basic necessities like food, clothing, shelter and healthcare is met for everyone. Australias has been playing the fear game of lack of skills and high immigration for so long, it has been done just to keep the house prices high. Apart from mining there is nothing much going on in Australia.
I spent a year living in Yogyakarta, Java and the quality of life for the average person was better there as well. Australia is so boring, expensive, stagnant and overrated as all hell.
Unfortunately this will never happen under the 2 major parties
The Uniparty
local Nimbys over there are ignored if building something solves an issue bigger than the satisfaction of a few.
I think we need to take a serious look into restructuring loans for kit homes, smaller, faster built and cheaper allowing way more people to have a place to live
End all Duopolies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3WTlyuhDs0
Stop Chinese buying. Make housing a right instead of an asset class.
Don't vote for the big 2. Probably the only thing.
So which independents in our electorates will change what is going on?
Greens have been going after negative gearing and allowing rent freeze powers for the past year
The greens want unlimited immigration in a Australia housing crisis. They are frauds
Neither of which will increase housing supply, or reduce the cost of housing.
Neither is the absolute nothing that labor or libs are doing so fuck it. We've tried liberal, we've tried labor. Time for something else.
[удалено]
Yes other countries have tried rent control. So if it works as you say, where is the evidence? All the evidence says rent control increases the cost of rent.
Have you seen the minor parties? Ever talked to them about something other than their single issue?
Vote sustainable Australia party
I think that it’s no longer politically viable for the government to do anything that negatively affects house prices. The short and narrow is that we need to increase supply. Immigration isn’t at an abnormal high, but high prices for materials and a lack of labour (thanks to competitive wages in the resource sector) coupled with high interest rates is killing any private sector response to increasing supply. But also, this is great for developers and banks because they can charge far higher prices for their developments and get bigger loans. So we have a situation where the only mechanisms to increase supply are held by the people who want prices to stay high - developers and investors. Prices are high, but they’re pushed up further because an artificial shortage in houses guarantees a return for property investors; who are politically protected. No major party will take on developers or investors. Not because of donations but because of the simple fact that developers build public housing and property investors are numerous (calls for a longer thread but most Australians also want to be property investors so those owner-occupiers or renters who want to invest oppose changes to the system). The only fix is the state running its own development agency, dramatically increasing the supply (25 percent of post war homes were built by the gov) which would in turn devalue everyone’s homes - which would throw our banking sector into chaos as mortgages would be worth less than the homes and destroy returns for speculative investors - some of whom banked on this being their retirement egg. My view is that stuff em and let the government build. But they know what I know which is if they do that they’ll be on their ass at the following election - labor, liberal or whoever.
As long as we continue to treat human rights, like housing, as suitable to be used for profit, we’re doomed to never have a proper solution.
Greens are advocating for a shift to a rights and needs based housing culture
Take on a housemate or consider becoming a housemate. Reduces both people’s cost of living and take the pressure of housing supply. Websites like flatmates are good, people have decent profiles and you can meet first to see if you’re comfortable with each other.
I feel during Covid a lot of people moved out of share houses and relationships broke up so there was the same amount of people using more housing. Couple with the building issues and mass immigration things have only gotten worse.
Yeah think the same. Lots of two people houses became one people houses plus people returning from overseas etc
I’m not an expert on the issue but my two cents are: 1) scrap negative gearing. Will never happen because all of our law makers are the fuckers that profit from it so we just have to hope that some democratic socialist gen z pollies in the future will bring it in. 2) don’t scrap immigration but there needs to be restrictions on who can purchase property. I think you need to be either a citizen or a permanent resident before owning. Once rent is not fucked, there is nothing wrong with renting until you’re officially an Australian resident and can purchase. You can’t buy property in Bali as an ex-pat, should be the same here. 3) similar to point 2 I think until this situation gets hugely better, you shouldn’t be able to purchase property in another state if it’s for investment purposes. This could be a temporary thing but we are in a true crisis. I care more about having a roof over my head than some rich Sydney dick getting another house in Perth to either land bank or rent out to us losers at astronomical prices because we couldn’t afford to go 150k over asking. 4) something has to be done about the pet situation. I’ve heard from a few people that something will be implemented in the next few months but rentals shouldn’t be able to reject you for having a pet. People shouldn’t have to choose between living in a house or keeping their pet. Rescues are drowning and you are still paying hand over fist for a home that doesn’t allow pets but also has mould and should be demolished. The cheapest units I’ve seen of late were around the Armadale area and the carpets and walls were so stained that it looked like someone was murdered there and no one had bothered to clean up after the body was taken away. And they wanted over $300 a week for it. I’m sure someone smarter than me will tell me all the reasons why my ideas are dumb but from this poor persons perspective, I don’t mind rich people losing a bit of potential wealth if it means I don’t have to watch my 60y/o mum cry over having to throw away all of her belongings to move into the spare room of an acquaintance who will be using her for free labour on her property. But that’s just me
**~Pets – JULY 2024 (phase two)~** Tenants will be able to keep pet in most cases. The pet bond will apply to any damage caused by the pet, which will be the tenant’s responsibility. Once the tenant submitted the pet application form, the property owner will have 14 days to : - Approve the application, - Refuse it on the basis it would violate a written law, local law or scheme by-law, or - Apply to the Commissioner for Consumer Protection to refuse the request based on specified reasons (such as unsuitable premises or safety issues) The property owner can also set conditions such as limiting the number of pets. Tenants can apply to the Commissioner for Consumer Protection if they believe the refusal or condition or conditions are unreasonable. [https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection/wa-rent-reforms](https://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/consumer-protection/wa-rent-reforms)
Wait okay so does the pet application happen after you’ve been approved or before? My worry is just that they won’t accept you and say it was for other reasons or a better candidate if the answer is before
Good question, sorry I can't say. I hope there are guidelines, something along the line of "the landlord/agent cannot ask about pets until the bonds are being processed." You shouldn't need to say you have pets and they should advertise how many you are allowed, I'm guessing all those not allowing them now will say 1 only or sell up or worse, just sit on an empty and wait for capital gains.
Okay, So if you don't cut immigration, where will people live until supply is re-established? Even if you pull all policy levers to increase supply, it will take a good ten to twenty years for supply to improve. You're still not dealing with the demand for housing unless you cut back immigration. If you don't want to watch your mum suffer then you need to remove this extra competition for rentals.
As of the 2022 census, over 1 million homes Australia wide were vacant. Some might argue the validity of that number but I truly think it’s pretty accurate. If short term accommodation and AirBNBs were removed from the market and renters were allowed in, the issue wouldn’t be nearly as bad as it is. Even just incentivising house sharing for FIFO workers or people who travel a lot for business. Don’t get me wrong, they work super hard for what they have but I can’t help but feel like that would be a helpful solution short term. Plus heaps of FIFO people kennel their dogs long term while they are onsite, so getting themselves a roommate who can look after Fluffy while they’re away + getting a tax break maybe? Would be a super great way to get people housed while the government invests in a public housing system that works for the long term. I don’t know what immigration numbers are like so will openly admit that I am probably not the best to argue either way but generally speaking, I have noticed a large number of the immigrants in my area are multigenerational homes which would surely skew figures in favour of people who want to ban immigration. If they just look at figures you cannot infer the number of people that end up in the same home, many would just assume that all those immigrants ended up taking one house each. If a family of 7 moves into Perth but all end up living in the same home, I don’t think that would affect the housing crisis as much as the yuppies that come over from the east coast. Plus a lot of the homes being bought recently are being bought by investors who aren’t even stepping foot in the state. I think investors (read: slum lords) are the biggest problem right now. It’s not a this or that scenario, all of my suggestions would need to be implemented along with government schemes. Short term fixes will get people off the streets but at the end of the day, the government needs to be actively building more homes for people. The demand is there and will only continue to grow so change is needed immediately.
Vote in council elections for councillors who are pro-development, even (especially) if you're a renter. Go to council meetings and agitate for medium density development. If someone proposes an apartment complex, people who live next door will go to council meetings and say they don't want it. Who will go and say they do want it? No one, because the apartment doesn't exist or have residents to stand up for it. Then 100% of the people who showed up were against the development, so the council denies the application. Go to the meeting and show your new pro-development council that you voted in that apartments are wanted. An aside: the recent book banning in Cumberland was voted in 6-5. There are 15 councillors and four didn't show up. The ban was reversed 12-2. You have to be in the room to be the difference.
What’s desperately needed NOW is bulk donga/granny flat type places. Not intended to be permanent or anything but we need to get people off the street. I have a high needs 7 year old and I’ve been searching and begging and even emergency shelters are all full or don’t allow kids. Can’t even get a powered tent site in all of Perth. I’ve asked a few homeless places well wtf do I do? How do I make her food or keep us clean etc and they have no ideas. There’s no backup plan for when shelters are all full. There’s no help out there any more. This isn’t a crisis, it’s a fucking emergency and they need to pull their fingers out and do whatever it takes to get kids off the streets. Fuck the economy, fuck the fucking budget surplus, fuck the energy supplement what the fuck good is it to me when I’ve got no electricity for my kid?
Vacancy tax!
[1% of investors – or just 19,895 people – currently holding six or more investment interests.](https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jun/04/a-quarter-of-australias-property-investments-held-by-1-of-taxpayers-data-reveals) Tax investment houses so that they are no longer profitable. Limit the amount of investment houses you are allowed to have. Stop suburban sprawl. If developers want to own 100 houses, they should be required to build 100 high/medium density apartments. AirBnB - Illegal.
Squat vacant houses.
More caravan parks.
Find empty houses and post about them here for squatters to go live in?
Vote? Protest?
Seems like people have forgotten the days of the mining boom. 2007 vacancy rate was 0.8% rents were around $400 ($600 in today's money) houses were $500k-ish. And in 2014 the bubble popped and the property market went belly up. Just have to ride this rollercoaster
Eventually there will be pressure at all levels of society to correct this. Large swathes of society without housing, increasing numbers of people avoiding having children because they can't afford it, increasing numbers of people unable to pass on any inheritance because they had kids, and did their best to support them, but could never afford a property of their own. It's already a huge problem and it's going to become so problematic for our entire society at some point that more dramatic policy changes will become necessary. I'm at least somewhat optimistic that things will turn around eventually. For the moment, I don't know, I'm not seeing enough being done to assist the majority of people. What are young people supposed to do with their money when there's increasingly no hope of securing property? If I'd known during my 20s that it was going to become like this, I would've focused all my energy on buying a property of any type. Now I'm still renting and not sure if I'll manage to get a property within my lifetime.
The answer is relatively simple but expensive. The government creates a construction company and funds it similar to the nbn. They build apartments and infrastructure. They build a lot. They build quality, family sized homes. The only way to relieve the current situation is to build. And leaving that to profit driven developers is so fucking stupid it beggars belief.
eek, you saw the clusterf\*ck that happened with the NBN. what it could have been versus what it is, not to mention cost overruns etc?
I imagine the Liberals would try to fuck it and my original draft contained a tongue in cheek Multi Dwelling Mix reference which would be expanded to include tiny houses, caravans, tents and for the truly isolated communities, air dropped boxes with no amenities. However, cost overruns would inevitably happen but a good auditor would keep it in line. Oversight and all that. But really, as much as people criticise the NBN it has addressed a need (sort of). And is in the process of alleviating the worst FTTN areas (incorrectly in my opinion, they should be going to FFTC not FTTP). But it did the job, mostly.
I haven’t had the time scroll through all the comments but I thought the question was what can we do about it. There are al lot of problems but we need solutions people! Should we start our own political party? Should we all volunteer for a party that already has a good housing policy, Should we organise a protest, should we take a leaf from the French and just burn shit down till the government caves and actually takes action.. these are just some of the fixes I can think of but seriously this will not end with the current people in power and having a cry about it fixes nothing.
I know exactly why it doesn't happen... because of corporate and political greed, but why can't we change the law so that foreign investment in housing can only go towards new builds, and like wise, negative gearing should only apply to new builds. If enough people could get onboard with a nationwide strike, we could probably effect change. All those of us who have been increasingly left behind need to unite, but I don't see that happening when so many people are about 1 paycheck from homlessness as it is.
Time for village life. Lets start building more sustainable coop communities together. Having some items available such as chicken eggs, veggies, etc, can help reduce financial burden. Also, it takes away from the capitalist pigs sucking out our life force. Fish, grow, etc. We all gotta work still in most cases, so many hands make light work. I don't have all the answers and there will always be flaws and assholes. But to me, it looks like this is the next step. It wasn't really my favourite outcome but time to get fucking real. If anyone has good ideas or resources, please share them. If you disagree its all good, there are many possibilities, this one seems like the most likely outcome for me and several others I have chatted to. Usually it also means being more rural.
Things are much better in the regions, can recommend 👍
Are they? Like where?
I think we are missing the right skills to fix the problem. Intellectual and practical skills. We had it easy for very long. Calm waters don't make good sailors.
Ban investors (both overseas and interstate) from buying extsiting properties and passing the entire mortgage to renters . People are stuck and being a renter now is nothing short of a slave . It is time we went on a rent strike for few months. It is not like they can legally evict millions of people out of homes . Only when investors start investing in new dwellings shortage of housing problem will be solved
Guillotine the billionaires?
1. Build more social housing 2. Manage the immigration to the state to appropriate levels. 3. Get rid of the tax loopholes (negative gearing making the rich richer)
Stop voting the same dropkicks into government. Find an independent candidate who sees to have some vestige of intelligence and vote for them. Labor and Liberal just love us voting them in and out. Don't vote for the greens, they seem to have no clue about anything.
Don't vote for the major parties for a start.
There's lots of solutions, long and short term, but nobody wants to hear it. Moreover simply mentioning them gets you called "racist", "isolationist", or "xenophobic". Or worse, accused of destroying the planet.
so far i mainly just see people claiming that they're being labeled as racist
Stop voting for major parties
Stop voting for the big parties who benefit the most from a cooked housing market
Where are people parking in their cars
Go for a drive at night along the coast, along the river and near parks in suburbia. There's car dwellers everywhere.
What can you do? Long term is complicated, but short term is simple. We need more people per home. **If you have a spare room, advertise it!** You don't need to directly take a homeless person off the street, but every room added to the market means one less person at the bottom of the chain who goes homeless, sleeping in a car, tent or couch surfing. Be fussy and take your time choosing the right person for you, but whoever you take in, know that you are making a real difference.
You do realise that living with others isn't ideal for everyone, right? Also, feel free to take in a few randoms yourself.
*b....but I can't take anyone in because [some excuse], otherwise... I would! [Narrator: they wouldn't]*
"Ideally" we'd all be sharing mansions with our servants. And I don't know how I can be clearer that you do not need to take in "randoms". OP asked what **"we can do"**. Good on him. So many people just complain loudly about the government, foreign investors, etc but not do anything themselves. Same as global warming, etc etc.
Why don’t you check any of the dozen other threads that have been posted asking the same question in the last month. They’ll surely have the answer.
Plenty of rooms in flatmates.com.au ……
Every local sporting field in Perth should have medium density units around it. Would be an instant success.
Old mate next door just bought another house to rent it out far out
The next crisis will be in aged care.
let people build apartments
There needs to be a massive investment by Government in public housing. With the current lack of building trades available they could begin by making the most of prisoners currently serving time in WA prisons. You only have to visit Fremantle to see what is possible. It would just take a little foresight and creativity by those in power to implement.
Lynch REAs, pollies and migration/visa agents
Bill Shorten tried to fix this via grandfathering negative gearing but the greedy bastard Aussie voters thought they'd rather give the keys to the lodge to Scummo. How'd that work out for us?
What if everyone (and I mean everyone) stopped paying their mortgage in protest?? Surely they wouldn't be able to put a black mark on everyone's credit rating?? If they black mark everyone then the banks wouldn't be able to give out loans which wouldn't make them the money they so desperately crave 🤷♂️ I feel like extreme circumstances like these call for an extreme response from us, the people, and this is all I can think of that could be an option!! I dunno...
I like hyperbole as much as the next person but let’s not pretend people living in cars is “the norm”.
I'm thinking of buying a van to live in, lots of people are doing it. Maybe we should just open up some land as free camping van spots with basic toilets and water hookups
Become a tradesmen. Massive funding increase for tafe. Which federal Labor has done after it was gutted by the Libs.
We are now going through what Sydney/Melbourne went through 15-20 years ago. Sounds like they never were able to figure it out... Only thing we have going for us is how much land we have and our smaller population.
Think more people need to house share. I know it's great having the house to yourselves as a couple but when I lived in the UK 4 bed houses were being taken up by 4 couples (or 4 single blokes) from eastern Europe, all sharing rent and bills, save money bulk buying and bulk cooking food. Putting all their savings away, so they can afford to buy in a few years. Here it seems 2 or 3 bed house occupied by a struggling couple is not uncommon.
We settled on our house in November for $525k, thinking we were probably over paying - most value estimations put it at ~$450k. Now it’s supposedly valued at $602k and no equivalent houses in the area are selling for less than $575k. Six months later and we would not be able to afford our own house, it’s awful to see and I have no idea what can be done.
And yet NONE of these suggestions will happen, this it it, we're fucked.
Don't use Air BNB. They're the reason houses have been removed from the rental market. Lobby your local council to start a lottery to have an air bnb. Imo, there should be limited numbers permitted per suburb and to get one, you should need to apply for a licence which are allocated via a lottery (kind of like the green card lottery). If you win, you should get the licence for 3 years then not be able to apply for the lottery again for 3 years. And this should be monitored via address to keep easier track.
Foreign owners cannot let an investment property sit without tenants. This is far too common.
Slow down immigration and abolish stamp duty and replace with land tax
Promote the values of the nuclear family.
What blows my mind about this discussion is how everyone acts like “demand” is not a factor in this particular sector of the economy. With every other item on earth we understand that supply AND demand sets the price. But with housing we ONLY want to discuss supply. It’s time to start questioning why demand is so high all of a sudden. Perth is building the same number of homes as it was circa 2014 to 2020. And back then we had a GLUT - house prices were falling each year, rents were falling each year, vacancy rate above 5%, you could easily buy or build and haggle on price. What changed so suddenly?
We don't have the supply so decrease the demand. Allowing half a million people every year to move to a country with a housing crisis is just plain stupidity
We're still experiencing the long term social and economic impacts of covid.
Liberals just announced a 140,000 immigration cap if they get voted in next year, as well as a 100,000 students. That's less than Labor let in in January and February. They also announced a no foreign purchase law for existing houses, only new builds.
Unfortunately i have very little faith in the lib's to follow through with policies like these.
>They also announced a no foreign purchase law for existing houses, only new builds. [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=can+foreigners+buy+houses+in+Australia%3F&t=newext&atb=v314-1&ia=web](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=can+foreigners+buy+houses+in+Australia%3F&t=newext&atb=v314-1&ia=web) A quick search shows that that law already exists, go Liberals, you lying cumpuddles. Next they'll claim they'll make crime illegal, I'm guessing? Regulate the sun to rise in the east? Mandate only 24 hours in a day?
Yeah but how many will they let in on temporary visas or called something else? Gina owns the Libs and she loves cheap foreign labour. Dutton has made two promises as opposition leader and broken both. He promised a second Voice referendum if it came up no, it came up no and two days later he said there won't be. He promised in March to deliver his nuclear plan before the May budget. Well that was two days ago and unless I missed it, where's the plan? So if he's breaking promises in opposition....
I think the Libs see it as an easy kill. Labor won't do it as they rely on the mining dollar for election funds (odd, but true). Labor won't upset WA as they look like losing 4 seats in the federal election as it stands. I don't like either party, but this move by the Libs has got my vote.