Housing Affordability

[LotteBum]

I'm getting rather tired of hearing about 'housing affordability at an all time low', when in Brisbane, you can still buy a home for under $300k in places like Boronia Heights, Logan Central etc. Gone are the days of one room for each child, plus a study, pool, rumpus room etc. Look at Europe - even with their cold winters, most people still live in small homes over there. Why? Because they can't afford big homes! Think you're too good to live in Boronia Heights or Logan Central? Can you afford to live anywhere else? No? Then you need a reality check in that you're NOT too good to live there if you can't afford any better. Tell me why it should be everyone's 'right' to live in a 4 bedroom McMansion within 10 or even 20km of the city...

[markharrison]

You raise interesting points. Most of which I agree with.

My first home was in Sydney in East Ryde (which was never "fashionable"). It had three bedrooms, one bathroom and no garage. I paid $92k for it in 1984. We saved a $33k deposit and borrowed the rest. The majority was at 13.5% but $25k was at a much reduced rate as I was an ex-serviceman and I was entitled to a Defence Service Home loan. I'm guessing but I think it would be around $500k today for this house.

In 1984, my first civilian job after I left the Navy paid $16k for an entry level IT job.

Let's say that I was going to buy my first house again on the same basis that I did. The same entry level IT job is probably in the mid to late $30's today. You would need to save a deposit of about $166k to get the same one-third deposit. With rents sky rocketing (and this is not just a Sydney thing) this would not be an easy task even with two similar salaries. That means you still have to finance $344k. Plus legals, stamp duty et cetera.

The repayments on $344k would not be affordable on that salary. Presuming that a couple wants to have children then you need to make the assumption that there will be only one income for at least some period of time.

My point is that yes, housing has become much less affordable but you are correct that there are other more affordable options. However, a lot of affordable options require private motor vehicle transport as there are no reasonable public transport options. There goes $20k (approximately) in motor vehicle cost for two motor vehicles in after tax dollars.

That's all bad enough if you are reasonably or even moderately well paid with a reliable income. There are many new homeless people that are being pushed off at the bottom as the scramble continues further up the ladder. A lot of these new homeless are not the traditional ne'er do wells, assorted dug addicts and alcos. They include families (often single mothers) and young people. A lot of these folks (the adults I am talking about) only work potential is as labourers and other unskilled jobs. These jobs do not pay well and are very unreliable.

It's hard to comprehend for those of us fortunate enough to have reliable and well paid jobs. I overheard two school girls (they were about 15-16) talking on my local train station and both were saying that they had to move because the rents had gone up so much that their families could no longer afford to live here. This means the same discussion is being had all the way down the rent chain, until it hits the bottom.

[q9]

I'm getting rather tired of hearing about 'housing affordability at an all time low', .. [/SIZE]
[/SIZE]

You do of course realise that when they say "Housing Affordability" they don't just mean "House Ownership Affordability" but also "House Rental Affordablity" - ?

What it means is that more of the average income goes on rent or mortgage repayments now, than ever before. There was a report a few weeks ago that said we needed 150,000 new homes PER ANNUM to start addressing this issue - there basically is a shortage of housing. Whether you live in Logan, or Milton.

[LotteBum]

Good points, guys.

I guess my main point is that people don't seem to want to start small, despite people doing this the world over (eg. Europe). Why does the first home have to be 3 bedrooms + ensuite? Why does it even have to even be nice to begin with? Our current house, which we snapped up cheap almost 2 years ago, was horrible - ugliest house in the suburb. Nothing a bit of work didn't fix (initially).

Our first place, which was a 2 bedroom unit in the socalled 'dodgy' suburb of Logan Central, cost us $76,500 in 2003. Sure, we made money on it in the 18 months we had it (around $40k, having put a bit of work into renovations), but we copped a lot of flak from friends who were renting in nicer suburbs at the time. That said, the same unit could still be bought for $150,000. So why don't people buy them to live in? More often than not, these are snapped up by investors... why? Because they feel that they are too good for it.

You say that people 'need' cars. Why is that? My partner and I share a car, but more often than not, I ride my scooter or pushie to work (I also even did this when we lived 35km from the city, where I mostly work), and my partner does the same. Our car does bugger all k's for this reason. Even so, it's just a 3 year old Corolla. Including repayments, it costs us less than $200 per week and because it does so few k's, we intend to keep it for a very long time. As a matter of fact, we often wonder why we bougth a brand new car, when our old car (1992 Corolla) was perfectly good, not to mention justified given the low number of k's we drive.

I'd hate to think that an entry level IT professional would be paid less than $40k, given that I (secretary) get paid more than that. I'm not saying you're wrong - just that I'd hate to think they get paid so little. I really would.

Lotte

[munruben]

My son came to Brisbane 7 years ago and bought a beautiful double story home about 20kms from the city centre for $220.000. Same house, same location today is selling for around $500.000. If he had come to Brisbane today he could not buy in the area he is in at the moment so I guess you could say in that instance that his house affordability level is way down low.
Why do we want to be like other countries ? This is Australia and suppose to be the land of opportunity. Let's keep it that way.

[munruben]

You say that people 'need' cars. Why is that? My partner and I share a car, but more often than not, I ride my scooter or pushie to work (I also even did this when we lived 35km from the city, where I mostly work), and my partner does the same. Our car does bugger all k's for this reason. Even so, it's just a 3 year old Corolla. Including repayments, it costs us less than $200 per week and because it does so few k's, we intend to keep it for a very long time. As a matter of fact, we often wonder why we bougth a brand new car, when our old car (1992 Corolla) was perfectly good, not to mention justified given the low number of k's we drive.

For most people this wouldn't work, Australia is a big big country and not everyone in able or capable of cycling to work. If everyone thought like that we would still be back in the days of the horse and carts. (come to think of it that may not be such a bad idea but I guess the answer to your question is "progress" we need to progress with the rest of the world. whether it be for the better or worse? well thats another story.

[q9]

You say that people 'need' cars. Why is that?

Lotte

And I would ask, as I always do, why do people need to own houses/units?

this whole idea that people feel they are too good or whatever is usually something that works in reverse. Just like when people label us "snobs" because we don't talk to them. Do they make the effort to talk to us? Nup. But it makes them feel better that they can hide their jealousy behind an imagined 'flaw' in our behaviour.

I don't believe in buying a cheap house just to own a house and then upgrading when it no longer suits. We only bought this year after 10+ years of renting, because it suits us now, and for the next 10 years, and we can afford it. The main reason we can afford it is because we rented all those years, and were disciplined with our money.

As for entry level IT - $35k is about the norm. And yes secretaries do get paid more.

[markharrison]

I guess my main point is that people don't seem to want to start small, despite people doing this the world over (eg. Europe). Why does the first home have to be 3 bedrooms + ensuite? Why does it even have to even be nice to begin with? Our current house, which we snapped up cheap almost 2 years ago, was horrible - ugliest house in the suburb. Nothing a bit of work didn't fix (initially).

That was how my first house was when I bought it. My point is that things have changed substantially in the past 20 odd years. When East Ryde becomes unaffordable another suburb will take its place, but it will be further away from the centre of the city and have less transport options because governments (of all flavours) have consistently failed in providing infrastructure.

You say that people 'need' cars. Why is that? My partner and I share a car, but more often than not, I ride my scooter or pushie to work (I also even did this when we lived 35km from the city, where I mostly work), and my partner does the same.

Motorcycle riders (and by extension scooter riders) are temporary Australians. Sorry but that's how it is. Cyclists are not a lot better off unless you are lucky enough to live near a cycle way.

Our car does bugger all k's for this reason. Even so, it's just a 3 year old Corolla. Including repayments, it costs us less than $200 per week and because it does so few k's, we intend to keep it for a very long time. As a matter of fact, we often wonder why we bougth a brand new car, when our old car (1992 Corolla) was perfectly good, not to mention justified given the low number of k's we drive.

The cost of a car is not just the repayments plus so much per kilometre. You have to take into account depreciation, maintenance et cetera. If you look at a novated lease you will get a better understanding of what the true cost of running a car is. Not everyone is in a position where they can share one car. What about tradesmen (and women)? Sure the cost is fully tax deductible but you still have to pay for it. What if your workplace is not accessible from public transport?

Myself, I take the train. I love it. It was the best decision I ever made to buy a house a five minute walk to a train station. There is no substitute for heavy rail. I hardly ever drive. We still have two cars but one is for sale.

However, I have a six figure income and a relatively small mortgage. The latter is partly as a result of moving from the Northern Beaches in Sydney to Brisbane and hard saving. I have also continuously worked for over 35 years. I haven't had expensive holidays or consumer items. Though I thoroughly intend to have a bit more of each now that I can afford it!

I'd hate to think that an entry level IT professional would be paid less than $40k, given that I (secretary) get paid more than that. I'm not saying you're wrong - just that I'd hate to think they get paid so little. I really would.

Well they do because there has been a huge change in the IT industry in the past few years. There are few entry level IT jobs in Australia. They are mostly in India and other countries like Malaysia. I saw some figures in today's Australian from the most recent census that graphically illustrate my point. According to these figures there has been a 13% slump in people employed in IT since the last census! Get that, 13%. That's a bloodbath by any objective measure.

The wheel has turned though. I regularly get at least three phone calls per week from recruiting agencies trying to poach me. Employers have consistently failed to nurture new talent and they are now paying the price and its only going to get worse. Too bad!

[LotteBum]

My son came to Brisbane 7 years ago and bought a beautiful double story home about 20kms from the city centre for $220.000. Same house, same location today is selling for around $500.000. If he had come to Brisbane today he could not buy in the area he is in at the moment so I guess you could say in that instance that his house affordability level is way down low.

You're right. That said, if he couldn't afford to live in X suburb, would he whinge and whine about it, or would he just buy in another (read: cheaper) suburb?

Why do we want to be like other countries ? This is Australia and suppose to be the land of opportunity. Let's keep it that way.

The land of opportunity at what cost?

That said, I still believe that Australia IS the land of opportunity.

For most people this wouldn't work, Australia is a big big country and not everyone in able or capable of cycling to work. If everyone thought like that we would still be back in the days of the horse and carts. (come to think of it that may not be such a bad idea but I guess the answer to your question is "progress" we need to progress with the rest of the world. whether it be for the better or worse? well thats another story.

The only thing that stops me from cycling from work currently is that I'm pregnant. Otherwise, nothing stops me. In fact, I used to live in North Maclean (an area you must be familiar with) and rode to and from the city for work each week day. That's an 80km round trip. If I was capable of doing that, then I don't see why so few others are. Further to this, your comment that we need 'progress' is nothing short of offensive. Is cycling, as opposed to driving, not progressive? I sure think it is.

Lotte

[LotteBum]

That was how my first house was when I bought it. My point is that things have changed substantially in the past 20 odd years. When East Ryde becomes unaffordable another suburb will take its place, but it will be further away from the centre of the city and have less transport options because governments (of all flavours) have consistently failed in providing infrastructure.

Good point. I used to live in Springfield Lakes - one of those horrible Delfin developments incorporating a couple of sedimentation basins labelled 'lakes' by the developer. Anyway, there was one bus from Springfield Lakes to the city (where I work), and it would have gotten me home at 6:45. I finish work at 5pm. Riding my pushie home got me home by 6:20. Go figure.

Motorcycle riders (and by extension scooter riders) are temporary Australians. Sorry but that's how it is. Cyclists are not a lot better off unless you are lucky enough to live near a cycle way.

I disagree with you on that one. I have been cycling for 15 years now, 12 of those competitively. Cycling/scooting/motorcycling is only as safe as you make it. Sure, you get the odd motorist who doesn't see you for whatever reason, however this is all the more reason to ride defensively. I've had one serious accident in all those years. I was on my pushbike, got distracted and accidentally ran a red light straight into the side of a car going through the light (no, I wasn't purposely running a red light - I don't do this). It wasn't pretty, but at the end of the day it was my fault. Too often, accidents involving 'temporay Australians' are due to a lack of attention and/or sheer stupidity on the victim's part. I'm not saying that this is always the case, but given the way some people ride, it wouldn't surprise me.

Further to this, on the subject of cycling, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the inherent health benefits of cycling far outweigh the risks associated with same.

I should mention that in the 2 years I've been riding my scooter (my partner and I have collectively done about 13,000km on it - most of those whilst we lived in the boonies), I've had 2 near misses. We've done a lot less k's in our car, and we've had a lot more near misses, at much higher speeds (ie. the scooter only does up to 70km/h down hills)... safety in cars is a figment of the imagination.

The cost of a car is not just the repayments plus so much per kilometre. You have to take into account depreciation, maintenance et cetera. If you look at a novated lease you will get a better understanding of what the true cost of running a car is.

Sure, it's expensive. But why do we all need 2?

Not everyone is in a position where they can share one car. What about tradesmen (and women)? Sure the cost is fully tax deductible but you still have to pay for it. What if your workplace is not accessible from public transport?

Very valid points. However, my argument was more aimed at those who actually have a choice and those who are simply sitting back and wanting the government to somehow make housing cheaper, whilst not making any sacrifices themselves (I know too many of these people). I'm not saying that everyone 'needs' to buy a house (as someone mentioned earlier) - rather that I'm sick of people whining about their lack of ability to do so. People ought to work for whatever they want. Go without a car (or have one less) if you can, buy in a cheaper suburb etc.

Myself, I take the train. I love it. It was the best decision I ever made to buy a house a five minute walk to a train station. There is no substitute for heavy rail. I hardly ever drive. We still have two cars but one is for sale.

Public transport is a good way to go if you can - trains in particular (they seem to be more on time than buses). The buses in our area are nothing short of hopeless, and the train station is about a 30 minute walk. Both would see me home around 6pm, which is fairly late considering I work 7 - 8km from home. Besides, my scooter is cheaper than public transport anyway )

However, I have a six figure income and a relatively small mortgage. The latter is partly as a result of moving from the Northern Beaches in Sydney to Brisbane and hard saving. I have also continuously worked for over 35 years. I haven't had expensive holidays or consumer items. Though I thoroughly intend to have a bit more of each now that I can afford it!

I bet, and it sounds like you deserve it!

Well they do because there has been a huge change in the IT industry in the past few years. There are few entry level IT jobs in Australia. They are mostly in India and other countries like Malaysia. I saw

some figures in today's Australian from the most recent census that graphically illustrate my point. According to these figures there has been a 13% slump in people employed in IT since the last census! Get that, 13%. That's a bloodbath by any objective measure.

I had no idea. It's a shame because IT is a craft. I'd be lost without the IT guy at work!

Cheers,
Lotte

[markharrison]

Good point. I used to live in Springfield Lakes - one of those horrible Delfin developments incorporating a couple of sedimentation basins labelled 'lakes' by the developer. Anyway, there was one bus from Springfield Lakes to the city (where I work), and it would have gotten me home at 6:45. I finish work at 5pm. Riding my pushie home got me home by 6:20. Go figure.

You illustrate my point perfectly. A 1 3/4 hour commute each way is not sustainable, unless you want to go insane. One of the reasons I left Sydney was the 1 1/2 hour commute each way. That was the average but the record was 2 1/2 hours to get home!.This is a recipe for burn out.

I disagree with you on that one. I have been cycling for 15 years now, 12 of those competitively. Cycling/scooting/motorcycling is only as safe as you make it. Sure, you get the odd motorist who doesn't see you for whatever reason, however this is all the more reason to ride defensively.

Sorry I still disagree. I have too many late friends that were killed on motorcycles. Not all of them were stupid.

I've had one serious accident in all those years. I was on my pushbike, got distracted and accidentally ran a red light straight into the side of a car going through the light (no, I wasn't purposely running a red light - I don't do this). It wasn't pretty, but at the end of the day it was my fault. Too often, accidents involving 'temporay Australians' are due to a lack of attention and/or sheer stupidity on the victim's part. I'm not saying that this is always the case, but given the way some people ride, it wouldn't surprise me.

Again you illustrate my point perfectly. One lapse of concentration puts you in mortal danger even at low speed. A similar accident involving two cars is still bad but the odds are you will survive it if not walk away from it.

Further to this, on the subject of cycling, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the inherent health benefits of cycling far outweigh the risks associated with same.

Indisputable fact. However, one does not arrive at the office in a presentable condition (especially in a Brisbane summer) for a client meeting! In fact you might find your co-workers keeping a fair distance as well. If you are lucky enough to have the facilities where you work to clean up when you arrive (not every office building does) then then there is no problem.

I should mention that in the 2 years I've been riding my scooter (my partner and I have collectively done about 13,000km on it - most of those whilst we lived in the boonies), I've had 2 near misses. We've done a lot less k's in our car, and we've had a lot more near misses, at much higher speeds (ie. the scooter only does up to 70km/h down hills)... safety in cars is a figment of the imagination.

Sorry, the statistics do not back you up there. Ask any Police or Ambulance officer. I have seen the numbers when I worked at the Police but I obviously can't disclose them.

Besides, a fall from a motor scooter at 70 km/h has a much higher probability of causing a fatal injury than being a passenger in a motor car in an accident at 70 km/h.

Sure, it's expensive. But why do we all need 2?

Another example is a family with a stay at home mother (or father). If the worker needs a car to get to work then the child carer is effectively stuck in the home all day.

Very valid points. However, my argument was more aimed at those who actually have a choice and those who are simply sitting back and wanting the government to somehow make housing cheaper, whilst not making any sacrifices themselves (I know too many of these people). I'm not saying that everyone 'needs' to buy a house (as someone mentioned earlier) - rather that I'm sick of people whining about their lack of ability to do so. People ought to work for whatever they want. Go without a car (or have one less) if you can, buy in a cheaper suburb etc.

I'm not a big fan of whiners either but my point has always been that there has been a fundamental shift and that there is some justification for this discussion. Governments have been a major part of the problem. I'm not sure what can be done to retrieve the situation now. It has gone on too long. The only thing I can think of is a major investment in public housing. Relying on the private sector has failed. The first home owners rebates, negative gearing et cetera has not worked and may have made things worse. Well, that's my observation anyway but I'm not an economist and I don't play one on TV (if you can imagine such a thing ).

As I said earlier, my major concern is for those that are being dropped off at the bottom. They have few options.

I bet, and it sounds like you deserve it!

Damn straight!

I had no idea. It's a shame because IT is a craft. I'd be lost without the IT guy at work!

Well it's not worrying me at the moment. However it ought to be worrying governments as this could be a serious dampener on productivity in the future.

It ought to be especially worrying to corporations but as they rarely look beyond the next quarter I sincerely doubt that it is.

[HappyHammer]

You do of course realise that when they say "Housing Affordability" they don't just mean "House Ownership Affordability" but also "House Rental Affordablity" - ?

I think some people (not saying you q9) include expenses like eating out 2 or 3 times a week, high spending and repayments on credit cards and buying a brand new car when they calculate affordability. Even worse are the ones that have all these expenses and intend to maintain them but do not include them when entering into house ownership or tenancy agreements.

My 2c.

HH.

[LotteBum]

Sorry I still disagree. I have too many late friends that were killed on motorcycles. Not all of them were stupid.

It was not my intention to offend. All I was trying to say is that I have no doubt a substantial percentage of death on motorcycles can be attributed to taking unnecessary risks etc.

Again you illustrate my point perfectly. One lapse of concentration puts you in mortal danger even at low speed. A similar accident involving two cars is still bad but the odds are you will survive it if not walk away from it.

I agree with you. That said, I'd rather have myself killed than be responsible for the death of someone else. If a moment's lapse of concentration is going to either kill me, or someone else, I'll choose me.

Indisputable fact. However, one does not arrive at the office in a presentable condition (especially in a Brisbane summer) for a client meeting! In fact you might find your co-workers keeping a fair distance as well. If you are lucky enough to have the facilities where you work to clean up when you arrive (not every office building does) then then there is no problem.

Lots of people have this problem. But lots of people don't. No doubt at least 60% of workplaces have showering facilities (they are supposed to supply these if they have more than 10 employees - not that they all obey this, of course). If even 20% of those people cycled to work, this would no doubt have a substantial impact. Where I work, we have not only a shower on our floor, but a shower in the basement where I also have a locker. I leave my make-up, clothes, shoes, towel etc. there. Doesn't get any more convenient than that. Most CBD based buildings have this. My partner works in the suburbs (approximately 18km from the CBD) and even his work has a shower and he leaves his shoes, towel etc. there.

I know that not everyone has the facilities available which enable riding as a suitable solution - but many people do, and those of us who do, should embrace this. At my work, despite the excellent facilities available, only 3 people (excluding me, as I'm currently not cycling due to impending spawn) out of 90 cycle. That's a pretty sad number, considering most people in the company live within a 15km radius of the CBD, and only 1 or 2 need a car for work (ie. to go and see clients). It gets tiring, hearing about the ever-increasing price of petrol, not to mention parking, congestion etc. when there are bike paths to virtually everywhere within 15km of Brisbane (a lot are well hidden, but with a bit of research via Council's website, not too hard to find).

Besides, a fall from a motor scooter at 70 km/h has a much higher probability of causing a fatal injury than being a passenger in a motor car in an accident at 70 km/h.

Absolutely. I must admit that I've had an instance where I was able to escape probable death on my scooter (car roaring up behind me, I slid in between two stationary cars in front of me and the driver of the car screeched to a halt, barely missing the car in front). I could not have avoided this in the car, and would no doubt have been seriously injured.

Another example is a family with a stay at home mother (or father). If the worker needs a car to get to work then the child carer is effectively stuck in the home all day.

This will be us next year. My partner will inherit my scooter and I'll be driving our car around. It sh!ts me that I can't take the baby on my bike, nor even in a bike trailer for the first 9 - 12 months of her life, because of 'inherent risks' associated with it. Please. Anyway, looks like I'll be stuck driving/walking. Not that I plan to do much driving. Will try to walk as much as I can (besides, I'll be that big and fat by then that I'll no doubt need it).

I'm not a big fan of whiners either but my point has always been that there has been a fundamental shift and that there is some justification for this discussion. Governments have been a major part of the problem. I'm not sure what can be done to retrieve the situation now. It has gone on too long. The only thing I can think of is a major investment in public housing. Relying on the private sector has failed. The first home owners rebates, negative gearing et cetera has not worked and may have made things worse. Well, that's my observation anyway but I'm not an economist and I don't play one on TV (if you can imagine such a thing ).

I see what you're saying. I guess my frustration is that people kind of dig their own graves a lot of the time, yet still they feel that they are entitled to a nice house on a nice block, with 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms, and they still feel that staying at home with children until they go to school is a right, not a privilege. I just don't understand why people can't settle for less, be it a different suburb, further away, or a lesser house in the suburb they want to live in....

Lotte

[Master Splinter]

Housing figures here. Fresh out today.

[sawdustmike]

Go west people, go west. Forget the house prices the land of opportunity exists on the opposite side of this wonderful continent. The only people out of work are those that dont want to. The money they are paying is extrordinary. The wifes work wanted a receptionist - no skills (they will train), 18yo (mining industry) and prepared to turn up. $43k + super + bonus. Not bad for the age required. Cleaners in a major north west town $70k keep included. In some cases construction companies are offering flyin/flyout to any place in Australia. Mining industry conditions 9on/5off usually travelling in company time. I would kill to be 18 and starting out now.