loquasagacious
NCAP Mooderator
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 3,636
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2004
This may go against the prevailing wisdom of those who watch house porn like hot auction but anyway here goes.
Since 1996 the cost(affordabilty or lack thereof) of a house has gone up 70%.
In this same period Interest rates have fallen.
These facts are the premise of an argument which runs as follows:
When interest rates were high we could not afford to borrow much, therefore we (or rtaher our parents or older siblings) could not afford to spend much on a house and therefore house prices were kept low.
Interest rates rose and as we had been borrowing as much as we were allowed we kept doing this, we borrows more so we could spend more on a house. The ned result being that we pushed the price of houses up becasue we were willing to pay more, we have done this to such an extent that:
It is now more difficult to buy a house now than it was when interest rates were in double digits. Futhermore the huge mortgages home owners have mean they are susceptible to the slightest interest rate rise.
Hence the young of our nation are screwed in two ways:
baby boomers are voting for a party they believe will keep their interest rates low as opposed to guarantee education and a future for their kids.
And becase the baby-boomers have pushed up house prices so much, higher than inflation and higher than wage growth (wage growth aprox 20% since 1996 versus 70% increase in house prices). The young can no longer afford to buy a house.
And thus I prophesise:
Our generation will be consigned to renting houses owned by the baby boomers generation whilst they all move to queensland. Hopefully when they go into nursing homes they will loose interest in property and stop bidding the price up, so when they die and we inherite prices might have fallen abit and so somewhere between middle-aged and approaching retirement we might be able to buy our own houses.
On the other hand our grandparents possess a remarkable ammount of wealth (6 billion plus form memory) and so when they die they might opt to skip giving it to our parents because they dont need it and instead give it to us. And then we can buy houses, and quite likely dive up the house prices again.
Or in a worst case scenario our grandparents die our parents collect, pay off their mortgage or more likely buy investment property and drive up prices still more and we are still excluded.
To break from prophecy becuase I have decided that prophets need beards and when I have one it annoys me.
The plus of the baby-boomers owning lots of property and us having to rent from them, we could make the pension means and asset tested so we can cut their welfare payments and hopefully save us from crippling social security payments draining the budget.
Then we could only hope that the savings this would deliver would NOT be passed on to us in the form of tax cuts, maybe this time round instead of giving us more money in our pockets to spend on consumables we could do something sensible with it like pay for our retirement in advance so that we do not f*ck evrything up like the baby-boomers.
Since 1996 the cost(affordabilty or lack thereof) of a house has gone up 70%.
In this same period Interest rates have fallen.
These facts are the premise of an argument which runs as follows:
When interest rates were high we could not afford to borrow much, therefore we (or rtaher our parents or older siblings) could not afford to spend much on a house and therefore house prices were kept low.
Interest rates rose and as we had been borrowing as much as we were allowed we kept doing this, we borrows more so we could spend more on a house. The ned result being that we pushed the price of houses up becasue we were willing to pay more, we have done this to such an extent that:
It is now more difficult to buy a house now than it was when interest rates were in double digits. Futhermore the huge mortgages home owners have mean they are susceptible to the slightest interest rate rise.
Hence the young of our nation are screwed in two ways:
baby boomers are voting for a party they believe will keep their interest rates low as opposed to guarantee education and a future for their kids.
And becase the baby-boomers have pushed up house prices so much, higher than inflation and higher than wage growth (wage growth aprox 20% since 1996 versus 70% increase in house prices). The young can no longer afford to buy a house.
And thus I prophesise:
Our generation will be consigned to renting houses owned by the baby boomers generation whilst they all move to queensland. Hopefully when they go into nursing homes they will loose interest in property and stop bidding the price up, so when they die and we inherite prices might have fallen abit and so somewhere between middle-aged and approaching retirement we might be able to buy our own houses.
On the other hand our grandparents possess a remarkable ammount of wealth (6 billion plus form memory) and so when they die they might opt to skip giving it to our parents because they dont need it and instead give it to us. And then we can buy houses, and quite likely dive up the house prices again.
Or in a worst case scenario our grandparents die our parents collect, pay off their mortgage or more likely buy investment property and drive up prices still more and we are still excluded.
To break from prophecy becuase I have decided that prophets need beards and when I have one it annoys me.
The plus of the baby-boomers owning lots of property and us having to rent from them, we could make the pension means and asset tested so we can cut their welfare payments and hopefully save us from crippling social security payments draining the budget.
Then we could only hope that the savings this would deliver would NOT be passed on to us in the form of tax cuts, maybe this time round instead of giving us more money in our pockets to spend on consumables we could do something sensible with it like pay for our retirement in advance so that we do not f*ck evrything up like the baby-boomers.