Oh dear... socialists think that can manipulate the market

[Leftwinger]

Everybody does

He brings it all on himself though by being such a cretin. Every time I hear on the news about a sex offender being jailed, I half expect for IQS.RLOW to mysteriously stop posting and never be heard from again.

[lisa jones]

Everybody does

He brings it all on himself though by being such a cretin. Every time I hear on the news about a sex offender being jailed, I half expect for IQS.RLOW to mysteriously stop posting and never be heard from again.

Look .. I'm a right winger so this isn't easy for me to say .. but I can actually understand why you would think that.

[lisa jones]

Take heart though Mr Leftwinger .. IQ announced he was leaving so hopefully that means he has found another message board to crap on.

[Leftwinger]

Everybody does

He brings it all on himself though by being such a cretin. Every time I hear on the news about a sex offender being jailed, I half expect for IQS.RLOW to mysteriously stop posting and never be heard from again.

Look .. I'm a right winger so this isn't easy for me to say .. but I can actually understand why you would think that.

Lisa, I've had the misfortune to have "known" IQ for a number of years through a number of forums. I'm not overly convinced that he actually believes in anything much in any real sense. He just frequents political forums to get something off his chest - the fact that he's a pitiful little sad-act with a penchant for sexual perversion. He trys to hold himself out as a champion of the political right but he's really only here to hurl lowbrow insults and harass female forum members - and he doesn't seem to care which side of politics they're on. I think that says a fair bit about him.

If I know IQ, he won't be able to stay away. He'll be back sooner or later.

Unless of course that sex offender that was caught was him. Pretty sure you're not allowed internet in prison

[Leftwinger]

For borrowers, 45 is the new 60

Have you noticed that the banks are getting tougher on lending?

You could be excused for thinking that it has something to do with the Global Financial Crisis, but it has more to do with the National Consumer Credit Protection Act.

The Act came into force earlier this year and among many things is supposed to make the lender responsible for verifying the customer’s financial situation and their capacity to pay without ‘substantial hardship’.

A relative who works for a mortgage broker complained about this a while ago. Too bad I say. When I first applied for a home loan, it would have been a COLD DAY IN HELL when the average borrower could borrow such sums that became commonplace a short while after.

The bottom line is that if you are over 45 and can’t demonstrate how you will be able to repay a 30-year loan, then there is every likelihood you will get knocked back.

With doubt about future price growth, your guarantee that you can sell the property if you fall on hard times is no longer a comfort to banks.

I met with the owner of a large financial planning firm this week who told me that a growing number of property owners are facing the reality that their homes are now worth less than what they borrowed. The perils of the 100 per cent loan!

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/busines ... 1dr70.html
This is the situation that 1 in every 4 US homeowners now finds themselves in. Negative equity is not the nicest situation to be in, particularly if you need to sell. If house prices start going backwards - as they have in just about every other country that had a house price boom - the number of people in negative equity will increase. The macroeconomic effects of widespread negative equity are unlikely to be anything other than negative for the country.

[Leftwinger]

Purely anecdotal.

I have been keeping my eye on prices in a nice little seaside hamlet not that far from where I live. They have exploded to utterly RIDICULOUS levels in the past decade.

It's a fantastic spot - just big enough to have a pub and a couple of takeaway joints. Great fishing and surrounded by national parks. A great place to have a humble little holiday home. Except that humble little beach shacks have blown out to absolutely ludicrous prices - courtesy of the property investment mania - , excluding all but the wealthy.

I just spoke to someone in the local property conveyancing business - prices in the place in question have basically COLLAPSED.

So who knows? In four or five years time, maybe I can pick me up a bargain, seeing as my own debt is tiny by today's standards and the value of my own house would need to collapse by at least 75% for me to end up in negative equity (they didn't fall that far during the great depression and won't fall that far now, though I wouldn't put falls of 30%+ off the cards).

Would it make me a vulture? Perhaps some would say that. But consider the following:

The majority of the houses in the place in question are owned by investors, many of which are not even local people. They are often from as far afield as Brisbane and even further. So how often do most of them visit? My guess: rarely, if ever. What do they contribute to the town? Nothing, that’s what. Nothing except unaffordable housing and cost of living pressure on the locals by driving up rates costs through driving up the price of land. They didn’t much care what happened to the place as a result of their collective actions so long as they saw themselves eventually stuffing their hip pockets with lots of lovely, juicy lucre. Their motivation was pure monetary greed.

So knowing those facts and also knowing that I would visit at least once a month and - unlike them - make some contribution to the place by patronising the pub, the supermarket, the eateries, the bait and tackle shop, the service station etc, would I be so bad if I took advantage of investors losing their shirts to snap up what I might call a “lifestyle investment” at a very good price? No, I don’t think so. What comes around goes around.

All things come to those who wait and the meek shall inherit the Earth.
But hey – if it doesn’t come about, I haven’t lost anything either. I’m easy one way or the other.

[lisa jones]

Everybody does

He brings it all on himself though by being such a cretin. Every time I hear on the news about a sex offender being jailed, I half expect for IQS.RLOW to mysteriously stop posting and never be heard from again.

Look .. I'm a right winger so this isn't easy for me to say .. but I can actually understand why you would think that.

Lisa, I've had the misfortune to have "known" IQ for a number of years through a number of forums. I'm not overly convinced that he actually believes in anything much in any real sense. He just frequents political forums to get something off his chest - the fact that he's a pitiful little sad-act with a penchant for sexual perversion. He trys to hold himself out as a champion of the political right but he's really only here to hurl lowbrow insults and harass female forum members - and he doesn't seem to care which side of politics they're on. I think that says a fair bit about him.

If I know IQ, he won't be able to stay away. He'll be back sooner or later.

Unless of course that sex offender that was caught was him. Pretty sure you're not allowed internet in prison

Ok .. so I was preaching to the church choir then. Mind you I had no idea he's been on different forums performing the same act over a number of years ( and it doesn't really surprise me either).

[lisa jones]

Purely anecdotal.

I have been keeping my eye on prices in a nice little seaside hamlet not that far from where I live. They have exploded to utterly RIDICULOUS levels in the past decade.

It's a fantastic spot - just big enough to have a pub and a couple of takeaway joints. Great fishing and surrounded by national parks. A great place to have a humble little holiday home. Except that humble little beach shacks have blown out to absolutely ludicrous prices - courtesy of the property investment mania - , excluding all but the wealthy.

I just spoke to someone in the local property conveyancing business - prices in the place in question have basically COLLAPSED.

So who knows? In four or five years time, maybe I can pick me up a bargain, seeing as my own debt is tiny by today's standards and the value of my own house would need to collapse by at least 75% for me to end up in negative equity (they didn't fall that far during the great depression and won't fall that far now, though I wouldn't put falls of 30%+ off the cards).

Would it make me a vulture? Perhaps some would say that. But consider the following:

The majority of the houses in the place in question are owned by investors, many of which are not even local people. They are often from as far afield as Brisbane and even further. So how often do most of them visit? My guess: rarely, if ever. What do they contribute to the town? Nothing, that’s what. Nothing except unaffordable housing and cost of living pressure on the locals by driving up rates costs through driving up the price of land. They didn’t much care what happened to the place as a result of their collective actions so long as they saw themselves eventually stuffing their hip pockets with lots of lovely, juicy lucre. Their motivation was pure monetary greed.

So knowing those facts and also knowing that I would visit at least once a month and - unlike them - make some contribution to the place by patronising the pub, the supermarket, the eateries, the bait and tackle shop, the service station etc, would I be so bad if I took advantage of investors losing their shirts to snap up what I might call a “lifestyle investment” at a very good price? No, I don’t think so. What comes around goes around.

All things come to those who wait and the meek shall inherit the Earth.
But hey – if it doesn’t come about, I haven’t lost anything either. I’m easy one way or the other.

I think you need to come to terms with the reality that everyone has the right to own/pay off a family weekender .. one which they may very well end up retiring into.

It's something many Aussies have been doing for some time.

[lisa jones]

I cannot really comment any further Mr Leftwinger because I don't know the LOCATION of the area you've been describing.

Real estate is a beast which behaves very differently because it is LOCATION dependent.

Ultimately though .. it is all about 3 things: position, position and position.

[Leftwinger]

I think you need to come to terms with the reality that everyone has the right to own/pay off a family weekender

I thought that's what I had implied. So how does the average person do that when average prices for such things are often between five and ten times average household income? Prices have risen so high on the back of speculation that the cost of either a place of residence or a weekender is now becoming prohibitive for a majority. The decade-long real estate boom has ensured that said right has now become a privelage for the better off and/or for those using real estate to reduce their taxable income. For people of average means who want to (unwisely IMO) play the game, this means becoming indebted to the eyeballs. There is only one sensible reason for doing this - you expect prices to continue to rise strongly so you can sell it for a solid return. For how much longer this might be possible is an interesting question.

Lisa, as I've said before I have no problem per se with people owning investment property. I do however have a problem with ever-increasing numbers of working families being locked out of home ownership because a lot of Australians have forgotten that a house is meant to be a home, not a vehicle for asset speculation. Investors - who already own a home - are heavily advantaged over many first time would be home buyers by virtue of the tax system and are able to pay more, pushing up the price. At today's prices, every gain for investors is a blow for those who merely desire to own the roof over their families head.

Since I've used the term "working families" you've no doubt deduced that it's fine by me if prices remain high in places like Sydney's inner rings, Toorak, Peppermint grove etc. I only care that Mr and Mrs average can reasonabley afford a home. What those in the upper income quadrant pay for their homes is immaterial to me.

Real estate is a beast which behaves very differently because it is LOCATION dependent.

Ultimately though .. it is all about 3 things: position, position and position.

In one sense that’s true. But it must also mean that most of Australia is a fantastic location (which I guess it is) since prices have ballooned right around the country.
Since houses are purchased almost entirely with debt, it’s also about 3 other things – finance, finance, finance. Prices cannot rise beyond the sort of money that lenders will lend. Financial deregulation has allowed this to greatly increase to the point where the weight of it’s own debt burden is now starting to become an unsustainable drag. Pushing prices to the limit of affordability has made a lot of money for banks, the property industry and investors but it’s not doing the country any good in the long run.