Housing Crisis What Housing Crisis?

[Perry]

Sorry to split hairs but if you say there is no crisis above
and then say that the government is to blame for all of
the former by definition aren't you confirming there is
a crisis?

Let's play some semantics, here.

I'm not saying there aren't any number of crises about. The
point is very similar to the articles that GK referenced, here:

http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/2007/0420.html

The revelations in those articles and the stories that the
author uses, show how well propaganda works. How well it
works for those who are responsible for the problems, as it
allows them to allocate blame to someone else. The first part
of that propaganda game is subversive language usage.

If the Minister of Housing said:
A number of government policies have not worked as
intended. Indeed, in some cases, a simple lack of clear
policy guidelines has contributed to the difficulties people
are facing with their aspirations for home-ownership. We
will promptly fix these mistakes so that the crisis which
we've unwittingly created can be solved.

That would never happen because politicians would not
admit such errors. To them, it's always someone (or
something) else's failing. Never theirs.

So there is no crisis of housing in that sense. There is
only a crisis of government that results in a housing shortage.

So there is no crisis of savings in that sense. There is
only a crisis of government that results in a savings paucity.

And lots of other bad things, too. It is the leaders who
have been entrusted with the responsibility, who have failed
in their stewardship of that responsibility and who must
take the blame.

[cube]

That would never happen because politicians would not
admit such errors. To them, it's always someone (or
something) else's failing. Never theirs.

T'was ever the same, and people managed to buy houses, have children and go on overseas trips.

Whilst the ship of state is steered or left to drift by the government, the people on board still have personal responsibilty to do what they can to stay on board.

This is coupled with high consumer debt

The affordability issue is not COUPLED with high consumer debt, its CAUSED by high consumer debt.

cube

[Grandma]

I sent my friend (on over $77K combined income) - who is always complaining that houses are too expensive - the article on not buying coffees.. I thought it would encourage them to start saving and get into good habits... He emailed back... and I quote:

"I can't believe they (I have yet to figure out who 'they' are) expect us to change our lifestyle in order for us to afford to buy a house. I am going to have to move to Australia"....

I was floored... enough said...

[whitt]

I sent my friend (on over $77K combined income) - who is always complaining that houses are too expensive - the article on not buying coffees.. I thought it would encourage them to start saving and get into good habits... He emailed back... and I quote:

"I can't believe they (I have yet to figure out who 'they' are) expect us to change our lifestyle in order for us to afford to buy a house. I am going to have to move to Australia"....

I was floored... enough said...

Says it all really.

[Glenn]

Do you notice the anger in the words.
Whats the bet that the politicians are also angry at the world and us.
See how they are changing the clocks on the basis of a whim. Who do those politicians think they are. Next they will be changing what time the tide comes in.
They can do that can't they?

[No Regrets]

Next they will be changing what time the tide comes in.
They can do that can't they?

That would then give them the excuse for beach errosian tax

[tricky]

... Next they will be changing what time the tide comes in.
They can do that can't they?

They sure can.
Just after I've worked out what time high tide is - the next bloody day it's changed!

[kerry0117]

I too have been reading about the North Shore couple that are complaining over not being able to afford a house with a combined income of 95k pa.

My first comment on reading that article was well if we could do it whats wrong with them!! OUR INCOME IS MUCH LESS

We are pretty much in the bracket of "first home owners"

If these people spent as much time saving and making sensible decisions about there futures, as they do complaining they might just have a house by now!!!

What were there ages, 38, what have they been doing until now if they still don't have there own home!

The other thing that amazed me that they MUST apparently live on the North Shore, and completley seemed to turn there noses up when shown other perfectly decent properties in there price range, but just because it wasn't in the right location it was a no go ! THERE BUDGET WASN'T THAT SMALL EITHER.

I say to people like that get a life, they really don't deserve to get anywhere when they are prepared not to sacrifice there so called lifestyle!!!

The is so many things they could do, she could work fulltime = earning more income, find a cheaper place to rent and lets try no coffee, no brought lunch, just a suggestion... = MORE SAVINGS

[muppet]

Aussie Housing crisis will get worse: analysts

Housing crisis will get worse: analysts

Jessica Irvine
July 4, 2007

SYDNEY'S housing squeeze looks set to worsen after a sharp drop in building approvals, reducing supply in an already tight market.

Building approvals in NSW plummeted 12 per cent to 2327 in May, the lowest level for six years and the biggest fall nationwide.

Analysts predict the dwindling number of homes being built means prices and rents are likely to rise further.

ANZ's head of financial system analysis, Paul Braddick, said Australia was in the midst of a "burgeoning housing crisis", with 137,000 building approvals a year inadequate to keep pace with demand for 168,000 new dwellings a year.

"With new supply likely to fall even further below underlying demand in the year ahead, conditions are likely to reach crisis point both in terms of rental vacancy and housing affordability," he said.

The mortgage squeeze is also hitting hip pockets, with NSW shoppers cutting their spending by $18.1 million, or 0.3 per cent, in May, according to figures released yesterday.

In another sign of the financial pressure facing homeowners, internal Treasury documents show that the number of writs for repossession of NSW properties rose to 3644 last year, double the number in 2005 and almost triple the level in 2004.

The share of NSW households with a mortgage who were issued a writ by the NSW Sheriffs Office grew from 0.1 per cent in 2004 to 0.25 per cent in 2006, according to the documents obtained by Channel 7 under freedom of information laws.

Figures from the NSW Supreme Court had already shown a large number of applications for repossession, but the new figures confirm that about two thirds of court cases end up in repossession orders. Treasury said not all repossession orders resulted in eviction.

The documents contradict repeated claims by the Prime Minister, John Howard, that the chief reason for higher home prices is the slow release of land by the state and territory governments.

"Whilst better land release and land use policies by the states and territories are likely to improve affordability to some extent, these reports probably overstate this effect," a briefing sent to the federal Treasurer's office in February said.

Treasury said that high property prices in capital cities were primarily due to the growing demand for a fixed supply of land in sought-after inner-city and waterside areas.

"The growth in house prices … can largely be considered demand-driven, attributable to the strong growth in household incomes, low interest rates of recent years and expanded access to housing credit generated by innovative financial products," the Treasury documents say.

An economist at ABN Amro, Kieran Davies, said that rents were acting as a "safety valve" in Sydney, but prices for home purchase would also pick up soon.

"NSW is where pent up demand should be building, the vacancy rates here are low and we have been building too few homes for quite a while," he said.

An economist at TD Securities, Joshua Williamson, said the Reserve Bank - which is expected to leave interest rates on hold this morning - would be concerned about the pick up in prices. "The push-back in housing supply is a potential worry for the Reserve because it could force rental yields and house prices higher, adding to domestically driven inflation pressures," he said.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/housing-crisis-will-get-worse-analysts/2007/07/03/1183351209778.html

[flyernzl]

Housing Crisis? What housing Crisis?

A very good article by Tim Hazeldine in the Herald

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10865494

I particularly like the comment
"We read that home ownership rates have declined, to 65 per cent. Well, actually, last time I checked, home ownership rates were bang on 100 per cent: every NZ home was owned by someone."

His conclusion that our problem is low incomes rather than high prices is, in my view, bang on target.

[speights boy]

Contact Energy,
NZ Post,
Mainzeal (plus a large number of their subbies),
Summit Wool Spinners.
All this month.

Meanwhile cashed up non-resident foreigners buy up anything in a good school zone.

Crisis.....what crisis?

[TheLiberalLeft]

Meanwhile, the NZD is breaking records against a number of major currencies, again.

[eri]

nz wants/demands

1st world; wages, pensions, benefits and housing

and expects to pay for it all with 2nd world productivity

doesn't work

never has

never will

New Zealand ranks 22^nd among the 30 OECD nations in terms of labour productivity

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/tprp/08-02/05.htm

[Davo36]

I thought his article was utter crap.

He says

Well, the buildable land in our city is just about all in private hands, and could be developed already or soon, if the private sector wished this.

Is National planning to confiscate private property to get houses built on it?

Which is just about the most stupid thing I've ever heard. But then he is an economist. The land is there but you sure as hell can't build on most of it, and if you can the council will charge you a fortune to do so. So it's not being developed.

And flyernzl, increasing everyone's wages - so they can all compete for the same small pool of houses is not going to work is it. All it will do is drive up the price of those houses. Simple simple supply/demand stuff.

We have 2 options to bring the price of houses in Auckland down: 1) Build more houses on greenfields sites or 2) Stop increasing our population via immigration each year.

If we do neither of those, house and apartment prices will continue to rise and so will rents.

[flyernzl]

As far as I can tell, building a new house costs at least as much as buying an existing one.
Also, I do not see any builder of new houses making extravagant profits. Just a normal business profit at best. "Affordable" (ie low income) housing is not profitable to build, which is why no-one is doing it.
Therefore I cannot see how building more new houses will reduce the overall price level (unless, as Labour and the Greens seem to propose, there is a taxpayer subsidy on the new builds).