Houseing boom -few winners

[Marc]

There are few people who have benefited from the recent housing boom. Mums
and dads who's family home has doubled in price may think they are better
off, but...

1. When they want to 'upgrade' houses, they will find that the house they
want to buy has also doubled in price, so they don't benefit.
2. Because mums and dads houses have doubled in price, they pay more in
council rates, water rates, etc...
3. First home buyers are now burdened with larger mortgages. The 'Australian
dream' for these people is further away.

The people to gain are people in the property industry - developers, real
estate people, etc. Of course, the government gains with massive stamp
duties, land tax, etc.

The mums and dads have not gained.

The first home buyers for the next 15(?) years are the losers.

I blame the government for this. They introduced a 14k first home owners
grant at a time when interest rates were so low. Of course this was going to
cause a massive housing boom. They then reduce this first home owners grant
at a time when first home owners need it the most.

The government has failed us again, this time, it is Howard. Give us a
break, Howard.

[Stephen]

Maybe yes,but thank god they have abolished the stamp duty for first home
buyers in NSW.That's a few extra grand I can put into my first house I plan
to buy later this year.

--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.645 / Virus Database: 413 - Release Date: 3/28/04
"Marc" <sam@everlast.net.au> wrote in message
news:40794d48@news1.veridas.net...
> There are few people who have benefited from the recent housing boom. Mums
> and dads who's family home has doubled in price may think they are better
> off, but...
>
> 1. When they want to 'upgrade' houses, they will find that the house they
> want to buy has also doubled in price, so they don't benefit.
> 2. Because mums and dads houses have doubled in price, they pay more in
> council rates, water rates, etc...
> 3. First home buyers are now burdened with larger mortgages. The
'Australian
> dream' for these people is further away.
>
> The people to gain are people in the property industry - developers, real
> estate people, etc. Of course, the government gains with massive stamp
> duties, land tax, etc.
>
> The mums and dads have not gained.
>
> The first home buyers for the next 15(?) years are the losers.
>
> I blame the government for this. They introduced a 14k first home owners
> grant at a time when interest rates were so low. Of course this was going
to
> cause a massive housing boom. They then reduce this first home owners
grant
> at a time when first home owners need it the most.
>
> The government has failed us again, this time, it is Howard. Give us a
> break, Howard.
>
>

[Marc]

Well, yes and no. If a house has increased by say $150k, the $20k saving on
stamp duty doesnt really help first home buyers. Its like the pathetic tax
cut that was given last year.
"Stephen" <xxxx@xxxx.com.au> wrote in message
news:c5c4jh$2vvl$1@ID-194817.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Maybe yes,but thank god they have abolished the stamp duty for first home
> buyers in NSW.That's a few extra grand I can put into my first house I
plan
> to buy later this year.
>
> --
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.645 / Virus Database: 413 - Release Date: 3/28/04
> "Marc" <sam@everlast.net.au> wrote in message
> news:40794d48@news1.veridas.net...
> > There are few people who have benefited from the recent housing boom.
Mums
> > and dads who's family home has doubled in price may think they are
better
> > off, but...
> >
> > 1. When they want to 'upgrade' houses, they will find that the house
they
> > want to buy has also doubled in price, so they don't benefit.
> > 2. Because mums and dads houses have doubled in price, they pay more in
> > council rates, water rates, etc...
> > 3. First home buyers are now burdened with larger mortgages. The
> 'Australian
> > dream' for these people is further away.
> >
> > The people to gain are people in the property industry - developers,
real
> > estate people, etc. Of course, the government gains with massive stamp
> > duties, land tax, etc.
> >
> > The mums and dads have not gained.
> >
> > The first home buyers for the next 15(?) years are the losers.
> >
> > I blame the government for this. They introduced a 14k first home owners
> > grant at a time when interest rates were so low. Of course this was
going
> to
> > cause a massive housing boom. They then reduce this first home owners
> grant
> > at a time when first home owners need it the most.
> >
> > The government has failed us again, this time, it is Howard. Give us a
> > break, Howard.
> >
> >
>
>

[matt]

Same old story that's been going around for years. It's not new. It happened
in the sixties. It happened in the seventies. It happened in the eighties
and it happened in the nineties.

$14k government grant? That was to combat GST. No other home owner has ever
received a payout from the government to buy their own home. The people who
qualified were just lucky.

And as for your statement that the only people who make money are the
developers and real estate agents. Think again. Developers have always made
money. That's what they do. If there was no money in it then why bother
doing it? Developers are charging higher prices not to get higher returns
but to ensure that their profit margins remain constant. It's the cost of
construction that is sky rocketing as a result of a depressed market which
extends back to the early nineties. They're just making up lost ground.

Like everything in economics it will balance itself out. Inflation is
playing catch up. I don't suppose you'll be complaining every time you get a
pay rise.

If you're gonna get political in an electronics newsgroup try and develop an
understanding of economics. Supply & Demand. Peaks & Troughs.

In response to your header for this message. Housing boom.....everyone
wins....in the end......for now.



"Marc" <sam@everlast.net.au> wrote in message
news:40794d48@news1.veridas.net...
> There are few people who have benefited from the recent housing boom. Mums
> and dads who's family home has doubled in price may think they are better
> off, but...
>
> 1. When they want to 'upgrade' houses, they will find that the house they
> want to buy has also doubled in price, so they don't benefit.
> 2. Because mums and dads houses have doubled in price, they pay more in
> council rates, water rates, etc...
> 3. First home buyers are now burdened with larger mortgages. The
'Australian
> dream' for these people is further away.
>
> The people to gain are people in the property industry - developers, real
> estate people, etc. Of course, the government gains with massive stamp
> duties, land tax, etc.
>
> The mums and dads have not gained.
>
> The first home buyers for the next 15(?) years are the losers.
>
> I blame the government for this. They introduced a 14k first home owners
> grant at a time when interest rates were so low. Of course this was going
to
> cause a massive housing boom. They then reduce this first home owners
grant
> at a time when first home owners need it the most.
>
> The government has failed us again, this time, it is Howard. Give us a
> break, Howard.
>
>

[thomo]

So what's your take about negative gearing for housing ... unnecessary
government subsidy?

"matt" <git@msn.com> wrote in message
news:yxmec.4895$ED.3512@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Same old story that's been going around for years. It's not new. It
happened
> in the sixties. It happened in the seventies. It happened in the eighties
> and it happened in the nineties.
>
> $14k government grant? That was to combat GST. No other home owner has
ever
> received a payout from the government to buy their own home. The people
who
> qualified were just lucky.
>
> And as for your statement that the only people who make money are the
> developers and real estate agents. Think again. Developers have always
made
> money. That's what they do. If there was no money in it then why bother
> doing it? Developers are charging higher prices not to get higher returns
> but to ensure that their profit margins remain constant. It's the cost of
> construction that is sky rocketing as a result of a depressed market which
> extends back to the early nineties. They're just making up lost ground.
>
> Like everything in economics it will balance itself out. Inflation is
> playing catch up. I don't suppose you'll be complaining every time you get
a
> pay rise.
>
> If you're gonna get political in an electronics newsgroup try and develop
an
> understanding of economics. Supply & Demand. Peaks & Troughs.
>
> In response to your header for this message. Housing boom.....everyone
> wins....in the end......for now.
>
>
>
> "Marc" <sam@everlast.net.au> wrote in message
> news:40794d48@news1.veridas.net...
> > There are few people who have benefited from the recent housing boom.
Mums
> > and dads who's family home has doubled in price may think they are
better
> > off, but...
> >
> > 1. When they want to 'upgrade' houses, they will find that the house
they
> > want to buy has also doubled in price, so they don't benefit.
> > 2. Because mums and dads houses have doubled in price, they pay more in
> > council rates, water rates, etc...
> > 3. First home buyers are now burdened with larger mortgages. The
> 'Australian
> > dream' for these people is further away.
> >
> > The people to gain are people in the property industry - developers,
real
> > estate people, etc. Of course, the government gains with massive stamp
> > duties, land tax, etc.
> >
> > The mums and dads have not gained.
> >
> > The first home buyers for the next 15(?) years are the losers.
> >
> > I blame the government for this. They introduced a 14k first home owners
> > grant at a time when interest rates were so low. Of course this was
going
> to
> > cause a massive housing boom. They then reduce this first home owners
> grant
> > at a time when first home owners need it the most.
> >
> > The government has failed us again, this time, it is Howard. Give us a
> > break, Howard.
> >
> >
>
>