Cameron Murray - The Great Housing Hijack | Australia's Biggest Book Club
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 04. 2024
- The Great Housing Hijack by Cameron Murray reveals how vested interests pull the strings on the property market in Australia, and offers a solution for genuinely affordable housing for those who need it.
While Australians on regular incomes dream of lower rents and prices, the housing policy debate has been hijacked, sailing further away from workable solutions.
Leading economics commentator Cameron Murray reveals how property insiders shape the housing market and its policy settings. He explains what property developers really mean when they call for more supply in order to provide affordable housing. He shows why landlords and the real estate industry resist rent controls and why the tax and first home buyer policies of the main political parties achieve little for first home buyers.
The hoaxes created by the Housing Cheer Squad hide the brutal truth: for every winner in the property market, there is a loser.
Sign up to get our latest analysis sent to you via our fortnightly newsletter!
📧 theaus.in/newsletter
Help us make more videos like this by becoming a supporter:
❤️ theaus.in/donateYT
There is some serious lack of community and awareness in society that as a home owner, you want to get rich by running a defacto cartel and making younger people pay more for something than you did.
As a recent home buyer, I don't want prices to rise faster than wages. That pre-2000 price-income ratio of 3:1 should be driven back by policy.
It also means that whilst homeowners are getting richer on paper with higher house prices, it doesn’t mean much when they want to move and still have to pay heaps for their next home…
@@Nikkska but at least they can keep up! That hardly clients as nothing relative to those who aren’t even on the ladder.
rent is not 20% of income, at the moment its sitting at 40%
As a disability pensioner, I spend about 70% of my income on rent. I don’t know anyone spending only 20%.
the problem in australia is there are no alternative tax effective investments than being a landlord. In the UK we have ISAs which allow people to invest £20000 a year in stocks/shares/cash tax free and pension allow £60K each year so there are alternative investments for people in the higher tax brackets. Then landlords would sell and buy alternative investments if they were more attractive. its crazy australia tax returns on savings of people saving for their first home yet give tax deductions for landlords. -)
Indeed!!!
Why the need to be rich though? If the government provided more services and we could afford to work less, what would be the point of all this investing? We’re ripping each other off just to be a bit richer tomorrow and in the meantime our planet is groaning under the weight of all this resource extraction and consumption. We regularly overshoot the rate at which we consume natural resources, idk who wants to advocate for investing on a dying planet…
@@ninefablesfox4872 wealth is unlimited freedom...in this world 🌎
@@ninefablesfox4872 well we live in democratic capitalism as the least worse economic system invented so far. Generally it is better if people can be self-reliant and not be dependent on the state hence the need to invest money for your future etc. Also to improve living standards we rely on economic growth and saving and investment otherwise we would still be living in caves. Ofcourse there is a role for govt to provide a legal system, property rights and help the less fortunate. Countries where the govt provides most of the services (think russia, cuba) have not been very successful even if ideally this might sound good. -)
@@user-yl4st7wi5w I don't think so. It is better is people are cooperative rather than competitive. Many countries in Northern Europe are showing it is far better to provide more government services than not. We have been conditioned to become more selfish and narcissistic since Neo-capitalistic politics of the last 40 years. If we wanted to be great - outlaw private hospitals and private schools, then those most able to affect change would ensure all the schools and hospitals are fit for purpose.
It's a well thought out book !
Really good book. Proves that prices will never drop as ALL pollies want prices up and they make the rules.
Brillant conversation
Cam, when interest rates increase, so does the risk-free return on capital. So, landlords should logically put up rents by at least enough to preserve their desired ROIC. They actually need to put it up by more, because unlike bonds and shares that typically cost nothing to hold, when rtes rise residential rental property attracts increased holding costs (e.g. land tax, mortgage interest, insurance, council rates) that increase disproportionately with improved property value.
Kiribati is pronounced phonetically as Ki-ree-bass.
As a Landlord I don't mind rent control but as a Victorian hitting me with $1000 extra in land tax, Insurance cost going up, rates go up and the return I can get on my investment if I put it in the bank going above 5%. I have to put the rent up or I'd be incompetent. I don't get tax incentives but the only reason I have an investment home is to protect against housing inflation to protect my kids future.
If you own a house as an investment and it’s not returning a profit then you should sell. If you’re owning a house as an asset to provide security to your children, that’s different. But at the moment as a landlord, you’re taking part of the wages of working people in order to hold on to this investment and making those folks poorer and unable to buy their own house. I understand you think of it as providing a service but did you have a hand in building that property, did you mix up material to form the concrete slab foundation or the bricks? Housing should really be a human right, not an investment.
The market for housing has failed ordinary people and really needs more government intervention. The fact that both landlords and renters get ripped off by real estate agents is unbelievable.
@@ninefablesfox4872 Few points to make. Ordinary people do own house's, 66%. I do get a profit of 6% after costs, I don't make them poorer, I provide a brand new home for them at 50% of the cost of a mortgage. The rent is only 15% of their wage and way better then the house I live in. I did build the retaining walls, fences, external concrete, landscaping and helped on the slab pour.
We have needed between 40,000 to 70,000 new homes a year for the last 15 years and the government does help with negative gearing.
I don't like house prices going up as it helps no one other than banks and real estate agents. Interest rates being too low for too long has created this problem and when we get to 8%, where it should be it will slow this right down.
Appreciate you sharing your rationale and I’m sure many can empathise with this.
However it’s quite an inefficient use of existing supply to hold onto a property for someone who doesn’t even need it for another 20-30 years, at the immediate cost of those who currently need a home for themselves and their kids.
I don’t blame you at all for taking what are entirely rational financial planning decisions. I blame the government for lacking the policy to prevent this whole scenario from happening in the first place.
@@ninefablesfox4872 thanks for the advice!
any other business losing money year over year is not viable and should close down . Asking for a assistance instead of absorbing the lose and moving on is not an option for other industries. It shouldn't be any different for landlords.
1 million houses sitting empty in Sydney, purchased by OS investors receiving the tax benefits that are on offer
Not true. Only if they are filing Australian income tax returns and even then, OS investors don't qualify for all the tax benefits. e.g. no CGT discount if you sell an Australian residential property while living overseas, even if it was your principal residence for decades before moving overseas.
The nice little argument pro "build it and they will come", for infrastructure, applies totally to Defence, Health and Education in particular and energy security of any-all elemental/thermodynamical holographic nucleation resources.., for as long as we continue in this Universe.
Does investors create the demand or renters or owner occupied buyers ? There’s a difference say 40 people need a home because say 20 of the ones selling needs another home this then means 20 needs a rental
When 25 homes for sale and 12 for rent
Now 5 investors buy 10 of the homes leaves only 15 available for the 20 that’s selling that needs to buy again now the market demand has increased due to investors the market becomes overheated
This is what is going on when investments in homes by investment funds and overseas Pension funds come here with Billions and buy up the available stock.
Should be tax breaks on a Australia Development program.
Economic investigator Frank G Melbourne Australia is following this very informative content cheers Frank 😊
Commendable.
Yes investors want public housing because it will double the value of their investment because private homes will become unable to find
Singapore’s private homes are now the most expensive in Asia-Pacific, having overtaken Hong Kong, according to a new report.
Data from the Home Attainability Index from the Urban Land Institute (ULI) Asia Pacific Centre for Housing showed the median price of Singapore’s private homes was $1.2 million in 2022, compared to Hong Kong’
Good enough for the goose, good enough for the gander? You are comparing the rent with land tax... yet land tax is not the elephant in the room. It's interest rates. That's by far the biggest expense. As long as interest rates can rise quickly so too should rents.
indeed. that is why the current situation is not sustainable. Salaries have to go up or rents come down.
The land tax is passed onto the tenant in the form of a rental increase.
There are plenty of landlords that own their rentals and don't pay any interest. Interest rates are now at normal long term levels. Don't expect them to come down any time soon. Rent rises is mainly a supply and demand issue.
@@user-yl4st7wi5w disagree. people have a maximum amount but they will have to rent lower quality or worse location or smaller size or all 3 for the same amount. therefore it is possible for rents to rise without people paying more.
I am not Australian born and tend to look at everything going on my adopted country as an outsider. This said, I consider this interview part of the problem. Cameron, could be a politician - he doesn't really answer the interviewers questions. Goes of on tangents and is vague. I am sure he is a bright guy but like all the clueless journalists in this country I cannot help to feel that he is just drinking his own cool aide. Ever considered that first world property prices in USD and that with the AUD having halved in value over the last 25 years that the Ausie homes are actually very well priced in USD?
I suppose he is focusing on something he can fix. The real solution is to become an American and get up on top of that pyramid. Some of my friends have done that and they earn triple what they would make here. Young people should just leave.
Sorry, no longer March - maybe try and realease on time LOL
Singapore's systems are very good. However, it rides on the back of across the border and overseas exploited workers, which brings me to the next point the wealth transfer continues with these arguments because of the necessity of small government thinking, low pension system, and misdiected spending and taxation loop holes, and guess what business as usual in the face of the evolution of what climate science is telling us. Nevertheless, a helpful and good discussion.
Singapore should be in jail. Look deeper and you will find more issues there
Good chat. Great conversation and different perspective. Some of all this is just life. In the early years we all rent, struggle, have multiple jobs, etc. Then we settle a bit, don't spend all our income, get paid better and then enter the market. Keep at it, don't give up. Better to be 80% there after trying than not trying at all.
Please tell me why Capitalism has failed housing?
The claim that higher house prices benefit those who own a single home is infuriatingly stupid. If you just own one home, you cannot sell it and make a profit. Unless you plan to live on the street.
A small house in Manly sold for $3M before Covid and $4.5 after. Surely the person who sold it and made $4.5M in 3-4 years is in a better financial position than someone who has never owned property.
I don't know how AU works, but in Canada owners can borrow against the equity in Property #1 to buy Property #2, #3, #4 and so on. Even those who don't go that route want values to rise so that they can borrow against equity to fund their retirements (2nd mortgage, reverse-mortgage, or sell it to fund very expensive retirement homes/assisted living). It's a huge problem that rewards people who already have access to capital, and shuts out everyone stuck-renting under them.
What utter rubbish!
It depends on how fast the supermarket checkout ladies work..
With that, I don't want to watch any further!!