The Forum > Article Comments > Selling out Australian home buyers to China > Comments
Selling out Australian home buyers to China : Comments
By Dan Denning, published 1/4/2010RBA governor Glenn Stevens has told anyone who will listen that speculating on house prices is crazy.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
-
- All
Posted by Rapscallion, Monday, 5 April 2010 12:01:29 AM
| |
"Chinese speculators, with suitcases of cash, are merely adding their bids to what many local buyers can afford on the strength of mortgages that they could never pay off anyway"
Except that it still hasn't been proven that they exist and that they are having the effect that the authors suggest. "ABS statistics show that over 800.000 houses were empty on census night" But where were they empty? I doubt they were empty near the CBD or the main suburbs of Sydney, Melbourne or Brisbane. Poor urban planning is as much a cause of our housing crisis than any outside factor. Posted by David Jennings, Monday, 5 April 2010 1:03:18 PM
| |
How long does Australia have to put up with do nothing gutless governments
Non democratic states should not be allowed to buy any property or shares in businesses. As for the Rio tinto business my motto is :- Dont buy chinese last, dont buy it at all! Posted by DOBBER, Monday, 5 April 2010 6:08:49 PM
| |
"ABS statistics show that over 800.000 houses were empty on census night"
This statement is patently false, and suggests little empathy or interest in the plight of the burgeoning numbers of Australians suffering housing stress. There is currently a severe housing shortage which is increasing. Last year saw Australia's population increase by 450,000, yet only 109,000 homes were built. There is an urgent need for new supply, but this will not happen while government is more interested in helping their mates than giving landowners back their rights. It amazes me how people are drawn to such bizarre explanations like working women or wanton speculation. Now it's those dastardly foreigners and their filthy lucre. What is needed is a freer market. Landowners need to have the right to develop their land. Where I live, council changed the rules a few years ago after many people started subdividing their properties. The argument for change was that it was important to preserve the character of the area. Over subsequent years rabbit warren developments have popped up like zits on a kid's face, all built from the finest quality cardboard and staples. When I spy these hideous shitboxes, I cannot but wonder whether there might have been another reason for restricting our rights. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/18/2849944.htm?section=business Posted by Fester, Monday, 5 April 2010 11:24:19 PM
| |
David Jenning and others;
There was a new five story block of units built near here. The salesman for the company tried hard to sell me one of the units. I saw him again and asked about the unit and he replied that they sold them all in Hong Kong, every single one of the 25 units ! They are only available for rent. Talking to him I gathered that they were all bought by one company. This I think is illegal but maybe every employee bought one. This has only just started, but I think it will fall over as the rents will be fairly high judging by the original sale price of $750,000. The Chinese economy is tottering on the edge of a bubble burst. By the end of this year the eonomy will enter a rather risky time so don't expect too much fun times next year. The debt clock has gone up $3,000,000 in the last 15 minutes. Now at $74,296,871,389.00 Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 6 April 2010 4:50:07 PM
| |
David Jennings:
>> Except that it still hasn't been proven that they (Chinese dwelling purchasers) exist and that they are having the effect that the authors suggest. << No, it's not 'proven', and one reason for that is that it is not possible at this stage to get this information from the government; who knows if records are actually being kept, by whom and when they will be released? But it would be startling if all the stories were apocryphal, or if the government's rather reckless opening up of Australian real estate were being ignored by the wealthy citizens of the country with the world's biggest debt bubble, potential bidders whose bids are not constrained by Australian loan to valuation ratios (now becoming much less generous). It is said by friends of mine who have witnessed it (and I can't confirm this as I don't attend auctions) that some auctions in Melbourne are conducted partly in Mandarin. Besides, in my post I did suggest that they are probably just adding to the bids of local bidders, coming over the top as it were. Meaning that the housing bubble is still very much a local phenomenon, Australian home purchasers and so called 'investors' determining prices in a full fledged mania. Posted by Rapscallion, Tuesday, 6 April 2010 9:35:58 PM
|
Chinese speculators, with suitcases of cash, are merely adding their bids to what many local buyers can afford on the strength of mortgages that they could never pay off anyway - they'd still owe heaps when they attempted to retire with their inadequate superannuation. But of course, the negative equity that they were left with when the bubble burst might have brought their loans to an end much sooner. It will be interesting to see what the Chinese do when the bubble bursts in China; many purchases made here might have to be turned back into cash.