The real cure to this problem is to find a way to reverse our urbanisation. Australia has basically either Mega Cities or small towns and very little in between. The simple answer to why in a land as under populated as Australia why there is land shortages is that most people want to live in the capital cities and most of them want to live in Bris,Syd,Mel. Governments need to find a way to make it attractive for business and people to move out of the mega cities and take pressure off them. We would fix a lot of other problems at the same time. Politics being what they are in this country another of the sort is likely to happen. The One party you would expect to be thinking about this (the nations) are too busy lining the pockets and filling out liberal party memberships forms.

If they restricted or got rid of negative-gearing, the housing problem (soaring prices) would be alleviated immediately. It would punish the greedy (serves them right) and lower prices to a more affordable level for the masses.

It would be interesting to know how many politicians own second or third houses. Perhaps that might explain the tardiness of successive governments over this issue.

David G, "If they restricted or got rid of negative-gearing, the housing problem (soaring prices) would be alleviated immediately"

Who will provide the welfare housing then David? Because government continues to back out of its responsibilities, relying on mum and dad 'investors', who sacrifice their quality of life to (hopefully) fund children's education and their retirement to shoulder its role.

Do you really believe that tired old spin largely put about by white shoe property spruikers about negative gearing subsidising the payments for the investment property? A loss is a loss and the owner have to fund it out of his own pocket and diminished lifestyle. The property owners also get to stump up for all outgoings to provide shelter and services 24/365 for someone else. That is a lot of risk and worry.

However, prices are driven by demand and the federal government has continually set new records for immigration without regard for housing, water, energy, infrastructure and sustainability. It is the Ponzi scheme to keep profits booming for the big end of town.

With prices going up by 20% in one year and rents soaring, I don't know which loss you are talking about, Cornflower (love that name)!

And who will provide the welfare housing. Same as now. No one!

P.S. I don't like the big end of town either.

Negative gearing causing the housing affordability crisis? I totally disagree. What is causing the problem is a lack of supply in the face of increased demand. Both causes rest solely with government and have nothing to do with negative gearing. In fact, negative gearing puts more money into the housing market, and so it should increase supply.

Two policy changes would end the housing crisis. First, a substantial cut in immigration would remove the enormous infrastructure burden for new home construction and government. A second measure of removing the substantial development restrictions on land owners would rapidly allow the construction of new housing to mitigate demand.

David G

All I can say is that if you can get those returns consistently go for it.

My experience is that investment in rental housing is labour intensive, is inflexible, delivers poor returns and the risks (and range of risks) are considerably higher than most property supporters are prepared to admit.