Yes, rent to buy would be a better deal with a portion of the rent becoming the deposit.
Alan B.

Shudder. Sharing a house with big brudder.

You see!…they just don’t get it.

A whole generation now, and future generations, are rendered homeless!

This just doesn’t sink in!

Australia has the most expensive housing in the World!

The culprits for this outrage, are NOT the ones to be trusted to fix it.

It’s time to vote with a bullet not a ballot paper!

Dan

Restrict negative gearing to the first investment property only.
Maximise total investment properties to, say, 5.
A pity homo sapiens is so greedy.

Property investors with their landlord mentality have been on the negative gearing gravy train of tax write offs for years, while many Australians, mostly young families who have a right to ownership of affordable bricks and mortar are literally being locked out. The pity with the 10,000 is its not 100,000.

Morrison's housing policy involves throwing over $5 billion dollars in the drink with a worthless French subs contract, and running up a trillion dollar debt by lining the pockets of his backers from the big end of town.

Graham, your anti- Labor bias is showing.
David

Little rich coming from a bloke whose party stymied any possibility of wholesale reform of the property sector including action on negative gearing but anyway.

In lieu of those reforms this is a reasonable measure. It impacts those most in need of assistance and will make a substantial difference to the cohort who most need it.

And it is a large chunk of that cohort. Given the owner occupier purchasers of homes of those in the under $100,000 wage group sits at just 16% of the overall volume this likely translates to 19,000 people. So 10,000 PA is more than half of that number.
http://www.westpac.com.au/content/dam/public/wbc/documents/pdf/aw/ic/WBC_1H22_IDP_and_Presentation.pdf Page 76.

Good on the Labor party for leaning down with a helping hand.

And yet, despite the subsequent political back-pedalling -

https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/unearthed-clip-shows-scott-morrison-backing-shared-equity-scheme-during-gfc/news-story/4aaae251f8c38f5afa6d6d6f840843f5

The ALP was spooked into dropping their proposed negative gearing changes from the last election but it was the voters who ultimately decided.

The housing market presides over the greatest transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top in Australian history.
Choices are stark for countless people; live under a roof and starve, or eat and live in the open.

This is a current event to deal with during an election period one would think. But not a whisper in addressing this reality.
For too many people there is nowhere to live: The lucky ones have a vehicle in which to dodge the elements to some degree.

Vote for me they cry…not likely say I.

I wouldn’t p* on a politician if they were on fire!

Dan.

Where has the government been over these past years?
Why the sudden move to do something just prior to
an election? More promises and then what?

Let's wait and see what happens next shall we?
At least Labor is trying to take the first step in
the right direction. No one is perfect - but it does
seem like a genuine attempt to help people. Whereas
where has the government been?

What will the Liberal Party look like if it loses the moderate
Josh Frydenberg?

Dan, vote with a bullet you say. Apart from showing your Russian inspired murderous morals? Who is in your crosshairs and why? And why do you think that would do any more that force a new byelection in that seat or those seats? Would you be the nutjob pulling the trigger or do you simply want others to do it for you?
Alan B.

Labor tried a similar scheme in Queensland about 30 years ago. They got a lot of people into trouble. At the time wages were going up quickly, so they started this scheme allowing for an increase in wages to help repayments. It didn't work.

On the other hand it might be an idea to stop denigrating those who supply rental housing. We hear every day sob stories of people who can't find accommodation for love nor money. Yes it must be tough for them, particularly as thousands of homes are temporarily out of use due to flood damage, & won't be back for a while.

Do remember Keating cut negative gearing for rental housing, & them had to bring it back quickly as the availability of rental housing dried up. I don't know if any of you have done the math, but I personally would never invest in rental housing, even with negative gearing. The math just doesn't work, except in times of very rapid inflation. Now might be a good time, before all those flood damaged homes come back on the market, unless of course you get a tenant who trashes the house. Ever checked the cost of rental house insurance.

What we need is a rapid release of housing blocks to bring the land component of housing back to something more sensible. Just a few years back, [3 or 4], you could buy a 1.5 acre block near me for $40,000. Now a 4000Sq Mt block is $299,000.

A small 3 bed on one of them brings $800,000, & you think $4000 a week is too much to charge for rent. Only an mathematical idiot would do it.

Sorry that was $400 a week rent, but it could soon be $4000.

Hassy, you will have to admit "affordable housing" is out of reach for many Australians. I see home ownership as a RIGHT, not a luxury. The system as it now operates puts that dream of owning a home out of reach for so many, particularly young families, something has to be done about it. If the private system cannot provide, and it cannot, then there is no alternative other than government intervention. There must be an alternative to the "rental trap" that now exists, in some cases a shortage of rental accomerdation is putting people out on the street.

Could I suggest AB, your reputation would be better served, if you didn’t advertise yourself as the OLO Royal DH.

Dan.

Suggest anything you like. Dan.

Your latest contribution simply makes my case, thanks!

On the topic of affordable housing? Something needs to change! And could start with negative gearing. which should be limited to 5 max properties and only on new build housing only. With a phase in period of 18 months to give investors a chance to get out of existing housing and into brand new not yet lived in housing.

That and the release of much more land by state government limiting supply currently to ramp up stamp duties, which should be abolished as promised with the introduction of the GST. Which should be withheld from those states still imposing stamp duties, until they comply and abolish it and other front loaded taxes! No ifs, buts or maybes!
Alan B.

That is the trouble with lefty thinking Paul. Far too many "rights", & not enough responsibilities.

Paul perhaps people should have the right to pitch a tent, or build a humpy on public land, as did the aboriginals, but no one has a "right" to expect others to supply things they don't have. There are tens of thousands of people who could have bought themselves a house, but wanted other things, like new cars, instead. They now have no right to public moneys for housing.

Even if we beat the local council, & get to split off a block for my daughter to put a house on, it will still cost me over $40,000 in council fees & charges. It will then cost her something similar in fees to actually build. If we could stop greedy councils ripping everyone off housing would be a lot cheaper.

I agree it is tough for kids today, but a lot of the reason is high taxes, direct & indirect. When I bought my first house most paid only 7.5% tax. Today with so many handouts to so many, people lose too much of their income for governments to spend on others, or wasteful "infrastructure" spending, that helps far too few to be of any use. Perhaps if government did less for the "needy", they would be able to do more for themselves.

Superannuation is a perfect example, taking money off people at the very time they need to buy houses, & raise kids. A house owned free & clear is the best superannuation on earth, not more money to spend in retirement.

The problem with accessing supa to pay for housing, or as Morrison did allow people to access supa to pay bills, is in old age there will be insufficient funds available to pay an every growing number on aged welfare.

"but no one has a "right" to expect others to supply things they don't have."..."split off a block for my daughter to put a house on". With your philosophy your daughter should be going it alone!

Hasbeen, disagree as you would if was you and yours reduced to living in a roadside tent! Something I'd like to see and something that was common during the Great Depression for a lot of former hasbeens and where we are headed now.

Stamp duty must be abolished as promised, along with all other front loaded tax and land tax.

State governments need to cut their cloth to suit their budget, not front load until affordable housing (a human right) is just a memory.

It's the cost of urban land and all the parasite middlemen (commission sales people talking it up) that make housing unaffordable.

Their needs to be a pool of government money dedicated to low cost housing loans. With each house becoming a government asset that supports the credit side of the ledger so the pool simply grows and grows as homebuyers pay down their loans. Meaning more and more folk are able to buy into affordable (steel framed) housing.

And all with new immigration severely restricted, their employment better guaranteed!

I have no sympathy for loan sharks or rogue real estate investors price gouging homebuyers out of the marketplace. And would counter their callous practice with oversupply!

Oversupply would force the price of housing down and down, until every boy and his dog could afford to live in Christian dignity, in a home of their own! This would also assist and grow the economy as well as steel production here at home! and a win/win situation for all Aussies!
Alan B.

Sorry AB

I’ve been busy voting with bullets in Buffalo…long trip!

What was it you were saying?

Dan