Yabby wrote:

"... rest assured that the 1000 million Chinese and 300 million Americans are quite able to sort out their own affairs, ..."

Of course, Yabby. What could possibly go wrong?

"WA is indeed the place to be, if one enjoys living amongst the tranquillity and harmony of nature, animals etc.. I certainly do and I have the luxury of not having neighbours for a few km. All that for less the then cost of your average suburban home."

So, what do you suppose stops people like OZYRENTER doing what you have done?

This might be an opportune time to observe,

the "bull run" might be coming to an end.

The sub-prime crisis in USA is rolling into higher interest rates in Australia, closely followed by massive sell-offs in the share market the scale of which we will not have seen in a couple of decades. That, in turn, will effect more than one or two superannuation funds and pensioner lifestyle expectations..

Rumours of a pending US recession, local higher interest rates, waning consumer confidence are the forerunners to recession,

The economic direction is a “no brainer”.

Any "speculator” who has bought and supposedly forced up house prices is going to be seriously exposed to the impending market downturn. Especially if they happen to be highly geared and forced to cover a house price (the securitised asset) decline.

In my first post to this thread I wrote

“Significantly, many (speculators) are other “Working Australians”, who have elected to defer consumption (save) and seek a good “return” for “saving”.

Some have chosen to save in property, rather than buy shares (riskier) or leave as a cash deposit (safe but very low return) or invest in property trusts (not Westpoint WA,).”

So I guess, let the “working classes” and public bar economists, which this article was blatantly pandering to, enjoy and say “I told you so”.

However, real Speculators actually stabilize any market by buying when prices are falling and selling when prices are rising.

If I were of a mood to speculate in real estate, the future is looking pretty good for a buy.

I also ended that first post with the statement

“There is no “magic bullet” and governments messing with it will only make things worse.”

Doubtless Krudd & Co will be on top of this. Mr “Metoo” not shirking from his election promises.

I am just wondering what piece of brass he will substitute for a “magic bullet”, to fob us all off with.

As is said, “we live in interesting times”.

Daggett, things go wrong every day, all over the world. People deal
with them.

I far prefer my own judgement and my own money to make decisions
about my life, then have some guy claiming to know it all, use
my money to force decisions on me.

As to Ozyrenter, what he does is really up to him. Some people
get on with their lives and make stuff happen, grab opportunities
that are all around them, others prefer to sit and complain. I
have long since learnt that many don't actually want advice, they
just want a bit of understanding for somebody to listen to their
problems. It makes them feel better to tell others, thats about
how far it goes.

eg I've told a number of women who were being physically abused by
their boyfriends, that perhaps they should pack their bags and leave.
They seldom do, seemingly prefering to just complain. Ok, whatever,
each to their own...

Yabby (or should I say yab-bot),

Thanks for that entirely predictable response to my question in regard to OZYRENTER (see "A crisis in housing affordability" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4834#98113). All those who claim that housing is unaffordable these days really have no-one to blame but themselves.

I have to say that stuff about battered women was uncharacteristically original, coming from you, but I fail to see any relevance to this discussion.

I was listening to the president of Real Estate Institute of Victoria discussing with Neil Mitchell on 3AW this morning

It went like this

Melbourne rental housing availability is under 2% (about 5,000 out of 300,000 rental dwellings).

This is the worst availability rate in over 20 years.
Whilst occupancy “spiked” back in the 1980s, the current position is the result of progressive increase in the occupancy, squeezing down the availability rate.

Mitchell then asked

what is the solution?

The REIV president said

Immediately, nothing, medium to long term, the rental property market needs to attract more investors.

Based on that comment I can conclude

Any fiddling with negative gearing (disallowing it from rental dwellings) , regardless of what anyone might say will

1 Not attract more investors into the rental housing market.
2 Not alleviate the unavailability of rental property in Melbourne.

Whilst some “economic experts“ enjoy pontificating about the social morality of tax breaks for investment property and (on other threads) proclaim how a rental dwelling is a passive investment, not deserving the same treatment as other investments;

Whilst Karl Fitzgerald – might ruminate over “Reward for effort would be encouraged over reward for speculation.”

It will not make another dwelling available for rent.

It will not make another house available for ownership.

Notions of fairness and equality, whilst being supposedly noble, do not recognise where a society is.

Aiming for a target is pointless when it is too far away (over the horizon) and the possibility of moving nearer is obstructed by the physical environment.

The physical environment can be summed up as an “existing shortfall in rental dwellings”.

Removing negative gearing from rental dwellings will not miraculously produce more rental dwellings nor move anyone forward.

Politics is said to be “the art of the possible”

Politicians, despite the rhetoric, cannot ignore the physical environment in which we all stand.

Negative gearing for rental property will be around until sufficient rental property becomes available to dispense with it

But by then the speculator/investors would have adjusted their portfolios, sold off their property investment and moved-on anyway.

*The biggest pressure depressing home building is state and local government infrastructure
requirements and other regulations and charges.*

Thats a quote from Robert Gottliebson and its a valid point.

Developers have been loaded up with all these charges in recent
years, so of course they pass them on to home builders. That
makes building new homes so much less affordable. Renters too,
will simply have to pay more, if not enough homes are being built,
due to these charges, thats the reality.

Daggett, if you never got the point I was making, so be it.
Some get it, some don't, some have it, some don't. Just keep
complaining to feel better, just like the 25 year old kid who
spat the dummy. Meantime out there, others are getting on with
their lives, making things happen, most likely passing you by...

Thats life