Your all talking silly, if you want to get to the heart of the matter it's all down to those evil money lenders. If you were not able to burrow money how much would houses cost?

The truth is Government should stay well away from this sort of thing. We would all be better off if Governments suck to the basics. The idea that private investment would cease is total crap. There will always be a demand for housing so there will also be people to make them. Government at all levels including highly corrupt councils are feeding the flames.

It is all hype. Hype is what drives speculation. If you understand human emotion you can too be a millionaire. It is very hard if you have ethics bred into you though as you understand it is wrong, so blame my parents yes I do.

Why do we pay extra for European appliance? Some still made same factory as Asian brand, some made in Turkey. No difference in quality. Hype.

Same with land. Hype. Water view. Waterviews are actually free, take a picnic to the shoreline, free. If you work 40 hours in a lower stress work environment you have lots of time to enjoy the waterview. However those that pay millions for one often have little time to actually enjoy thier view. Just hype.

The government keeps giving some incentive to keep house prices high. They use FHOG which just inflates price, migration then the foreign investment last year so now Chinese nationals are buying 30% housing stock. Whenever it looks like collapsing enter new scheme. Then talk up how we are doing so well. Ponzi scheme economic policy. Hope they never take the eye off the ball, then collapse for sure. The thing is many vacant building, also some tourist accommodations at quite low vacancy rates so easily converted to housing. There is no real shortage of housing and there is no real shortage of many skills, just ask a cab driver. Just a shortage of skilled workers willing to work for peanut. Hype.

One threat I see is debt at retirement. Once you are 45 income options reduce so many will borrow against their house to pay rates, repairs, even "buy" a job so I think more and more will have debt at retirement and will need super to pay out debt rather than self fund retirement. At the end of the day the only real wealth is equity, not home values. There is a decline in outright ownership. The skills shortage that is over stated is really a push for lower paid workers. One does not add up to the other being sustainable.

*So "double incomes" may have been the cause, rather than the effect, of more expensive property.*

Ah very true! I seem to recall some Reserve Bank statistics
which showed that some of the highest real estate debts were
carried by double income professionals, uptrading their inner
city homes. So if you want to live close to the city, that
is who you are competing with.

You can still buy a house in the outer suburbs of Brisbane for under $300K. Sure, it's not the flash modern, rendered home, but it's a house.

Lower your standards a little, prioretise your spending and you may well be able to afford a house.

Now on the other hand, if you want to be close to the cities and keep up with the jones, then yes, afforabillity may well be an issue.

But! Don't get your 'wants and needs' mixed up!

If you can afford to rent at say $400 a week and, you have a steady income and, you don't have a mark against your 'credit history', then you should be able to afford around $300K. That's about $300 per week for the interest. Still leaves $100 for other expenses associated with owning a home.

Save, save, save is the best option. Nobody said there was no pain attached!

Oh, where to start on this one!
Michael of Adelaide wants to stop population growth so we don't have to provide housing. Huh? Why not allow people to build what they need. There is no shortage of labour or building materials. Bring 'em together. Let the economy work, and the market will provide what we need. It is the interferences in the market that is forcing house prices up. I agree that Negative Gearing is a problem, and should be abolished. It is simply an interference, aimed at baby boomer and yuppie investors, but costing Gen X and Y heavily.
Inner-city-trans warns of people opting out of work altogether. That is the result of gov'ment interference. Of course people should keep what they earn, without that same gov'ment that has pushed house prices out of their reach, picking their pockets and taking away the earnings of their sweat or brain.
So, Jack from Bilton, you will understand that your suggestion to have guv'ment develop the land and to manufacture pre-fab houses doesn't sit well with me. Let them show they can run a chook raffle first.
rehctub: Oh dear, your generosity in providing a roof over our heads is overwhelming! Thanks, but, we'd prefer if you'd just vacate the market and give us a chance to buy our own home. Especially as the tax deductions claimed in expenses in Oz exceed the total rents received. So, do you do it for the tax relief, perhaps, or the capital gains? Either way, you are asking future generations to fund your current lifestyle. Some of us choose not to live like that; we prefer to invest our time and money in productive enterprise, but go for it, you civic-minded philanthropist, you. But, puhleeease!, don't expect us to take you seriously.
(to be continued)

Runner, well done for saving. You would have saved a deposit for a (average) property that was 2 or 3 times your (average) wage. Try that now, and you're facing a mortgage 8 times average earnings. The game has changed, and the players might just have to live in that bus forever. House prices (land price, really) have escalated faster than either earnings or savings can keep up with. That's the treadmill we've put Gen X and Y onto.
Pericles takes an academic approach to discredit the report on which the article is based. Could be right, for all I know, but really, who cares? Its beside the point. As Pericles says in a later post, its about cause and effect.
The article is about land price escalating beyond our capacity to pay, and laments the pseudo remedies of regulating greed and speculation by force. It suggests the cause is 'privatisation of land value'.
Compared to all other posts, it makes the greatest sense to me. In fact, nothing else comes close, so I'm prepared to accept the primary proposition, unless I read a plausible critique.