rehctub, "It takes sacrifices to buy a house and many today simply won't make them"

Some are willing.

Such as the many Asian graduates who put property second on the list of priorities and after gaining citizenship (first priority), they are not long in employment taking lunch and eating noodles at home, before they make their first investment in housing. They buy well located, solid property too. Good for them.

Or a neighbour working as a security guard, now supervisor, for a major store who slowly got into her first cbd unit off the plan, rented it and retained her modest lifestyle to buy more. For her as others, it has always been a hard grind with risks that few are prepared to take. In her forties she is well on the way towards the independence and world travel that were her goals. She is still working, has a positive outlook, is there for the early bus every day rain, hail or shine unlike some, and is now doing P/T study towards a Degree.

My experience is that many young people have what it takes. They have to be very careful with the credit card and discretionary expenditure.

However, it is incontrovertible that large scale immigration is ramping up demand and prices (and taxes and council rates!). That is the elephant in the room that is not being discussed. But why not?

Well they could afford 3 houses if they only did what the old wise one, Joe Hockey did...

You marry well, then get a high paid job as a politician, where you can ensure you get your 'living away from home allowance' while Parliament is in session in Canberra.

You simply pay your wife rent!
Isn't it lucky she bought a mansion in Canberra for them both to stay in?

They have to slum it in the Canberra mansion when I am sure they would rather be staying at either their NSW mansion, or the old Queensland farm they own.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/treasurer-joe-hockey-is-paid-the-same-amount-as-newstart-1000-a-month-to-sleep-at-his-wifes-house/story-fni0cx12-1227396303489

It is true that houses cost more times annual wage today than pre the
1980s. The reason is quite simple, it is a matter of market forces.

Previously banks etc would only lend on the husbands income usually.
There was a push by the ladies mostly but probably their husbands as well
to have the government force the lending authorities to lend on both incomes.

Now economics 1.0 will tell you what happens when twice as much money
appears in a market ?
Surprise, surprise the prices GO UP to meet the money available !!

Next, the price reaches a level where both must work full time and
then eventually have to start paying child care. Another burden for
no, not the parents, the taxpayer, because all their income is taken
up paying for two cars and the house and the government has to step in.
Of course the parents income tax has to pay also for the child care.
Whacko, more money in the market !

Around and around we go adding on costs to meet both fashion and the
"need" for the latest whatsits right from the start.

No wonder we can't afford the houses unless you are in a VERY VERY good job !

notice how its mainly Greens/Labour supporters doing most of the whinging. Strangely enough many of them live in leafy Green suburbs thanks to cushy tax payer funded jobs. The 'sense of entitlement' mainly comes from unionist who sometimes uses cleaners money for prostitutes and Green rent seekers who suck the public purse by scaring kids with pseudo science.

Suseonline,

When she was PM, Julia Gillard voted herself higher pay that the US President, Barack Obama and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

You thought that was quite OK, very reasonable and justified. If she can get it good for her you said as I recall (but correct me if you said otherwise). The going rate you would have imagined.

Julia retired to a $2million 'bungalow' in SA and on a handsome golden handshake and fully indexed super courtesy of the Aussie taxpayer. Deserved and her business you would snort. Leftist feminists of the previous Millenium are proudly distinguished by their snorting, among their other (ahem) ways.

Here is a man who legitimately applies for and receives the ordinary away from home allowance, the conditions and amount of which were not set by him, but you are scandalised and casting nasturtiums his and his wife's way.

Dear Suse,

There's an excellent article in the Sydney Morning Herald
that may just jog a few memories:

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-are-the-expenses-row-hands-out-of-the-cookie-jar-20131011-2vdvi.html