So you want to rail against property managers, whose expensive services and staff turnover reflect the complication and tenant-slant of the regulations?

But you don't want to discuss the causes of expensive housing, which is indisputably driven by successive federal governments and their Ponzie mass immigration scheme that has been criticised by State Premiers for decades?

Or the foreigners buying up real estate that also has been going on for many years? One country is responsible for taking a massive 8% of good stock. Have you any idea how that affects prices?

You don't want to discuss either the impact on housing of the diversification of government taxes and ramping them up to and past inflation?

Most wanting to invest in tenanted property haven't done the due diligence and financial stress-testing of the investment. S/he is wasting his/her and family's precious years of life and running very real risks of a shorter, troubled life through the introduced chaos and stress.

Sorry diver dan, you are very wrong when you say, "Not owning, or being in the unenviable position of facing unaffordable rents, is a unique path to poverty, with very mean outcomes. Homelessness is an end game.
My post above, re; eviction of renters for profit, by estate agents should be a criminal offence. NSW is the least protected state in this regard".

It is not the responsibility of the owners of residential property to supply housing for those who have done poorly in life. Very many of them are depending on the income from their hard earned property to fund their own retirement.

If you want to subsidise housing, that is a tax payer function, not a house owner function. Individual property owners are entitled to earn market rates for their property at all times.

diver dan,

Government, the State, has been burned too many times and freely admits it is pushing its responsibility for welfare housing onto the private sector.

I believe that the tampering in housing by feckless government, the federal government especially, risks a flight of small investors away from rental property and once that happens it will turn into a mass movement that will not be stopped or turned.

BTW, those foreign investors, especially Asian, buy long. Which means that even your great-grandchildren will never see those well placed properties, housing and farms, on the market again.

LeoJ
*…risks a flight of small investors away from rental property and once that happens it will turn into a mass movement that will not be stopped or turned…*

It is difficult to accurately predict, but easy to invent scenarios of outcomes. A renter in Australia lives a very tenuous existence.

Investment housing in Australia will always have a market value, and an owner. Either the Bank will repossess or the owner will find a way to retain possession. It will not evaporate. So conceivable, a tenant will retain a roof over their head, if it is possible to pay the asking price rent.

No hasbeen, renters should not be subject to profiteering by anybody or any organisation.
And if it happened to you, you would loudly object, trust me. You show very little empathy towards others in this regard. It is one thing to be comfortably ensconced in your own property, but it's quite another, to be smug and insensitive.
You should follow my example. The land value alone of my house, is two million dollars,
So I should go well when a chinaman arrives on the doorstep with a suitcase of laundered money, don't you think? I have concern for how this country is sliding off the edge.

The increasing casualty rate, evidenced by those Australians left behind to be mercilessly plundered for profit by real estate agents, sickens me!

Still totally wrong DD.

I would never consider domestic housing rental as a business proposition, there is too much risk, & not enough prospect for profit. If you want to earn money from rental, commercial is so much safer & so much more profitable, I consider only a fool should ever consider domestic. Still I consider any rental prospect available to the small investor to be a pretty poor choice.

Domestic rents are far too low to be worth the risk of expensive damage & high costs. They need to increase by at least 50% to make any sort of business sense.

In Oz today it is such a bad investment I am surprised anyone does it. In the US you can buy a domestic rental property on 20% deposit, & the rent will cover all costs, including repayments easily. Of course their housing prices are much more sensible than ours, making this possible.

Hasbeen…

I agree that domestic rental in today's climate is huge and risky for the investor.
There was a time when it was a leader of the pack investment medium…those days are long gone.
The only sensible people in the property investment market, are the old hands: The ones who have already made a “motza” , and can afford to ride out the bad cycles, such as we are in.
My gripe about corrupt estate agents, is their complicity in driving prices up, all aspects of it, which brings me to this thread. The poor left to the mercy of estate agents. There is no mercy!

LeoJ has been focused on immigration and over population, as the root cause of increasing poverty in Australia. It can't be denied. This country is a lottery. Very few big winners, and very many losers.

If rents continue to escalate, blind Freddy will be acutely aware of the pitfalls to the economy. Disposable income restrictions and its consequences. The poor will not win a revolt against glaring inequality. When even the term inequality has been castigated by the political class, to mean only applicable to homosexuals and high flying female executives.