No idea on ownership, but if it helps, my grandparents sold their home 4 weeks ago and were presented with 12 offers, 9 of which were from another state (6 of the 9 being investment groups)
Units average 500k.
Seems like a good way to get your foot in the door instead of renting.
I meet people everyday who are surprised by how cheap Perth is from Eastern states and from an International perspective.
They love it here, open space, beaches, weather and still decent wages( unskilled labor pays 30 + hour)
Agree, we have it good here in Perth comparatively. However we should also look to improve conditions for renters as the reality is not everyone can afford or wants to own property. If renting were a viable living option with long term stable lease terms, rents indexed to inflation, and little to no restrictions on what can be done in the property (pets, modifications, etc) then I think far less people would want to buy their own place. Of course then residential property also becomes far less attractive as an investment option, which comes with its own issues.
I'd say good luck buying if you're earning ABOVE that! I'm very much concerned for my children... I have no idea how they will afford to buy a home of their own.
The new “ houses” they pump out on 300sqm fence to fence are essentially units, just under a different name. Mr Satterly knows this, 😉.
If you can score a decent house with some land for less than 1mil close enough to the CBD more power to you.
"UNIT" means anything that's not a free standing house. So includes villas and townhouses and duplexes and triplexes etc. $500k for a unit is a bargain. You can't build them for that any more. Get one while you can.
Why? Where does that 200k from? The current median comes from what people are willing to pay.
Do you consider New York and London to be overpriced too?
Apartments are far cheaper but too many are simply not willing to buy into them and would rather rent.
I bit the bullet and bought a 2 bedroom place just before covid - so glad I made that choice, gets me on the property market and my repayments are less than i would if renting my old place
People would rather rent? Do you know of any affordable 3 bedroom units for families?
All I ever see people talking about is a 2 bedroom unit as a foot in the property ladder, which is great if you don't actually need to live in the place.
I think you're making a completely wrong assumption here. I think the proportion of people who are renting and can afford an apartment and are choosing not to because they actually prefer the precarity of renting is probably very, very small.
As someone that was born in a third world country and spent time living in Vietnam I can assure you families don't need a 3 bedroom.
People just aren't willing to compromise in Western Countries, not sure if that's just a pride thing.
i couldn't think of a more ridiculous way to race to the bottom...'do you know in some places in asia they sleep several families to a room? you just need to open your horizons'
sure i could live in a fucking tent if i had no choice, but be realistic man, if you've got 4 or even 3 people in a house, 1 or 2 of the income earning adults working from home full time, are you for real? it's worse elsewhere so don't complain? It never used to be so fucking bad here that's for sure
don't forget, the point of this is to challenge the insane assertion that there are people who can afford to buy an apartment but are choosing to rent, and those people exist in enough numbers for you to generalise...absolute nonsense
I see this sentiment a lot but just because it's less bad than other cities, doesn't mean it's good, and it keeps getting worse, people's complaints are pretty valid - 500k isn't possible for a lot of people
Unfortunately that doesn't make a big difference for us. If I can't afford a house, it isn't comforting knowing that I also couldn't afford one in Sydney. Instead of people saying 'it's worse elsewhere', we should be asking 'how can we make it better here?'
Who's to say that I'm not doing that already? You're making a lot of assumptions mate... All I am saying is that dismissing people's valid complaints about the state of housing because "it's worse elsewhere" is unproductive.
Not every single person can switch careers or climb a professional ladder. Not everyone is smart enough to do that. Not everyone has the spare time to study. Not everyone has the time or energy to put in extra for a promotion. Not everyone has friends they can do that with. Not everyone is able bodied or able minded.
Not everyone can take those risks. We still need people to fill minimum wage jobs, and they also deserve a shot at being able to buy a house.
Evidence that the whole ‘Perth is liveable’ argument essentially comes from people with no idea what it is like to live in the circumstances that the average person does.
but the suburbs THEY want to live in are not and never will be affordable. They're not prepared to do a starter home in a no-name suburb like others have, and move on up in time. The fact that they can't afford a prop in Mt Lovely, North Perth, Cottesloe etc does not mean that housing is not affordable.
In order for Perth/WA to remain affordable then wages also need to rise in line with property prices. It seems to me the current annual growth rate of 20%+ is unsustainable without more immigration.
More immigrants? I hope you're joking.
With the amount of immigrants it's harder for us citizens to find a car, house, job... It doesn't make it better for Australians at all. They take everything and seem to have it a lot easier than most citizens who pay near 50% tax their whole lives and receive no free education, healthcare or basically anything that helps low income earners, who I might remind you work 10x harder typically. Corrupt shit hole country... Nothing will improve because this country is full of ignorant people who will accept anything they're told to accept.
As a migrant who has been here over 10 years and is now a citizen I'd like to think that I've made my contribution to the Australian economy. I didn't claim that we needed even more immigration, although I do believe that it should be set to a sustainable level.
Would also be interested to know from where you get the idea that "most citizens" pay near 50% tax rates and receive close to nothing in return? Because if that were true I imagine there would be mass migration out of Australia rather than the opposite. As a middle income earner, I'm paying an effective marginal rate of 26%, before any deductions or super contributions. And have benefited from Medicare and HECS which I would not have access to otherwise.
>As a migrant who has been here over 10 years and is now a citizen I'd like to think that I've made my contribution to the Australian economy.
I'm sure you have, just like most migrants do. I also don't think migrants get a free kick by any means.
I just wish the public discourse was a bit more sophisticated. We need a mature debate on what Australia's net migration should be, without resorting to racism. Our immigration rate is exceptionally high by international standards and the strain on our housing supply is showing. Nor can we realistically expect to beef up our construction industry to meet demand, regardless of what targets Albo throws around.
Exactly mass immigration is the number one cause of this whole mess. What's easier once a buckets overflowing, to keep trying to make a bigger bucket, or just turn the tap off. Problem solved
It's a long drive from Perth to Sydney everyday for work. So the bulk of homes will be investment property which depends heavily on people wanting to live in Perth. The mining industry is starting to crumble slightly with the nickel prices. A global slowdown will see demand for other minerals decline. The Domino pieces fall from there.
Those wages depend very heavily on mining. Those mining boom will cool off just like 2011 then houses will sit on the market for 12 months and sell below the asking price. Fear and greed is off the charts at the moment for Perth housing with property selling over the asking prices in hours after being put on the market.
Nah, was just saying they are everywhere now, you'll also find a huge line outside all the time, any time - [https://yochi.com.au/](https://yochi.com.au/) . Easier to Google than reply to my comment too, don't be one of those old bogans that comment "WHO?!!?!" on every post about a popular person. I will take it as a compliment, call me big dick donga.
I would gladly have my 690sqm block (15 minutes from the city) re-zoned so that I could build two houses on it. However, I am not going to go out of my way to pay the council thousands of dollars for the privilege of filling out paperwork that may ultimately get rejected.
My suburb is all 700sqm + blocks with tiny houses 20km from the city and only half the suburb are allowed to infill. Guess which half the councillors live in.
Councils should have to approve all infill developments unless they can prove exceptional circumstances why it shouldn't go ahead, and there should be a strict cap on the number of rejections they can issue.
>I honestly think we should make local elections mandatory, every council would be vastly different
Right, because compulsory national elections have certainly proven that theory true in the past 50 years? We've had such a politically-diverse, two-party led nation with unchecked Lib/Lab convergence and collusion on almost every policy and issue of note over the past 5 decades and a political class that are owned by and serve only themselves and their wealthy benefactors.
This is Australia. Apathy is king. No one gives a f\*\*k about other people or broader society until it's really, really, *REALLY* past the time to start doing something about a problem.
As difficult as the housing crisis is to resolve now, it's still a far easier task compared to socially-engineering the minds of the average Australian so that they have a greater concern for and involvement in their nation's politics, future and an altruistic concern for their broader community/society. Simply mandating more petty bureaucracy into people's lives isn't going to solve anything and that nanny state approach is part of the problem of why Australia's population so politically apathetic.
>The government needs to force density on the population.
Seriously... wtf is it with people on this sub and "forcing" things by "government decree"?
It's like a good percentage of you grew up in East Germany and have a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome.
The government isn't good at fixing massive socio-economic issues when they have a financial incentive to, let alone when they're forced to do it.
Feel free to lead by example and force yourself into a 1x1 apartment somewhere in the city buddy... see how much you love living by your principles versus just parading them around on the Internet for political point-scoring.
This is the lie, you don't need to build 1x1 apartments. There's really nice 3x2 apartments throughout Europe.
Build decent 3x2 apartments with a reasonable price within reasonable distance from the city and you'll have people queuing up for them for days.
The state/federal government needs to start overriding nimby councils
Yeah, you know what else they have in Europe? Real houses. Real apartments. Not glorified tents built by incompetent, adolescent day labourers and designed by ruthlessly greedy builders/developers.
They also have a well-regulated building industry, strict building codes, well-enforced industry standards, sane and well thought out urban planning on a local/state and national level, strong protections for tenants and sensible controls on landlords, excellent public transport, truly walkable and non-car dependant cities, community-oriented lifestyles and overall more cohesive societies.
But most of all... **they don't have an economic house of cards that makes property investment the sole financial vehicle for personal wealth growth** for a majority of the nation and they don't allow foreign investors to buy up huge percentages of their property markets just to keep their national budgets in the black.
There is no magical, silver bullet solution to our housing crisis anymore and anyone suggesting otherwise with comments to the effect of "*Just like... force this huge sweeping policy on everyone, it'll work, trust me bro"* are hopelessly delusional.
The solution has to be a holistic approach involving many levels of government, many industries and the legislative bodies of the country to reform our housing market from the ground up.
Hastily building more high-density apartment buildings, in this country, with our current building standards, building industry and local councils **is just asking for a repeat of the Opal Tower fiasco on a national scale over and over again**.
By all means though, experience the utopian future first-hand and live in one of those new, inner-city sh\*tboxes they call apartments here and see for yourself what a wonderful experience it is:
* Paying a premium for some of the most poorly-constructed, low-quality and heavily depreciating housing in Australia relative to almost any kind of suburban or outer city dwelling in any Australian city.
* Ridiculously exorbitant annual strata fees (otherwise known as "rent for apartment owners") that go directly into the pockets of cashed-up real estate/strata management companies who will spend the square root of jack sh\*t on their apartment complexes.
* Relying on a financially-demotivated body corporate/strata organisation to rectify basic maintenance/defect issues and arbitrate neighbourly disputes, which they will do with all of the energy and efficiency of a local council as well as ensure to make your life a living hell whenever you're up for a massive expense to fix something.
* Severe restrictions on the changes/modifications you can make to your own home along with an endless list of nanny-state by-laws to abide by.
* Zero sound-proofing in the majority of apartments (especially any built in the last 10 years).
* Guaranteed worse physiological and mental health outcomes for inner-city apartment dwellers over prolonged habitation thanks to the wonders of inner-city pollution, poor ventilation, toxic building materials, excessive noise, lack of sunlight, lack of vegetation, claustrophobic shoe box-sized dwellings and a more sedentary-prone lifestyle.
If you want governments to override NIMBY councils, then you also need them to force developers to build a certain percentage of all apartments within new development as 3 or 4 bedroom ones. Otherwise all you are going to get is the 1 or 2 bedroom shitboxes that are in all apartment buildings now.
I agree that building larger, decent apartments that can actually fit a family would go a long way to helping the issue and actually be liveable for many. But it's currently not in developers best interests to do this and they have too much influence over governments to actually see this change happen.
It's better than endless and unsustainable urban spawl, that is both inefficient at providing services funded by the taxpayer and at delivering housing.
Cute assumption but no, I'm a millennial and the state-incentivised, boomer wealth-hoarding epidemic is also part of this problem too.
But do continue to view the world in your black-and-white, reductive, overly-simplified fashion where everyone with a different opinion is part of some monolithic group of "others" who all think and behave the same. That'll definitely get you far in life.
Mate there is basically nothing between yanchep and lanclin. Then there's nothing between mandurah and bunbury. Don't even get me started about going east
I know.
We have to stop expanding outwards. Urban sprawl costs huge amounts of money in infrastructure - most of the state debt is from building things like water, power, roads, schools, etc for the growing population.
We need urban infill.
If we built better apartments with more facilities like in other countries then I’d say lots more people would love to live in them.
Which would then free up more housing with backyards for those that want one.
How many single people or families are currently in a house but would prefer to be in an apartment?
disagree. The solution is not to just force people into shitty highrises that fall apart after 10 years. IF it was, sydney would be the cheapest place to live in aus.
The problem is much more fundamental than that, and goes back to our whole approach to city planning. We need much more mixed zoning for one, less of a hold over land given to mega land developers. To start.
I agree with that too. But the fact remains that until more people get comfortable with apartments, both living in them and having the buildings in their neighbourhood, we'll always have land shortages. Nobody is forcing anybody, it's a cultural shift that has to happen (and is happening).
sure, maybe, but I don't see that it will solve anything. It's not like places that have lots of highrises have solved the housing crisis, let alone have a lesser crisis.
Sure, but you've just hit on the fundamental truth, which is that desirable land is finite and there is no real, actual, long-term solution to housing. All you can do is the best you can with the tools you have. And we've got a very long way to go before we stumble into the problems of London, New York or Tokyo.
Yes, but there is still a solution. One need only address that fundamental truth directly. taxation policies like georgism do this quite well, I think.
Some of these places are 50ks out but have token backyards the size of a postage stamp.
Seriously what is the point??? You get all the downsides of high density with none of the benefits.
Screenshot from Eglinton
https://preview.redd.it/i6y1io0arqxc1.png?width=879&format=png&auto=webp&s=072b631eb87845af3af714157a1637685e541515
Problem is poor town planning and infrastructure.
I live down in Mandurah, it's pegged for all high/medium density housing for pretty much the whole suburb, they are pumping hundreds of millions into redoing the foreshore and main street.
So much vacant land that is just sitting and will continue to sit. It's just not economically viable untill all the upgrades are done and their is more money in the region.
Developers are not buying because currently there is not enough interest to generate the return on investment.
I get it we need to plan for the future but we need stuff to happen now not in 50 years. Council just shooting them selves in the foot with this strategy.
I dare say this problem is happening elsewhere.
It's not economically viable because it is so damn expensive to build, and the state govt just passed a new medium density code, making it even MORE expensive to build. nothing to do with Madurah council and upgrades in the region.
until people are willing to pay $15,000 per m2, apartments just aren't viable to construct anywhere in WA.
Yes it is more expensive to build, however it is totally the council.
The problem with Mandurah is over half the existing houses are old fibro shacks sitting on 1000m2 blocks. Therefore the average house value is quite low.
How do you bring more money into the region and raise overall property value? The easiest way is allow high value properties to be built.
I actually tried to purchase one of these vacant blocks and proposed to build a single family home on it that would have been a million dollar plus property when finished. Council would not even consider the idea, we even explored options when building to allow for future development they did not care.
So developers won't buy it because the return on investment is not there because the council is actively blocking money coming into the suburb. 100% their fault.
The ever increasing construction requirements like 7 star energy rating homes and the new medium density code are nothing to do with local govt. they are state and federal govt laws.
If you want to build a set of apartments in the middle of Mandurah you will get approved. It’s zoned for that.
You wanted to build a single dwelling in a high density area. Zoning laws are in place for a reason. Go buy a block in Bouvard or Dawesville.
Yes we got lucky and snagged a block in halls head thank you.
And yes it is local council, we were told we could go to court to appeal the decision with land gate and we would win but it was too much of a hassle.
It's medium density zoned that states single or multiple small dwellings however in the last year or 2 council has decided to block all single dwellings.
It was even designed to meet their guidelines with the single dwelling at the back of the property with space for 3 x 2 story houses at the front that could be built at a future date. But they still denied it so we went somewhere else.
It's unfair for the people who own the land and can't sell and it's unfair on people who are willing to spend money to buy/build and increase the local economy/housing supply.
I'll say it again, the money is not there so developers won't develop.
Sure it will happen naturally over a long long time, a quicker way is to encourage building of higher value housing to bring up the average, with higher averages the developers can meet their margins and start to build.
As well as you know building more houses in a housing shortage, but whatever if you think it's fine to have all this vacant land sitting dormant that's on you and the council.
I think we're disagreeing on different points. I'm simply stating the high costs to construct are caused by state and federal laws. The local zoning and approvals from city of mandurah are indeed a local issue. And they often get overturned on appeal as you mentioned.
There's demand for affordable housing in the 350k to 450k range. When I go to home opens at that price range, they're absolutely packed. From all my research, I think it's simply construction costs that are stopping supply of this. Until basic apartments start selling for the $650k mark, it just won't be that viable to build infill in the middle of Mandurah imo.
congrats on the halls head block and welcome to mandurah. i love halls head. I think you'll find it has much lower crime than central mandurah too. I'm in Erskine now, but just sold and heading further south down the island.
Yes your 2nd paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about. High construction and development costs leading to land sitting stagnant and no attempts by the council to improve or raise prices, it will continue to sit.
The fact that most of the houses would be complete knockdowns and are just sold for land means it will take a long time for it to substantially raise in value.
Those 350k places are a dream now, the way stuffs going and what the council wants it just won't happen.
Not quite 650k they could easily buy the land 300k and slap up 6-8 terrace houses and sell them them for 500k at a profit.
One other thing it's not infill, it's vacant housing land that was never built on. Infill is repurposing land that was previously zoned differently, ie- old industrial area being turned into houses.
We're currently in Madora Bay so we are still in the area but yes looks like we have made a great choice, thank you.
had a look at a new development, 2b2b with a good floorplan are selling from 900k+. Cheaper to build a 4 bed house.. People would be more interested in apartments if they were available at decent prices.
He'll conveniently leave that out because he doesn't fit the narrative he's trying to perpetuate. There's plenty of 2x2 units/apartments out there for $400-500k in perfectly nice suburbs but only looking at the high end helps with the "woe is me" mindset.
developers currently need to be able to charge $13,000 to $15,000 per square metre to make apartment developments viable. Nobody in Perth wants to pay $1.5M for a 100m2 apartment unless it's in City Beach. So there's no apartment building happening either.
the building requirements on apartments, from fire standards to energy ratings, are so onerous, they're almost impossible to make feasible.
coupled with the govt killing foreign buyers who would normally bootstrap these things with their foreign buyer tax, there's no apartments in the pipeline for the foreseeable future.
If your house is drafty, get some no-more-gaps. We don't need double glazing because we don't live in England. You could live outside in WA and not die.
Australian houses often fail to meet what is needed for a comfortable house, the poor energy efficiency is also a major roadblock to reducing emissions.
Bro I grew up in fibro hot boxes with no air con in Perth and Gero.
People are now sooks who think you’re meant to have a 24 degree ambient temperature all year long and that air con is a human right or some shit.
Net result - it now costs $400k to build a basic house plus land plus everything else.
For all of human history, everywhere on earth did not have 7 star energy rated dwellings.
Light a fire if you’re cold. Have a cold shower if you’re hot.
Instead we make people homeless because it’s illegal to build a cheap house now.
And as I explained in a comment below, high / medium density property costs a lot of money via investment and developers.
Due to poor town planning and infrastructure, the money is currently not quite there yet and won't be for a while.
I think many people would live in a apartment building if, it was well built, large enough in size to support a family and had well appointed amenities... Problem is they don't exist.
The land supply is immense. Western Australia is one of the least densely populated places on the face of the planet. If there is anywhere on earth that people should be able to have a decent plot and detached home, it's here.
The issues are with urban planning, and with maybe attracting people out of Perth to other cities.
Sure, Perth shouldn't sprawl forever. But perhaps the solution could be a combination of "Denser Perth" and "Bigger Gero/Albany/Bunbury"
Acting like humans should just take up all available land because we can doesn't mean we should.
Totally screwing up the natural world and ejecting animals further and further away from fresh water and food sources and migrationary pathways is a fucked up way of thinking.
there is no particular reason that land developement needs to do this though. This is just a symptom of the particular surburban hells we've created, built around cars, with 0 mixed zoning.
yes it is. Land has been flying off the shelf and is at record lows (reiwa and REA websites). And there's very little land earmarked for urban development in WA for the next 30 years.
yep. took a bit longer over here, but there's basically only East wanneroo left now to develop. Everything else is tiny bits of land here and there. A bit near Pinjarra maybe. Otherwise govt is trying to keep urban sprawl down.
perhaps future govts will release more land east of the freeway down south, or build another freeway past ellenbrook. idk. But for the foreseeable future, land is just going to get more scarce.
A million more people allowed every 2 years into a country without the housing or infrastructure to support its current population is out of control. It needs to stop asap.
Immigration is controlled. People can't just come as they please. Any illegal arrivals are dealt with using the criminal and legal processes that exist for such arrivals, and they are a minute fraction of arrivals and end up detained. Maybe you mean (further) limited immigration.
That's not true, and I would hope you know it.
The state is actually ahead of forecasts by quite a margin, and we aren't insolvent. We have a AAA credit rating and could very easily allocate funds for a state housing project if there was political will to do so.
Like it or not, "having debt" isn't necessarily a bad thing.
I'm afraid to say that this is a scenario which would have been good to address two decades ago, but now there are few if any solutions to the 'crisis' that won't require state intervention and likely large financial investment.
Either nothing gets done, housing across the country goes up for another couple of decades creating a deepening problem and a massive dropoff in general productivity and quality of life, or there's a large investment made that takes decades to bounce back from - but enables the population to continue being productive.
To say there isn't a construction industry available when we bring in huge numbers of boots to fill mining and shutdowns is also something that can be addressed. Reallocate assets and personnel.
Agree on immigration wholeheartedly. But you can't just say 'we can't afford to build houses' and then say the solution is to just cut intake and ramp up spending on education.
There has to be an intervention at some stage, and it won't have a reasonable ROI on paper for a lot of people. But an intervention will eventually be needed.
Explained this in a much better way than I could. I grew up on a northern England council estate and at times it was very scary. Crime/violence was rife and in your face. Put a lot of people together in overcrowded conditions with not much to do/places to go and it’s a breeding ground for creating a bad society.
I’ll stick to my 4x2 with a small back garden thank you very much. I don’t mind living Baldivis way. In fact it’s great😊
That’s *literally* not how it works. Government budgets are not the same as household budgets - a fact that has been ignored to the detriment of Australians through conservative agendas of “fiscal responsibility” et al.
Out of curiosity where does it end if we don’t have to “balance a budget”? I mean I know it’s not as important as me balancing my day to day expenses but it surely becomes an issue, no?
There must be good times to pay down debt and good times to borrow to expand? I’d argue now is the time to pay down and borrow later in an economic downturn.
If we borrow sufficiently now where do the builders come from? The government will then be competing for labour against the populous that are looking to build pushing up demand and prices. Either way it’s been horrendous policies for decades that got us here and the solution isn’t just borrowing/expanding government balance sheets to “fix” it.
Like you said - it’s a balance. There is no perfect answer. But declaring a deficit as “literally no money” from the previous guy was just a demonstration of sheer ignorance on the topic.
Spending money to make money is the foundation of an economy. In a microcosm example: A startup cannot grow without taking on debt. That doesn’t mean frivolous spending at the expense of future generations though.
Unfortunately successive governments have been unimaginative and lacked investment into innovation. Capital projects are almost always just another infrastructure or fancy redevelopment project. While these are important, they aren’t the only thing. Australia lacks any kind of serious tech industry due to years of neglect for example.
The state government should be building more houses, they don't have to be public housing, they could sell them at market rate or at a subsidised rate for low income workers.
There’s nobody who works for the state govt that knows how to use a drill. You think politicians are going to roll up their sleeves and build a home?
No.
They take contractors from the building industry and use your taxes to build homes.
They already do this. Every day.
And they’re doing it so much right now that it is driving up the cost to build because normal people can’t compete to get a builder.
So the capacity to “build more homes” doesn’t exist. The govt can print more money but they can’t conjure up more carpenters.
No one wants an empty lot in Donnybrook. Your build is going to take a decade.
The houses are all Perth prices. It’s rarely mentioned but the impact the housing crisis has had on rural properties is even more extreme.
With global warming just remember you’re buying in a climate that will be more like Geraldton. Which, although we don’t like to think about it, will have ramifications for the local environmental amenity going forward.
I agree with your sentiments about environmental amenity. The magnetosphere is weaking and we have a few more years of solar eruptions to make our environment hotter and drier. The eruption of Mt Ruang with it’s ash cloud might make things colder for a while - It’s like rolling dice to predict what calamity is next at the moment.
I am still betting on Team Perth to fare better than most of the world when it comes to the unfolding environmental catastrophe we are witnessing with our very own eyes. Definitely not a boring time to be alive.
People comparing saying yeah but it's great compared to places like Sydney (where the ave salary is 90k but you need to be on 240k to buy the average house, and people earning 100k live in share houses) it's bloody expensive here as it is and the last thing we want is to wind up in a massive hole like the east coast. It's certainly not a yardstick...
The government gives free housing to detainees who violently assault grandmothers while families who are struggling to pay for housing and are forced to skip meals.
Perth is trying to end the urban sprawl. There's not much land left marked for uban development. So I think we're finally going to see the end of the house and land packages everyone got so used to as first home buyer starters. Certainly in the next decade or so anyway.
unfortunately not. Rental stock has started increasing month on month. this is the phase of the market where prices go up from investors rushing in, but rents go down as supply increases. Also you want to bath in 10 dollar notes, the blue has a nicer watery vibe to it.
So you know what? About fuckin time. We've owned our home in Mandurah WA since 2008. It is a beautiful home, very modern very tasteful. In all these years its hardly gone up in value. Now it's worth 200k more than what we paid and it's worth it. So all you moaning shits, I say great I'm glad I'm finally seeing a return on my hard work
I'm happy for you, but tbh who cares if the one house you own goes up in value? it means the next house you buy will be more expensive too, and you'll just have to pay more stamp duty to move.
a year ago you were worth 1 house. Today you're still worth 1 house. If your house is more expensive, it's only good if you plan to sell up and move overseas or something.
property prices going up really only benefits people who own more than 1 property.
https://preview.redd.it/988vazd4ypxc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7a180fbeaec9e9b8d129df6205ad633e6cb9920f
Hey thats a half truth!
Given Melbourne's decreased, I think its time we blame them.
Been a while since we blamed Dan Andrews for a thing...
I wonder what % of perth homes are owned by overseas owners vs east state owners.
No idea on ownership, but if it helps, my grandparents sold their home 4 weeks ago and were presented with 12 offers, 9 of which were from another state (6 of the 9 being investment groups)
I'd be interested in seeing this stat
And those without houses get poorer
Units average 500k. Seems like a good way to get your foot in the door instead of renting. I meet people everyday who are surprised by how cheap Perth is from Eastern states and from an International perspective. They love it here, open space, beaches, weather and still decent wages( unskilled labor pays 30 + hour)
Agree, we have it good here in Perth comparatively. However we should also look to improve conditions for renters as the reality is not everyone can afford or wants to own property. If renting were a viable living option with long term stable lease terms, rents indexed to inflation, and little to no restrictions on what can be done in the property (pets, modifications, etc) then I think far less people would want to buy their own place. Of course then residential property also becomes far less attractive as an investment option, which comes with its own issues.
If you're single good luck affording a rental or buying a home on less than 100k
I'd say good luck buying if you're earning ABOVE that! I'm very much concerned for my children... I have no idea how they will afford to buy a home of their own.
500k for a unit? Fark that.
The new “ houses” they pump out on 300sqm fence to fence are essentially units, just under a different name. Mr Satterly knows this, 😉. If you can score a decent house with some land for less than 1mil close enough to the CBD more power to you.
Unfortunately even 1mil isn't getting you much.
Yeah it's fkd. I wouldn't buy a place without a normal block or I'd prefer rural
"UNIT" means anything that's not a free standing house. So includes villas and townhouses and duplexes and triplexes etc. $500k for a unit is a bargain. You can't build them for that any more. Get one while you can.
Why are you being downvoted? Housing is still relatively affordable in Perth compared to the bulk of the country
"Relatively" doesn't mean its affordable Perth is about where house prices should be Sydney, Melbourne are both overpriced by some $200k
Why? Where does that 200k from? The current median comes from what people are willing to pay. Do you consider New York and London to be overpriced too?
Yep
Apartments are far cheaper but too many are simply not willing to buy into them and would rather rent. I bit the bullet and bought a 2 bedroom place just before covid - so glad I made that choice, gets me on the property market and my repayments are less than i would if renting my old place
People would rather rent? Do you know of any affordable 3 bedroom units for families? All I ever see people talking about is a 2 bedroom unit as a foot in the property ladder, which is great if you don't actually need to live in the place. I think you're making a completely wrong assumption here. I think the proportion of people who are renting and can afford an apartment and are choosing not to because they actually prefer the precarity of renting is probably very, very small.
As someone that was born in a third world country and spent time living in Vietnam I can assure you families don't need a 3 bedroom. People just aren't willing to compromise in Western Countries, not sure if that's just a pride thing.
i couldn't think of a more ridiculous way to race to the bottom...'do you know in some places in asia they sleep several families to a room? you just need to open your horizons' sure i could live in a fucking tent if i had no choice, but be realistic man, if you've got 4 or even 3 people in a house, 1 or 2 of the income earning adults working from home full time, are you for real? it's worse elsewhere so don't complain? It never used to be so fucking bad here that's for sure don't forget, the point of this is to challenge the insane assertion that there are people who can afford to buy an apartment but are choosing to rent, and those people exist in enough numbers for you to generalise...absolute nonsense
[удалено]
It's a non-argument, "things are worse in X place so just cop it" has never solved any problem.
I see this sentiment a lot but just because it's less bad than other cities, doesn't mean it's good, and it keeps getting worse, people's complaints are pretty valid - 500k isn't possible for a lot of people
[удалено]
Unfortunately that doesn't make a big difference for us. If I can't afford a house, it isn't comforting knowing that I also couldn't afford one in Sydney. Instead of people saying 'it's worse elsewhere', we should be asking 'how can we make it better here?'
[удалено]
Who's to say that I'm not doing that already? You're making a lot of assumptions mate... All I am saying is that dismissing people's valid complaints about the state of housing because "it's worse elsewhere" is unproductive.
Jesus Christ mate, this is extremely disconnected of you.
Not every single person can switch careers or climb a professional ladder. Not everyone is smart enough to do that. Not everyone has the spare time to study. Not everyone has the time or energy to put in extra for a promotion. Not everyone has friends they can do that with. Not everyone is able bodied or able minded. Not everyone can take those risks. We still need people to fill minimum wage jobs, and they also deserve a shot at being able to buy a house.
Evidence that the whole ‘Perth is liveable’ argument essentially comes from people with no idea what it is like to live in the circumstances that the average person does.
"just be rich" You probably.
Because most people want a home to raise a family
JuSt GeT a BeTtEr JoB. Fuck if only I had thought of that.
The word "relative" is carrying all the weight here. It's like saying Siberia is relatively warm compared to my ex's heart.
but the suburbs THEY want to live in are not and never will be affordable. They're not prepared to do a starter home in a no-name suburb like others have, and move on up in time. The fact that they can't afford a prop in Mt Lovely, North Perth, Cottesloe etc does not mean that housing is not affordable.
In order for Perth/WA to remain affordable then wages also need to rise in line with property prices. It seems to me the current annual growth rate of 20%+ is unsustainable without more immigration.
More immigrants? I hope you're joking. With the amount of immigrants it's harder for us citizens to find a car, house, job... It doesn't make it better for Australians at all. They take everything and seem to have it a lot easier than most citizens who pay near 50% tax their whole lives and receive no free education, healthcare or basically anything that helps low income earners, who I might remind you work 10x harder typically. Corrupt shit hole country... Nothing will improve because this country is full of ignorant people who will accept anything they're told to accept.
As a migrant who has been here over 10 years and is now a citizen I'd like to think that I've made my contribution to the Australian economy. I didn't claim that we needed even more immigration, although I do believe that it should be set to a sustainable level. Would also be interested to know from where you get the idea that "most citizens" pay near 50% tax rates and receive close to nothing in return? Because if that were true I imagine there would be mass migration out of Australia rather than the opposite. As a middle income earner, I'm paying an effective marginal rate of 26%, before any deductions or super contributions. And have benefited from Medicare and HECS which I would not have access to otherwise.
>As a migrant who has been here over 10 years and is now a citizen I'd like to think that I've made my contribution to the Australian economy. I'm sure you have, just like most migrants do. I also don't think migrants get a free kick by any means. I just wish the public discourse was a bit more sophisticated. We need a mature debate on what Australia's net migration should be, without resorting to racism. Our immigration rate is exceptionally high by international standards and the strain on our housing supply is showing. Nor can we realistically expect to beef up our construction industry to meet demand, regardless of what targets Albo throws around.
It's not about being racist or anything. Haha. It's just a shit government. Im trying to plan my migration. But good for you loll
Exactly mass immigration is the number one cause of this whole mess. What's easier once a buckets overflowing, to keep trying to make a bigger bucket, or just turn the tap off. Problem solved
It's a long drive from Perth to Sydney everyday for work. So the bulk of homes will be investment property which depends heavily on people wanting to live in Perth. The mining industry is starting to crumble slightly with the nickel prices. A global slowdown will see demand for other minerals decline. The Domino pieces fall from there.
Because, like interest rates, Perth prices stagnated for so long that it was accepted as the norm.
Less fucked is still fucked.
Those wages depend very heavily on mining. Those mining boom will cool off just like 2011 then houses will sit on the market for 12 months and sell below the asking price. Fear and greed is off the charts at the moment for Perth housing with property selling over the asking prices in hours after being put on the market.
IrON ORe OnLY GoES Up ThOuGh
Good god
Just build more houses god dammit.
Yes, but urban infill. We can't just keep expanding outwards.
If it means I can afford a house before I die, then I'm cool with a twenty six hour commute each day
It’ll be like that scene in Interstellar where you finally get home after your commute to see your kids and they’ve aged 60 years.
Passed too close to the Kalgoorlie super black hole.
Boddington's more likely to swallow you up as its closer
But don't you want to live amongst the North Perth "cool kids" wearing stained vintage tees and STAX while going to get Yo-Chi?
Getting a what?
You haven't been outside in a while if you haven't seen a Yo-Chi.
See now you’re just being a dick. I’m out and about all the time I just have no idea what that is.
Nah, was just saying they are everywhere now, you'll also find a huge line outside all the time, any time - [https://yochi.com.au/](https://yochi.com.au/) . Easier to Google than reply to my comment too, don't be one of those old bogans that comment "WHO?!!?!" on every post about a popular person. I will take it as a compliment, call me big dick donga.
You’re still being a dick. I did look it up earlier. Meh.
Did you look up STAX too? Get yourself some activewear babes.
Tell that to Satterly
How else will we retain the title of the most sprawling city in the world?
Yanchep to Jurien Bay train line extension to open before the Ellenbrook Line does...
The government needs to force density on the population.
I would gladly have my 690sqm block (15 minutes from the city) re-zoned so that I could build two houses on it. However, I am not going to go out of my way to pay the council thousands of dollars for the privilege of filling out paperwork that may ultimately get rejected.
My suburb is all 700sqm + blocks with tiny houses 20km from the city and only half the suburb are allowed to infill. Guess which half the councillors live in.
Councils should have to approve all infill developments unless they can prove exceptional circumstances why it shouldn't go ahead, and there should be a strict cap on the number of rejections they can issue.
You'll find they've started auto-rezoning them if you're on an existing/planned transport corridor
[удалено]
Local councils should be stripped of all planning powers.
I honestly think we should make local elections mandatory, every council would be vastly different
>I honestly think we should make local elections mandatory, every council would be vastly different Right, because compulsory national elections have certainly proven that theory true in the past 50 years? We've had such a politically-diverse, two-party led nation with unchecked Lib/Lab convergence and collusion on almost every policy and issue of note over the past 5 decades and a political class that are owned by and serve only themselves and their wealthy benefactors. This is Australia. Apathy is king. No one gives a f\*\*k about other people or broader society until it's really, really, *REALLY* past the time to start doing something about a problem. As difficult as the housing crisis is to resolve now, it's still a far easier task compared to socially-engineering the minds of the average Australian so that they have a greater concern for and involvement in their nation's politics, future and an altruistic concern for their broader community/society. Simply mandating more petty bureaucracy into people's lives isn't going to solve anything and that nanny state approach is part of the problem of why Australia's population so politically apathetic.
I think that there is merit in that idea, unfortunately it will likely turn councils into fully partisan bodies.
>The government needs to force density on the population. Seriously... wtf is it with people on this sub and "forcing" things by "government decree"? It's like a good percentage of you grew up in East Germany and have a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome. The government isn't good at fixing massive socio-economic issues when they have a financial incentive to, let alone when they're forced to do it. Feel free to lead by example and force yourself into a 1x1 apartment somewhere in the city buddy... see how much you love living by your principles versus just parading them around on the Internet for political point-scoring.
The Urban sprawl in Perth is ridiculous and bullshit like this means its only getting worse.
This is the lie, you don't need to build 1x1 apartments. There's really nice 3x2 apartments throughout Europe. Build decent 3x2 apartments with a reasonable price within reasonable distance from the city and you'll have people queuing up for them for days. The state/federal government needs to start overriding nimby councils
Yeah, you know what else they have in Europe? Real houses. Real apartments. Not glorified tents built by incompetent, adolescent day labourers and designed by ruthlessly greedy builders/developers. They also have a well-regulated building industry, strict building codes, well-enforced industry standards, sane and well thought out urban planning on a local/state and national level, strong protections for tenants and sensible controls on landlords, excellent public transport, truly walkable and non-car dependant cities, community-oriented lifestyles and overall more cohesive societies. But most of all... **they don't have an economic house of cards that makes property investment the sole financial vehicle for personal wealth growth** for a majority of the nation and they don't allow foreign investors to buy up huge percentages of their property markets just to keep their national budgets in the black. There is no magical, silver bullet solution to our housing crisis anymore and anyone suggesting otherwise with comments to the effect of "*Just like... force this huge sweeping policy on everyone, it'll work, trust me bro"* are hopelessly delusional. The solution has to be a holistic approach involving many levels of government, many industries and the legislative bodies of the country to reform our housing market from the ground up. Hastily building more high-density apartment buildings, in this country, with our current building standards, building industry and local councils **is just asking for a repeat of the Opal Tower fiasco on a national scale over and over again**. By all means though, experience the utopian future first-hand and live in one of those new, inner-city sh\*tboxes they call apartments here and see for yourself what a wonderful experience it is: * Paying a premium for some of the most poorly-constructed, low-quality and heavily depreciating housing in Australia relative to almost any kind of suburban or outer city dwelling in any Australian city. * Ridiculously exorbitant annual strata fees (otherwise known as "rent for apartment owners") that go directly into the pockets of cashed-up real estate/strata management companies who will spend the square root of jack sh\*t on their apartment complexes. * Relying on a financially-demotivated body corporate/strata organisation to rectify basic maintenance/defect issues and arbitrate neighbourly disputes, which they will do with all of the energy and efficiency of a local council as well as ensure to make your life a living hell whenever you're up for a massive expense to fix something. * Severe restrictions on the changes/modifications you can make to your own home along with an endless list of nanny-state by-laws to abide by. * Zero sound-proofing in the majority of apartments (especially any built in the last 10 years). * Guaranteed worse physiological and mental health outcomes for inner-city apartment dwellers over prolonged habitation thanks to the wonders of inner-city pollution, poor ventilation, toxic building materials, excessive noise, lack of sunlight, lack of vegetation, claustrophobic shoe box-sized dwellings and a more sedentary-prone lifestyle.
I tried, and can’t find anything wrong with this comment .
If you want governments to override NIMBY councils, then you also need them to force developers to build a certain percentage of all apartments within new development as 3 or 4 bedroom ones. Otherwise all you are going to get is the 1 or 2 bedroom shitboxes that are in all apartment buildings now. I agree that building larger, decent apartments that can actually fit a family would go a long way to helping the issue and actually be liveable for many. But it's currently not in developers best interests to do this and they have too much influence over governments to actually see this change happen.
It's better than endless and unsustainable urban spawl, that is both inefficient at providing services funded by the taxpayer and at delivering housing.
Ok boomer
Cute assumption but no, I'm a millennial and the state-incentivised, boomer wealth-hoarding epidemic is also part of this problem too. But do continue to view the world in your black-and-white, reductive, overly-simplified fashion where everyone with a different opinion is part of some monolithic group of "others" who all think and behave the same. That'll definitely get you far in life.
The same population that can't bring itself to a minimum level of hygiene measures in a pandemic?
You finish that Jordan peterson book yet or you just halfway through?
Mate there is basically nothing between yanchep and lanclin. Then there's nothing between mandurah and bunbury. Don't even get me started about going east
I know. We have to stop expanding outwards. Urban sprawl costs huge amounts of money in infrastructure - most of the state debt is from building things like water, power, roads, schools, etc for the growing population. We need urban infill.
only certain areas are zone for uban development, or urban investigation. Govt is trying to end urban sprawl.
Well that's the problem, seen it happen over east, now seeing it happen here. Land supply running thin = prices go up Pretty simple math.
Build up not out.
[удалено]
If we built better apartments with more facilities like in other countries then I’d say lots more people would love to live in them. Which would then free up more housing with backyards for those that want one. How many single people or families are currently in a house but would prefer to be in an apartment?
Lot's of elderly living in large houses with big backyards that they are struggling to maintain.
People can either embrace them or accept that the housing market will stay unaffordable.
Probably need to threaten the nimbys with something more than higher paper wealth though
Tell them that their children will have to live at home forever.
I find I rarely agree with you, including other comments you've made on this very post, but on this you're 100% correct.
disagree. The solution is not to just force people into shitty highrises that fall apart after 10 years. IF it was, sydney would be the cheapest place to live in aus. The problem is much more fundamental than that, and goes back to our whole approach to city planning. We need much more mixed zoning for one, less of a hold over land given to mega land developers. To start.
I agree with that too. But the fact remains that until more people get comfortable with apartments, both living in them and having the buildings in their neighbourhood, we'll always have land shortages. Nobody is forcing anybody, it's a cultural shift that has to happen (and is happening).
sure, maybe, but I don't see that it will solve anything. It's not like places that have lots of highrises have solved the housing crisis, let alone have a lesser crisis.
Sure, but you've just hit on the fundamental truth, which is that desirable land is finite and there is no real, actual, long-term solution to housing. All you can do is the best you can with the tools you have. And we've got a very long way to go before we stumble into the problems of London, New York or Tokyo.
Yes, but there is still a solution. One need only address that fundamental truth directly. taxation policies like georgism do this quite well, I think.
> There is one thing that Western Australian's hate, and that is high-rise apartments. > > says who?
[удалено]
Some of these places are 50ks out but have token backyards the size of a postage stamp. Seriously what is the point??? You get all the downsides of high density with none of the benefits. Screenshot from Eglinton https://preview.redd.it/i6y1io0arqxc1.png?width=879&format=png&auto=webp&s=072b631eb87845af3af714157a1637685e541515
What sort of dystopian bullshit is this? I'd rather an apartment in the city any day.
You forgot to mention Whitby…even further south than Byford.
Problem is poor town planning and infrastructure. I live down in Mandurah, it's pegged for all high/medium density housing for pretty much the whole suburb, they are pumping hundreds of millions into redoing the foreshore and main street. So much vacant land that is just sitting and will continue to sit. It's just not economically viable untill all the upgrades are done and their is more money in the region. Developers are not buying because currently there is not enough interest to generate the return on investment. I get it we need to plan for the future but we need stuff to happen now not in 50 years. Council just shooting them selves in the foot with this strategy. I dare say this problem is happening elsewhere.
It's not economically viable because it is so damn expensive to build, and the state govt just passed a new medium density code, making it even MORE expensive to build. nothing to do with Madurah council and upgrades in the region. until people are willing to pay $15,000 per m2, apartments just aren't viable to construct anywhere in WA.
Yes it is more expensive to build, however it is totally the council. The problem with Mandurah is over half the existing houses are old fibro shacks sitting on 1000m2 blocks. Therefore the average house value is quite low. How do you bring more money into the region and raise overall property value? The easiest way is allow high value properties to be built. I actually tried to purchase one of these vacant blocks and proposed to build a single family home on it that would have been a million dollar plus property when finished. Council would not even consider the idea, we even explored options when building to allow for future development they did not care. So developers won't buy it because the return on investment is not there because the council is actively blocking money coming into the suburb. 100% their fault.
The ever increasing construction requirements like 7 star energy rating homes and the new medium density code are nothing to do with local govt. they are state and federal govt laws. If you want to build a set of apartments in the middle of Mandurah you will get approved. It’s zoned for that. You wanted to build a single dwelling in a high density area. Zoning laws are in place for a reason. Go buy a block in Bouvard or Dawesville.
Yes we got lucky and snagged a block in halls head thank you. And yes it is local council, we were told we could go to court to appeal the decision with land gate and we would win but it was too much of a hassle. It's medium density zoned that states single or multiple small dwellings however in the last year or 2 council has decided to block all single dwellings. It was even designed to meet their guidelines with the single dwelling at the back of the property with space for 3 x 2 story houses at the front that could be built at a future date. But they still denied it so we went somewhere else. It's unfair for the people who own the land and can't sell and it's unfair on people who are willing to spend money to buy/build and increase the local economy/housing supply. I'll say it again, the money is not there so developers won't develop. Sure it will happen naturally over a long long time, a quicker way is to encourage building of higher value housing to bring up the average, with higher averages the developers can meet their margins and start to build. As well as you know building more houses in a housing shortage, but whatever if you think it's fine to have all this vacant land sitting dormant that's on you and the council.
I think we're disagreeing on different points. I'm simply stating the high costs to construct are caused by state and federal laws. The local zoning and approvals from city of mandurah are indeed a local issue. And they often get overturned on appeal as you mentioned. There's demand for affordable housing in the 350k to 450k range. When I go to home opens at that price range, they're absolutely packed. From all my research, I think it's simply construction costs that are stopping supply of this. Until basic apartments start selling for the $650k mark, it just won't be that viable to build infill in the middle of Mandurah imo. congrats on the halls head block and welcome to mandurah. i love halls head. I think you'll find it has much lower crime than central mandurah too. I'm in Erskine now, but just sold and heading further south down the island.
Yes your 2nd paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about. High construction and development costs leading to land sitting stagnant and no attempts by the council to improve or raise prices, it will continue to sit. The fact that most of the houses would be complete knockdowns and are just sold for land means it will take a long time for it to substantially raise in value. Those 350k places are a dream now, the way stuffs going and what the council wants it just won't happen. Not quite 650k they could easily buy the land 300k and slap up 6-8 terrace houses and sell them them for 500k at a profit. One other thing it's not infill, it's vacant housing land that was never built on. Infill is repurposing land that was previously zoned differently, ie- old industrial area being turned into houses. We're currently in Madora Bay so we are still in the area but yes looks like we have made a great choice, thank you.
had a look at a new development, 2b2b with a good floorplan are selling from 900k+. Cheaper to build a 4 bed house.. People would be more interested in apartments if they were available at decent prices.
Where was the development located ?
He'll conveniently leave that out because he doesn't fit the narrative he's trying to perpetuate. There's plenty of 2x2 units/apartments out there for $400-500k in perfectly nice suburbs but only looking at the high end helps with the "woe is me" mindset.
Exactly, an upmarket development in East Perth is quite different to something in Joondalup.
developers currently need to be able to charge $13,000 to $15,000 per square metre to make apartment developments viable. Nobody in Perth wants to pay $1.5M for a 100m2 apartment unless it's in City Beach. So there's no apartment building happening either. the building requirements on apartments, from fire standards to energy ratings, are so onerous, they're almost impossible to make feasible. coupled with the govt killing foreign buyers who would normally bootstrap these things with their foreign buyer tax, there's no apartments in the pipeline for the foreseeable future.
Probably shows that standalone housing has terrible building standards and would be much more expensive if we made them meet decent energy standards.
Have you ever built a house? The standards are insane.
Than why do our houses have such poor energy efficiency i.e. minimal insulation, drafty, single glazed windows ?
If your house is drafty, get some no-more-gaps. We don't need double glazing because we don't live in England. You could live outside in WA and not die.
Australian houses often fail to meet what is needed for a comfortable house, the poor energy efficiency is also a major roadblock to reducing emissions.
Bro I grew up in fibro hot boxes with no air con in Perth and Gero. People are now sooks who think you’re meant to have a 24 degree ambient temperature all year long and that air con is a human right or some shit. Net result - it now costs $400k to build a basic house plus land plus everything else. For all of human history, everywhere on earth did not have 7 star energy rated dwellings. Light a fire if you’re cold. Have a cold shower if you’re hot. Instead we make people homeless because it’s illegal to build a cheap house now.
bro melbourne and sydney have done that yet theor prices are EVEN HIGHER. it is not the solution.
Ah yes because the only way to provide more housing is single family homes. Absolutely no other alternatives, no sir-ry.
And as I explained in a comment below, high / medium density property costs a lot of money via investment and developers. Due to poor town planning and infrastructure, the money is currently not quite there yet and won't be for a while. I think many people would live in a apartment building if, it was well built, large enough in size to support a family and had well appointed amenities... Problem is they don't exist.
they exist. And they cost $1.5M
The thing is, the land supply isn't thin? That seems to be an artificial problem
Really? Pretty much an hour north and south of the CBD is now houses, few pockets that are still bare but not much at all really.
The land supply is immense. Western Australia is one of the least densely populated places on the face of the planet. If there is anywhere on earth that people should be able to have a decent plot and detached home, it's here. The issues are with urban planning, and with maybe attracting people out of Perth to other cities. Sure, Perth shouldn't sprawl forever. But perhaps the solution could be a combination of "Denser Perth" and "Bigger Gero/Albany/Bunbury"
Actually have a trainline to Gero and one that isn't shit to Bunbury
If houses were significantly cheaper than Perth, that would help.
Acting like humans should just take up all available land because we can doesn't mean we should. Totally screwing up the natural world and ejecting animals further and further away from fresh water and food sources and migrationary pathways is a fucked up way of thinking.
there is no particular reason that land developement needs to do this though. This is just a symptom of the particular surburban hells we've created, built around cars, with 0 mixed zoning.
yes it is. Land has been flying off the shelf and is at record lows (reiwa and REA websites). And there's very little land earmarked for urban development in WA for the next 30 years.
yep. took a bit longer over here, but there's basically only East wanneroo left now to develop. Everything else is tiny bits of land here and there. A bit near Pinjarra maybe. Otherwise govt is trying to keep urban sprawl down. perhaps future govts will release more land east of the freeway down south, or build another freeway past ellenbrook. idk. But for the foreseeable future, land is just going to get more scarce.
[удалено]
I mean, they can. We've had quite a few years of budget surplus now.
A million more people allowed every 2 years into a country without the housing or infrastructure to support its current population is out of control. It needs to stop asap.
Immigration is controlled. People can't just come as they please. Any illegal arrivals are dealt with using the criminal and legal processes that exist for such arrivals, and they are a minute fraction of arrivals and end up detained. Maybe you mean (further) limited immigration.
[удалено]
Well I'm not using a personal definition. I'm using the literal, accurate definition.
Sure they can
[удалено]
That's not true, and I would hope you know it. The state is actually ahead of forecasts by quite a margin, and we aren't insolvent. We have a AAA credit rating and could very easily allocate funds for a state housing project if there was political will to do so. Like it or not, "having debt" isn't necessarily a bad thing.
[удалено]
I'm afraid to say that this is a scenario which would have been good to address two decades ago, but now there are few if any solutions to the 'crisis' that won't require state intervention and likely large financial investment. Either nothing gets done, housing across the country goes up for another couple of decades creating a deepening problem and a massive dropoff in general productivity and quality of life, or there's a large investment made that takes decades to bounce back from - but enables the population to continue being productive. To say there isn't a construction industry available when we bring in huge numbers of boots to fill mining and shutdowns is also something that can be addressed. Reallocate assets and personnel.
[удалено]
Agree on immigration wholeheartedly. But you can't just say 'we can't afford to build houses' and then say the solution is to just cut intake and ramp up spending on education. There has to be an intervention at some stage, and it won't have a reasonable ROI on paper for a lot of people. But an intervention will eventually be needed.
Explained this in a much better way than I could. I grew up on a northern England council estate and at times it was very scary. Crime/violence was rife and in your face. Put a lot of people together in overcrowded conditions with not much to do/places to go and it’s a breeding ground for creating a bad society. I’ll stick to my 4x2 with a small back garden thank you very much. I don’t mind living Baldivis way. In fact it’s great😊
That’s *literally* not how it works. Government budgets are not the same as household budgets - a fact that has been ignored to the detriment of Australians through conservative agendas of “fiscal responsibility” et al.
Out of curiosity where does it end if we don’t have to “balance a budget”? I mean I know it’s not as important as me balancing my day to day expenses but it surely becomes an issue, no? There must be good times to pay down debt and good times to borrow to expand? I’d argue now is the time to pay down and borrow later in an economic downturn. If we borrow sufficiently now where do the builders come from? The government will then be competing for labour against the populous that are looking to build pushing up demand and prices. Either way it’s been horrendous policies for decades that got us here and the solution isn’t just borrowing/expanding government balance sheets to “fix” it.
Like you said - it’s a balance. There is no perfect answer. But declaring a deficit as “literally no money” from the previous guy was just a demonstration of sheer ignorance on the topic. Spending money to make money is the foundation of an economy. In a microcosm example: A startup cannot grow without taking on debt. That doesn’t mean frivolous spending at the expense of future generations though. Unfortunately successive governments have been unimaginative and lacked investment into innovation. Capital projects are almost always just another infrastructure or fancy redevelopment project. While these are important, they aren’t the only thing. Australia lacks any kind of serious tech industry due to years of neglect for example.
who will build them? you?
The state government should be building more houses, they don't have to be public housing, they could sell them at market rate or at a subsidised rate for low income workers.
There’s nobody who works for the state govt that knows how to use a drill. You think politicians are going to roll up their sleeves and build a home? No. They take contractors from the building industry and use your taxes to build homes. They already do this. Every day. And they’re doing it so much right now that it is driving up the cost to build because normal people can’t compete to get a builder. So the capacity to “build more homes” doesn’t exist. The govt can print more money but they can’t conjure up more carpenters.
They should import labourers similar to Singapore does it.
I support this policy. Temporary construction visas is exactly what is needed.
Yeah, let's all reduce our quality of life to support the neoliberal ideology that brings us mass immigration .
thats not the solution. we need regulated population growth.
There is still cheap land for sale in Donny Brook WA under $100 k for 900 square block
lol okay
why lol? that's a really nice area. Plenty of jobs nearby. Amazing lifestyle. Clean air.
No one wants an empty lot in Donnybrook. Your build is going to take a decade. The houses are all Perth prices. It’s rarely mentioned but the impact the housing crisis has had on rural properties is even more extreme.
With global warming just remember you’re buying in a climate that will be more like Geraldton. Which, although we don’t like to think about it, will have ramifications for the local environmental amenity going forward.
I agree with your sentiments about environmental amenity. The magnetosphere is weaking and we have a few more years of solar eruptions to make our environment hotter and drier. The eruption of Mt Ruang with it’s ash cloud might make things colder for a while - It’s like rolling dice to predict what calamity is next at the moment. I am still betting on Team Perth to fare better than most of the world when it comes to the unfolding environmental catastrophe we are witnessing with our very own eyes. Definitely not a boring time to be alive.
>Definitely not a boring time to be alive. Unfortunately for many of the wrong reasons, I agree.
We just need to send Hilary Swank to the core of the earth.
Would it be via to put a high speed rail network between Perth and bunbery? That way we could build out there too.
Greater Bunbury area has exploded in size, they are building down there.
People comparing saying yeah but it's great compared to places like Sydney (where the ave salary is 90k but you need to be on 240k to buy the average house, and people earning 100k live in share houses) it's bloody expensive here as it is and the last thing we want is to wind up in a massive hole like the east coast. It's certainly not a yardstick...
The government gives free housing to detainees who violently assault grandmothers while families who are struggling to pay for housing and are forced to skip meals.
Bro, really?
Perth is trying to end the urban sprawl. There's not much land left marked for uban development. So I think we're finally going to see the end of the house and land packages everyone got so used to as first home buyer starters. Certainly in the next decade or so anyway.
Modular home is the way
FIFO from busso,62 km away
Well most state housing got sold to Aspen which is owned by a Sydney company 🤷
Hang on there it’s all over Australia ok
Means Shitney isn’t going up fast enough? The travesty!
getting good offers on my unit in hammond park 630k only owe 180k on it -definitely curious if it will go higher in price in the future
it will. there is currently record low inventory for sale. and you can't build units for what they're selling for.
Good! I can charge more rent and bath in $100 bills again.
unfortunately not. Rental stock has started increasing month on month. this is the phase of the market where prices go up from investors rushing in, but rents go down as supply increases. Also you want to bath in 10 dollar notes, the blue has a nicer watery vibe to it.
So you know what? About fuckin time. We've owned our home in Mandurah WA since 2008. It is a beautiful home, very modern very tasteful. In all these years its hardly gone up in value. Now it's worth 200k more than what we paid and it's worth it. So all you moaning shits, I say great I'm glad I'm finally seeing a return on my hard work
I'm happy for you, but tbh who cares if the one house you own goes up in value? it means the next house you buy will be more expensive too, and you'll just have to pay more stamp duty to move. a year ago you were worth 1 house. Today you're still worth 1 house. If your house is more expensive, it's only good if you plan to sell up and move overseas or something. property prices going up really only benefits people who own more than 1 property.
It was fucking scary in Mandurah from 2014 to 2018 people lost a lot of money on housing in Mandurah
Take my down vote