Australian Housing Crisis TRUTH 🚨 Economist Strips Media Hype What's Really going on! Cameron Murray
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- The Australian housing market has had some underlying issues to say the least. There are so many factors to consider.
Historically, this housing market's been cyclical in nature. Dating back to 1836 😳 when Charles Darwin wrote about the high prices close to 200 years ago!
Today we are joined by Economist Dr. Cameron Murray, author of the book - The Great Housing Hijack.
Dr. Murray offers us his expert perspective tearing away the media market hype as he sheds light on the current housing market and how this story has been playing out for CENTURIES
Alongside a ton of other market trends and questions we dive into like:
Is it likely other states will follow suit of Victoria hiking up land tax?
Is the boom we've experienced just a result of the massive amount of money that's been pumped into the system?
Do you see growth or price falls over the next 12-24 months?
All that and so much more!
Dr. Murray shares with us his takes on several dynamics within the housing market that are causing a lot of friction, and how this friction is not a new thing.
🍕🏠 We want to hear your investor story! So if you've experienced something that you know other investors can learn a thing or two from, click the link below and let us know. 🍕🏠
👉 pizzaandproper... 👈
If you'd like to be flown into the Pizza & Property Studio, put up for a night's accommodation, have dinner with Todd Sloan, and have a team of carefully chosen property investing experts help you get unstuck, click the link below and tell us why you're stuck, and you could be our next UN-Stuck Yourself winner!
👉 pizzaandproper... 👈
Grab a copy of Dr Cameron Murry's book:
www.allenandun...
Get in touch with our amazing episode contributors & sponsors:
Investor Kit:
www.investorki...
Click the link to get $50 off your depreciation schedule with MCG: mcgqs.com.au/pizza
Rob Flux:
developernetwo...
Want more help understanding how to buy property faster and for less? Get your copy of Todd Sloan’s book today:
Booktopia:
www.booktopia....
Dymocks:
www.dymocks.co...
TH-cam Pizza & Property:
/ @pizzaandproperty1246
Facebook Pizza & Property:
www.facebook.c...
ASK YOUR LISTENER QUESTION BY VISITING THE WEBSITE BELOW
Website: www.pizzaandpr...
Disclaimer: All discussions are general in nature and should never be considered financial advice, please seek your own professional financial advice. The content displayed on the website, podcast, and blog is the intellectual property of Pizza and Property. You may not reuse, republish, or reprint such content without our written consent.
as a 40 year old renter with a family I can confidently say, I hate renting, I hate it, I hate telling my daughter she cant have a pink room, I hate telling my son he cant have a tree house. I will support anything that could cool down the housing market and give me, my kids and 3.2 million other aussies a fighting chance. (dont fool yourself, very few people prefer renting)
I was the same until I was 36 and a half..now I'm 36 and 9/10ths. I had to step it up a notch in my plumbing business and that allowed me to earn more and get a place.
@@netfish69 fully agree, business owners plus tradies is the way to go in aus. As an employee one is stuck.
@@1490aap Anyone whose income is tied to their labour will work until the day they die. Business owner or not. There's a clue in there
“ban homeowners from buying new homes and only let first homebuyers buy new homes” could be potential in that one
Loving the communistic approach 👍🏼
This guys speaks like someone who earns well and never suffered hardship
Exactly my thoughts... smug entitled that!
I moved to Croatia
Fully furnished apartment 2 km from the city centre 600 dollars a month, water, power, and internet included.
Australia 3200 dollars a month , unfurnished
,plus power, plus water is a joke.
You're paying off their property.
There’s some pretty amazing value in Europe, Prague use to be like that a few years ago too
Oh my god here we go again. I thought I recognised the voice from the elephant in the room. Podcast had a look and sure enough. They’ve shotted out the 12-year-old economist again for God sake somebody stop this guy from talking. Not even one minute in and he is rambling on again about how there’s nothing to see here and everything is fine. What seems to be in denial about is the fact that people will keep paying their rent whether they can afford it or not, they simply go without other things. It has been happening for a long time. Discretionary spending simply slows down or comes to a halt so that people have enough money to pay for things like rent, whether they can afford it or not. I’m asleep. People keep this guy off your podcast. He is bloody dangerous.
Curious to test my thinking here. The Greens seem a bit upset about tax deductions for landlords, but aren’t these tax deductions simply rental subsidies by another name? Using round figures, let’s say landlords get a tax refund of 20 billion (excluding deductions on capital gains), to get that 20 billion, landlords had to lose 60 billion. That 40 billion gap between the loss and the tax refund, that was for the benefit of the renter. That seems like a win for the tax payer, as they don’t need to spend that 40 billion into social housing, a win for the renter. And maybe over time the landlord gets a capital gain.
That's correct. Investor incentives translate into more properties owned by investors making renting more affordable through abundance of rental stock. It also saves taxpayer on having to pay rental assistance, provide social housing, etc. But the link is indirect making it a bit unclear for an average observer.
It's a lot clearer to them to see 20 billion cost to taxpayers as a useless subsidy to " greedy landlords. "
Actually, in politics it's even more primitive: if we cancel landlord subsidies, we will win more votes this year. The consequences of this decision will bite us 2-3 years later, which we will worry about towards the next election.
This line of thinking would be very interesting to open up in more detail
100% correct. It's more cost-effective to incentivise property investors and government selling off public housing and don't intend on being a provider for property.
Continuing lying for votes.
Tell the media the agenda, wind them up and let them go.
The only reason most people would own a rental property is to reduce their tax. Keating did away with negative gearing for a year & rents sky rocketed. The decision was quickly reversed.
The greens are very good at announcing policies which will actually make the situation a lot worse for renters.
A very big issue in Victoria is who controls your property the STATE OR THE INDIVIDUAL. I would argue the individual is loosing the ability to control their own property as governments intrude with taxes & regulations
The Greens don't know how negative gearing works. If landlords cannot claim a tax refund on owning investment properties those costs get passed onto tenants.
This entire concept of one investor selling to one owner occupier would take one renter out of the market and the rental market will remain in same balance is actually not true. Periods of higher than usual sale activity by investors lead to rental shortages and price spikes for tenants. Periods of higher buying activity for investors lead to abundance of rental availability and rents stabilise for years.
Devil is in the detail - composition of owner occupers who buy properties off investors. Not all of them were tenants, and they were not renting similar properties and not even in the same suburb where that sold property was.
How about this example: 100k people move from Melbourne to Brisbane and the same number move the other way same year. The population in both cities remains unchanged. Do you really think rental markets in both cities will remain the same? Nope. It will be an actute crisis with tent cities in both Melbourne and Brisbane.
You raise a valid point mate, I find it fascinating the difference in which investors that are in the market everyday see it differently to academics that have a very in depth knowledge from a university level.
There's merit to both but both viewpoints never seem to see eye to eye perfectly.
This would make an interesting debate episode 🙂
Well, you just had an academic who happens to be an investor.
The funny part is that you can ask a property manager on their vision for a rental market , selling agent on their vision for their local market, accountant on their vision for federal and state taxes, economist on their vision of the economy, analyst on where the data is heading, etc. None of them will see these areas the way a seasoned property investor does.
Hence you can only rely on these professionals to tell you what they see right now, not how they see the future in their professional field.
Maybe it has something to do with invetors' mind pointed at the future while professionals deal with here and now.
A professional can be an investor too of course, just has to develop a future oriented mindset.
Dr Cameron's understanding of the property market economics was second to none. His opinion of the future was very clouded if not confused. He needs more seasoning as a property investor I guess.😂
I'd be keen to read more about why you think this is true "How about this example: 100k people move from Melbourne to Brisbane and the same number move the other way same year. The population in both cities remains unchanged. Do you really think rental markets in both cities will remain the same? Nope. It will be an actute crisis with tent cities in both Melbourne and Brisbane."
@@fresheconomicthinking where do you house 100k additional arrivals in 1 year?
@@Betterthat In the empty homes that 100k people just vacated, no?
I'm going to live in van starting later this year. i'll go from having to pay half my take-home salary for a 1 bedroom unit to saving 70% of my take-home pay. Landlords shouldn't have a monopoly on housing
Mate that’s awesome!
Such valid points spoken. I just do not understand how politicians could not foresee these issue or know how to correct them but everyone else in the public can see it clear as day.
Rent control? Then tell the banks not to raise interest rates, tell the council not to raise their fee, tell the insurance as well...
Thing is if you get tax incentives as an investor, there needs to be regulated buffers for the customers as well....
If the “tax incentive” for an investor is claiming their losses the same way a business will, why would you have more regulation in proeprty than in business?
As any investments there will always be risks. Increasing interest rates is the risk in investment properties. Who should the Government side with is the big question. The property investor who has the option to sell if it is not profitable or the renters who won't have a roof over their head when the rent becomes unaffordable?
@@pizzaandproperty1246Consumer protection.
@@pizzaandproperty1246 Why, if I 'invest' in a property can I claim any losses I incur against my income, when if I 'invest' at a roulette wheel I cannot? A bad investment is a bad investment. Why should taxpayers shoulder any part of the cost of an investors poor decision making? I would love to see you argue the pros of NG and CGT as a property investor.
Hi P&P, I love your podcasts and insightful guest dialogue!
What would you think about doing a panel discussion with young property investors and an investment specialist?
I do find Dr Murray’s commentary very interesting but also as a young property investor myself who also has a lower income I do disagree with some perspectives he has (particularly his comments on 20% rental increases being the norm, however does he factor in income increases that don’t match the rental increases per annum?)
I just don’t believe the above is as linear as he claims.
Love to hear your thoughts
Hey Nikki, great suggestion do you mean kind like our UnStuck series we did late last year?
Land tax is a joke. Best way to maximise tax from the land is tax the export of the mining industries digging up the actual land and use that income to support the Australian people
Of the things that people miss out of renting is how much renter's are living in share houses. So yes people can afford rents only because of share housing not because individually they can afford it themselves. Unfortunately if rents do keep going up more and more people are Unfortunately going to have to be crammed into to share houses with strangers. And most people wouldn't want that scenario.
If you really want to help this is what I would do.
1. No stamp duty
2. Land tax on all properties OO and Investments
3. No one can buy an investment property
4. Government do 100% home loans
5. Bring in 30 year fixed rates
They're some pretty bold moves!
Do you think there'd be a pretty negative knock on effect to the financial future of a lot of people not allowing them to buy an IP?
i do like the sound of 30 year fix loans though I know that's big in the States from institutions like Fannie Mac
@@pizzaandproperty1246 yes 100% it would never get approved, I also don’t like the idea of not letting anyone own an investment property, but that is one way to fix it, everyone owns, the government underwrites the loans and if you default the debt never goes away as it’s government debt. Yes bold and I don’t like it but if they want to fix it they can.
@@pizzaandproperty1246 I'm an investor so this wouldn't benefit me but I think that person is correct if we actually want to be serious about ensuring everyone has affordable housing
Sounds like you've really put some thought into this, not sure I'd vote for you if you were running for PM though haha kind see your point though 🙂
i like them, except 3. when my kids are ready to move out, they won't be able to buy straight off the bat. Also, new aussies, where do they sleep until their house is built? There will always be a need for rentals, so there will always be a need for investors.
Sorry, I turned it off when he said the part about when a million investors sell then a million renters buy those houses. Renters can't afford to buy a house which is why they are renters. The ones buying those houses are other investors or people who already own a home and want to upgrade / downgrade.
You missed the best bits of you turned off that soon… happy investing mate 😊
I came across him peddling his rubbish on elephant in the room podcast and turned him off also. He’s delusional.
Yes I also thought this. Its not true for 100% of renters but certainly a solid chunk perhaps 2/3 rds of renters even if they have a desire to buy do not have the financial means therefore will be stuck renting forever.
Also his comments on fractional reserve banking not impacting house prices were eyebrow raising.
I can afford to buy outright but choose to rent because I hate wasting my weekends on home maintenance.
Most owners I know did rent at some point. They didn't all go from living with Mummy and Daddy straight into ownership.
Camerons humble acknowledgement he doesn't understand politics whilst supposedly being an expert in property market mechanics is a concerning admission.
It is entirely a politically driven semi command market. The government state federal local is almost entirely responsible for all the key supply and demand levers that dictate property prices. Also the RBA.
If you can understand the politics which i dont think is actually that difficult its not hard to see why we're in the situation we're in with property prices.
Everything else is just noise.
Hey Kurt! Interesting take on it mate, I feel Cameron's understanding on politics might be deeper than his passing comment of not understanding it is, potentially more of a "Dunning Kruger" acknowledgment.
I completely agree that having an understanding of what's happening politically will help us as investors grow a solid portfolio, but I'm sure the rest is all noise...
@@pizzaandproperty1246thanks. Sure or not sure?
good spotting mate not sure** 🙂
@@pizzaandproperty1246but seriously. Aussie property is so heavily manipulated to be a one way street where prices can only ever go up long term because an entire political economic system depends on it. This interview was a discussion of factors entirely in control of the government whether state or federal.
And the solutions offered for house prices or rents also again entirely within the theoretical control of our elected leaders but will never happen because they cause too much pain for the wrong people.
Also I forgot to mention yes he's a super smart dude credit where it's due!
I actually wanted to hear him overlay his personal view of the political aspect on top of the actual economic settings. We saw hints of that but never fully explored.
Canada is failing because zero productivity and all in housing. UK, Canada, NZ all the same, industry is gone, manufacturing gone, red tape too much, tax high so corporates leave......and all in housing, failing societies. Good luck, they are all failing and Australia mirrors Canada almost identically with mining, supermarkets, tax & red tape on productivity investment so it's all left.
Civil unrest more than likely, only a few win when housing is this high, and unfortunately that isn't the workforce who gets screwed and I doubt they want to support those who benefit at older age.
Going to fail
Yep. And the fact that people cannot get affordable housing to buy or rent like a normal country will disincentivize productive or innovative companies to set up here (or stay here) because they won't want to pay the huge salaries required by people need for accommodation, they won't want to subsidize parasitic landlords by renting or buying land for their companies here and lastly highly skilled and innovative people won't want to live here if they can get a better bang for their buck somewhere else for their skills.
Keep up the good work Todd! The quality of your shows is getting better and better. I am a big fan of cameron his recent book is one of kind.
Awesome, thank you mate! year we were stoked getting him on for a chat
Do you control dividends?
Why must rent be controlled?
That’s an interesting point 🤔
Because dividends are (mostly) derived from businesses that are not also a roof over people’s heads.
It’s an essential service. And yes in other essential services delivered by private companies the yearly increases are capped - eg in health insurance and electricity
Also, if a customer doesn’t like a business’s prices then they can generally take their business elsewhere pretty easily. If a landlord raises rent and a tenant has to move then it’s a huge cost to them and also has other impacts as they may be removed from their community. There’s more at play than just a number on a screen (or piece of paper)
Arnt they directly tied to the jobs people have and potential mass lay offs over paying dividends, that income is directly responsible for paying for necessities like food and shelter. @pradipamahadeva8051 makes a solid point
@@pizzaandproperty1246 Sorry I don't agree that it is a solid point at all. Comparing dividends and rent is comparing apples and oranges. And then extending the topic of dividends out to include the potential layoffs and impacts on salaried workers in private companies. Based on this thought process we could include all and every facet of private business and conclude with a nice tidy "therefore rents shouldn't be controlled". It makes no sense at all...
Dividends are profits that are distributed to shareholders. This is on the bottom of a P&L
Rents are fees charged to customers. This is the top line of a P&L.
They are totally different.
The more appropriate question is "should fees charged by an individual or company to another individual or company be regulated or capped?" And an extension is "if some should, then which ones and who decides?"
My response to that more appropriate (and less emotive) question is 'yes there are some essential services that are already capped such as health insurance price rises and electricity price rises and I personally think that is appropriate regulation'. Why are they capped? because they are essential services required for the quality of life that we value (require?) in Australia.
So should rent be included in that? I am not sure personally. I feel it is a bit of a slippery slope and that there are likely other, more efficient methods that could be utilised to better balance the supply and demand in the market.
Let's argue ideas, concepts, policies, etc, but best to keep it focused on apples and apples. Otherwise the whole discussion breaks down.
Exceptional episode! It's good to put face to the author's name of the book I recently bought but haven't got time to read. 😅
Haha it’s well worth the read!
To say oh people have money that’s why they pay high rents is just idiotic. When people use 70% of their income to pay rent how do you even make that argument
Yeah it's a real tricky subject, I know some people that are totally in the category you're referring to but then a lot that are in exactly the category Cam's referring to
So on what data does he use to say that few people are really struggling to pay rent and most aren’t? He knows how out of touch that statement is? SMH
Hi Todd
Interesting interview, thanks.
I think Cameron's logical arguments miss some unquantifiable elements, as described in Morgan Housel's book "Same as Ever". Eg; when Paul Keating removing negative gearing in the 90s, investors exited & rents soared. Not the outcome that was planned. I think it is a mistake to simplify things by thinking that forcing investors to sell will help home buyers long term. Noone really had a big problem with rental supply or rent prices pre covid. So what caused the problems we are having now? Government interference - Interest rate hikes, huge immigration intake & QE I'd suggest. So more government interference will improve things? Quite likely not!
Ps: Hi from Adelaide.
G
Gina! Hope you’re keeping well 😊 long over due for a coffee catch up
Great episode 😊 I enjoyed listening to it.
All good thought provoking.
Thanks mate 😊 Glad you enjoyed it!
Everyone seems to talk about the real issue, it’s a supply issue. And the buck stops with the local shire councils. The time it takes to get approval to create new housing and land developments is unprecedented. It used to take half the time to get this done. It’s changed since labour came in in 2007.
One thing does’nt make sense here. The australian popopilatoon growing faster than stock of the properties and in the last year super fast. Why he didn’t talk about it but about the income, politics and tjousand other things? Yes median income to rent prices this same for decades but the amount of renters /buyers vs stock is changing dramatically. (Costs of construction, lack of tradies , expensive loans and so on ) The gap is only growing . Has it ever grown so fast in history (nr of propertiesvs nr of people)?
Yes as medium prices not going to change dramatically within next 12 months(max 10 percent in euther direction) but within markets they will change drastically(shifting to cheaper more affordable properties by first home buyers)because no choice) Yhat is why Logan accelerating like crazy.
EXACTLY!😮
Supply and demand is everything. I’d say air bnb is another huge factor.. 160,000 odd homes tied up right there..
housing is the monopoly game of choice for wealth creation in Aus. We need to make stock market popular again and invest in local manufacturing innovation.
Or we just become a rich tourist holiday destination island..
@@damienbarton3910 stock market doesn’t have the real estate leverage( bank is not going to give you big $ to invest in stock). Yes I didn’t think about air bnb , is so popular nowadays , good point. Some innovations in construction maybe is yhe good way. I have seen in USA robotic brick layers (actually made in Australia) capable to build house walls in 2 days. I haven’t seen it in Australia.
He does touch on it from about 20 minutes onwards when he's talking about disruptions.
@@JodyForbes I meant he denies that supply in sense less new dwelling coming is a main factor of property growth. In prices growth (debelopers control prices and not going to release too much) pkis few other things. That is his main point in all interviews. For him suplly is what is in particular moment on the market for sale/rent. The problem is his research is based on only 7 developers . In Australia are plenty small players competing . Sevelopers buold faster when market growing (concept of absorption rate) . He simplifies everything. Simply he selling controvery syories because they sell well. He was doing this same during covid. Good seller
Economic investigator Frank G Melbourne Australia is following this informative content cheers Frank 😊
Wages haven’t been keeping up. Many of those people who you are saying can afford the rent are actually subsidised by rental assistance. Surely a competent economist would question the enormous incentives the government is providing for the landlord class to invest in what is a safe investment.
can be lower density with owner occupation--OBVIOUSLY and yet?
Thanks gents, great chat.
Glad you enjoyed it mate!
Anyone have a link to the article or research paper by Ben Phillips on the 20% income-rent ratio that Cameron Murray refers to?
No I don’t, I’d like to see that data as well, we’ll see if we can get our hands on it and put in the comments 👍🏼
this guy should be the housing minister
He'd make some pretty big changes that's for sure!
You have to be part of a two income (well paid) family!
In some areas in Australia but certainly not all of them
@@pizzaandproperty1246 Which ones?
You should ask him to share information about the dodgy stuff going on with the developers partnering with council who happened to be one and the same
That is why it cannot be done by public
The conversation at the 49 min mark is one that always confuses me. Investors say that interest rates are up so we have to put up rent. Does that mean that you haven’t already set the rent as high as you possibly can? Isn’t that the point of an investment? Sure there are some who might not raise rent sometimes, but on average the investment is there to make money.
The host didn’t seem to understand the point being made, that the rent is set based on the market but whether the owner thinks they need to recoup some costs or not…
@@alex98b627 when the market does not support higher rents then it doesn't matter if the owner wants to recoup someting or if the owner is a greedy landlords. Rents will not go up if the market does not pay more rents. There were so many instances when rents went down no matter what landlords wanted to achieve. Fix the market, cteate more incentives for moms and dads to invest and the rental market will stabilise
I’m a property developer and with all the new taxes being introduced in Victoria, it’s becoming less and less attractive to even dip my fingers in. Might as well just sit on my ass and get 5% bank returns with no risk.
If a property developer gets slugged with huge taxes, do they need to pass on the cost? Is the average developer independently wealthy 😂
Good
@@berniestar1490 Development contributions. It’s headline under tax but it’s considered a cost, so yes you would have to pass it on. It provides no added value to the new build, it’s essentially stamp duty 2.0
@@jollipetdrive3660 It was a joke
The idea that a rental home disappears and a new first home buyer/owner occupier is created seems optimistic given we have negative gearing and even the richest of renters will not be able to compete with the already established home owners who will just add to their portfolios. Sure the shaky investors might be forced to liquidate their portfolios but the wealthier ones will swoop in or worse still corporate investors. You need to scrap negative gearing, remove foreign and corporate investors. Cut net migration to zero. We also need to cut a lot of red tape building regulations that are stiffling supply.
I think a-lot of first home buyers are still living at their parents house which skews that rental equations
It really would be interesting to see how many first home buyers come from mum and dads vs renting
Non of the Australiaan government didn't want to solve the housing crisis like in Singapore.for the last 40 years.
You feel it's a better model in Singapore?
in 1860's sydney wasn't the most expensive city after honk kong in asia pacific, it is in housing crisis now.
This economist has some very simple ideas that will not work.
Firstly Australia has extremely high migration so its not a zero sum game.
Its essential we maintain rental stock when we have migration.
The high migration is something Cameron talks about in the ep, do you think smoothing out the spike in migration wouldn’t cause the market to stabilise?
Great Ep. 👍
Thanks mate 🙂
He says 30% remters, 1/6 or 1/8 of those are facing the feeling of hardship. So 3-5% of the population.
This guy is a total tool.
This guy has no idea what he is talking about...completely dissing the fact that landlords make for available rentals in expensive areas...constantly subsidising renters...
How do homes become available when you account for the amount of immigration?
Have you watched the episode?
Everyone seems to talk about the real issue, it’s a supply issue. And the buck stops with the local shire councils. The time it takes to get approval to create new housing and land developments is unprecedented. It used to take half the time to get this done. It’s changed since labour came in in 2007. Restrictions on rental return wtf yeah stop capitalism. Let’s just keep raising taxes, you know nothing suit boy
Cameron and others have no idea about the land tax in Canberra. If my town house was a rental i would be paying our local govt around $5,000 on top of other bills. Landlords with a house for rent could be looking at $8,000-12,000 grand just in land tax extra just because it is a rental.
Canberra is pretty Fd to be a landlord.
They are called cycles for a reason
I’ve never met anyone young who’s paid off a nice house without some help.
Yea. I don't believe hard work guarantees success- your financial success often comes from your Intellectual capability (how you perform at work- which helps you keep your job and allows you to earn) Your earn allows you to move forward in life. If you don't have the capacity to earn (your disabled) you are limited and can only rely on family or government for assistance.
Wow! Sorry to hear that mate, I know a ton of people that have got into the property market without the bank of mum and dad, it’s definitely harder but not impossible
Check out the chat below with Max who bought 4 regonal properties by 21
th-cam.com/video/-PbmhNpv0sg/w-d-xo.htmlsi=aanf-heHLTjxSGRo
Thats so inaccurate. Including myself and friends that did it without mum and dad, we have all made a sacrifice in working away to make more money.
All I’m saying is that it’s easier to buy your second or third or fourth home than it is for young people to get on the property ladder.
@@stevemolloy2747 Yes that's why the country is so messed up. People acquiring more properties than they need, when they should only be having 2 at most. One house and one investment property per person, full stop. There are greedy people with hundreds of investment properties which they don't need.... Housing is a fundamental human right, the sooner people realize that then the community can find a new way to solve the housing crisis.
I consider myself an Academic (not sure if having 2 University Degrees one in Engineering and one Finance majoring in Shares Portfolio Management, done many Economics Micro and Macro along with Accounting too, would qualify me as an academic or not). I've also been in the trenches too personally invested in Shares and Bought 9 properties for myself. But respectfully this gentleman is very out of touch with reality! I think we may have found the advisor for the QLD & Victorian State Government, the reason why the VIC rental market has been obliterated 😅. Although QLD Government did a backflip.
At 15:53, he says "It doesn't matter who owns the properties" is he kidding? That's out of touch, isn't it? It makes ALL the difference because owner occupiers will move in and live in it while investors rent them out. That's just the first parts. good on you Todd for calling him out on this with facts when Todd was an agent and standing up for Renters at 18:22 to which he brushed off and didn't even address Todd's question. Good on ya Todd for trying to wake these out of touch economists, Todd was at the front lines dealing with actual people and renters, but this guy is just brushing Todd off saying it's not a supply issue LOL. Perhaps I could finish my Doctorate and start saying the same: "Economics isn't about Supply and Demand at all... LoL".
I do however agree with his other points as to what the Government is doing is wrong.
Overall great episode Todd!
Thanks mate this really is an ep that creates conversation and makes you think, also it's pretty safe to say you're an academic with accompaniments like you've described above bro 🙌🏼
Housing can't be a free market, it just doesn't work
This Cameron bloke is off with the fucking fairies.
Perth??😊
I think we should REDUCE home ownership, and free Australian capital for business & innovation. Property is a non-productive asset.
That's a very interesting take on the situation
Government departments never have enough money - not enough staff not enough money yeah sure!
Rates need to be much, much higher.
Why?
@@pizzaandproperty1246 Because rates are still lower than historical normal levels. The RBA's own mandate is screaming at them to raise. Greed needs a flush.
Are they though…? According to trading economics Interest Rate in Australia averaged 3.86 percent from 1990 until 2024
This guy speaks so well you just believe him 😂
Homies answer - we tax this and we tax that and we just take take take and y’all just pay pay pay.
Economists are always reds.
The only loser in real estate is the one who sells ! Wake up
Come to Melbourne, no one wants to buy here. No house crisis here
Haha it wont be long now and a lot of investors will be coming back to Melbourne
Eventually they will come. It seem the Victorian government forgot that states compete for population growth, investment and talent. Once they realise that, the policies will change. That government probably will not have Labour logo.
It's because they moved investments to the qld market.
@@leapingdeer7880 qld government tried to land tax those interstate investors, but learned their lesson very quickly. Vic government is a slow learner.
@@Betterthat yes exactly it's not the humble landlord that's the issue for qld it's the nimbys and the overseas investors that are a big issue on top of migration (interstate and international migration), a humble one and done landlord is not an issue regardless of which state they come from.
Qld councils also are not being reasonable when it comes to density, we need more high and medium density unfortunately this is where council and the nimbys are a problem.
I watched this whole episode and didn't see any pizza. What' a scam chanel. I'm hungry and want to see pizza.
Hahaha we actually did eat Pizza in the very first episode, but the sound of chewing in the mic was a bit too gross to listen too 🤣
This interview though interesting shows why we are where we are, economists are footy unpires who went the academic route, complete fwits and all disagree with each other and love nothing more then inserting themself into the situation.....
Yeah interest rates go up but landlords shouldn't up the rent WUNKER
Taxes & regulations go up means it more expensive to renovate and not helping green activists blocking trees to be cut down
Maybe we finally give John Howard the middle finger and fix Negative Gearing and Capital Gains taxation.
How would you fix it?
Bob hawke the socialist hypcrite 80s killed home ownership late 80s , home ownership declined since public sector grew bigger ! There more than 125 taxes today australia a joke ... $700000 to build a 3 bed house
Apply bigger taxes on landlords and the rent will increase in direct proportion. Governments are not building public housing so we rely on private rental properties. I've rented houses from wonderfully nice people.
Bro, too much intro/teaser skipped into the content.
Cheers for the feed back dude!
28 minutes I will never get back 😂
No refunds 🤣
Small fraction? You have no idea
Yeah put the screws on the university's so they up the course fees then all the nurses and paramedics and teachers hex debts are even bigger
Economist you predicted gfc hmmm
first two minutes was annoying...then gold..
Glad you enjoyed the other 88 minutes mate 👍🏼
Theres a new type of careers thats emerged - house flippers :) Going to be funny when the market slows and theyre all stuck holding the bag :)
Not sure why that's funny...
Living in a fantasy land turning renter's into home owners its as easy as that don't worry about the tighter lending criteria or people living pay cheque to pay cheque and can't save for a deposit
Sorry I think you're confused this is just one of many things that need to be changed to fix capitlist markets 😂
Have fun
Not sure id hire Cameron as my economist.The guy lives in a world of pipe dreams and unrealistic policy outcomes. Polite man thou ;)
Just another day in the Colo$$eum
20% yields YoY needs a challenge! Smells like hyperinflation....
Not sure it was a 20% Yield YOY, if anyone did say that I missed it
@pizzaandproperty1246
Whether one subscribes to a property cycle or not (I personally believe in the 18.6 cycle), the multiplicative action by governments and others to maintain property value and have 70% of people sitting on the side line waiting for the doors to open, like a boxing day sale frenzy FOMO at its best. Those that have wealth can continue to buy, Those who the government want to help can buy 5% deposit shared equity. Those who are responsible financially, we will make it harder for them Serviceability Buffer's higher interest rates ect .it's a manipulated market. Those who understand the system wins.
Half of this isn’t well thought out.
What part do you mean?
Referencing Darwin and other deceased people to the society whingeing about the cost of shelter simply proves that we have never fixed the problem. Effectively this guy does not want to admit that there is a shelter crisis in Australia. He wants to gloss over it and make out like there’s nothing to see here. Yet we have boomers aggressively pulling money out of their superannuation share market funds to give to their grandchildren just so the grandchildren can have a deposit, for a mortgage that they will be locked into for the next 25 years. Yeah, this guy wants to tell us there’s nothing to see here and everything is fine. Honestly, he is still wet behind the ears.
Ponzieconomics
You definitely didn't watch the whole episode bro
We call it names or we can learn how it works and how to navigate it
well said Anton 👌🏼
@@Betterthat I’m almost convinced that a 2 bedroom Triguboff shoebox in Eastgardens worth 1MM. I’m thinking of getting 800k mortgage and be happy for 30 years 🫶🏻
@ASXFundamentalsAnalysis If that's what makes you happy go for it, but hands down not the best property investment you could make atm mate
Not a very impressive commentator
Who would you like to see on the show?
Absolute waste of time from first 5 mins. Spewing nonsense!
so great listening to... "oh 3 grand a unit when i own 4 of them but there cheaper in NSW..." flogs crying poor your the same as the rest of the asset hoarders who make liability harder in Aus. Love a bit of greed talk.
700k to build a 3 bed home ??. My parents luxury 3 strory home cost 2 million to build ! It not just land expensive it taxes & regulations going pushing up costs to build homes
There more than 125 taxes in australia ! We tax to hell on luxury cars ' alchoal " fuel.
Homes 30% less in new zealand no stamp duty . Australia 15%
Some renters should be in a mortgage. Some people in a mortgage, should rent. Needs a shakeup 🫨
Homies answer - we tax this and we tax that and we just take take take and y’all just pay pay pay.
Economists are always reds.
Agree, and they always think governments pump money into noble causes and greedy people expect to keep their own money
Oh my god here we go again. I thought I recognised the voice from the elephant in the room. Podcast had a look and sure enough. They’ve shotted out the 12-year-old economist again for God sake somebody stop this guy from talking. Not even one minute in and he is rambling on again about how there’s nothing to see here and everything is fine. What seems to be in denial about is the fact that people will keep paying their rent whether they can afford it or not, they simply go without other things. It has been happening for a long time. Discretionary spending simply slows down or comes to a halt so that people have enough money to pay for things like rent, whether they can afford it or not. I’m asleep. People keep this guy off your podcast. He is bloody dangerous.