1 bedroom apartment in Sydney that isn't in a rough suburb is 650k, 2 bedroom 750k 😑 parents bought a 3 bedroom apartment in Bexley for 250k in the 90s, single storey house in the early 2000s for 350k upgraded their house in 2010 for a two storey house for 900k. Meanwhile I'm expected to buy a 1 bedroom apartment for 650k lol.
Average income in Sydney is 100k. A 100k salary can service a loan at around 600k maybe a bit less but all depends on the ratio of deposit on the property. Not much really wrong with this. Also most people get loans as a couple and a household on 200k which again is average 100k each, can service a loan of around a million. You said your PARENTS bought at those prices. Get yourself a partner and then it’s easy.
People forget that lucky country was actually a deragatory nickname meant to emphasize the country booming despite the "second class" people running it.
Can you please speak on the whole strata industry? It is in dire need of reform. It scares a lot of people away from buying apartments or anything else related to strata.
Reforming housing by limiting its endless possibilities for wealth creation as an asset, is needed. Look at Austria and Sweden as examples of more stable housing/renting.
and a sustainable migration plan. These rates are unprecedented and alarming. We don’t have the houses for the amount of people coming in. This isn’t xenophobia. It’s basic maths
My parents had all of their kids leave home as teenagers or early 20s. They were tgen able to save for retirement. My kids will probably be home until they're 30 because of house prices. This is crazy.
More density is NOT what we need or want. There is another solution and that is more big cities. Start with encouraging more people to live in Wollongong and Newcastle, instead of expanding Sydney.
We need to shift out thinking from the great Aussie dream being "the biggest dwelling we can afford" to "the most adequate thing we can afford". I see people all the time buying huge homes WAY out in the suburbs and they have huge commutes, and barely have anything left after paying the mortgage and vehicle costs. IMO being a slave to your mortgage is not living
@@owenmcdonald8342 missing the point. Foreign ownership is a massive problem. Bring in legislation that makes foreign owners sell within 24 months. You'll see house prices tumble to what they should be
Wtf? You stick to low quality, quantity based housing to lower the living standards? Seriously people like you who ignore the root of the problem, mass migration being population growth contributor are the reason why Sydney's livability declined.
the government issues bonds to print money to the RBA, the printing of money dilutes purchasing power thus increasing paper value of assets, banks enjoy the higher value of homes and the higher interest rates that come with inflation, government gets the big banks to take on government bonds to help fund the cycle, government continues to make it beneficial through monetary policy for wealth accumulation through taking on debt all the while our real wages (adjusted for cpi AND MONEY SUPPLY) haven't increased in decades.
I think we need to abolish heritage facade being applied so indiscriminately on residential housing. On my street there are many abandoned houses that cost too much to fix up because the council wants it to look like it's the 1800s still. This prevents density too as they use these restrictions to block more dense housing being built where townhouses and workers cottages are
The price of houses comes down to zoning if they rezoned any area with in 500m to 1 km of a railway station to high density housing supply and demand would fix the issue.But that means having proper interest rates not the low rates of today. The real problem the politicians have a conflict of interest as many are land lords.
Don't agree with more density, make more mid cities. Stop ruining Sydney and Melbourne with overcrowding and no infrastructure to support it.. Australia doesn't need 7 million in a city as it has the land to create more cities that are separated from Sydney and Melbourne. High density creates low standards of living compared to previous generations. Your right we need more housing. What was wrong with the old housing commission that was carried out in the from the late 1940s 1950s to 1970s as OZ was poor after WW2 and mix these houses in all suburbs in all cities and create larger towns into cities and slow down immigration.
@daintree98 100 % he's a brainwashed labor lover. He thinks the answer to Australia's housing crisis is to villify people's grandparents who don't want to sell and downsize. Not everyone wants to live in a shoebox or worse, a lounge room separated by bedsheets which you share with 3 other people.
The problem is our economy relies on it Without it we would all be broke We need to diversify our industry We could be world leaders in renewable energy It could be one of our biggest exports But narrow minded politics is killing it
@gdawwg1125 terrible idea. Renewables are not the answer to supply reliable baseload power Labor and Liberal are both happy to sell off our resources while we get nothing. Less migration equals higher wage growth.
Immigration has other impacts on retirement that need to be considered. For instance, in Australia our birth rate is below replacement from around 1.9 in 1980 down to 1.5 in 2023. This will result in a lot of retirees and not enough working-age people to support them. It isn't just about money and housing, you also need someone to do the actual work, such as constructing the housing. Immigrants are mostly working age and help re-balance our age demographics. Without immigration we will just accelerate the slide towards Australia being a retirement village with no staff.
@Ladadadada don't think anyone's saying no immigration. The rate and type of immigration is the issue. Most new jobs in health, social welfare, education and admin services. Very little in construction. So taking care of and "educating" a growing population, but not adequately housing them. And if we are trying to increase the future tax base with immigration, why are the number of parent visas also increasing?
@@Ladadadadabut possibly the decision to not have children or as many children is also connected to house prices and housing availability. If one can’t afford a house then one is less likely to have kids.
It's actually due to this one fact 1989 25000 457 immigrants my mother was one of them... 2024 over 1 million.... The majority are a cheap labour force and the rest are not able to afford houses so rentals are all gone.... Unhinged immigration policy
Sharath, I know this is a very random question but were you at Exeter today (5 Jan) around 12:30-1pm? I saw a car that looked very similar to the one I’ve seen you have in other videos and I saw someone who looked very similar to Amy. Very random I know but I need to know!
I’m renting in Leumeah near Campbelltown and I retire in 2038 when I hit 67. My super will be 350,000-400,000 if I’m lucky so my only choice is to hopefully find a caravan park like the one in Denham court but way down the coast and put some tiny prefabricated building on a small lot.
Lots of people are starting to move to Asia to live which is unheard of back in the days. Reverse migration is a thing now due to house prices and cost of living
A third of Australians own a house outright, a third have a mortgage, and a third rent. A third of Australians vote LNP, a third Labor, and a third Greens and other. There’s a lot of overlap between those two statistics.
@@Aysthete yeah 100% of australian are retards it turns out. Labor, greens, liberals will never solve the problem. They manufacture the crisis and benefit from pitting each other against one another
Well done! Yes, tax changes help. Hollow logs are better than houses I reckon for storing wealth. Look at the Frenchies. The norm is to rent from an Insto such as a bank or insurance company on a very long lease with pegged rent increases. Apartments , natch. Ever pondered why there are apartments in those small towns the Tour rockets through? A lot of Francaise Super savings go into Govt regulated investment funds which invest in big companies which , amongst other things, run Oz water and sewerage infrastructure, slow trams to Randwick and multitudes of bus routes. There’s also a fair bit that goes into Rocket science. I reckon we’ll have the balance right when we wean ourselves off the addling effects of home ownership as small biz. Report back when an Oz company gets a concession to run a French or Chinese High Speed Rail line!
More density? No way! That’s the last thing needed … with only a fraction of land used by humans in Oz, just build out …and create infrastructure as you go
Massive eastern coastline needs more satellite cities. So many can live near the water and have a good life vs crammed with the many millions in the big cities.
I like your videos, but you are way off on this. The causes (in chronological order) are - Feminism. Dual incomes. More affluent housing aspirations supported by said dual incomes. Deferred child bearing. Possibly, no child bearing. Cheaper finance since 1986 with banking deregulation. More borrowing on lower interest rates. Property price inflation. And, frankly, young adults like having nice things and they don’t like giving up on some of them to have a family, or at least will have less children to keep having those nice things. I feel sorry for younger generations, but this whole mess has been facilitated by the banks over the past 30 years lending money created out of thin air, and lent out too cheaply for too long. That’s it. It’s not a baby boomer conspiracy.
Kids whinging about not being able to buy a house? Raise more capable kids. The next generation will earn the most amount of money in the history of all mankind. And when their parents stroke out, they get all their wealth as all. Want to be cell-dwelling renter? Move to the northern hemisphere bud.
@potapotapotapotapotapota That's not how an economy functions. You sustain 1/2 million migrants a year into a population of 26 million into cities, you get 2.4%pa average growth. That's 3x the u.s average.
@@potapotapotapotapotapota it is not possible to build that many houses and commensurate infrastructure for that many people every year. Australia has some of the highest proportion of tradies in the workforce of any country and we can’t keep up. Why don’t we go back to immigration levels like they were between 1950-2000 when it was sustainable and basically everyone could afford a house
@@potapotapotapotapotapotanot at that rate. It takes time to build homes and in the meantime people need somewhere to build The only group pushing mass immigration is the property and banking lobby. Because mass migration means higher property prices and more mortgages to sell. This mass migration policy is entirely pushed by corporate interests
@@Julian-xs8ncOk so you agree with my statement, but you understand the situation is even more complicated than that. I would have to concede to your argument.
Usable land meaning you're willing to move out to the Blue Mountains when business opportunities are in the city? The problem is urban sprawl and lack of infrastructure for density.
@ - i agree, i think old prefer to live closer to the city but if i could get 2-3 bedroom house/apt or something similar for under 500k - yeah i would live there provided there is a connection to my place of work and i could get to my place of business within 1 hour- i done my exchange in Germany and it was a well connected town about 50m out of frankfurt and everyone loved it
@rexjgeorge So you can live in Gosford or something. The problem is that people are looking for immediate solutions and not solutions for times when High Speed Rail that might not even get built makes it viable to live in those places.
I mean, there's a lot of land. I wouldn't say useable land unless you want more urban sprawl, leading to more car dependency and traffic. Who doesn't love a stupidly long commute into work. We need more housing in the areas people actually want to live. Not out in the sticks
The government prefers to have it citizens in dire straights and destituted. It's all about keeping people under control. Harry S. Truman said the economy won't work with full employment, I can remember a time when Australia had full employment apart from ww2 .
The truth is even the 33% who don't already own a house would want the value of their property to go up after they bought at astronomical prices not down. Who wants the value of their single biggest asset that they are paying huge amounts of interest to the bank for, to fall in value? Nobody.
The system of having housing be an investment should be abolished through massive government housing ownership. I say this as a capitalist. Then people will start investing in upstaters and other businesses to really boost the economy in a way that improves the standard of living
@@oufukubinta ok. say we do turn communist where the government owns all the land and housing by comulsarily buying out the existing owners. What then? Who gets the water front harborside government housing mansion and whos gets the 2 bedroom dogbox apartment in the middle of nowhere? How do you prevent it from turning into 1984 style everyone is equal but some are more equal than others?
^ Me, when I forget that cars exist. People already take out massive loans to pay off vital assets that depreciate in value, but because they don't have a financial advisor whispering in their ear like Wormtongue about it, they're fine because they understand that the value you get out of owning the thing is the point, not some hypothetical future sale value.
Yes, but consider the problem of negative equity. If house prices fall, many people who purchased in the last 5 years could lose everything. Consider the effect of falling prices on China's economy before wishing for lower prices.
"could lose everything" Oh no! They bought a house and now they just own a house! The poor babies! What ever can we do! Show me a gram of equity and I'll start caring about it.
1 bedroom apartment in Sydney that isn't in a rough suburb is 650k, 2 bedroom 750k 😑 parents bought a 3 bedroom apartment in Bexley for 250k in the 90s, single storey house in the early 2000s for 350k upgraded their house in 2010 for a two storey house for 900k. Meanwhile I'm expected to buy a 1 bedroom apartment for 650k lol.
Average income in Sydney is 100k. A 100k salary can service a loan at around 600k maybe a bit less but all depends on the ratio of deposit on the property. Not much really wrong with this. Also most people get loans as a couple and a household on 200k which again is average 100k each, can service a loan of around a million.
You said your PARENTS bought at those prices. Get yourself a partner and then it’s easy.
You want a nice area , parramatta a very nice area has apartments for 350k
@@2_pelicansParramatta is a shithole.😢
@@BIGIFANDYELLOWCARDAverage is skewed way up by the top end of town. The median is way less.
You can buy a two bedroom apartment in Parramatta today for $500,000. The repayments would be less than rent.
People forget that lucky country was actually a deragatory nickname meant to emphasize the country booming despite the "second class" people running it.
This!
Came to say the same thing
😂 I think by second class u mean Indians who are getting nominations in WA 😅
My home is worthless because I'm not going to sell.
You can liquidate the equity in your home without selling.
Can you please speak on the whole strata industry? It is in dire need of reform. It scares a lot of people away from buying apartments or anything else related to strata.
❤ yes 🙌 100% true
Reforming housing by limiting its endless possibilities for wealth creation as an asset, is needed. Look at Austria and Sweden as examples of more stable housing/renting.
and a sustainable migration plan. These rates are unprecedented and alarming. We don’t have the houses for the amount of people coming in. This isn’t xenophobia. It’s basic maths
My parents had all of their kids leave home as teenagers or early 20s. They were tgen able to save for retirement. My kids will probably be home until they're 30 because of house prices. This is crazy.
30 if you're lucky, could be longer
@@NHIexist and I bet you'll continue to vote for Labor or Liberal both of whom have gotten us into this mess.
Don’t be so niave homie, not 30, 60 😂
If you bought a home for $1M, you wouldn’t be happy to sell it for $800k
It's easy to say when the people with 1 or more house bought at a time when a decent house was under 300k and that same house is now worth 3x as much.
"most importantly more housing" - says the property developers. Read 'The Great Housing Hijack' and learn why that is mistaken.
More density is NOT what we need or want. There is another solution and that is more big cities. Start with encouraging more people to live in Wollongong and Newcastle, instead of expanding Sydney.
We need to shift out thinking from the great Aussie dream being "the biggest dwelling we can afford" to "the most adequate thing we can afford".
I see people all the time buying huge homes WAY out in the suburbs and they have huge commutes, and barely have anything left after paying the mortgage and vehicle costs.
IMO being a slave to your mortgage is not living
@@owenmcdonald8342 missing the point. Foreign ownership is a massive problem. Bring in legislation that makes foreign owners sell within 24 months.
You'll see house prices tumble to what they should be
Wtf? You stick to low quality, quantity based housing to lower the living standards? Seriously people like you who ignore the root of the problem, mass migration being population growth contributor are the reason why Sydney's livability declined.
Sharath, the secret to not being stuck with adult kids, is staying single 😂
the government issues bonds to print money to the RBA, the printing of money dilutes purchasing power thus increasing paper value of assets, banks enjoy the higher value of homes and the higher interest rates that come with inflation, government gets the big banks to take on government bonds to help fund the cycle, government continues to make it beneficial through monetary policy for wealth accumulation through taking on debt all the while our real wages (adjusted for cpi AND MONEY SUPPLY) haven't increased in decades.
I think we need to abolish heritage facade being applied so indiscriminately on residential housing. On my street there are many abandoned houses that cost too much to fix up because the council wants it to look like it's the 1800s still. This prevents density too as they use these restrictions to block more dense housing being built where townhouses and workers cottages are
The price of houses comes down to zoning if they rezoned any area with in 500m to 1 km of a railway station to high density housing supply and demand would fix the issue.But that means having proper interest rates not the low rates of today. The real problem the politicians have a conflict of interest as many are land lords.
We don’t even need to make existing houses lower in price, we just need to create new houses that are cheap.
Don't agree with more density, make more mid cities. Stop ruining Sydney and Melbourne with overcrowding and no infrastructure to support it..
Australia doesn't need 7 million in a city as it has the land to create more cities that are separated from Sydney and Melbourne.
High density creates low standards of living compared to previous generations.
Your right we need more housing.
What was wrong with the old housing commission that was carried out in the from the late 1940s 1950s to 1970s as OZ was poor after WW2 and mix these houses in all suburbs in all cities and create larger towns into cities and slow down immigration.
He never talks about the main problem causing expensive housing ie, massive migration.
@daintree98 100 % he's a brainwashed labor lover. He thinks the answer to Australia's housing crisis is to villify people's grandparents who don't want to sell and downsize. Not everyone wants to live in a shoebox or worse, a lounge room separated by bedsheets which you share with 3 other people.
The problem is our economy relies on it
Without it we would all be broke
We need to diversify our industry
We could be world leaders in renewable energy
It could be one of our biggest exports
But narrow minded politics is killing it
@gdawwg1125 terrible idea. Renewables are not the answer to supply reliable baseload power
Labor and Liberal are both happy to sell off our resources while we get nothing. Less migration equals higher wage growth.
Negative gearing
never understood why people want to be stuck with paying more property tax
Yes, tax reform is important, but any increased supply has to be coupled with decreased demand pressure from immigration.
Immigration has other impacts on retirement that need to be considered. For instance, in Australia our birth rate is below replacement from around 1.9 in 1980 down to 1.5 in 2023. This will result in a lot of retirees and not enough working-age people to support them. It isn't just about money and housing, you also need someone to do the actual work, such as constructing the housing. Immigrants are mostly working age and help re-balance our age demographics. Without immigration we will just accelerate the slide towards Australia being a retirement village with no staff.
@Ladadadada don't think anyone's saying no immigration. The rate and type of immigration is the issue. Most new jobs in health, social welfare, education and admin services. Very little in construction. So taking care of and "educating" a growing population, but not adequately housing them. And if we are trying to increase the future tax base with immigration, why are the number of parent visas also increasing?
@@Ladadadada sounds great if I'm being honest.
@@Ladadadadabut possibly the decision to not have children or as many children is also connected to house prices and housing availability. If one can’t afford a house then one is less likely to have kids.
Well u dont have to worry....wealthy parents..private school..etc etc
When everyone are forced to to cbd to work, who would want to live far away
It's actually due to this one fact 1989 25000 457 immigrants my mother was one of them... 2024 over 1 million.... The majority are a cheap labour force and the rest are not able to afford houses so rentals are all gone.... Unhinged immigration policy
"Phew" says the NIMBY's nationwide "they're looking at the immigrants ONLY again, not us, carry on chaps, lets' make sure we keep it that way".
When PM Howard introduced GST in 2000, the migrant floodgates were opened; the more migrants, the more GST the States received.
Sharath, I know this is a very random question but were you at Exeter today (5 Jan) around 12:30-1pm? I saw a car that looked very similar to the one I’ve seen you have in other videos and I saw someone who looked very similar to Amy. Very random I know but I need to know!
I’m renting in Leumeah near Campbelltown and I retire in 2038 when I hit 67. My super will be 350,000-400,000 if I’m lucky so my only choice is to hopefully find a caravan park like the one in Denham court but way down the coast and put some tiny prefabricated building on a small lot.
Keep voting Labor and Liberal...
There the ones that got us into this mess
Aussies can't afford kids that is why the government imports waves of migrants.The great replacement.
Lots of people are starting to move to Asia to live which is unheard of back in the days. Reverse migration is a thing now due to house prices and cost of living
😂 lies !!! Asia is the worst continent to live in…
We could also NOT bring 650k new people into the country each year.
?
that's not gonna fix the whole problem fuckwit. don't be racist about housing.
that would make too much sense.
Sharath is a giant mouthpiece of the property lobby, no wonder he is silent on mass migration. I reckon he's sponsored by the them.
@@DaCatOnDaMatwhat part of stop immigrating 650k people a year don't you understand?
Less demand for homes means less increase in price
More and more migrants and Aussie cities will look like Calcutta. Overcrowded
@@daintree98 more housing to import more 3rd world? No thanks
We’re appreciating at unprecedented rate. Eh, who are we kidding…
A third of Australians own a house outright, a third have a mortgage, and a third rent.
A third of Australians vote LNP, a third Labor, and a third Greens and other.
There’s a lot of overlap between those two statistics.
@@Aysthete yeah 100% of australian are retards it turns out. Labor, greens, liberals will never solve the problem. They manufacture the crisis and benefit from pitting each other against one another
Well done! Yes, tax changes help. Hollow logs are better than houses I reckon for storing wealth. Look at the Frenchies. The norm is to rent from an Insto such as a bank or insurance company on a very long lease with pegged rent increases. Apartments , natch. Ever pondered why there are apartments in those small towns the Tour rockets through?
A lot of Francaise Super savings go into Govt regulated investment funds which invest in big companies which , amongst other things, run Oz water and sewerage infrastructure, slow trams to Randwick and multitudes of bus routes. There’s also a fair bit that goes into Rocket science. I reckon we’ll have the balance right when we wean ourselves off the addling effects of home ownership as small biz. Report back when an Oz company gets a concession to run a French or Chinese High Speed Rail line!
More density? No way! That’s the last thing needed … with only a fraction of land used by humans in Oz, just build out …and create infrastructure as you go
Massive eastern coastline needs more satellite cities. So many can live near the water and have a good life vs crammed with the many millions in the big cities.
I like your videos, but you are way off on this. The causes (in chronological order) are - Feminism. Dual incomes. More affluent housing aspirations supported by said dual incomes. Deferred child bearing. Possibly, no child bearing. Cheaper finance since 1986 with banking deregulation. More borrowing on lower interest rates. Property price inflation. And, frankly, young adults like having nice things and they don’t like giving up on some of them to have a family, or at least will have less children to keep having those nice things. I feel sorry for younger generations, but this whole mess has been facilitated by the banks over the past 30 years lending money created out of thin air, and lent out too cheaply for too long. That’s it. It’s not a baby boomer conspiracy.
I agree Feminism is the root of all evil 👿
Kids whinging about not being able to buy a house? Raise more capable kids. The next generation will earn the most amount of money in the history of all mankind. And when their parents stroke out, they get all their wealth as all. Want to be cell-dwelling renter? Move to the northern hemisphere bud.
the lucky country was meant as an insult
Rampant immigration well beyond what infrastructure can be built to keep up I’d say is problem #1
Immigration would be fine if we used that extra man power to build more houses.
@potapotapotapotapotapota That's not how an economy functions. You sustain 1/2 million migrants a year into a population of 26 million into cities, you get 2.4%pa average growth. That's 3x the u.s average.
@@potapotapotapotapotapota it is not possible to build that many houses and commensurate infrastructure for that many people every year. Australia has some of the highest proportion of tradies in the workforce of any country and we can’t keep up. Why don’t we go back to immigration levels like they were between 1950-2000 when it was sustainable and basically everyone could afford a house
@@potapotapotapotapotapotanot at that rate. It takes time to build homes and in the meantime people need somewhere to build
The only group pushing mass immigration is the property and banking lobby. Because mass migration means higher property prices and more mortgages to sell. This mass migration policy is entirely pushed by corporate interests
@@Julian-xs8ncOk so you agree with my statement, but you understand the situation is even more complicated than that. I would have to concede to your argument.
Thanks, social engineers.
there is so much usable land in this country - it is criminal to think that we cannot have more affordable homea
Usable land meaning you're willing to move out to the Blue Mountains when business opportunities are in the city? The problem is urban sprawl and lack of infrastructure for density.
@ - i agree, i think old prefer to live closer to the city but if i could get 2-3 bedroom house/apt or something similar for under 500k - yeah i would live there provided there is a connection to my place of work and i could get to my place of business within 1 hour- i done my exchange in Germany and it was a well connected town about 50m out of frankfurt and everyone loved it
You think a place like sydney should grow in built-up area infinitely?
@rexjgeorge So you can live in Gosford or something. The problem is that people are looking for immediate solutions and not solutions for times when High Speed Rail that might not even get built makes it viable to live in those places.
I mean, there's a lot of land. I wouldn't say useable land unless you want more urban sprawl, leading to more car dependency and traffic.
Who doesn't love a stupidly long commute into work.
We need more housing in the areas people actually want to live. Not out in the sticks
The government prefers to have it citizens in dire straights and destituted. It's all about keeping people under control. Harry S. Truman said the economy won't work with full employment, I can remember a time when Australia had full employment apart from ww2 .
Coz of albo
Australia was the lucky country up until the early 2000s. Than came the migrant waves...
It all started when PM Howard introduced GST in 2000.
@@daintree98 both can be true at the same time
And I just feel like a burden 🙃
No need to feel like a burden if you pull your weight around the house and are grateful.
Save up a 10% deposit and buy a $500,000 apartment and rent out the other bedroom. Simple.
@@patrickmadden5938 are you serious? You know nothing about this man's circumstances.
The truth is even the 33% who don't already own a house would want the value of their property to go up after they bought at astronomical prices not down. Who wants the value of their single biggest asset that they are paying huge amounts of interest to the bank for, to fall in value? Nobody.
The system of having housing be an investment should be abolished through massive government housing ownership. I say this as a capitalist. Then people will start investing in upstaters and other businesses to really boost the economy in a way that improves the standard of living
@@oufukubinta ok. say we do turn communist where the government owns all the land and housing by comulsarily buying out the existing owners. What then? Who gets the water front harborside government housing mansion and whos gets the 2 bedroom dogbox apartment in the middle of nowhere? How do you prevent it from turning into 1984 style everyone is equal but some are more equal than others?
^ Me, when I forget that cars exist.
People already take out massive loans to pay off vital assets that depreciate in value, but because they don't have a financial advisor whispering in their ear like Wormtongue about it, they're fine because they understand that the value you get out of owning the thing is the point, not some hypothetical future sale value.
Yes, but consider the problem of negative equity. If house prices fall, many people who purchased in the last 5 years could lose everything.
Consider the effect of falling prices on China's economy before wishing for lower prices.
It's going to happen sooner or later. Could be decades away, but that negative equity hit will come, as it did for many in Europe and the US in 2008.
"could lose everything"
Oh no! They bought a house and now they just own a house! The poor babies! What ever can we do!
Show me a gram of equity and I'll start caring about it.
@@ross.venner fuck China