1. Unemployment is pretty steady and residential construction is taking over from the mining boom. Apart from the mining boom slowing, everything else is actually going OK.
2. The USA also had massive stimulus, but it didn't prevent house prices there crashing because they had an actual housing bubble. Also Australia government debt is very low by global standards. Plenty of scope for more stimulus there if needed.
3. Until their next one.
4. Rates can be cut further if needed, although increased banking competition will probably do the RBA's job for them here. I think you're right, but I was assuming Wisebear meant restricting to 3x single income - i.e. pre-financial deregulation style of not considering the wife's income etc.
Quote:
1. Unemployment is pretty steady and residential construction is taking over from the mining boom. Apart from the mining boom slowing, everything else is actually going OK.
Lets see. Its rising and youth unemployment is high. They are the "greater fools" you are relying on.
Quote:
2. The USA also had massive stimulus, but it didn't prevent house prices there crashing because they had an actual housing bubble. Also Australia government debt is very low by global standards. Plenty of scope for more stimulus there if needed.
But where was their China?Yes, there is plenty of scope. Bailing out overleveraged Investors is part of the cycle by your own admission.
Quote:
3. Until their next one.
Oh sorry, forgot Chinese fiscal policy is also "all part of the cycle"
Quote:
4. Rates can be cut further if needed, although increased banking competition will probably do the RBA's job for them here. I think you're right, but I was assuming Wisebear meant restricting to 3x single income - i.e. pre-financial deregulation style of not considering the wife's income etc.
And all of a sudden Monetary policy and "the cycle" become one. Jeez, this is cast iron. Better go buy some investment properties.
Property acquisition as a topic was almost a national obsession. You couldn't even call it speculation as the buyers all presumed the price of property could only go up. That’s why we use the word obsession. Ordinary people were buying properties for their young children who had not even left school assuming they would not be able to afford property of their own when they left college- Klaus Regling on Ireland. Sound familiar?
The evidence of nearly 40 cycles in house prices for 17 OECD economies since 1970 shows that real house prices typically give up about 70 per cent of their rise in the subsequent fall, and that these falls occur slowly. Morgan Kelly:On the Likely Extent of Falls in Irish House Prices, 2007
1. Unemployment is pretty steady and residential construction is taking over from the mining boom. Apart from the mining boom slowing, everything else is actually going OK.
2. The USA also had massive stimulus, but it didn't prevent house prices there crashing because they had an actual housing bubble. Also Australia government debt is very low by global standards. Plenty of scope for more stimulus there if needed.
3. Until their next one.
4. Rates can be cut further if needed, although increased banking competition will probably do the RBA's job for them here. I think you're right, but I was assuming Wisebear meant restricting to 3x single income - i.e. pre-financial deregulation style of not considering the wife's income etc.
Unemployment is at a 10 year high and tipped to rise further.
Youth unemplyment is high and will be high for some time.. especially if the retiring age is continually raised.
The massive stimulus in the USA was for the benefit of the banks, not mortgage holders or the housing market.
There are some people who seem angry and continuously look for conflict. Walk away, the battle they are fighting isn't with you, it's with themselves.
The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is not enough of anything to satisfy all who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics. ~ Thomas Sowell.
Who was the fool, who the wise man, who the beggar or the Emperor? Whether rich or poor, all are equal in death.
If mortgages were restricted to 3x income then we could see price/income ratios fall back to 3x household income instead of the current 4x to 5x household income.
Which aspects of financial deregulation do you believe will be reversed, and when?
So you accept that there are circumstances under which real price declines of up to 40% are possible. That's good progress Shadow.
While I eventually expect more regulation I don’t think it’s necessary in order for the property market to correct significantly. I’m a strong believer that market forces trump everything and that everyone acts in their own best interest. Banks will therefore not continue to lend into a bubble forever and people won’t bid up the prices of bubble assets forever regardless of whether prudent lending standards are imposed or not.
So you accept that there are circumstances under which real price declines of up to 40% are possible.
There are circumstances under which Australian house prices could fall to zero.
Quote:
Banks will therefore not continue to lend into a bubble forever and people won’t bid up the prices of bubble assets forever regardless of whether prudent lending standards are imposed or not.
If house prices keep tracking incomes as they have done for over a decade then the banks and the people are not going to worry about bubbles.
Which aspects of financial deregulation do you believe will be wound back, and when?
Poontang
16 Jul 2014, 03:08 PM
Unemployment is at a 10 year high
Yet house prices are still rising. And let's put it in perspective...
Quote:
and tipped to rise further
Tipped by who... gloomers? Many economists are tipping the unemployment rate to fall.
It did in the late 90s and early 2000s as a result of financial deregulation, but that process ended more than a decade ago, and since then prices have simply tracked income growth. So current price/income ratios in Australia have been sustained for over a decade. The current ratio appears to be sustainable.
In all other countries that had a housing crash, the crash happened immediately after the sharp rise in price/income ratios and construction boom. That's because price/income ratios in those countries grew to levels that could not be sustained.
There have been no cases ever in the history of popped bubbles where a bubble suddenly popped after relatively stable price/income ratios had been sustained for a decade. Incorrect. I have always said the run up in price/income ratios during the late 90s and early 2000s was a result of financial deregulation. If that financial deregulation is reversed, then house prices would fall back to earlier price/income ratios. But in my opinion the likelihood of financial deregulation being reversed any time soon is pretty remote. If anything, there is likely to be further deregulation, lower structural interest rates, increased competition from foreign lenders and supermarkets etc.
If mortgages were restricted to 3x income then we could see price/income ratios fall back to 3x household income instead of the current 4x to 5x household income.
Which aspects of financial deregulation do you believe will be reversed, and when?
U.S. was under 2x in the early 80s and had what I would describe 'a minor blip', and are back around 1.8x 30 years later..
We were slightly above 2x in early 80s, and at parity with US in 1986, and have had a sustained huge growth and are now around 4.5 to 5x. ( Chris Joye recently said 6x didn't he?)
Somehow, you see that as sustainable.
I certainly don't.
It might be if we were a first world economy, but as we have slaughtered manufacturing, and predominantly rely upon resource exploitation and the rural sector, I just cannot see how our urbanised population that services each otherer with cheap Chinese product can compete in a globalised market.
They are a dead weight relying upon tax concessions just to survive!
Flogging houses to each other just isn't going to cut it.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE! Share a cot with Milton?
U.S. was under 2x in the early 80s and had what I would describe 'a minor blip', and are back around 1.8x 30 years later.
The US has the lowest price/income ratio in the world, but they have very high property taxes, so the overall cost of ownership is much higher than their price/income ratio suggests.
Australia's price/income ratio is about average compared other comparable countries...
House Price to Income Ratio, Country 29.39 Hong Kong 28.09 China 24.14 Taiwan 21.84 Thailand 21.66 Singapore 20.24 Indonesia 19.39 Philippines 19.10 Vietnam 16.59 Brazil 14.65 Russia 12.33 South Korea 11.61 Italy 11.57 Israel 11.05 Poland 10.87 Greece 10.39 India 10.38 Spain 10.31 France 10.19 Austria 09.68 Sweden 09.59 Hungary 08.70 Portugal 08.34 Japan 08.32 Luxembourg 08.27 Malaysia 07.80 United Kingdom 07.76 Norway 07.43 Australia 07.01 Switzerland 06.54 Netherlands 06.13 Germany 06.10 Ireland 05.97 Belgium 05.94 Denmark 05.80 New Zealand 05.71 Iceland 05.41 Canada 03.32 South Africa 02.41 United States
Quote:
now around 4.5 to 5x. ( Chris Joye recently said 6x didn't he?
Depends on how the ratio is calculated. Houses vs dwellings, single vs household income, gross vs disposable vs discretionary income, mean vs median etc.
House Price to Income Ratio, Country 29.39 Hong Kong 28.09 China 24.14 Taiwan 21.84 Thailand 21.66 Singapore 20.24 Indonesia 19.39 Philippines 19.10 Vietnam 16.59 Brazil 14.65 Russia 12.33 South Korea 11.61 Italy 11.57 Israel 11.05 Poland 10.87 Greece 10.39 India 10.38 Spain 10.31 France 10.19 Austria 09.68 Sweden 09.59 Hungary 08.70 Portugal 08.34 Japan 08.32 Luxembourg 08.27 Malaysia 07.80 United Kingdom 07.76 Norway 07.43 Australia 07.01 Switzerland 06.54 Netherlands 06.13 Germany 06.10 Ireland 05.97 Belgium 05.94 Denmark 05.80 New Zealand 05.71 Iceland 05.41 Canada 03.32 South Africa 02.41 United States.
How do you know? You don't know anything about me.
But even if I don't, what's the diff?
You cant take it with you buddy.
Ex BP Golly
16 Jul 2014, 04:30 PM
7.43x
Is that household income?
In Numbeo we trust.
Dumbeo more like.
Quote:
You are only now figuring out that the property cycle is related to interest rates?
I have translated what you mean when you say "all part of the cycle"
What you mean is the "cycle" is controlled by monetary and fiscal policy and rosy assumptions regarding underlying economic fundamentals and buyer sentiment.
Oh, and that we cant talk about the cycle before 2003. That doesn't matter you see.
But we can talk about interest rate fluctuations going back 160 years.
Property acquisition as a topic was almost a national obsession. You couldn't even call it speculation as the buyers all presumed the price of property could only go up. That’s why we use the word obsession. Ordinary people were buying properties for their young children who had not even left school assuming they would not be able to afford property of their own when they left college- Klaus Regling on Ireland. Sound familiar?
The evidence of nearly 40 cycles in house prices for 17 OECD economies since 1970 shows that real house prices typically give up about 70 per cent of their rise in the subsequent fall, and that these falls occur slowly. Morgan Kelly:On the Likely Extent of Falls in Irish House Prices, 2007
The corollary of what is a reasonable extrapolation (consistent with historical practice) of ex-post data for house price growth is the implication for real income growth in Australia at higher than historical averages, which fits with the accordant pressure for higher rates of real income growth in the developing world, both of which will serve to ensure the labour competitiveness gap between Australia and those countries does not widen while still allowing for the stability of asset prices which also have the complimentary effect of maintaining the level of investor support for house price sentiment in this country, as well as the flow on effect to rates of credit growth supporting our financial system and employment generally.
This provides the RBA with ample scope to pursue a policy of sustained lower interest rates without undue concern for what would otherwise be construed as ‘inflationary’ effects on asset prices, as any increases will generally be effectively capitalising the implied future gains in real domestic income growth relative to the expected trend of Chinese income growth. The combination of these factors should continue to support and in some cases arguably improve on the affordability of housing at existing levels, notwithstanding some occurrences of excesses in highly sought after and naturally or effectively constrained markets, which serve merely to create noise in the aggregate data.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy