More definitely needs to be done regarding housing affordability, but it's not a purely city issue. Housing in the city should be considerably more than regional and country areas.

Speaking just in terms of living in Brisbane, there is affordable housing available for those willing to move beyond inner suburbs, but once again people want the ideal location, which comes with a premium price unfortunately.

Get used to your commute: data confirms houses near jobs are too expensive

Australia’s capital cities are getting more and more units, that are largely concentrated and come with a hefty price tag, a new report shows. And while these areas also have lots of jobs, the high price for houses means many on low incomes won’t be able to access that employment.

Between 2006 and 2014, more than 50% of new units were built in the 20% of local government areas with the highest number of jobs.

When compared internationally, it would seem that Australian housing supply has not been as weak as is widely believed. However, the report points to some stark differences in housing supply patterns, emerging across Australia’s capital cities.

In Sydney, Perth and Brisbane, new housing supply has lagged slightly behind population growth. In the other capital cities, housing supply actually outpaced population growth between 2006 and 2014.

Housing supply and house prices

The issue of housing affordability has traditionally been pitched in terms of supply failing to keep pace with growing demand, and house prices rising in response to the imbalance.

Yet, house price inflation has surged even in metropolitan areas where housing supply exceeds population growth. The evidence suggests a complex relationship between supply, population growth and price that is shaped by both supply and demand-side factors.

As prices and rents rise, housing costs continue to eat up larger shares of household incomes, particularly in moderate and low-income groups.

The study shows 80% of new unit approvals were located in the top 20% of local government areas with the highest unit prices. This is while 80% of new house approvals were in the top 40% of local government areas with the highest house prices.

There is very little new supply in areas where house prices are lower, where households on low to moderate incomes can afford to live.

Affordable housing, cities and productivity

The lack of affordable housing in the vicinity of employment centres can pose threats to the productivity of our cities. If suburban residents are forced into longer commutes to access employment in the CBD, it can reduce productivity.

A potential consequence is that low-paid workers are deterred from seeking jobs in CBDs. This would then cause certain skills to become unavailable, and businesses to be less efficient, because they cannot quickly fill vacancies with suitable applicants.

Our data shows new units have grown by 30% in areas which have the most jobs, between 2005-06 and 2013-14. In contrast to this new units have only grown by 2.5% in areas with less jobs.

It would appear that unit approvals are concentrated in areas with abundant job opportunities. So productivity could improve, as congestion eases, and commute times lowered, if (and it’s a big if) these dwellings were affordable to those wishing to take advantage of these job opportunities.

New housing supply has grown at a pace that matches population growth rates, at the national level. However, there is plenty of variation across the capital cities.

The strongest growth in the number of units has been in the territories (though this is from a low base), followed by Melbourne and Brisbane. However, the strongest growth in the number of houses has been in Perth, at around 22%.

Sydney has experienced much lower growth in its number of houses, at less than 10%. This reflects the very different patterns of development in the two cities.

In Perth, Brisbane and Sydney, increases in the supply of housing didn’t keep pace with population growth during, between 2006 and 2014. However, the drivers of this shortfall are varied.

Perth’s population grew very strongly over the period that we studied. The roughly one-quarter increase in population would stretch the capacity of most housing construction sectors.

However, even though Sydney’s population growth (at 14%) is below the average across all capital cities, its housing supply failed to match this growth. These outcomes highlight the different demand and supply side factors operating across states.

We currently have a national housing policy narrative that is dominated by a consensus view that higher levels of housing supply are the solution to housing affordability problems. While increased supply will always help take steam out of pressured markets, our study suggests a more nuanced approach is needed to the supply side, while not ignoring the demand side pressures.

It’s important that we identify those barriers to expanding affordable housing supply that have been impeded in the majority of our cities, especially for low income households.

https://theconversation.com/get-used-to-your-commute-data-confirms-houses-near-jobs-are-too-expensive-77867

My wife spent 6 years at Uni doing Environmental Engineering and Zoology at the height of the mining boom.

When she got out the boom stopped, all those Engo jobs disappeared overnight and Zoology in Townsville isn't much to work with (especially in a town so dependant on dem mining dollars).

$50k+ in HECS for hardly any job oppurtunities (actually there was one in remote WA, roughly 200km off the NT border), so yes, its stiff shit.

We made a choice not to do FIFO just to have her on a salary of $120k+, we valued our relationship over the money and due to that we never have anything to complain about. 

-PB

I saw a movie called "The Purge". Wasn't that good but I sat through it. 

Maybe we should make Australia day as Annual Purge Day. 

You will never be able to do that again.

Thing is this, if property prices never went up and stayed the same as what it was back in the days of your dad. it would certainly mean depression, no jobs and no prosperity at all. You would still not be able to buy because you just won't have a job.

It will also mean that 99% of our society will be poor in retirement and on a pension, and with an ageing population, the country will be bankrupt. 

We have a good country but things are not going so well.

Self entitlement and a political class pandering to the popular vote will mean a country in decline, where over a period of time, things will not be so good. 

It is true that the previous generations made huge sacrifices to buy a house. no holidays for years on end, no restaurants, no bars or clubbing, just home cooked meals on the cheap and a lot of hard work on factory lines usually. Not to mention, there was no PAY TV, no internet, no computers, no gadgets or Ipad this or that.

The clothes they wore were from Target and K Mart and not the designer labels of today as well. no trips to Bali even. 

Plus, they never had the same access to education like young people have today. Now, just about anyone can go to uni, even those who barely pass Year 12.

And in my case, my parents escaped war, ethnic cleansing and death to boot. We are refugees. They had it hard, real hard but when they got to this country they rolled up their sleeves. Young people are not willing to make any sacrifice today. maybe because they never really had it that tough. 

And despite them working hard on factory lines, and sacrificing the holidays and other luxuries, they paid private school fees for me and my sister. They had to sacrifice to be able to do this. 

Spot on. The uni students on Q&A made fools of themselves. They were only well received on places like Q&A. 

Thing is, the Government has a dilemma. they can't keep it the way it is because future generations will be denied the same educational opportunities they get, because the system is unsustainable over the long term. our population is aging, which means that the tax paying base is shrinking. In fact, I think it is less than 40% of people who are net contributors. 

$8 per week is just so minuscule, especially when you consider all the other things young people waste their money on. They would still for instance still go out to a bar and buy far more than 1.25 schooners of beer. 

And yes, it is advantageous to them because they will start paying off their HECS sooner and actually save a lot more in the long term because of the way it is indexed with CPI. 

Those with "snouts in the trough" worked the factory lines mostly and made sacrifices. They worked hard.

If anyone wants to work, they can find a job. They just need to lower their expectations a little in the short term. There are many manual labour jobs, taxi jobs, kitchen hand jobs available at any given time. these are the jobs no one wants to do, including many younger people who are unemployed. It's much better to work as a Kitchen Hand than be unemployed, and it will help them find a better job rather quickly because it shows initiative, great attitude and a willingness to get out there. 

And in time, they will be able to buy $19 smashed avocados on toast. 

That's a huge generalisation and/or assumption you're making there based on nothing more than the age old sport of ragging on young people.

Like you, I have 2 young kids, and I actually feel sorry for them too. They do have it somewhat tougher in certain respects than previous generations, but easier in others such as the prolific availability of university positions compared to decades past. 

As you say, it's about decisions and their attitude. I also feel confident that my kids will be ok, with proper parenting, and that they will be equipped with assistance from their parents in making the best decisions they possibly can in order to make the best out of the current circumstances. Plus, they will be supported and have their fall back position called FAMILY.  

They will actually work the kitchens, despite their legal (or whatever they get) degree they have. It's about rolling up the sleeves, and everything will fall into place with the fullness of time. You can't expect to buy that inner city 3 bedroom house in Perth overnight. that is what young people need to understand. but they can get there with the right choices and acting strategically. 

They will however, be able to buy a house slightly further out, and get themselves into the market. Hopefully for them, their property value will increase too, and if conditions permit, they can sell and buy a better house or even move closer to the city. 

You know guys, 86% of Australians will retire on less than $300 per week. 86%

that is scary, but at the same time, it is their fault because they don't have to retire on $300 per week. 

It's about decisions.

You guys need to read "Rich dad, poor dad". It's about a Rich dad who earned less than half of what the Poor dad earned. 

Now here is the kicker. There will be people earning $150,000 per annum who will fall within that 86%. 

there will be people earning $75,000 per annum who will not fall within the 86%.

It's not what you earn, but it's what you do your money that counts. 

And there seems to be a fixation on university. I often say, that if I was young again, I would do things differently.

We under-estimate the power of TAFE. In my opinion, there are TAFE courses that are of much greater value than many University degrees. also more interesting.

Things like Photography, or jewelry making. Very creative and often lucrative professions. And you can set up your own little business and work for yourself. You know how powerful that is?

University is underestimated. Too many poorly educated people vote, who have failed to develop critical thinking skills.

So let's get this straight! the poorly educated shouldn't be allowed to vote right?

Wowee! I guess that is the leftist idea of democracy and equality for all. it should only exist if you have a degree, and you should only have a vote if you're smart enough to agree with their worldview, and that those who don't must be the uneducated deplorables.
Amazing...


And am I missing something? Critical thinking is developed through the university of life, not through university. 

As per the US elections & what is happening with health care, the poorly educated are 'learning' the consequence of having a lack or application of critical thinking.

As for 'University of Life' there is no such thing. Its just a cliche catch cry. I always wonder if the railing against the educated is because it exposes the poor education in the complainer - a cognitive dissonance thing.

That is extremely arrogant of you.

If I was in the USA and allowed to vote, I would have voted for trump and not Hillary. 

But I guess, this is one of the reasons why Hillary lost and Trump won. The Democrats were beyond arrogance, and their candidate was utter rubbish, so trump cruised home. 

And so is your arrogance to be so dismissive of people who bother to put the effort into becoming better educated

I got no issue with people being better educated at all. 

I value education more than you do as it is an important culturally. 

What is arrogant is your presumption of a higher intelligence over Trump supporters and that you even insinuated that the poorly educated (ie Trump supporters) should not have the democratic right to elect representatives to Government. 

So what if they worked on factory lines and made sacrifices, should I give a shit? I bust my ass working hard and making sacrifices each day and so do thousands of other young people, what do you want me to say? Oh poor Boomers I'm sorry that you had to work hard and make sacrifices like every other generation before and after you!  

Honestly when it comes to the notion of entitlement there's no other generation that has been more greedy or entitled than the Boomers.  

jk

-PB

Stick with the times PB it's all about Avolatte's now. :laugh:

What on earth is that rofl?

-PB

I'm sure certain people will be jumping up and down about this one like they were about Coopers. Personally I think she's welcome to boycott, I personally have been choosing to support their company for the same reason.

Marg is entitled to her religious beliefs without being sneered at. After all we are supposed to accept Islam, aren't we?

She's entitled to her beliefs and can people can tolerate them. However people can be critical of her just as people can be critical of Islam as long as it's civil.

Well done Margaret Court.

The issue is I have is not that people are criticising her views, but that Court has become persona non grata and people are wishing to erase any public celebration of her notable sporting achievements due to her religious and cultural beliefs. If the same thing was done to a Muslim it would be considered racist*. 

(*yes I know Islam isn't a race).

If people who go through university are so much smarter than those who haven't, how come half of the graduates can't find work? I say you can vote if you have a job. If all you can do is study, then you don't get to have a say on how the rest of us live our lives.

Yeah fuck democracy, let's listen to this bloke on the internet 

I don't see an issue with that. If people don't like her views they have a right to express them. Just like the RWNJ's did with Yassmin.

However the difference is their criticism of her Facebook post was very weak which leads to other reasons they might be trying to attack her... If someone can outline another reason apart from her views on SSM that people would be attacking Margaret Court that'd be interesting to hear.

I don't personally agree they should take her name off the stadium but I wouldn't mind if they did. When SSM is legalised finally, some weddings should be booked for the venue and then she'll probably want her name taken off of it anyway :laugh: