Toots Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Victorian wages are failing to keep pace with sky-rocketing property rents with tenants ploughing an increasing portion of their income into keeping a roof over their heads a new study shows. Average rent growth has outstripped wage growth by 35% according to a Victorian Council of Social Service study. Renters are often the "forgotten victims" of a housing market crisis as they have little choice but to pay astronomical rental prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starlight7 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 It is something the government needs to deal with. You only have to look at the increased number of beggars round the CBD of Melbourne to realise that things are crook . Overseas non- residents are part of the problem and so is negative gearing but the government hasn't got the will or fortitude to do anything at all. It will only get worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 There are so many new apartments buildings in and around the CBD at the moment I can't work out why rents aren't collapsing. Perhaps foreign investors who are happy to just have them stand empty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starlight7 Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 It is still quite hard to get a good rental apparently which is hard to understand. Cost doesn't seem to be an issue. Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luisa Cannon Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 Even if I can’t afford to buy my own place yet, that’s fine, but it would mean my finances are in order if I could afford to rent on my own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzy--bee Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 On 7/19/2017 at 19:22, starlight7 said: It is something the government needs to deal with. You only have to look at the increased number of beggars round the CBD of Melbourne to realise that things are crook . Overseas non- residents are part of the problem and so is negative gearing but the government hasn't got the will or fortitude to do anything at all. It will only get worse. Negative gearing keeps rents down as effectively the government subsidises the rent. If negative gearing was removed rents would need to go up by 10 - 20% to cover the shortfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted July 31, 2017 Share Posted July 31, 2017 4 hours ago, buzzy--bee said: Negative gearing keeps rents down as effectively the government subsidises the rent. If negative gearing was removed rents would need to go up by 10 - 20% to cover the shortfall. Nonsense. Negative gearing means that landlords can afford larger mortgages than the rents will support. If negative gearing is removed rent will remain the same but house prices will fall. If landlords could increase rents by 10-20% they would do so regardless of negative gearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collie Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 21 hours ago, buzzy--bee said: Negative gearing keeps rents down as effectively the government subsidises the rent. If negative gearing was removed rents would need to go up by 10 - 20% to cover the shortfall. Yep, i agree with Ken. This is a fallacy spouted by vested interests (Real Estate Agents, Landlords). Landlords will charge the market rent. If the rent is not covering their costs, they either exit the market (freeing up a property for a buyer - so they cancel each other out, 1 less property, 1 less renter) or wear the loss (hoping for capital appreciation). The taxpayer should not be subidising the investment (of any asset class) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 On 8/1/2017 at 16:49, Collie said: Yep, i agree with Ken. This is a fallacy spouted by vested interests (Real Estate Agents, Landlords). Landlords will charge the market rent. If the rent is not covering their costs, they either exit the market (freeing up a property for a buyer - so they cancel each other out, 1 less property, 1 less renter) or wear the loss (hoping for capital appreciation). The taxpayer should not be subidising the investment (of any asset class) The reason the government subsidises it is to save money later. If they can assist people with wealth creation now they won't have to pay them a pension later. So it actually saves the taxpayer money in the long run. If you can enter retirement owning your own home and own an investment property, then you will be self sufficient in retirement. If the government doesn't have to pay you an AGE Pension for 25 years it is worth the expense now. It is the same reason Superannuation also has tax breaks. No system is perfect of course, but the huge runup in property prices has been a fairly recent phenomonen considering negative gearing has been around for 30 years or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.