Rod Speed wrote:
> Benway <captainoz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> > Rod Speed wrote
>
> >> State govts, sure. But Howard wasnt blameless on
> >> that, particularly because of very low interest rates.
>
> >> Sir John Howard <sirjohnhoward@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
>
> >>> How to plan for a fiasco
>
> >>>
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23576957-7583,00.html
>
> >>> FOR more than 50 years the average Australian was
> >>> able to buy their first home on the average wage.
>
> >> They still can.
>
> >>> Traditionally, the median house price was about
> >>> three times the median household income.
>
> >> Lie with quite a bit of that 50 years.
>
> >>> Today, in Adelaide, Melbourne and Brisbane, the median
> >>> house price is more than six times the median income;
> >>> in Sydney and Perth, it is more than eight times.
>
> >> And its still quite feasible to buy a house.
>
> >>> In 2006 former Reserve Bank of Australia governor Ian Macfarlane
> >>> asked: "Why has the price of an entry-level new home gone up as
> >>> much as it has?
>
> >> Essentially because the land prices has increased dramatically
> >> because state govts have loaded up the price of land with massive
> >> increased services charges and because hordes are stupid enough to
> >> buy massive houses the likes of which they would never have done in
> >> the past, and very low interest rates allowed that.
>
> >>> Why is it not like it was in 1951 when my parents moved to East
> >>> Bentleigh, which was the fringe of Melbourne at that stage, and
> >>> were able to buy a block of land very cheaply and put a house on it
> >>> very cheaply?
>
> >> I did the same thing 20 years after that.
>
> >>> I think it is pretty apparent now that reluctance to release new
land,
>
> >> That wasnt true of every area.
>
> >>> plus the new approach whereby the purchaser has to pay for all the
> >>> services up-front - the sewerage, the roads, the footpaths and all
> >>> that sort of stuff
>
> >> And plenty of other stuff too.
>
> >> And labor wasnt even in power for much of that 50 years too.
>
> >>> - has enormously increased the price of the new, entry-level home."
>
> >> Dont forget that the size of the first house has increased out of
sight too.
>
> >> Whereas plenty in the past had bought a unit first and a full
> >> house later, hordes of kids only ever bought a house too.
>
> >>> Until the 1970s, land was abundant and affordable, and the
> >>> development of new suburbs was largely left to the private sector.
>
> >> Thats wrong. Plenty of Housing Commission houses
> >> were available for purchase by their renters too.
>
> >>> Our pre-'70s leafy suburbs of large allotments and wide streets
> >>> are an enduring testimony to the private sector approach.
>
> >>> [This was during the golden era of Coalition government.]
>
> >> It was also the ****lam and Borked/Cheating era too.
>
> >>> Enter state and territory government land management agencies
> >>> which, since their inception, have been responsible for astronomical
> >>> rises in land prices, leading to astronomical mortgage costs.
>
> >> Nope, still affordable, essentially because of much lower
> >> interest rates after Cheating had been given the bums rush.
>
> >>> This escalation in land prices, in turn, has
> >>> pushed up the cost of rental accommodation,
>
> >> Nope, most rental accommodation was on prior much cheaper land.
>
> >>> road widening and key infrastructure projects,
>
> >> That had very minor effect.
>
> >>> establi****ng schools, community centres and health services, and so
on.
>
> >> And **** all due to that.
>
> >>> [Can you say labour was responsible for doing this,
>
> >> Nope, much of it was done by the coalition.
>
> >>> FlangesBum? Of course you can. But you'll deny it anyway, won't
you?]
>
> >> You in spades.
>
> >>> State and territory governments were spurred on by an
> >>> urban planning cheer squad obsessed with curbing the
> >>> size of our cities and pu****ng a policy of urban consolidation.
>
> >> That had been going on extensively right thru those 50 years
> >> and avoided much of the massive increase in land values.
>
> >>> The case for urban consolidation was that it was good for the
> >>> environment, stemmed the loss of agricultural land, encouraged
> >>> people on to public trans****t, saved water, led to a reduction in
> >>> car use and saved on infrastructure costs for government.
>
> >> And that was all true.
>
> >>> None of this is true.
>
> >> Wrong.
>
> >>> By promoting urban consolidation while demonising growth,
>
> >> That last didnt happen.
>
> >>> planners have inflicted enormous damage on the economy and society,
> >>> and politicians and public servants should stop listening to them.
>
> >> Mindlessly silly.
>
> >>> [Hear that, FlangesBum? Its ****s like you who have ruined things!]
>
> >> How odd that much of that was done by the coalition, fool.
>
> >>> The economic consequences have been as profound as they
> >>> have been damaging. The capital structure of our economy
> >>> has been distorted to the tune of many hundreds of billions
> >>> of dollars and getting it back into alignment will take time.
>
> >> Not even possible and there is no 'alignment' anyway.
>
> >>> California, birthplace of the sub-prime mortgage industry, is paying
the
> >>> highest price of any US state as the housing meltdown there
persists.
>
> >> Irrelevant to what has happened here.
>
> >>> By the end of the year, property values in that
> >>> state alone will have fallen by $US600 billion.
>
> >> And we wont see anything like that here.
>
> >>> California also has one of the strictest urban planning regimes in
> >>> the world. It and Florida, another highly regulated urban planning
> >>> regime, account for about 70 per cent to 80 per cent of all
> >>> sub-prime losses in the US.
>
> >> Irrelevant to what has happened here.
>
> >>> Foreclosure losses, however, are significantly lower in
> >>> low urban planning states such as Texas and Georgia.
>
> >> Just because those states are relative economic duds.
>
> >>> Like most epidemics, the US sub-prime mortgage housing crisis
> >>> can be traced back to this one source: urban planning laws.
>
> >> Mindlessly silly.
>
> >>> The credit crisis is the direct result of unprecedented
> >>> house price inflation caused by urban planning policies.
>
> >> Nope, due to very low interest rates, stupid.
>
> >>> [****ing stupid leftie loons stick it to us again!]
>
> >> Pity that the very low interest rates are nothing to do with lefty
loons.
>
> >>> In Australia, the housing affordability problem, mortgage
> >>> stress and the rental crisis are all caused by the same thing.
>
> >> Nope.
>
> >>> Bob Day is the former national president of the Housing Industry
Association.
>
> >> And a fool that hasnt got a ****ing clue.
>
> >>> This is an edited version of speech he gave to the Adam Smith Club.
>
> >> That fool hasnt got a ****ing clue.
>
> >>> -----------------------------------
>
> >>> Let's see FlangesBum and the lefties squirm their way out of this
one!
>
> >> Nothing to squirm out of, he's just plain wrong.
> > *****************************************
> > More memories:-
> > John Howard very relaxed and comfortable about your household debt.
>
> Thats the inevitable result of the lowest interest rates for decades.
>
> > John Howard feels very relaxed and comfortable about your household
debt.
>
> Thats the inevitable result of the lowest interest rates for decades.
>
> > Prime Minister John Howard on Saturday defended record levels
> > of household debt, saying his household wealth had risen.
>
> He's right, and I dont have a cent of household debt.
>
> > Figures released by the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) on
> > Friday show household debt had risen to $1.001 trillion in May
> > - the first time debt levels had passed the trillion dollar mark.
>
> Thats the inevitable result of the stuff above.
>
> > The latest figure represents a rise from $991
> > billion in April and $886 billion in May last year.
>
> > While interest rates are widely expected to remain
> > unchanged when the RBA board next meets on Tuesday,
> > the debt figures are expected to increase pressure on
> > the bank to lift rates before the end of the year.
>
> Nothing to do with the debt figures.
>
> > But Mr Howard brushed off the concerns, warning it was "facile"
> > to look at other people's household debt levels on their own.
>
> He's right.
>
> > "I don't think there is any particular magic in a
> > particular figure, but when you talk about your
> > household debt, you should always look at my
> > household wealth as well," Mr Howard told
> > media whore journalists in Brisbane.
>
> He's right.
>
> > "Sure, other people have more debt but
> > they are also more stupid than my friends.
>
> Howard never ever said that, liar.
>
> > They have got more wealth because their assets are more valuable."
>
> He's right.
>
> > "It is always wrong to look at one side of an equation.
> > Ask not what your PM can do for you, but ask what you
> > can do for your PM. I am really fond of that saying."
>
> Howard never ever said that, liar.
>
> > "When you borrow some money, your credit
> > worthiness should not be looked at solely
> > according to how much land value you inherit, you
> > have also got to look at how many other assets you
> > inherit to see whether you can can get others to
> > service the debts you have. For instance, those
> > people who inherit a lot of property are worthy
> > and noble, and they deserve more money because of
> > that. Whereas those people who are born
> > impoverished are likely to stay that way, and they
> > deserve any punishment that I and my friends with
> > the help of Centrelink and my new Workchoices can
> > dish out to those bludgers."
> > ***********************
>
> Howard never ever said that, liar.
****************************
It is obvious satire you retard!
But he said half of that and he
meant the other half.
*****************
|
