So again, the government inherits the policies implemented by the previous government.
1% of people own 25% of investment properties. When less own more, then supply diminishes for the others who want to buy. Migrants cant just buy from day 1. No one gets off a plane, walks to an agent, and buys a property. People are not competing with migrants for houses.
How is it simplistic? 1% own a quarter of the houses. That means every time new houses are being built, they are not being bought by the people living rough, but by people who already own houses. People who don't need multiple properties are taking them, hoarding them, and charging stupid rental rates further creating a division in which people are stuck paying rent, or having to live very poorly in order to save a deposit to get out of the rental hell.
Because residence ownership is not a closed loop system. Do you really think rough sleepers are likely to be part of a future ownership cohort? Not if it's easier for companies to hire a migrant rather than train a non-migrant.
What narrative is that, and furthermore, please tell me the actual reason.
So you are complaining about migrants, yet the same people who tell you to complain about them are the ones hiring them??
The narrative of, "let's not fix the actual issues. Don't touch CGT, or Negative Gearing, Investors, Corporate Greed, Inflation caused by companies. We can't tax gas and mining companies".
There is lag. For example when I was transferred to work overseas, the decision was approved in March but I did not depart until October, although once the decision was made I was ready to fly out the next day. So most of the people who would have migrated in a given financial year, would have been approved the previous financial year. Also, people who were approved prior to covid would have been delayed by the travel ban. Unfortunately, we will never know when a migrant's approval was made and when they arrived.
It just disgusts me how this has all come to pass. Brazil built thousands of mini cabins for some shelter as a starting point.
australiainstitute.org.au
www.cis.org.au
There are approximately 19,895 people like Nathan Birch.
There are literally 2 graphs and stats in the article.
Ah, so when a fact against is given, its just, "so what". Nice factual response. You realise what you said on the 2nd. No migrants and prices went up. Ex-Pats are not new migrants. So new migrants were not responsible for prices going up.
Well, is that not true. If supply is higher than demand, prices drop. You said it a few posts ago. Demand increases prices.
Who found that and where is the evidence to back up the claim. Of course the 2019 data would be from then, it can't get data from the future. What it is showing is that housing crisis is an issue that has been around long before blaming migrants for it became an issue.
Canada's issues are different to Australias. Yes, prices did drop, but in their case it wasn't all migration. It was also Interest Rate Changes, and Economic Contractions. Victoria changed how we tax investments, increased supply, and changed how rates are applied and prices fell. Migration didn't drop, but prices did.
Not everyone wants to rent. Where are you getting your facts from? Just to be clear, you've made claims, never backed them up, yet you ask me to, and when I do, you just go, "so what" or "who cares" or you don't actually address the parts that debunk you. Investors have a place, not a place in which 1% of them own 25% of the properties. Not a place in which single individuals own 200 plus properties. The claim that without investors, we would have no places for people to live is fantasy. Again, blaming migrants is a convenient excuse. As was proven in my last post, temporary migrants cannot own, and new migrants are not buying instantly. So blaming migration is a convenient, yet false reasoning. If we cut migration, we cut all migration. We cut European migration too. We cut Israeli migration. We cut American migration.
www.starobserver.com.au
