By: wendywen85
6/11/2009
1:23 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: wendywen85
6/11/2009
1:22 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: wendywen85
6/11/2009
12:53 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: wendywen85
6/11/2009
12:52 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: tigereye670
3/08/2009
8:07 am Yahoo! Profile:
tigereye670 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Rossenhoj
This country was economically backward and heavily reliant on the sheeps back during the Liberal yrs. Rightly or wrongly (probably a bit of both) Keating took brave and politically unpopular steps to change the economy to move it away from relying on resources to be more like Nippon and Germany – ie technologically advanced. I didn’t agree with dropping tariffs but so be it. Howard wanted to do what keating did but Fraser didn’t allow it. Keating and Kev are different creatures for different times.
The libs were great at spending tax payers money to boast (advertise) so called accomplishments, which were actually a result of the resources boom and asset sales. And as a result of several lies by howard during elections the labour party now mimics the libs propaganda machine by using tax payers money to take credit for successes that were not their doing either. Howard boasted they would keep int rates down if they win which eventually cought up with him during the last election when rates went up and his lies were open for all to see. Labour saw how howard use slight of hand tricks to convince the population that THEY were responsible for the boom and THEY control interest rates etc etc. Now Labour is doing the same propaganda Howard started.
The unions aren’t happy with Kev BTW.
The worlds best EASYJION welfare sytem with the best EASYJION Coverage was no different under the Libs, so don’t blame labour for that. Libs could have, and should have, changed the system but didn’t.
Basically, anyone claiming Libs were fantastic and lab was/is bad is simply not being realistic or insightful. The reality was the libs were very lucky to come into power when the economy was already coming out of the last recession and the world started a decade long boom. Now labour was again unlucky to take power just when the world was about to hit almost depression levels. The libs had easy times to work with, Lab had/has recession times to work with. ... |
|
By: rossnhoj
1/08/2009
5:25 pm Yahoo! Profile:
rossnhoj Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| As for the CLEVER COUNTRY which the duo Bob /Paul was to structure Australia into, which ended in tears and 17% bankers hikes, Now with Kev/Lindsey who"s Politics control all States also have the media onside, again have the Unions in total agreement, have the majority of the huge public servant workers and administrators in obiediance AND was elected with a good balance in the kitty and now ITS Kevs TIME for monumentle fiscal and wealth shift away from the social engineering thats put this clever country into a looser on wealth production and instead has developed the worlds best EASYJION welfare sytem with the best EASYJION Coverage, which has detroyed the meaning of the word FAIR. Young Countries need Determination, Strong Diverse attitude,Right and courages Fairness. 2 Yrs of Labors Buckling and Bending,with no real change, all we have is more political agenda and much less productive wealth. This all has to be again Government sponsored and again as Kev said last week with bankers Hikes and more Tears. Now its The "Kevs Clever Fair Country". Well done30%of the voters, First past the post voting will sort it. |
|
By: tigereye670
31/07/2009
8:27 am Yahoo! Profile:
tigereye670 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
PS High int rates was set by the reserve bank not keating, and the reserve was too slow in dropping rates.
hbautomation is ignorant of facts or history which is why he makes such plainly illiterate statements. He says “i was in the housing industry and still am, it was THE best time we have seen in 40 years!†So what did howard do to create that boom which started around 2000? What exactly, other than simply being in office?
“We survived the Asian recession etc etc amongst countless other dramas of the world , they passed us by like it was nothing!†Again, wouldn’t have mattered which party was on office same result would have occurred.
“Now the market is dead due to YOU, not rudd, YOU put him there..†Market dead? What rubbish, I doubt this guy is a trady based on that comment. The market is doing well, only the poorest quality tradies may be starting to feel the pinch. They still have plenty of work. |
|
By: tigereye670
31/07/2009
8:17 am Yahoo! Profile:
tigereye670 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The sour grapes by lib voters is based on ignorance and simplistic assumptions by people who obviously haven’t studied economics or political party accomplishments any deeper than watching Today Tonight.
Of course Kev and Labour isn’t perfect, no party is.
The surplus lib voters crow about occurred without Libs lifting a finger, and accrued during the last few yrs of the resources boom plus by selling off assets which can only be done once and is not difficult to do or something worthy of crowing about, a monkey can sell an asset.
Costello even agreed that Keating set up the infrastructure that allowed the economy to take advantage of the boom. Libs were lucky they came into office as Aus was already coming out of the last recession. Libs did not do anything to create the boom or get Aus out of the recession. Even they quietly admited that.
Howard’s only claim to fame was GST (which I agree with), but that’s it. Even Lib commentators and promoters can only cite the GST reform as the Libs only substantial reform. They were smart enough to leave most things alone. I am happy with Howard’s middle class welfare though. The middle class create the wealth and therefore have most right to it. The poor that can work but don’t have only themselves to blame and should suffer the consequences. There is too much lower class welfare if anything. It has become a lifestyle option rather than a last resort, and that is plain wrong. Both parties should be tougher especially during boom times when there is no excuse for not working.
Both parties have valid and invalid points and ideas, in my humble opinion. Hence I vote for the best overall party of the day be it Lib, Lab, Dem, or other not on outdated ideology. |
|
By: slap_n_tickler2003
29/07/2009
11:57 pm Yahoo! Profile:
slap_n_tickler2003 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
You want to know who stuffed up the housing market? Greedy real estate agents and their greedy clients.
Australia is also massively invested in by FOREIGN investors therefore when the foreign investors lose their money Australia suffers |
|
By: jaymarcel
27/07/2009
9:15 am Yahoo! Profile:
jaymarcel Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Why are small businesses moaning the 50% investment tax rebate deal is great! |
|
By: puyi
27/07/2009
1:55 am Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Milanda Rout | July 27, 2009
Article from: The Australian
ANGUS Bissland thought he would have a relatively easy time buying his first home after working in Britain and the US and witnessing the impact of the global financial crisis.
But the 30-year-old, who works in finance, could not believe the state of the property market when he got home.
He thinks the combination of low interest rates, the first-home buyer grants and people still borrowing more than they can afford has created a false property boom that could come crashing down.
As Kevin Rudd warns of higher interest rates, Mr Bissland says he is concerned about buying in Melbourne at the height of what he calls a "false economy" and then seeing the market decline because of the impact of any rate rises.
"It's just madness at the moment," he said of the city's record 87 per cent clearance rates for the year.
Mr Bissland said the first-home buyers grant was artificially pushing house prices up and he was worried about the impact on the market when it ends.
"I call it the first-home sellers grant," he said. "It has led to a real sellers market and that is something of a false economy. It has pushed houses that used to be $500,000 over $500,000." |
|
By: lasty49
25/06/2009
4:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
lasty49 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| anyone seen my ute |
|
By: puyi
11/06/2009
7:38 am Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Housing fears as loan hits new high
Jacob Saulwick
June 11, 2009
SMH
THE average first-home loan in NSW has risen more than $50,000 in just over a year, climbing to $300,000 on the back of low interest rates and generous government grants.
But the surge in borrowing runs the risk of overinflating the lower end of the housing market. "We have just got to make sure that we don't get a recovery on the back of over-extended young couples," said Julian Disney, an affordable housing expert from the University of NSW.
The Reserve Bank Governor, Glenn Stevens, cited similar concerns last week, saying it would be counterproductive if low interest rates encouraged marginal borrowers to take on large debts. Yesterday's release came alongside a rise in consumer confidence, attributed to the resilience of the economy amid global recession.
Since then, the average loan for first-home buyers across the country has increased $50,000 to $283,000 - about $25,000 more than loans to buyers who already have a foothold in the market.
For NSW home buyers, the average first mortgage is $299,000, against $276,000 for existing home owners. Before October, there had been little increase in the average first mortgage for about four years.
Asked if the the market had been inflated by grants, the Treasurer, Wayne Swan, said yesterday's figures showed the benefits of the Government's economic stimulus packages. |
|
By: puyi
25/05/2009
10:14 am Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Source: The Australian newspaper
By Nick Tabakoff and Joe Kelly | May 25, 2009
THE average loan size for first-home buyers has risen by $52,000 - or 23 per cent - in the past two years, raising fears that government incentives for young buyers are artificially inflating the market.
A report commissioned by Brandmanagement, a market research firm specialising in the finance sector, says the average size of loans being taken up by young home buyers is jumping by an "unsustainable" amount.
Brandmanagement's principal, Andrew Inwood, said the statistics - which indicate that property prices are rising in line with loan sizes - have raised questions about whether the grant was simply being used by consumers to buy into a bubble.
"What the government incentives appear to have done is transfer the money from the people who are borrowing money to buy their first homes into the pockets of those who are selling at a more attractive price," he said.
Mr Inwood hinted that this mini-boom in the price of properties would not go on forever.
"There'll be a collapse in those prices again," he said.
Australian Consumers Association spokesman Christopher Zinn said the rapid growth in loans to first-home buyers against the backdrop of the government incentives carried certain moral obligations for banks.
Even real estate agents admit that the government incentives are creating an unsustainable bubble at the more affordable end of the property market.
Legendary Sydney luxury property agent Bill Bridges said yesterday some agents on entry-level real estate were "loading the prices up" to capitalise on the first-home buyers scheme.
Mr Bridges is also pessimistic about the ability of many people taking up first-home buyer grants to service loans into the future.
He expressed concerns that if people are stretched beyond their means through incentives, "it will all end up like (the sub-prime mortgage situation in) America". |
|
By: puyi
22/05/2009
12:21 am Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Re:FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS -ARE YOU BEING FOOLED?
Observations on the Cost of Housing in Australia
Anthony Richards
Head of Economic Analysis Department
Address to 2008 Economic and Social Outlook Conference
The Melbourne Institute
Melbourne - 27 March 2008
<<On the demand side, it is now widely accepted that policies that simply give people more money to spend on housing are likely to be capitalised into higher housing prices. On the supply side, efforts to improve housing affordability should be focused on policies regarding land use and on improving efficiency in the supply of land and housing.>>
The first Home buyers Grant does absolutely NOTHING to improve housing affordability and does NOT HELP first home buyers as taxpayers money is simply used to inflate the price of the properties.
Only policies leading to an increase in the supply of properties will genuinely help first time home buyers, builders, plumbers, electricians, gardeners, etc. And more affordable houses will lead to more property transactions both from first home buyers and property investors. And more transactions will lead to more jobs for estate agents and more overall tax revenue for state governments.
If products are priced too high, there is a very high risk of a fall in price and nobody would be interested to buy. And this will lead to no job and no commission for estate agents. |
|
By: sharynwilliams007
13/05/2009
10:17 pm Yahoo! Profile:
sharynwilliams007 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Entirely agree with your comment....I didn't vote labor & never have.The party that needs urgent attention is the 'green party abolish it & the rhetric that goes with it. |
|
By: aliceflnt
13/05/2009
6:48 pm Yahoo! Profile:
aliceflnt Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Yeah Wayne, how can it be the Liberal Parties fault that you have a $58billion dollar deficit. The liberals cleared all the debt from Mr Paul Cheating (keating) and gave you a surplus of $22bn, you have spent that and a further $58bn. I won't be alive by the time it is paid. But my grandchildren have goot a big debt. |
|
By: stephn@ymail.com
13/05/2009
5:21 pm Yahoo! Profile:
stephn@ymail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| n.kuijpers, as Mr Swann acknowledged recently Australia would have been ever worse off if it was not for the strong position and SURPLUS that the Howard Govt left them with. How can it be Howards fault that he not only cleaned up the massive debt incurred by the previous Labor Govt but also left us with plenty in the bank. It took 12 years to get to that point with Howard and less then 2 years to fritter it all away with Rudd. The GEC is not Rudd's fault, of course. But it could have been handled far better (or is that just a great excuse to "buy" votes for next time?) |
|
By: cozaba1
13/05/2009
1:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
cozaba1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
what is wrong with people these days self absorbed and selfish
how can any logical person blame the rudd goverment for the global economic crisis?
the liberal government rode on the back of the resourses boom and accordingly gave money to those who didnot qualify under definition for welfare
middle class welfare ??? what a joke
countries in the world have massive debts but australia is mismanaged if we go into debt?
what else would you do
cancel the pension?
create poverty?
i guess as long as your ok jack thats it
as human being we have a responsibility so what will hurt if we miss out on a take away so people can eat
howard gave welfare to the middle class and then went about saying disability pensioners and unemployed are bludgers talk about picking on those through circumstances are vulnerable
as for the handouts
you could have given it back
gave it to charity
turnball sanctioned the 1st handout in december
and the other one seeing as they can use the senate to block it why did they not block the second?
as for keating or whitlam this situation is very different
alot of people around the world are starving homeless cause of the greed of the multinationals and all we do is complain about a deficeit
everyone of us who objected to so called handouts go to centerlink and give it back so then you can reduce what you fear the deficeit
the budget 2 soft lastnight well turnball said this
so what should he cut
maybe get collection agencies onto all of us to recoup rudds blunder
why dont you wake up and see howard and his government for what it was
as a lady said on the news after rudd won
i dont understand this this is weird i am used to howard looking after the rich |
|
By: jkueh
13/05/2009
11:47 am Yahoo! Profile:
jkueh Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| We as a Austrlian should support our leader and polictics even we dont like it. We have to stand side by side if we want stay stronger. Past is the past , nothing to blame except us . Future is the most important thing we all have to think. Be positive and aggressive . OZ fellow. We believe we are not sore loser. |
|
By: craignorton99
13/05/2009
11:33 am Yahoo! Profile:
craignorton99 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Your comment is so typical of so many people in this country that just have no idea. Hey he gave me $900 or even worse thousands of dollars so Kevin Rudd is the greatest. Well don't worry becuase the hard working people of this country will repay all this debt with interest and you can continue on in your ignorant ways.
This is why democracy doesn't work but yes I agree there is no better alternative but I 100% agree all those that voted for Labor will have nothing to whinge about when it all goes even worse. |
|
By: king_mervyn
13/05/2009
3:09 am Yahoo! Profile:
king_mervyn Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| very good comments cowgirl, specially when you have named a liberal leader, Kennett, I suggest you go back to what ever school you came from and learn who is in which party |
|
By: rohan.anderson
12/05/2009
10:53 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: csf_nm
12/05/2009
10:51 pm Yahoo! Profile:
csf_nm Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Shouldn't have been Kevin 07 it should have read Hyperinflation by 2017 or Deficit 07 or Trainwreck 07 or Stuff the Future 07 or You idiots for letting a cartoon Ad run the nation 07 aka Mr Sheen 07.
What drugs are these guys on! Bumbling and stumbling from bad to worse.
They are worse than my worse nightmare, I pity the childeren of this nation. |
|
By: pretesh_hirani
12/05/2009
10:43 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
