By: wealthforlife@ymail.com
18/05/2009
11:57 am |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: jaymarcel
18/05/2009
7:19 am Yahoo! Profile:
jaymarcel Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Great post almurrie
FTB are not being fooled, this is a great chance for a anyone with a secure job to join the world of being a home owner, the FHOG has been established to stimulate the economy so use it.
There is nothing better than taking out that wall that could be knocked down to open the room up or even just painting the room the colour you want, or even renting your house out for a year having someone else pay your mortgage while you go travelling. Renting is dead money, in 25 years or less you could be the 100% owner of that property with nothing more to pay to have a roof over your head.
Do you want to be a retired 65 year old still paying rent out of your super! |
|
By: rickyrollings
18/05/2009
1:41 am Yahoo! Profile:
rickyrollings Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Great post shao.lin90!
I absolutely agree with you. |
|
By: shao.lin90
18/05/2009
1:27 am Yahoo! Profile:
shao.lin90 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Hi puyi
The only kind of help that these folk get as a result of buying a property now is to join a growing number of people who shall soon find themselves the proud owners of property valued at far less than the price which they paid to obtain it with or without a "GRANT" or not.
With unemployment increasing, the economic outlook bleak to say the least and recovery if indeed it comes anytime soon forecast to be slow and painful.. Who in their right mind would think that now is the time to buy property?
The mind boggles! |
|
By: puyi
18/05/2009
12:06 am Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Thank you for all your responses. The question is: IS THE GRANT HELPING FIRST HOME BUYERS?
There is no need to be very clever to know that when you increase money supply without a corresponding increase in the supply of the product, this causes an increase in the price of the product.
The question is: Is the grant helping first time home buyers are are they being conned? The grant has caused house prices to increase by more than 7k. So, first home buyers are better off without the grant.
If those who came up with the idea genuinely believed that such a measure would benefit first time buyers, they are probably deeply incompetent. It is to be hoped that they are not simply trying to deceive those who they are supposed to assist. It would be very sad indeed. |
|
By: bananabender56
17/05/2009
11:05 pm Yahoo! Profile:
bananabender56 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| To be pragmatic, you need a roof over your head. Either you think the government will provide this (not) or you rent, or you buy. When I emigrated the mortgage interest rate was 18% - yet I decided buying was better than renting and recieved a small grant from the government. No one is forcing people to take the first home owners grant and if you can't work out whether you earn enough for the repayments you should keep renting. |
|
By: wealthforlife@ymail.com
17/05/2009
10:13 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: almurrie1@y7mail.com
17/05/2009
6:09 pm Yahoo! Profile:
almurrie1@y7mail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Property is theft. Where has that come up before. I know - when Captain Cook stole the whole of Australia from the rightful owners. In fact all Australians are living on stolen land, so what are we to do? - I don't want to give mine back.
Torrens title first established in South Australia enabled the small guy to actually own land. Never before was it possible. You previously rented or long term leased from the nobility. Even now the most expensive properties in the world (Pall Mall) can't be bought, only long term leased. Eventually it reverts back to the owners - the British Royal Family and their relatives. I say have a go and own a plot, regardless of what is happening, other wise you are a debt slave to your landlord the whole of your life, waiting for the next rent inspection. It is not so bad owing to the bank, at least you can lock in the low interest, and in tough times rent out the house and live in a caravan. Then you know you have a place to go back to.
Lighten up gloomers, the world is controlled by forces we have no say about, so live with it, make the most of everything. Your rent is soon going to go up again and is getting closer and closer to the interest on a loan. What - you haven't saved a deposit? I see why you are so gloomy, it is the only hope you have - to see others lose. Ricky and your cadre of split personalities, we need no more rubbish from you either. |
|
By: dr.xingli
17/05/2009
5:48 pm |
Message deleted. Reason: Breach of terms of service |
|
By: sly_guy_nsw
17/05/2009
5:26 pm Yahoo! Profile:
sly_guy_nsw Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Well said j_bynon
Indeed, the reason for the first time home buyers "grant" being offered at all had nothing whatsoever to do with helping the average bloke.
Instead, the one and only reason for the introduction of this stimulus measure was to get money moving at the expense of the average bloke. That is to say, at the expense of the individual the fluidity of the states economy shall be better maintained than would otherwise be the case.Keeping money flowing being a main objective of the government.
Many of those who paid rent previously, (read lived withing their means) but who now own property as a result of entering the property market as a result of this stimulus measure shall be left with the prospect of having to stay in the property for years to come unless they want to sell it for far less than what they paid for it recently.
And add to that, (in most cases) the fact that mortgae payments shall rise as the economy recovers, (which it shall surely do within the next few years) and interests rates rise also.
All in all, a clever scheme to keep money moving and so support the economy. Yet at significant risk to the citizens. |
|
By: sly_guy_nsw
17/05/2009
5:22 pm Yahoo! Profile:
sly_guy_nsw Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Well said j_bynon
Indeed, the reason for the first time home buyers "grant" being offered at all had nothing whatsoever to do with helping the average bloke.
Instead, the one and only reason for this stimulus measuer was to get money moving at the expense if neccessary of the average bloke.
That is to say, at the expense of the individual the states economy shall be more fluid... more money flowig than would otherwise be the case.
Many of those who paid rent previously but who now own property as a result of entering the property market as a result of this stimulus measure shall be left with the prospect of having to stay in the property for years to come unless they want to sell it for far less than what they paid for it recently.
And add to that, (in most cases) the fact that mortgae payments shall rise as the economy recovers, (which it shall surely do within the next few years) and interests rates risa also. |
|
By: j_bynon
17/05/2009
4:02 pm Yahoo! Profile:
j_bynon Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Joseph Proudon, saw the writing on the wall in 1840, when he coined the phrase;"property is theft" and going on to say that "property is roberry." Those first time home buyers that get caught in this scenario, will ultimatley be selling themselves into a modern form of slavery. The citizens that take up this offer,(so as to escape the "rental trap") are misguided if they believe their future will be more secure, by becoming home owners. The only one's to benifit from this setup are the money lenders. |
|
By: puyi
17/05/2009
2:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Extract from <Beware the Boost>
by Peter Boehm
"More harm than good?
The first of these concerns is the increased level of debt first-time buyers are taking on. Borrowing power has increased considerably as a result of the Reserve Bank dropping its cash rate target from 7.25% in March 2008 to 3.00% today. The consequent drop in home loan borrowing rates has, according the Australian Bureau of Statistics, seen average first-time buyer loans increase from $228,000 in February 2008, to $280,000 in February 2009. That's a whopping $52,000 or 23% increase in only a year. So not only is their debt burden at record highs, but as these loans are predominantly variable rate loans, there is considerable risk that sometime in the not too distant future, if interest rates rise, today's borrowers may find themselves in severe mortgage stress and unable to meet their mortgage commitments.
Negative equity risk
The second development is the effect increased activity is having on house prices. While property prices generally have been flat or been dropping, particularly at the higher end, prices in the first-time buyer range of between $300,000 to $400,000 have been relatively strong and in some cases even increasing. Increased demand, increased buying power and lack of stock have combined to push up prices. Many property experts believe prices have gone up by around the value of the Boost and wonder what will happen to prices when the Boost is withdrawn. If prices adjust downwards, then there may be a large number of highly geared first home buyers in negative equity territory - not a good place to be if interest rates go up or jobs are lost." |
|
By: puyi
17/05/2009
2:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<<Professor Steve Keen: First home buyer's grant is a vendor's grant>>
<<The extension of time for the enhanced first home grants puts more borrowers at risk of default, as the spectre of double-digit unemployment looms, an academic says.
University of Western Sydney Associate Professor of Economics and Finance, Steve Keen, said the federal government's decision to extend the period for the enhanced grants would benefit sellers.
"It is really asking first home buyers to take out leveraged positions to boost the economy at a time when it is very likely the economy is going to go very cactus and so are house prices," Professor Keen said.
"I am calling it the first home vendor's grant." >> |
|
By: ryan_yeong2000
17/05/2009
12:32 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ryan_yeong2000 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Houses have maintained or even increased their prices overall by at least 10-25k (5%) for house range of <450K ever since the stimulus boost. and especially when the government has announced they are extending the stimulus boost, so many more houses have went on the market taking advantage of the desire of first home owners to buy a home.
This results in:
1. an increase in value of the property/investment that is actually absent.
2. Increase risk of default in mortgages whether or not an individual/partners may or may not afford a home due to job loss.
3. When No. 2 happens, the value of property we once saw may actually not be there due to forced sell of properties when more people can't afford homes/too expensive.
However, with the control of land release by the government and developers, they may still control/maintain prices to feed the demand.
50/50 chance property will crash |
|
By: rickyrollings
17/05/2009
8:20 am Yahoo! Profile:
rickyrollings Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Oh my goodness. Show some sense fella`s.
In reality, the vendor simply increases the asking price by the same amount offered by the government incentive.. The BUYER loses in the end.
This stimulus is designed to keep the money flowing. It is not designed to helt the individual house purchaser.
See the BIG picture!
DO NOT BUY ANY PROPERTY. You will lose more than just a few bucks if you do! In time the market shall naturally find its own level, a level far below the inflated values we see out there at present.
...There is indeed much bad news at present.
Why! Only last week, two good friends of mine lost their jobs. Both are now worried about how to find the funds to enable them to keep up payments on the mortgages on their homes.
With little prospect for gaining employment in the town where they are currently residing, one of these friends of mine is faced with the prospect of selling his home at a great loss, (due to the glut of property now on the market and the fall in real value) and moving his whole family elswhere.
Who is not concerned now for their own financial future?
Are not each of us now seeing that the situation is becoming more and more desperate each and evry day?
An extension of the government property purchase stimulus measures is a BIG mistake. People who would otherwise not be drawn so deeply into the economic disaster which is so rapidly unfolding shall now find themselves deeply in debt, ownin properties which shall have a value far less than the purchase price which they paid.
It is nothing less than irresponsible to encourage people to purchase property at a time such as this.
The BLOG: AUSTRALIA - ECONOMIC DISASTER LOOMS & steve_b_wilson`s efforts to stimulate a CRUSADE which shall serve to get the word out to each and every citizen of this country so that they may be better prepared and able to take action which shall result in their securing their financial future is to be applauded. |
|
By: sly_guy_nsw
16/05/2009
10:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
sly_guy_nsw Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| People who cannot afford a house who buy a house as a result of this stimulus initiative are exposing themselves to long lasting and what would otherwise be, (if they did not buy a property now) finnancial pain and discomfort |
|
By: puyi
12/05/2009
10:28 am Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
EXTRACT FROM NATIONAL SHELTER WEBSITE
http://www.shelter.org.au/FHOG%20141008.pdf
MEDIA RELEASE
14 October 2008
Thick FHOG obscures real housing solutions
Chairperson of National Shelter, Adrian Pisarski, has warned against the unintended repercussions of
the increase in the First Home Owners Grant, stating that the inflationary impact would outstrip any
of the proposed benefits.
Mr Pisarski said this is not the best measure to counter the economic downturn and claimed this
initiative may cause inflation by stimulating demand without adding to supply.
âThis is an untargeted initiative that could result in thousands of first home owners having negative
equity if we experience the expected correction in the housing market,â he said.
âIf the intent is to stimulate new supply, there are better targeted, more direct ways of bringing new
supply to the market,â Mr Pisarski continued.
According to National Shelter, on the cusp of a new National Affordable Housing Agreement, this
measure is a surprise and goes against the systematic approach the government has adopted until
now.
âOur fear is that this may threaten a boost to public housing through the National Affordable
Housing Agreement and doesnât help renters who we know are the most vulnerable,â
It is difficult to see how this measure also meets the governments environmental and infrastructure
concerns as it is likely to stimulate new supply at the urban fringe, placing greater demands on
infrastructure and energy.
National Shelter would prefer boosts to Public Housing and support for low income earners including
unemployment benefits as they would flow through the economy more directly.
In the middle of AntiâPoverty Week when up to 10 per cent of Australians are living in poverty, this
looks like more middle class welfare.
While National Shelter holds many concerns regarding the outcome, we hope the measure has the
intended rather than unintended consequences.
âEndsâ |
|
By: puyi
4/05/2009
7:24 pm Yahoo! Profile:
puyi Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Extracted from Yahoo Finance News:
'Artificial boom'
A leading property analyst says buyers will get a better deal if they wait for the deadline on the first homebuyers grant to expire.
Real estate ethics campaigner Neil Jenman says the grant has created an artificial boom at the bottom end of the market, with prices rising more than what the grants are worth.
He says if people wait until after June 30, they may get a better deal later.
"If the grant is not extended it will actually be better for a lot of people, because the prices will come back a bit and they could come back more than the grant," he said.
"Take away the $7,000 bonus, the house drops in price by $10,000, and you're $3,000 better off.
First home buyer Rebecca Bowers says competition with other buyers has been so fierce, she does not want the bonus grant to continue.
"I'm kind of hoping that they will stop it," she said.
Tim Walsh is also looking for a unit in Sydney, but he is not fussed if he does not find one in time.
"I think that [housing prices] are inflated now by about $20,000," he said. |
|
