House prices
freeride76 wrote:I used to shop entirely at local Farmers Market which was always 15-30% cheaper than Coles/Woolies.
Prices really inflated over Covid and stayed very high.
Now, local Farmers Market is usually 30% more expensive (at least) than local Woolies if you are prepared to shop on price.
eg, Broc has been consistently 6.90/kg at local Market.
Woolies had it consistently 2.50-3.50 kilo over winter.Capsicum 8.90/kg market.
Woolies special $4.90/kg.Avos.
Market 8.90-10/kg ($2-2.50/avo)
Woolies $1-1.50 /avoResult: I stopped buying local, farm produce and now mostly buy Woolies produce.
I just can’t bring myself by fresh produce from supermarkets. I find the quality appalling and it just doesn’t last as long either. Fruit and veg shops for me even if they are more expensive their quality shits all over the super markets.
Depends on the supplier/farmer Don.
Fruit and veg shops will be buying from large central distribution centres.
Woolies has more of their own contracted farmers.
Obviously good growing season this Autumn/Winter because the brassicas (caulis, broc) were as good here at the local woolies as I've ever seen anywhere, including the ones I grow myself.
2 bucks each for iceberg lettuces now and they are freaking massive and crisp.
One will last a week.
Quality and price are variable.
I buy on both.
Probably worth putting in this thread as we discuss the CBs here the most, this bill coming up before the end of the month:
https://digitalfinanceanalytics.com/blog/how-to-stop-the-central-bankers...
At the moment I don't really have an idea on what afterward would look like, and the RBA seem to be acting like the adults in the room confronting inflation where the government is not. But the government oversight is described as being hard won, so it's worth considering how it would change things.
a history of it above
velocityjohnno wrote:Probably worth putting in this thread as we discuss the CBs here the most, this bill coming up before the end of the month:
https://digitalfinanceanalytics.com/blog/how-to-stop-the-central-bankers...
At the moment I don't really have an idea on what afterward would look like, and the RBA seem to be acting like the adults in the room confronting inflation where the government is not. But the government oversight is described as being hard won, so it's worth considering how it would change things.
Without reading the bill it's hard to make a reasonable assessment based on one person's opinion (which may or may not be valid) and an emotional one at that. What I dont understand is why all this hate aimed at the RBA. Does everyone want 1% interest rates forever ? We could argue that perhaps QE shouldnt have been done and rates shouldnt have been held low for so long but I dont recall any governments or public anger toward the RBA back then.
We have some of the lowest interest rates in the so called developed world.
velocityjohnno wrote:Probably worth putting in this thread as we discuss the CBs here the most, this bill coming up before the end of the month:
https://digitalfinanceanalytics.com/blog/how-to-stop-the-central-bankers...
At the moment I don't really have an idea on what afterward would look like, and the RBA seem to be acting like the adults in the room confronting inflation where the government is not. But the government oversight is described as being hard won, so it's worth considering how it would change things.
It might seem substantial VJ, but not really. The RBA has been independent for 20 plus years. Enshrining it in legislation doesn’t mean much, governments can and do change laws. That’s what they do. If they enact this in legislation now they can overturn it the next day.
There is a bigger issue which is more about our media than our government, and the bought and paid for shills from the economic community. Then there is the problem that the fundamental principles underpinning economics are, well, just wrong.
Economics is a made up social study. They keep getting things wrong, not just prospectively but in hindsight also, and as a group are very slow to admit error. If an economist isn’t antithetical to current economic theory, they aren’t worth listening to.
And what role does the media play? To a large extent they determine the Overton Window, essentially defining the limits of allowable public policy. The Shorten government policies are a good example. Who knows whether it would have fixed things, or improved them, but likely they would have helped. The media were relentless in their stupidity and the gullible public voted in a huckster in Morrison. It’s no use arguing how Labor isn’t doing the things they should be doing, the People are not informed enough to vote in their own interests.
The choice at the moment is between going backwards slowly, with Labor, or taking the express train to economic hell with the LNP.
Our best hope at the moment is a minority Labor government supported by the Greens and Independents. They might make some of the essential changes to our economy we need, but hell will break loose if that happens because Big Capital don’t want these problems solved. They’re doing great.
Meanwhile the RBA looks on with its economic theories and decides that the cost of hairdressers going up is a reason for them to consider taking interest rates higher for longer.
We are fucked, and it ain’t Labor’s fault. It’s a worldwide phenomenon so even if we got things right it will still only help at the margins. While the US is completely bonkers there is no chance of anyone getting through unscathed.
And legislating RBA independence doesn’t mean that oversight would cease.
The RBA remains, always, a government body. That can’t change here without fundamentally changing our structure of governance, and that ain’t gonna happen.
velocityjohnno wrote:… the RBA seem to be acting like the adults in the room confronting inflation where the government is not.
VJ, you’re one of the more sensible posters here. I’m intrigued how you have come to the conclusion that the government is not (doing anything about controlling inflation).
It’s a pretty glib statement, assumes that there is much they can do apart from letting the RBA have its way, rolls over the fact of the $20B surplus in the last financial year (which is deflationary) and forgets the targeted assistance for the battlers they have put out there.
Further, this government came in after the previous quarter inflation was 2.2%, annualised at 8.8%. It has been going down ever since.
I’m interested in your take on this.
By the way, for anyone ready to diss me about those inflation figures, yes, I know what the reported annual inflation figure is. Even the way they measure and report on inflation is cock-eyed. The RBA is supposed to work within a 2-3% inflation range. That should be amended to a quarterly inflation range of 0.5% to 0.75%.
Having an annual inflation target is just dumb. It leaves you setting policy based on economic ancient history. It’s the inflation rate NOW that matters.
And yes, going ahead with the mindless LNP tax cuts Stage 3 would be inflationary, in the future, if they go ahead with them.
Chalmers and Andrew Leigh will be barking at Albo to dump them. Albo is afraid he might lose an election if he doesn’t go ahead with them. Gutless, and pointless.
Watch the media scream blue murder if the tax cuts are shelved, even though most people agree they should axe them, and that economically they should.
Pretty much nails where the problem lies: https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-dirty-little-secret-that-keeps-austr...
batfink just quickly, I don't have too much time at present: RBA are adults in the room as they are raising rates to combat the inflation (it's cause: well, they were complicit in this, that term funding facility was flabbergastingly stupid). Govco is doing the opposite, it is boosting demand via historically unprecedented numbers of people entering the country (gotta live somewhere, will need the same things the rest of us need: I suspect this is to avoid a technical recession as overall demand stays positive although per capita recession is occurring) and through infrastructure projects on a large scale, with very good pay (we've heard how good, almost worth the commute into the city...). We're in a situation where monetary and fiscal policy have been at odds, if I've got the terms right. Paging gsco
now for some jokes:
anyone who received an economics degree in the last 70 years should be given special parking permits
if historians ran the banks, there never would have been a GFC
for my 2 cents worth, there is currently a large-scale pushback against economics across the globe.
People believe that it is just a political ideology that has caused most of society's problems like inequality, climate change, housing bubble, cost of living, social instability and market crashes, and many more. They believe it is focused only on economic growth to the exclusion of other social, environmental and cultural etc outcomes. They believe its policy levers, particularly monetary policy, are ineffective and actually worsening things and are not in the public interest. They also believe there exists this thing called neoliberalism and they equate it to economics - that these are the same thing.
They believe that we are currently undergoing - and they are actively pushing for - a worldwide, grassroots paradigm or mindset shift or sea change in economics and public policy, which is well captured in what they're calling 'Bidenomics' and in these links
- https://rooseveltinstitute.org/2023/11/17/how-a-new-economics-went-mains...
- https://rooseveltinstitute.org/publications/sea-change/
“[W]e have seen a new approach take shape—not only individual policies, but a broader worldview shift that seeks to rebalance power, invest in people and places, and shape markets in the public interest,” they write.
“Whether or not this new approach marks a long-lasting shift remains to be determined, and whether this shift goes far enough depends on the outcome of politics and policy fights ahead.”
batfink's remarks above are in line with this new mindset shift.
The mindset is rampant in the Australian labor, Greens and Teals, and can be seen creeping in across the board in policy decisions by our Labor government, particularly relating to the overhaul and new appointments at the RBA and productivity commission, Chalmers' values based capitalism, etc. It can be seen in the ramblings of many journalists like Alan Kohler, ABC and The Guardian economics commentators, etc.
It reflects a disillusionment in society due to the increasing inequality, housing in-affordability, cost of living problems, perceived climate emergency, etc.
I wonder who the Roosevelt Institute are lobbying these days.
Meh, more fluff. Which exact economic models are not correct? You have to prove that through mathematics, not rhetoric. I’m not saying they are all fantastic but it is mathematical work. Very few articles are willing to challenge it on this basis. Rambling about it does nothing. For example, it’s a 100% fact that increasing immigration will push the demand for housing curve to the right. If the supply lags behind the prices will increase above the equilibrium. That is the economical explanation and the momentum of change can be calculated to a very fine number (assuming input numbers are available).
So why do we have such high levels of immigration? The answer is simple; housing prices are not a serious (or at least not the primary) consideration when crafting the immigration policy. Most politicians are lawyers, not economists. And they decide wether to follow the models or not. And it’s up to us to judge them based on their decision.
Now I remember it, this new sea-change economics paradigm being pushed is also in the context of what's being called inclusive economics or inclusive growth:
- https://www.aspeninstitute.org/blog-posts/how-do-you-define-an-inclusive...
- https://www.fordfoundation.org/news-and-stories/big-ideas/inequalityis/j...
Modern monetary theory (MMT) is also a part of the new paradigm.
The new economics sea-change basically intentionally goes against the mainstream thinking in economics, which is seen as 'the enemy' and cause of all our problems.
I once had saved some really good think tank papers on it and will try to find them.
Btw yes the Labor party is not doing much about inflation or property prices, and is on average making problems worse. Their recent idea for inflation is to reduce infrastructure spending, which is the exact wrong thing to do since doing this will reduce the capital stock of the economy and therefore only restrict economic output and push up prices and reduce employment over the longer term.
But apparently this statement, being within the mainstream economic thinking, is no longer true and is actually complete rubbish in the eyes of the new sea-change/inclusive growth/MMT paradigm.
"Their recent idea for inflation is to reduce infrastructure spending, which is the exact wrong thing to do since doing this will reduce the capital stock of the economy and therefore only restrict economic output and push up prices and reduce employment over the longer term."
I'd have to agree with that.
High immigration and reducing infrastructure spending.......mmmm dosent make sense to me..
"...and reduce employment over the longer term."
maybe that's the intention?
or at least, part of it...
wages are so high in certain fields, and only going up and up and up... because of the old 'supply and demand'...
because there is already - and will be more - loads of bulding and civil works going on...
adelaide is literally booming, which is way out of character and unheard of...
and vj's comments above...
many opportunities in certain fields atm - certain fields.. applyig wages pressure...
then there's the governments seemingly half arsed / half thought through (lip servive) intention to build social housing...
when there is already difficulty finding certain trades etc.
and a need to house 600k + migrants (likely much more in real numbers)
maybe the government plans to import workers from tuvalu and the like... with bamboo houses strapped to their backs...
What are they doing with all this record amount of tax the government is raking in ? Almost 30% of GDP.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/government/taxation-revenue-au...
Are you around the city of churches Sypkan? Both it and Perth tend to go later in the cycle compared to the east. Was very impressed driving through a few months back - booming with lots of new businesses.
more I pass through from time to time with extended stays
a place I love... to avoid generally...
booming with the completion of decades long investments in infrastructure, some smart local gov. decisions, some pending potential investment, and of course... house prices...
which surprisingly, have actually overtaken perth, something you would have been laughed at for banking on not all that long ago... (the disparity was inverted and large)
a bit of coming of age from the above, coupled with covid refugees it would seem
totally unthinkable a decade or so ago when holdens and mitsubishi were shutting down
yeh, plenty of shiny new stuff and businesses
but apparently has seen a bit of a slow down of late
love... to avoid, coming of age - classic comments, can relate to those in my own life's travels
I had the distinct impression last visit to Adelaide they actually had intelligent state and local government!
Speaking of Kohler, he’s just done a Quarterly Essay on housing affordability which sounds like it would be a worthwhile read based on this short podcast discussion of it: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/audio/2023/nov/25/alan-kohler...
Oh, and here’s the 50 projects to lose funding under the govt’s infrastructure spending review: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/16/list-every-infras...
Seems unwise and there’d be better ways to reduce govt spending than this.
simba wrote:High immigration and reducing infrastructure spending.......mmmm dosent make sense to me..
Methinks there is no one sailing this ship!
Oh the ship is being sailed at speed
On infrastructure and immigration - I spent the last decade in the corporate world planning, tendering, executing some of the largest infrastructure capital projects in this country. I can safely say that there is a zero chance of delivering all these projects without immigration. And by this I mean the end to end supply chains where some segments (and professions) get very heavy immigrant presence. There is a strong correlation between the two. And one of the biggest drivers is a parallel push on many fronts leading to massive labor shortages.
oliver.ricci wrote:Oh, and here’s the 50 projects to lose funding under the govt’s infrastructure spending review: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/nov/16/list-every-infras...
Seems unwise and there’d be better ways to reduce govt spending than this.
I can somewhat picture ~ half of these and have mixed feelings about them. Depends how you asses these projects. You don’t build infrastructure for today but for the next few decades. For example, Woy Woy commuter car park is on the list. If you want the Central coast to relieve the pressures from housing in Sydney then this car park improvement is much needed. And not just that, the whole Woy Woy needs to be redefined, enormous potential for housing there. This is a long term view. But if you look at it on it’s face value today you can probably get away with what’s there now. Good for the budget but not so good for the future. Delaying means risking urgent projects in the future. And when you need things urgently you usually have to overpay for the services.
"...can safely say that there is a zero chance of delivering all these projects without immigration..."
no doubt flollo
and tbh, I have no problem with sensible immigration to undertake such works
the problem is the heroin that immigration has become...
decades of over the top immigration - sold as a wonder drug - with no discussion to be entered into... has shown to be exclusively a lazy means to prop up the economy rather than anything else...
which, ironically, has pushed infrastructure, and services like hospital waiting lists to the absolute brink
...then there's house prices... all building immigration resentment amongst the population...
the government/s have finally 'sensed' this...
only when their absolute obstinance can ignore it no longer...
so they pump some cash into infrasructure and hospitals, and promise a cut to immigration
then they serve up 600 000++ migrants and cuts infrastructure!!!
the disconnect and outright lies are unbareable
all this in a big country, with a small population, and abundant resources...
seriously, we really really really shouldn't have needed any of this propping up in the first place with such abundance of resoures
if we had any decent leadership that is...
the whole decades long shit show beggars belief
and here we are... with more migrarion than ever, significantly more... in 100s of 1000s more... a housing crisis, and cuts to infrastructure...
we really are on a dangerous road
honestly, i actually like talking about immigration about as much as our ball-less, gormless, integrity bereft economic journalists do... that have found reality about 20 years too late
who have created this mess as much as anyone
but look what happens when you don't...
when any conversation at all is shut down time and time again... decade after decade...
the whole thing beggars belief
and our ruling / leading / media class has some serious questions to answer...
to answer to...
the absolute failure and scale of it all is mind blowing
......and there is the new kid on the block competimg for land (he is rather large with a varocious appetite):
"former Commonwealth chief scientist Robin Batterham, calculates that we'll have to sacrifice 120,179 sq km of land to construct enough renewable plants and associated transmission lines to meet Bowen’s target.
That is roughly 15 times more land than we use for mining or almost half the size of the state of Victoria."
House price impacts of a new big competitor for land that must be reasonably close to urban areas to minimise transmission losses?
Then think of the trees, the Koalas, the loss of farmland, the wildlife corridoors disrupted, the scenery impacts, the construction disruption, the powerlines crisscrossing properties, the replacement costs, the disposal of aged equipment, the chemical weed control around solar farms, the need to rebuild and replace it all every 20 years or so....
It all makes sense.
Sh%tting an unpeeled pineapple, over and over.
Frog, where did you get this from:
"former Commonwealth chief scientist Robin Batterham, calculates that we'll have to sacrifice 120,179 sq km of land to construct enough renewable plants and associated transmission lines to meet Bowen’s target.
That is roughly 15 times more land than we use for mining or almost half the size of the state of Victoria."
Maps of possible land and ocean use patterns for renewables are in the slides of this study:
https://energy.unimelb.edu.au/about/news-and-events/events/net-zero-aust...
The shift is from sources with very high energy density to very low energy density. Land / ocean usage has to scale up substantially to bridge the gap.
that's some serious swathes of land in the frog post!
obliterating koalas aside...
I would be totally dubious as to whether it will actually achieve anything at all... when / if all the tree felling was considered...
tree felling, and the carbon footprint of all the works, wires, and 20 year renewal regime... which just reeks of typical government high energy turnover bullshit...
a farmer, or anyone with common sense... would squeeze much more life out of them
the government's whole all in with renewables policy doesn't seem very well thought through... we literally copied the US and their 'green new deal' and investment into carer services as an answer to predicted economic woes following covid...
did those woes not materialise at all?
...or did governments just totally overshoot the mark?
yet again...
anyway, the green new deal is now marketed as the inflation reduction act...
when it appears to do anything but
the all in agenda just seems to be greeny appeasey populism from what I can see...
ie. not very well thought out policy gratuitously formulated as a vote grab
fwiw, Im an all in with renewables person... but from my perspective, it should be a decentralised strategy, encouraging more independent micro systems...
therefore not needing land clearing of large swathes of land and a large infrastructute spend... and carbon footprint...
but anyone whose looked into making their solar independent of the grid will know this is frowned upon and totally discouraged
they really don't want you free of the government's power grid - in more ways than one...
it's almost like the big business renewable companies and power supply corporations are running the government..
neoliberalism baby!
the machine (and lobby group driven agenda) rolls on...
Apparently, Gov to call for tenders on the big renewable projects to fast track things in a risky world with proviso that if projects prove lossmaking, Gov (taxpayers) will make good losses. Perfect business opportunity to grab the attention of the big players. Of course the plunderers will not think to cleverly hide profits in the accounting or business structure complexity - such as having large loans at high interest from the parent company draining costs (profits) overseas. Then double dip on Gov make good subsidy. Super profit $$$$$$s paid for in high energy prices and tax dollars! Wooo hooo.
If things get awkward in explaining the policy there is always the famous Albo precedent excuse for ministers and advisors "I have not read it, why would I?" Page one of the glossy brochure is enough these days. Buy in haste, regret at leisure will be key themes for the energy transition from an economic and an environmental perspective. So many unintended consequences await.
That draining profits thing can be a good thing - in days long gone now, the automakers would fit a model with a special motor at times from "overseas" and charge the local outfit $$$$ for doing so... The punter then received the thrills, in subsidised sideways fun :)
If you read between the lines in this article you will find that something quite depressing has to occur for the national prices to drop by 3%:
‘His more downbeat scenario is based on a continuing energy crisis that sees inflation remain higher for longer, interest rates rise above 5 per cent and unemployment above 6 per cent.
That would see national property prices fall by up to 3 per cent’
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-21/property-price-falls-tipped-for-2...
flollo wrote:If you read between the lines in this article you will find that something quite depressing has to occur for the national prices to drop by 3%:
‘His more downbeat scenario is based on a continuing energy crisis that sees inflation remain higher for longer, interest rates rise above 5 per cent and unemployment above 6 per cent.
That would see national property prices fall by up to 3 per cent’
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-21/property-price-falls-tipped-for-2...
If unemployment rises above 6% property prices will fall by way more than 3%.
Notwithstanding a broader economic problem, I think until
a) immigration is brought back to more historical levels, and
b) governments back away from legislating property to be an attractive investment,
then we're going to continue with more of the same.
As an aside, I see that NZ are continuing with a ban preventing overseas purchasers from buying existing residential properties.
Also something that Australia needs to consider.
AndyM wrote:As an aside, I see that NZ are continuing with a ban preventing overseas purchasers from buying existing residential properties.
Also something that Australia needs to consider.
Any data showing the impact (or otherwise) this is having on NZ property prices?
Edit; coming off a decent post covid dip by the looks of it.
Plenty of local factors are not positive. Take out immigration and house prices would be sliding lower.
Investors have had mixed results in recent years. Not the certain winner for all an every stage of the cycle in most locations as it is often portrayed. Refinance for many investors in 2024 coming soon....
Whilst this is only an extract it’s still a damn good read.
https://www.quarterlyessay.com.au/essay/2023/11/the-great-divide/extract
Has anyone made mention of recent Vic changes to taxes upon vacant or undeveloped properties? The Ms outlined them to me this morning, it seemed a decent stick.
ICYMI - the video of our webinar with @AlanKohler about his @quarterly_essay "The Great Divide: Australia’s Housing Mess and How to Fix It" #auspol https://t.co/lhRWGTNn7l
— Australia Institute (@TheAusInstitute) November 29, 2023
Headline inflation figures sounded good but were impacted by a couple of Government handouts which will not be there in the future:
https://www.abs.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/monthly-cpi-indicator...
Prices are still going up at a rate above the RBA Cash Rate, we still have negative rates in AU.
My money is on no Xmas present from the RBA, but potentially another increase in the next meeting in 2024.
Spot on the money Don
interesting...
'governments don't control interest rates'
except for when they do...
https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/aussie-econom...
Yo Syppy dude yo man that’s not interesting at all G.
This is interesting… (point 1 especially)
https://www.worldwildlife.org/stories/why-do-polar-bears-have-white-fur-....
yeh thats interesting...
polar bear albo's snow is melting
because he's cooked
revealing... well something...
lucky he lost all that body fat
Ha back to Labor bashing. We’re on the same page there. But the alternative? As Soggy points out those new donations laws are really an issue but it’s barely making a dent in the MSM.
House prices - going to go up , down or sideways ?
Opinions and anecdotal stories if you could.
Cheers