Rumours and Stuff

[Tiger5150]

Another one of the scumbag clubs Manly are in a bit of turmoil and i reckon there a timebomb about to explode next year.

I heard 6 weeks ago that Turbo wants to go UK.

And it now comes out in the media outlets.

It all comes back to Seibs getting an extension last year when a few senior players approached Mestrov and the board before it got rubber-stamped and told them not to extend him past 2025.

Well we all saw this year what DCE thought of that decision.

Actually a strange connection to Galvin and Parra if you dig deep enough.

 

[T-Boon]

Does anyone else think our season started to turn around after we started towel whipping players at training for bad ball control? I brought that in around round 19.

 

[T-Boon]

Some fucjer doubted me when I said Pezet will play 7 tonight and it’s a good chance to check him out if he’s a genuine star in a big game. He said blah blah they’ll play Wishart.

Anyway. Ha. I was right.

The pez dispenser.

 

[Tiger5150]

Where we are different is that I think it’s unethical to own more than one house. There’s other places you can invest without exacerbating housing affordability. Buy some cheap shitcoins or something.

I also don’t think it’s good that the house I live in (and every other house) keep increasing in price. What’s going to happen when my kids grow up and need somewhere to live.

Buying one, two or seven houses isnt the problem with housing affordability or preventing the opportunity for your (or my) kids from home ownership. The problem is very simple, increasing >350K new people (demand) into the housing market without significantly increasing supply is the very simple straightforward issue.

 

[Tiger5150]

It’s how wealth has been built for generations in this country full of peasants. It’s why our economy is propped up by mining and home loans, instead of productive activity like in other developed countries.

Economy is "propped up" by population growth and construction, not mining. Particularly in Sydney & Melbourne.

 

[Tiger5150]

100%.
Politicians should be "forced" to declare how many houses they own.

They are...

 

[Tiger5150]

If money was cheaper, all that does is flood the market with more buyers of the same small stock. That increases price.
If banks want to go communist, they could make money cheaper for people entering market, but people in that situation (at least the ones who require cheaper money) are more at risk of being unable to sustain that lending. Have you not watched The Big Short?

Unbelievable....its almost like you started to make sense......

The biggest contributor to housing prices has been for decades, supply.

and.....there we go. Wrong again. DEMAND

 

[Tiger5150]

I’m not sure it’s an ethical argument.
People respond to incentives put in front of them. It would be smarter, and better for the country as a whole, to incentivize investments in productive assets than incentivize speculation in housing.
Ultimately if young people can’t afford a house they stop believing in a meritocratic/capitalist system and start voting for some form of socialism or wealth redistribution. And doesn’t that always end well?

you cant make an assessment about a capitalist "system" in Australia if the demand side is artificially inflated constantly.

 

[Tiger5150]

And demand. ‘Investors’ with high incomes get an annual subsidy (tax deduction) younger, lower income earners do not.

Why? My first house was as a 21yo and it was an investment property and I negative geared it straight away. Why cant younger lower income earners do the same? In fact that is the more sensible thing to do.

It’s much easier for a high income earning 45-55 yr old with high income and other properties as security/collateral to outbid 1st home buyers.

If they are bidding on the same property but its always going to be easier for higher income to out bid lower income earner, thats kind of the whole point.

Now run the same algorithm when the population is artificially increased by 3%pa.

 

[85 Baby]

Unbelievable....its almost like you started to make sense......



and.....there we go. Wrong again. DEMAND

I mean demand of course has its part especially at an individual property level but ultimately housing is an inelastic demand with high barriers to entry thus available supply is what affects overall price the greater. It’s economics 101.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

and of course HNWP will hold greater portion

Harvey Norman Women’s Premiership???

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Some fucjer doubted me when I said Pezet will play 7 tonight and it’s a good chance to check him out if he’s a genuine star in a big game. He said blah blah they’ll play Wishart.

Anyway. Ha. I was right.

Was it @Avenger? He’s not a fan of Jonah Pissant

 

[85 Baby]

Buying one, two or seven houses isnt the problem with housing affordability or preventing the opportunity for your (or my) kids from home ownership. The problem is very simple, increasing >350K new people (demand) into the housing market without significantly increasing supply is the very simple straightforward issue.

Ahh ok this is your angle. It has altered the requirements but it has only accelerated the issue, because land is finite

 

[85 Baby]

Harvey Norman Women’s Premiership???

Where else would the funding come from?

 

[T-Boon]

Most of the worst offending politicians in terms of ownership of multiple properties are women.

 

[Tiger5150]

I mean demand of course has its part especially at an individual property level but ultimately housing is an inelastic demand with high barriers to entry thus available supply is what affects overall price the greater. It’s economics 101.

you are correct if the market population is stable, but what if the population is artificially inflated at 3%pa?

 

[Tiger5150]

Ahh ok this is your angle. It has altered the requirements but it has only accelerated the issue, because land is finite

Therefore the market isnt the issue (buying more than one property) artificial demand is.

 

[85 Baby]

Therefore the market isnt the issue (buying more than one property) artificial demand is.

If there was sufficient supply (building upwards) that “artificial” demand would quickly erode. That’s inequality in access to money. I don’t disagree that demand is important. They’re 2 sides of same equation but supply is always going to be the greater driver when demand is inelastic.

Anyway I think there’s some football on I might watch

 

[Stevie]

Pezet is good. I get the excitement.

 

[Avenger]

Was it @Avenger? He’s not a fan of Jonah Pissant

No, it wasn’t me.