Wooo… nice argument… can probably write an essay
god_of_money – I thought the GFC started around mid 2007 (the peak of the sharemarket).
Do you have a link to prove otherwise? And what is your point?AussieHousePrices wrote:You’re spending a lot of time making a point that I’ve already made – that the more expensive areas rise and fall by the biggest percentage. Personally, I wouldn’t take that to mean it’s OK to hold throughout the downturn. It could, for example, take 20+ years to get to its pre-bubble peak.No, I'm not confirming a point you've already made, much as I agree with your assessment. I'm simply saying to please, for goodness sake, read what I'm saying and stop assuming that I'm implying what hasn't been implied.
Geez! What a mouthful that was. Nevertheless, I'm not going to waste my time to explain myself any further. I do not need to further justify what's been written.
AussieHousePrices<span wrote:Sure you can make a business out of property by, for example, buying a knock-down job, re-building and selling for a profit – or even just as a full-time landlord offering shelter to tenants.Fantastic. So property venture is a business and it's perfectly ok for property to change hands at increasing prices (or decreasing prices if property becomes unfashionable)! I don't know what makes people think it is NOT ok for property prices to increase. In my line of work, we increase the fees of some of our services every couple of years and I'm sure many other companies do this. Has their level or service or what they offer actually increased when their fees are increased? Absolutely not.
AussieHousePrices wrote:But in a property boom, prices go up because …prices are going up! They are rising more than can be explained by increasing population, shortage of land, general inflation etc. Therefore, we are paying each other increasing amounts for the same thing for no good reason – with less to spend on other things and less money being investment in the productive area of the economy. It’s a Ponzi scheme and it will end in tears. That’s fine of you’re OK with that. I’m not.This is going to waste our time by going back to square one. We've debated this for the last few pages, much to the amusement I suspect, of our onlookers. I don't understand this: what makes you think that property changes hands each time for increasing prices, yet remains unchanged itself throughout? Haven't we considered what houses are like today compared to what they were like 30 years ago?
Furthermore, we need to consider the upgrades to infrastructure that is occurring all the time. This would explain why areas that were previously considered 'holes' out in the middle of nowhere are suddenly more accessible, more livable, and, you guessed it: more expensive. Perhaps you could argue that the land itself didn't change. It didn't move an inch (save for what the Geologists would tell us), and it's still a piece of dirt. But did the utility of that piece of dirt increase? Yes. Did the residential density on that piece of dirt increase? Yes as well. Did the desirability of the piece of dirt increase? Of course!
An old guy I used to work with told me about how, in his younger days, a part of Burwood in Melbourne was a church in the middle of vast fields of vacant land. Now, what do we have? Just looking around that spot, I see K Mart plaza, a petrol station, a massive highway with tramlines and yes, houses. Lots of them. And the church is still there. How can we say property never really changed at all when it changed hands from one owner to another?
The way I see it is, this is the way things work. Whether I'm ok with that or not is immaterial. The world does not stop moving for even one second, or change its course whatsoever, not for one man, a few hundred, or even a few thousand, unless, touch wood, these people died in a calamity of some sort. Then they get a minute of silence. I either decide to fight the evil scheme by abandoning the thought of purchasing property forever, and hoping enough people do the same so that property prices fall, or I buckle down and learn to ride the monster on its own terms.
god_of_money wrote:Wooo… nice argument… can probably write an essayROFL I think it's hilarious too. Hope they make it a sticky.
And no, it's not an argument. It's a healthy debate. And this debate was extremely enjoyable.
I asked you to define GFC (Global FINANCIAL crisis)… and you can't even define it…
FINANCIAL CRISIS happened in mid 2008.. go back to history and re-read it againIt is not theory of "PEAK" ALL ORDS CRISIS…
god_of_money – I've got no idea what you're talking about or why you're asking me to define the GFC.
Here's a link – look it up yourself. Looks like it started in 2007, but I'm not an expert.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932010fWord – I think we've gone as far as we can with this debate. Was fun – cheers.
AussieHousePrices wrote:fWord – I think we've gone as far as we can with this debate. Was fun – cheers.Thanks AHP, it was a good one. There's another thread that I've been following and you might have seen this one as well:
https://www.propertyinvesting.com/forums/property-investing/general-property/4335661
It's an interesting read and there's good opinions for both sides of the story.
Hm.. no further comments??
god_of_money wrote:Hm.. no further comments??We should probably review the discussions of this (and similar threads) topic constantly. But it would be very interesting to see how everything went in the next couple of years.
What more were you looking for god_of_money?
fWord wrote:god_of_money wrote:Hm.. no further comments??We should probably review the discussions of this (and similar threads) topic constantly. But it would be very interesting to see how everything went in the next couple of years.
You will most probably find that housing will be following its long term trend and the doomsters will be predicting impending doom. Nothing much will have changed.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
