[Article] - Sick and tired of chasing dreams of finding a home

:

---

I'm not entirely sure how he claims to know how tough those heading for retirement have had it actually. As I look around my district, there are plenty of retirees who face their twilight years in rented accommodation because they never did reach the dream of being able to own a house - because they had huge families and one very low income to raise their families on. Now they struggle to pay rent on a measly pension.

---

That's my parents. They lost everything in 1989 when interest rates spiked and they both lost their jobs (they were employed by the same company that also went belly-up) and weren't able to get back on their feet. They are struggling, but get by. My plan is to buy them a home and to look after them or at the very least have a home big enough so they can move in with us. I hope I raised my son right and he will look after me if I'm ever in the same position.

FWIW my grandparents never owned a home but lived in one of those built for the returned servicemen after WWII. My nan stayed there until my pop died. For 55 years she called that place home. Now she lives in a two-bedder surrounded by people in very similar situations. Luckily she is in in a lovely complex with warm and loving people living around her.

Yes, I would love to own my own home. But that's something that DH and I won't be in a position to do for at least another four years (until DS1 finishes Uni). I'll wait. By then we'll also be in the position to move to where we want to move. Not paying an exhorbitant mortgage in the city - somewhere rural that has a good school (for DS2) and a good community.

Home is where the heart is.

I'm tired of the assumptions. Full stop. Like the Gen Y's are the first people ever to face this. Why do they think there are so many small, ****ty properties in the first place? Because that's the housing that previous generations had! Yeah the housing market is tough to get in to, but plenty of young people get around this by being agile in their choices, and thinking outside the box. Can't afford to get into the market here? Well, get into it somewhere else where you can, then negative gear yourself a better deposit. Or get into a property by purchasing a % share. Or lean on your "privileged" boomer parents to give you a leg up, but do it with respect & gratefulness, not entitlement. And make the hell most of whatever situation you're in. And quit whining like no one else has ever faced what you are facing.

I think there are some good points in there about real estate strategies and political forces that make it hard to get a house, but the whole 'we can't have children because of it' blah blah blah end bit is a bit rich isn't it?

"....people who are approaching retirement will react to this with a ''cry me a river'' statement, when they know full well they never had it this tough.....".
Really?? Is that really a fair comparison? Most of our parents would have had their children (at least their first child) while renting and had second hand/hand me down baby stuff and probably had never owned a car less than 10 years old.
But the author thinks he has it way tougher as he is trying to have stuff they never dreamed of having, all before he steps foot inside a maternity ward.

I think just because he wants to have those kinds of things (ie. home ownership, new car, all new baby stuff etc.) doesn't mean that stuff is mandatory before you have a baby. If you choose to live the top shelf life style I don't think you can complain how tough it is to pay for it. Our parents mostly went without the new and lived within their means because debt was treated much more wearily than it is today. But if you want to live beyond your means and reach beyond what you are capable, don't come complaining to me about how tough it is living with your substantial debts!

I'm sick of being thrown into the Gen Y label.

DH & I worked hard for 3 years, renting a cheap cottage and taking local breaks while saving for a deposit. Now we are in our own 4x2 on 600sqm 13km from the CBD.

Meanwhile friends of ours are whinging that they can't afford to buy a home... 2 months after they returned from Europe, and are now planning a 6 week stay in North America. Um??

I'm Gen X. We're the perfect ones ;)

:

---

I think there are some good points in there about real estate strategies and political forces that make it hard to get a house, but the whole 'we can't have children because of it' blah blah blah end bit is a bit rich isn't it?

---

Yes the whole cant have kids is silly and does nothing but obscure the facts. The negative gearing not only inflates prices but also drives demand so property is then built for investors and not families so even if they want to rent the housing stock is not available ( I am living the two bed 5 people strategy and so are others - so the idea that people wont make sacrifices is not true either). How can we move to the higher density housing that is required for population if none of it is being built?

Yes build more public transport but also make use of the areas that already have some. Kids who grow up using public transport and walking to school are more likely to continue those behaviours as adults.

To me it isnt about entitlement but about sustainability and at the moment seems to me are sacrificing sustainbility to protect those who are avoiding tax through property investment on a large scale in some cases with 4 plus investment properties. It seems so odd to me in a forum where there was plenty of support for taxing higher income earners there is no concern about the fact not only does negative gearing lead to them paying less tax but is contributing to housing affordability problem and the type of housing built

I suspect the underlying problem here is that Australia has a housing undersupply (for a number of complex reasons) and has had for a long time, and pretty much the only way to remedy that is to continue to attract investment into the sector. Hence negative gearing. Landlords are not the only people who benefit from this type of arrangement - local councils are doing very nicely thankyou out of the housing prices in their area, allowing them to provide more amenities. I have no doubt that negative gearing helps fund a higher standard of housing stock in regional areas where the rent returns by themselves are not an incentive to invest. There is plenty of urban "back-filling" going on here in Adelaide, much of which would not occur without the investment incentives. I think the real problem in Australia is that our main urban areas are coastal, which puts constraints on how many people can live close to the main economic hubs (eg CBD). THAT is what pushes up the housing prices. There are other benefits to negative gearing too - it makes it easier to be a mobile/agile worker. Again, this has benefits in rural areas. If a skilled worker is able to rent out their home for a couple years without it being a financial loss situation, specifically to go an fill a skills gap in a regional area, then that's a win for everyone.

And, I got sidetracked from my other train of thought.

If your whole definition of "having a dream" is getting a HOUSE, then ....man, you need a better dream!!

Seriously. Where are we headed, as a country, when our aspirations for ourselves revolve around real estate? Life satisfaction has been shown to be about a whole heap of stuff, none of which is measurably attached a wealth (over and above having the bare means to subsist). Obviously the quality and liveability of our urban environment influences this, but it's not the be-all and end-all of happiness. What ever happened to finding our sense of meaning and purpose??

:

---

IIf you choose to live the top shelf life style I don't think you can complain how tough it is to pay for it. Our parents mostly went without the new and lived within their means because debt was treated much more wearily than it is today. But if you want to live beyond your means and reach beyond what you are capable, don't come complaining to me about how tough it is living with your substantial debts!

---

Man. if you saw the 2 bedroom dives that sell for 500k+ within 10kms of melbourne CBD you sooo would not be able to even come close to describing it as 'top shelf life' :lol:

Also, i am just not that convinced that the outer suburbs that are being heralded as the alternative answer are really the alternative. i mean, when DH and I were looking we looked further out...the prices were marginally cheaper (if at all), what it got you was more square feet. we concluded that rather than live in a big house further out with still a big mortgage we would live closer in, in a smaller, older house with a big mortgage. why? less driving and smaller living costs overall for us.

I dont agree with the authors outlook that previous generations had it easy. he is obviously driven to desperation and needed to vent :lol:. there were other factors no doubt influencing economic situations in previous generations but we cannot deny that housing affordability has gotten worse in the last decade and half.

FWIW, i am a GenY, i bought inner city and dont whine. But I suppose my opinion that i think housing costs are insane - i look back 10 years ago and can only dream that DH and I had our savings in place back then...dream a little dream hahahaha - is not allowed because then I am seen as simply a 'GenY Hipster' who 'wants it all'.

For all those that have come on here to trash other people's choices (ie those of us that have bought or want to buy inner city but are horrified at seeing dump after dump going off like a frog in a sock in terms of prices): Do you really want to live in my house with your whole family? Is that the choice you wanted to make? Really? 3 kids to a 2 bedroom house? because hey: newsflash! you can! sell your big ol' suburban house and come on over! My house isnt 1 million dollars: I see the average point cook home sells for what mine would. So come on, move your family in here. live in an old small house like mine, and tell me that I am being greedy and wanting it all.

Is that the 'top shelf' life that you are all aspiring towards? Is that 'having it all'?? I dont have a new car, or all new baby things, my kids share a room, not because it is quaint, but because they have to. I dont COMPLAIN about that. But i will lament the cost of housing and the lack of choices that it gives people.

This idea that people in my position have not made sacrifices is just so blatantly judgemental and of course, with that, incorrect.
We just made a different choice. And I dont think it is fair to come on here and allude that those of that made a different choice are greedy and selfish. glass houses people.

No I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about the author who 'could not have children until they could buy a house', and was already complaining about how tough it was even before the debt has happened!
Quite clearly from your post your situation is very different from his. No where in my post did I make general statements about any generation as a whole, only specific comments about the specific whining of the articles author.

:

---

And, I got sidetracked from my other train of thought.

If your whole definition of "having a dream" is getting a HOUSE, then ....man, you need a better dream!!

Seriously. Where are we headed, as a country, when our aspirations for ourselves revolve around real estate? Life satisfaction has been shown to be about a whole heap of stuff, none of which is measurably attached a wealth (over and above having the bare means to subsist). Obviously the quality and liveability of our urban environment influences this, but it's not the be-all and end-all of happiness. What ever happened to finding our sense of meaning and purpose??

---

I agree with this but coming from a different perspective. The part of the world I come from was affected by bush fires that took many many homes and some lives. I've seen what people have gone through when the thing they have attached their identity to, saved for, restorated carefully for years, dreamed of, attached their sense of home and security to, literally go up in smoke.......well seeing that has certainly made me look at attributing too much meaning to a possession like a house.

Cassius, I'd say you've made exactly the sacrifices that previous generations, and most others buying a house, have. Where I've sacrificed a city lifestyle, you've sacrificed space. We've both gone without newer, bigger things.

Where I take issue is with my friends who constantly go overseas, go out and blow their entire pay in a weekend, have a new car, a wardrobe full of just shoes, and then complain that the reason they live with their parents is because a house just costs too much.

:

---

No I wasn't talking about you, I was talking about the author who 'could not have children until they could buy a house', and was already complaining about how tough it was even before the debt has happened!
Quite clearly from your post your situation is very different from his. No where in my post did I make general statements about any generation as a whole, only specific comments about the specific whining of the articles author.

---

I understand you were talking about the author but I think the thing is where does anything in his post suggest "top shelf lifestyle" - there isn't anything there that suggests anything but not wanting to live in a two bedroom dive - he didn't even say didn't want to live in a two bedroom just not in a dive. Other posts have mentioned "home theaters", people looking for perfect forever homes, big screen TV's, Ipads, Gen Y hipsters etc - it seems that whenever anyone mentions housing affordability being a problem and wanting to live in an inner suburb it is assumed that they are "wanting to have it all" - which is just simply not true.

Someone said what sort of a nation have we become if property has become the dream - (I don't believe property has become the dream for all - despite all those ridiculous adverts about "not living in someone else's dream") - but also what sort of a nation have we become where we are so ready to believe that our younger generations want to "just have it all" and are not prepared to make any sacrifices. What is it they say about young children "you call them naughty they will be naughty".

:

---

Cassius, I'd say you've made exactly the sacrifices that previous generations, and most others buying a house, have. Where I've sacrificed a city lifestyle, you've sacrificed space. We've both gone without newer, bigger things.

---

I think the thing is that the problem is even that choice is being taken away, the ability to even choose to sacrifice space is disappearing, and lots of people are tied to the city not by choice but by the career they are in.

:

---

I understand you were talking about the author but I think the thing is where does anything in his post suggest "top shelf lifestyle" - there isn't anything there that suggests anything but not wanting to live in a two bedroom dive - he didn't even say didn't want to live in a two bedroom just not in a dive. Other posts have mentioned "home theaters", people looking for perfect forever homes, big screen TV's, Ipads, Gen Y hipsters etc - it seems that whenever anyone mentions housing affordability being a problem and wanting to live in an inner suburb it is assumed that they are "wanting to have it all" - which is just simply not true.

---

I think my use and interpretation of top shelf is probably skewed by my experiences as has everyone who has read it (been skewed by their experiences)....and I can see how the use of that phrase has inadvertently hit a bit of a nerve. By top shelf I meant owning your own home (whatever size or standard or location) having a new car, buying new furniture instead of going without or getting cheaper options) - basically the things that the previous generation would work for most of their lives going through the sharing/renting/second hand etc lower shelves and then eventually progressing to the top shelf of 'owning new'. I wasn't even delving into the territory of luxury items or excess but I can see how it 'read' like that. I was saying the author seemed to be aiming for that which my parents have not yet reached at near retirement age - all before he is willing to have a child!

I think perhaps 'top rung' may have said it better, not necessarily the best of the best in $$$ terms, but the final rung of the ladder that you generally have to progress towards, not start at!

I'm sorry, I don't buy that people are tied to the city due to their careers. That's why people commute.

Eta - the property dream represents security in old age and, in some cases, wanting to leave a financial legacy to children/grandchildren. What scares me is getting to retirement age and not owning a home. What then? Live on the largess of family members who do own a home??

:

---

I think the thing is that the problem is even that choice is being taken away, the ability to even choose to sacrifice space is disappearing, and lots of people are tied to the city not by choice but by the career they are in.

---

I don't know. In my experience most careers/jobs can be done in a more rural area. I started my career in the city, but they need people in my job in the country. It's still corporate, it still pays well. I'm yet to see a job that can only be done in a city, unless it's very specialised and can only be done at one or two companies.

see for me...my dream is to get out of inner city and tree-change it...that would be my top rung :D